Williams Dávila, deputy and president of the Mixed Commission of the National Assembly for the Defense of the sovereignty of the Essequibo and the Atlantic Façade, rejected this Sunday the statement issued by the “inefficient and irresponsible” Foreign Ministry of Nicolás Maduro addressed to the authorities of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), expressing its refusal to allow the Republic to participate in the hearings convened to study the Essequibo territorial controversy and, in turn, to analyze the validity of the Award of 1899.
In the opinion of the parliamentarian, Nicolás Maduro’s regime must appear before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for being responsible for this, not only to point out the court has no authority over this controversy, but to present the elements that support the historical, legitimate and irrefutable titles that Venezuela has over the Essequibo territory. “There is no excuse for not attending the ICJ, due to the undeniable fact that the lawsuit will run its course without the participation of Venezuela. The dictatorship is solely responsible for this case reaching the Court, that is why it is its obligation to convene the most capable Venezuelans to face this within the Court, not outside it,” he added.
“The regime has the responsibility to appear before the ICJ due to the undeniable fact that the lawsuit will continue its course without the participation of Venezuela,” he stressed, citing the most recent statement from the parliamentary body he heads.
Likewise, the spokesperson for this Mixed Commission reiterated his condemnation of the use of the Venezuelan military institution to endorse its crime of ‘lesa patria’(against the country), “making it a silent accomplice in the handover of our territory to another nation.”
Blaming Hugo Chávez, Nicolás Maduro and Vladimir Padrino López for this situation, Dávila said that those who insist on usurping power in Miraflores have “an agenda to surrender of our sovereignty, to attend decisions made from Havana, as a way of granting rights to Guyana that correspond to Venezuela and that have historically been defended by our democracy.”
“Future generations are condemned to the dispossession of a territory seized by dark agreements of the late nineteenth century and that now, due to premeditated irresponsibility, surrender our sacred duty to defend the homeland, with the instruments granted by historical reasons, legal reasons and the reason for the Geneva Agreement,” insisted Dávila Barrios.
On this issue, he emphasized that only with a political change resulting from free elections, will it be possible to elect a president who defends territorial integrity and national sovereignty, as well as conduct an efficient foreign policy that rescues the prestige of Venezuela.