Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T00:47:54.960Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Gibraltar Dispute and Some Possible Solutions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2009

Gino J. Naldi
Get access

Extract

The Rock of Gibraltar has long been a bone of contention between Spain and the United Kingdom. Talks undertaken in Lisbon in April 1980 between the two countries on the problem of Gibraltar had however, given rise to hopes that normal relations would soon be restored between Gibraltar and Spain, that is, until the Falklands Conflict led to the indefinite postponement of negotiations in June 1982. Matters have progressed only imperceptibly since.

Type
Articles
Information
Netherlands International Law Review , Volume 31 , Issue 1 , May 1984 , pp. 31 - 58
Copyright
Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. The Gibraltar Constitution Order of 1969 abolished the term ‘colony’ and rephrased it by the phrase ‘the City of Gibraltar … part of Her Majesty's dominions’, see Halsbury's Law of England, vol. 6, para. 1101.

2. GAOR, 34th Session. Supp. No. 23, A/34/23/Rev. 1, p. 129.

3. GAOR, 31st Session, Supp. No. 23, A/31/23/Rev. 1, p. 247. For an account of general economic conditions, see GAOR, 34th session, Supp. No. 23, A/34/23/Rev. 1, pp. 133–39.

4. See generally, Garratt, G.T., Gibraltar and the Mediterranean (London 1939), Part I, Chap. I: Hills, G., Rock of Contention (London 1974), Chaps. 2–7Google Scholar.

5. Apparently, the suggestion of exchanging Gibraltar for Ceuta was at one time seriously considered, see Lowry, B., ‘El indefendible Penon: Iglaterra y la permuta de Gibraltar por Ceuta, de 1917a 1919’, 153 Revista de Politico International (1911) p. 195Google Scholar.

6. Garratt, , op.cit., p. 23Google Scholar.

7. Hills, op.cit., Chap. 14; Fawcett, J.E.S. ‘Gibraltar: The Legal Issues’, 43 International Affairs (1967) p. 195Google Scholar.

8. Hills, , op.cit., p. 176Google Scholar.

9. Hills, op.cit., Chap. 17.

10. Parry, C., The Consolidated Treaty Series. (New York 1969) Vol. 28, p. 295 at pp. 330–31Google Scholar.

11. Hills, , op.cit., p. 223Google Scholar; Fawcett, , op.cit., pp. 242–43Google Scholar.

12. Hills, , op.cit., p. 224Google Scholar.

13. Hills, , op.cit., p. 227Google Scholar.

14. Fawcett, J.E.S. ‘General Course on Public International Law’, 132 Hague Recueil (1971)p.363 at p. 515Google Scholar.

15. GAOR, 34th Session, Supp. No. 23, A/34/23/Rev. 1, Annex II, Chap. XIII, p. 140; Letter dated 10 August 1979 from the Permanent Representative of Spain to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General.

16. Hills, , op.cit., 375–76Google Scholar; Fawcett, , ‘Gibraltar: The Legal Issues’, op.cit., p. 241Google Scholar. See also the statement by the then Lord Privy Seal Sir Ian Gilmour, to the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons quoted in 52 BYIL (1981) p. 449.

17. See Article 12(1) of the Geneva Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone 1958, and further, Article 15 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982, which, however, the United Kingdom has not ratified at the time of writing.

18. See, The Times, 13 April 1983, p. 1, 19 April 1983, p. 5; El Pais 12 April 1983, p. 12, and 13 April 1983, p. 15; The Guardian 16 April 1983, p. 3, and 20 April 1983, p. 6.

19. Hills, op.cit., ibid., pp. 390–91; Fawcett, ‘Gibraltar: The Legal Issues’, op.cit., ibid., Rezette, R., ‘The Spanish Enclaves in Morocco’ (Paris 1976), p. 142Google Scholar. This has often taken the form of interference with shipping.

20. Hills, , op.cit., p. 224Google Scholar, Franck, T.M. & Hoffman, P. ‘The Right of Self-Determination in Very Small Places’, 8 NYUJ Int. Law and Pol. (1976) p. 331 at p. 375Google Scholar.

21. Articles 51 and 52 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969.

22. The treaties in question were those of Seville, 1729, Vienna, 1731, Aix-la-Chapelle, 1756; Paris, 1763; and Versailles, 1793. See also, Fawcett, , ‘Gibraltar: The Legal Issues’, op. cit., p. 239Google Scholar.

23. See GAOR, 24th Session, Supp. No. 23 (A/7623/Rev. 1) p. 50.

24. GAOR, 24th Session, Supp. No. 23, A/7623/Rev. 1, pp. 55–56. In a letter to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the Permanent Secretary of Spain stated further that the enactment of the Constitution disregarded General Assembly resolutions calling for the termination of the colonial situation, that it reinforced the colonial dependence of Gibraltar upon the United Kingdom, and that it allowed de facto discrimination against Spaniards (ibid.). See also, Rezette, , op.cit., pp. 140–42Google Scholar; Sureda, Rigo, op.cit., p. 192Google Scholar; Mathy, D., ‘L'Autodetermination de Petits Territories Revendiques par des Etats Tiers’, 11 Revue Belge de Droit International (1975) p. 129 at pp. 134–35Google Scholar.

25. Hills, , op.cit., p. 449Google Scholar; Mathy, , op.cit., pp. 137–38Google Scholar; Barbier, M., ‘Le Comite de Decolonisation des Nations Unies’ (Paris 1974) p. 568Google Scholar.

26. GAOR, 24th Session. Supp. No. 23, A/7623/Rev. 1, p. 56.

27. GAOR, 21st Session, 4th C, 1679th meeting, Doc.A/C.4/684 and Add. 1, pp. 609–19; Hills, , op.cit., p. 450Google Scholar; Barbier, , op.cit., pp. 567–68Google Scholar.

28. Sec YUN (1966) pp. 585–86.

29. Ibid., p. 586.

30. Hills, , op.cit., pp. 461–62Google Scholar; Franck, and Hoffman, , op.cit., p. 372Google Scholar.

31. Hills, , op.cit., p. 462Google Scholar.

32. YUN (1967) pp. 668–72.

33. Cmnd. 3735, p. 15.

34. Resolution 2353 (XXII), GAOR, 22nd Session, Supp. No. 16, Doc. A/6716 (1967) p. 53.

35. Sanchez, M.A., ‘Self-Determination and the Falkland Islands Dispute’, 21 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law (1983) p. 557 at pp. 570–71Google Scholar.

36. GAOR, 22nd Session, Fourth Committee, 1741 st. meeting, Doc. A/C.4/SR. 1741 (1967) pp. 409–10; Hills, , op.cit., p. 466Google Scholar; Franck, and Hoffman, , op.cit., p. 374Google Scholar.

37. See the statement by the then Lord Privy Seal, Sir Ian Gilmour, to the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons, quoted in 52 BYIL (1981) p. 449.

38. This commitment was reaffirmed in the Lisbon Agreement 1980 by the then Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Lord Carrington, and by the then Assistant Under Secretary to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Mr. E.A.J. Fergusson, to the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons, quoted in 52 BYIL (1981) pp. 386 and 448 respectively.

39. GAOR, 24th Session, Supp. No. 23, A/7623/Rev. 1, pp. 53–54.

40. GAOR, 24th Session, Supp. No. 23, A/7623/Rev. 1, pp. 55–56.

41. Sureda, Rigo, op.cit., pp. 295–98Google Scholar.

42. Article 62(2) provides that a fundamental change of circumstances cannot be invoked as a ground for terminating or withdrawing from treaty:

a) ‘if the treaty establishes a boundary’, or

b) ‘if the fundamental change is the result of a breach by the party invoking it either of an obligation under the treaty or of any other international obligation owed to any other party to the treaty.’

43. GAOR, 22nd Session, 1641 st plenary meeting, Doc. A/PV.1641 (1967) at p. 15, observation by the Representative of Spain to the United Nations, Sr. Jaime de Pinies; see also, Franck, & Hoffman, , op.cit., pp. 375–76Google Scholar; Rezette, , op.cit., pp. 145–46Google Scholar; Sureda, Rigo, op.cit., pp. 193–94Google Scholar.

44. See, for instance, GAOR, 28th Session, Supp. No. 30 (A/9030) p. 111; General Assembly resolution 34/412, GAOR, 34th Session, Supp. No. 46, (A/36/46) p. 273; GAOR, 35th Session, Supp. No. 23 (A/35/23/Rev.l) p. 115.

45. Sureda, Rigo, op.cit., pp. 190, 192–96Google Scholar; Franck, & Hoffman, , op.cit., p. 376Google Scholar; Sanchez, , op.cit., pp. 572–74Google Scholar; Crawford, J., The Creation of States in International Law (Oxford 1979) pp. 377–84Google Scholar.

46. ICJ Reports 1975, p. 12 at p. 33.

47. On self-determination generally, see Rigo Suteda, op.cit., Crawford, op.cit. Umozurike, U.O., Self-Determination in International Law (Hamden, Conn. 1972)Google Scholar; Ronen, D.The Quest for Self-Determination (London 1979)Google Scholar. Emerson, R., ‘Self-Determination’ 65 American Journal of International Law (1971) p. 459CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Maguire, J.R., ‘The Decolonization of Belize: Self-Determination v. Territorial Integrity’, 22 Virginia Journal of International Law (1982) p. 849Google Scholar.

48. Article 3 of the Charter of the Organisation of African Unity.

49. See Buchheit, L.C., Secession: The Legitimacy of Self-Determination (New Haven 1978) pp. 86–87Google Scholar.

50. For example, Morocco's annexation of the Western Sahara and Indonesia's annexatio of East Timor. Argentina's invasion of the Falkland Islands, and the outstanding claims of Guatemala on Belize and Venezuela to the Essequibo region of Guyana raise similar problems.

51. ICJ Reports 1975, p. 12.

52. Loc. cit., p. 58.

53. Loc. cit., p. 114.

54. Loc. cit., p. 112. See also the observation by Singh, Judge Nagendra, loc. cit., pp. 79–80Google Scholar.

55. Loc. cit., p. 120, n.l.

56. Loc. tit., p. 122.

57. Maguire, . op.cit., p.872Google Scholar.

58. Op.cit., p.868.

59. GAOR, 24th Session, Supp. No. 23 (A/7623/Rev.l) pp. 57–59.

60. GAOR, 24th Session, Supp. No. 23 (A/7623/Rev. 1) p. 59.

61. The unofficial restoration of telephone links since December 1977 and the opening of the frontier for certain humanitarian purposes, see The Daily Telegraph. 5 July 1982, p. 22 and The Guardian, 10 July 1982, p. 5.

62. Keesing's Contemporary Archives, 7 June 1980, p. 30296 and 25 June 1982, p. 31549; The Times, 11 April 1980.

63. Keesing's Contemporary Archives, op.cit., 30296; see Articles 143–58 of the Spanish Constitution.

64. The 1873 Order in Council, the Immigrants and Aliens Order of 1885 and the Gibraltarian Status Ordinance of 1962 prohibit residence in Gibraltar to Spanish citizens; See Sureda, Rigo, op.cit., pp. 195–96Google Scholar; Fawcett, , op.cit., p. 235Google Scholar; Keesing's, Contemporary Archives, op.cit., p.31549Google Scholar.

65. Keesing's, Contemporary Archives, op.cit., p. 31550Google Scholar.

66. El Pais, 22 June 1982, p. 1.

67. El Pais, 1 December 1982, p. 13; The Guardian, 27 January 1983, p. 6., Keesing's Contemporary Archives, March 1983, pp. 32027–28.

68. Keesing's, Contemporary Archives, op.cit., p. 32027Google Scholar.

69. Ibid., according to The Guardian, 16 December 1983, p. 6 Spain has allowed Gibraltarians, who were previously confined to one border crossing per day, to make as many daily crossings as they wish, while The Times, 16 December 1983, p. 6 suggests that this concession would be in force only for the Christmas period. Furthermore, the Spanish Government has indicated that if reciprocal rights were granted to Spanish citizens on the Rock, all form of traffic would be allowed across the frontier, see El Pais, 22 July 1983, p. 14.

70. El Pais, 16 March 1983, p. 15.

71. The Times, 18 March 1983, p. 6; The Guardian, 18 March 1983, p. 6.

72. El Pais, 13 April 1983, p. 15.

73. The Guardian 5 September 1981, p. 5; and 10 June 1982, p. 6; see also The Times, 7 October 1981.

74. The Sunday Times, 11 October 1981, p. 8.

75. The Times, 4 September 1981; The Guardian, 5 October 1981, p. 6.

76. See Hansard, H.C., Vol. 14, cols. 354–55, 8 December 1981; The Guardian, 17 July 1983, p. 6. The Times, 28 July 1983, p. 4.

77. Hansard, H.C., Vol. 46, Col. 1212, 27 July 1983.

78. Hansard, H.C., Vol. 46, Cols. 1212 et seq., 27 July 1983; The Times, 28 July 1983, P. 4.

79. TheSunday Times, 23 August 1983, p. The Times, 1 August 1981, p. 12.

80. See The Guardian, 15 March 1983, p. 8; The Times, 1 August 1981, p. 12.

81. El Pais, 13 April 1983, p. 15; The Times, 13 April 1983, p. 1 and Leader, p. 11; 14 April 2983, p. l; and 19 April 1983, p. 5; The Guardian, 16 April 1983, p. 3; and 20 April 1983, p. 6.

82. El Pais, 14 June 1983, p. 1. Spain has to overcome the opposition of France, see The Guardian, 24 June 1982, pp. 1 and 26. It also appears that the United Kingdom may block Spanish entry if a solution to the Gibraltar dispute is not forthcoming, see The Times, 20 July 1983, p. 4; The Guardian, 21 July 1983, p. 2.

83. See The Times, 21 July 1982, p. 4.

84. Hansard, H.C., Vol. 46, Cols. 177–78, 19 July 1983 The Times 20 July 1983, p. 4; The Guardian, 21 July 1983, p. 2. See also the statement by the then Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, MrHurd, Douglas, that it was inconceivable that Spain should join the EEC while restrictions remained to ordinary traffic between Spain and Gibraltar, The Times, 14 04 1983, p. 4Google Scholar.

85. El Pais, 22 July 1983, p. 14; La Vanguardia, 22 July 1983, p. 4.

86. El Pais, 15 July 1983, p. 14; The Guardian, 15 July 1983, p. 6. The Times, 16 July 1983, p. 6.

87. The Guardian, 21 July 1983, p. 2.

88. See the article by the Marquess of Douro, MEP, in The Times, 1 August 1981, p. 12.

89. Ibid., Spain has repeated its commitment to allow Gibraltarians to keep their British citizenship, see The Guardian, 15 July 1983, p. 6.

90. (1983) OJC 23, p. 1. The original Declaration defined United Kingdom nationals as, inter alia, ‘persons who are citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies by birth or by registration or naturalisation in Gibraltar, or whose father was so born, registered or naturalised.

91. See Evans, A.C., United Kingdom Immigration, Policy and the European Convention on Human Rights, Public Law (1983) p. 91 at p. 96Google Scholar. Section 51(3)(a)(ii) of the British Nationality Act 1981 provides that in any enactment or instrument passed or made before commencement, the term ‘citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies’, in relation to any time after commencement means a person who under the British Nationality Act 1981 is a British citizen, a British Dependent Territories Citizen, or a British Overseas citizen. It is not clear whether the Unilateral Declaration can be considered an instrument for the present purposes but, even if it cannot, the principles contained therein may be applicable by way of analogy.

92. Hansard, H.L., Vol. 423, Col. 246, 22 July 1981, per Lord Soames.

93. Ibid., The Times, 23 July 1981, p. 6; The Daily Telegraph, 23 July 1981, p. 10.

94. Hansard, op.cit., Col. 242, per Lord Bethell.

95. Hansard, op.cit., Col. 249, per Lord Soames, and Cols. 272 and 274, per the Lord Chancellor, Lord Hailsham. It is respectfully submitted, therefore, that the observation made by MacDonald, I.A. and Blake, N. in The New Nationality Law (London 1982) at para. 207, p. 75Google Scholar, that Gibraltarians could be excluded from the United Kingdom under the Immigration Act 1971 though they could move to other EEC countries, is inaccurate. This is because directly applicable provisions of Community law, including those governing freedom of movement of nationals, prevail over earlier national legislation inconsistent therewith.

96. Not all residents with the right of abode in Gibraltar are defined as United Kingdom nationals.

97. Hansard, op.cit., Col. 274, per Lord Hailsham.

98. British Nationality: A Report of Justice, pub. Justice Education and Research Trust (London 1980) pp. 43–44Google Scholar; Wooldridge, F., ‘British Nationality Bill of 1981’, New Community, Vol. 9, No. 2, 1981, p. 230 at p. 242, n. 9(a)Google Scholar; and ‘British Nationality Act 1981’ New Community, Vol. 9, No. 3, 1981, 1982, p. 487 at p. 489.

99. It appears that under Section 23 of the British Nationality Act 1981, a former citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies who becomes a British Dependent Territories Citizen through a connection with a colony does not necessarily acquire a right of abode in that colony, see Evans, , op.cit., p. 94Google Scholar.

100. Hills, , op.cit., p. 465Google Scholar; Wooldridge, ., ‘British Nationality Bill..’, op cit., p. 44Google Scholar.

101. The Guardian, 15 July 1983, p. 6.

102. The Guardian, 29 August 1981, p. 24; Keesing's, Contemporary Archives, op.cit., p. 31549Google Scholar.

103. The Times, 5 October 1981, p. 9, Keesing's Contemporary Archives, ibid.

104. Hansard, H.C., Vol. 26. 26, Col. 157, 22 June 1962; The Guardian, 23 june 1983, p. 8. This commitment has also been reaffirmed by the Prime Minister, see Hansard, H.C., Vol. 46, Col. 177, 19 July 1983.