“Case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear. (Cambodia v. Thailand), Merits,. Judgment of June I.C. J. Reports , p. 6.” Le présent arrêt doit être. Preah Vihear Temple is an ancient Hindu temple built during the period of the Khmer Empire, In the ICJ ruled that only the temple building belonged to Cambodia, while the direct way to access the temple is from Thailand. As previewed in my post of 29 October, the International Court of Justice yesterday handed down a unanimous decision in relation to the Preah.
|Published (Last):||7 June 2010|
|PDF File Size:||8.46 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||19.83 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The Court then decided to afford each of the Parties the opportunity of furnishing further written explanations, pursuant to Article 98, paragraph 4, of the Rules of Court. Counter-Memorial, Reply and Rejoinder Available in: Judgment of 26 May Preliminary Objections Procedure s: Temple of Preah Vihear Cambodia v. Large numbers of Cambodian refugees entered Thailand after the invasion. As of [update]it is not possible to access Preah Vihear from Thailand.
Preah Vihear Temple
The court said this order would not prejudice any final ruling on where the border in the area between Thailand and Cambodia should fall. Accordingly, the Court considered that the promontory of Preah Vihear ends at the foot of the hill of Phnom Trap, that is to say, where the ground begins to rise from the valley. Kui in Cambodia were skilled ironsmiths using ore from Phnom Dek. This article needs additional citations for verification.
Judgments | Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia v. Thailand) | International Court of Justice
The natural inference was that Thailand had accepted the frontier at Preah Vihear as it was drawn on the map, irrespective of its correspondence with the watershed line. Affording a view for many kilometers across a plain, Prasat Preah Vihear has the most spectacular setting of all the temples built during the six-centuries-long Khmer Empire.
At the foot of the cliffs were minefieldsplaced by the Khmer Rouge during their rule in Cambodia. Retrieved February 7, Written Observations of Thailand 21 November Available in: The Court found that Thailand had indeed accepted the map and concluded that the Temple was situated on Cambodian territory. The Court however has upheld a frontier line which is not the line of the watershed, one which in the critical area of the Temple is an entirely different one.
On June 12,the government of General Kriangsak Chomananwho had come to power in Thailand by a military coup, informed foreign embassies in Bangkok that it was going to expel a large number of Cambodian refugees. In this respect, the Court recalls that under Article 6 of the World Heritage Convention, to which both States are parties, Cambodia and Thailand must co-operate between themselves and with the international community in the protection of the site as a world heritage.
Some people hid on top of the mountain and survived. These versions of the name carry significant political and national connotations see below: On 28 Aprilthe Kingdom of Cambodia submitted to the Court, by an Application filed in the Registry, a Request for interpretation of the Judgment rendered by the Court on 15 June in the case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear Cambodia v.
Moreover, in the course of the negotiations for the and Franco-Siamese Treaties, which confirmed the existing frontiers, and in in Washington before the Franco-Siamese Conciliation Commission, Thailand was silent.
As a key edifice of the empire’s spiritual life, it was supported and modified by successive kings and so bears elements of several architectural styles. Today, elements of the Banteay Srei style of the late 10th century can be seen, but most of the temple was constructed during the reigns of the Khmer kings Suryavarman I : With these and other acts, it said, Thailand had accepted the map and therefore Cambodia was the owner of the temple.
Thailand – Opening of the public admission and media accreditation procedure Available in: In the context of these obligations, the Court emphasized the importance of ensuring access to the Temple from the Cambodian plain. Winiarski, presiding Procedure s: Retrieved from ” https: Translation bilingual version Translation. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
They tied their children on their backs and strapped them across their chests. Refugee Workers in the Indochina Exodus, One international law professor has urged that practicality calls for laying aside exclusive sovereignty in favor of an “international peace park. Correspondence 6 October Correspondence Available in: In three frantic hours the foreigners picked out 1, refugees for resettlement from among the thousands being held by Thai soldiers behind barbed wire in a Buddhist temple at Wat Ko Refugee Camp and loaded them on buses to go to Bangkok.
This overview is provided for information only and in no way involves the responsibility of the Court.
Presentations on the work of the Court. Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr.
The case became a volatile political issue in both countries. The sanctuary is reached via two successive courtyards, in the outer of which are two libraries. The Phnom Penh Post.
The defenders simply stepped across the border and surrendered to Thai authorities. The earliest surviving parts of the temple, however, date from the Koh Prsah period in the early 10th century, when the empire’s capital was at the city of that name. Guerrilla warfare continued in Cambodia through the s and well into the s, hampering access to Preah Vihear.
The approach to the sanctuary is punctuated by five gopuras these are conventionally numbered from the sanctuary outwards, so gopura five prreah the first to be reached by visitors.
This section needs to be updated.
Other documents | Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia v. Thailand) | International Court of Justice
Thailand – Request for the indication of provisional measures – The Court to deliver its Order on Monday 18 July at 10 a. Cambodia contended the map showing the temple as being on Cambodian soil was the authoritative document. Institution of proceedings Application prfah proceedings 6 October Available in: