En busca del esquivo mar: la controversia Bolivia-Chile ante la Corte Internacional de Justicia

Abstract

This article addresses the study of the dispute between Bolivia and Chile regarding the obligation to negotiate an access to the Pacific Ocean, focusing on the judgment on the merits of 1 October 2018. It starts by considering the stands taken by both Bolivia and Chile in the successive phases of the procedure, leading to the defining of restrictively the object of the controversy made by the Court in its previous decision on admissibility (preliminary objection) of 24 September 2015. Further, the analysis of the 2018 judgment reveals a Court’s approach inspired by a formalist and voluntarist conception of International Law, unable to overlooking the slightest legal significance of the numerous diplomatic exchanges between the parties over almost a century of contacts. Contrary to this angle, it is argued that a more flexible approach to the elements of the case, paying due attention to the principle of good faith, might have drawn diametrically opposed conclusions and the consequent recognition of a legal obligation incumbent to Chile.