Macedonia Wraps Up Arguments Before World Court

On the second day of the hearing, Macedonia’s lawyers elaborated in detail how Greece has violated the UN accord, which regulates relations between the two states, and dismissed Greek arguments in the case as groundless.

Macedonia sued Greece at the ICJ in 2009 for blocking its accession to NATO in 2008 over Macedonia's unresolved name dispute.

Skopje argues that the blockade violates the 1995 UN-brokered Interim Accord, which obliges Athens not to block the accession of its neighbour to international organisations.

Professor Sean Murphy told the court that by its conduct Greece “ deliberately and unequivocally violated that obligation”, citing numerous examples of how Athens publicly opposed and lobbied against Skopje joining NATO.

“Numerous public statements by senior Greek officials trumpeted the fact that Greece had ‘vetoed’ Macedonia’s accession to NATO. Greece single handedly prevented a consensus decision in favour of that accession,” he said, noting that Greece cannot use as an argument the fact there was no vote in NATO, as there never is because matters are decided by consensus.

Murphy explained that the Accord includes only one clause under which Greece is allowed to object to Macedonia’s admission in international organisations. Athens may protest only if Skopje is referred to under a different name than in UN resolution 817, meaning anything other than the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, FYROM.

“In pursuing full-fledged NATO membership Macedonia has never sought to change this approach and there is no basis for Greece to invoke this clause as means to avoid its obligation [not to block admission].”

Murphy also said that Greece will cite “failure to date to settle the name difference” as a legitimate concern in explaining why it objected to Macedonia’s NATO bid.

“In fact this is the real reason that Greece objected to Macedonia’s admission to NATO. Yet that is exactly what Article 11 is designed to prevent; the two states agreed that while the difference persists Greece would refrain from taking certain steps.”

British barrister and law professor Phillipe Sands, speaking for the Macedonian team, told the court that Greece’s claims that Macedonia has breached the Accord “are part of its overall strategy to divert attention from its violation of Aricle 11 and merely an ex post facto attempt to justify its unlawful conduct.”

The allegations, Sands said are factually baseless and incapable of amounting to a “internationally wrongful act”.

Greece argues that Macedonia broke the 1995 accord by taking a hard line over the "name" issue and by "stealing" its history by renaming airports, highways and sport arenas after Ancient Greek heroes.

“You will note the extraordinary triviality of the allegations: the renaming of Skopje’s airport in honour of Alexander the Great, or the naming of the Pan – European Corridor highway after the same person,” Sands said.

“How on earth can it be seriously argued that these acts are incompatible with the Interim Accord, or with any rule of international law? How can it plausibly be argued that such acts caused Greece an injury, in any reasonable sense of the word?”

The hearing will continue on Thursday, when Greece will have two days to present its arguments. On March 28, Macedonia will respond to Greece’s defence and the hearing will conclude on March 30 with the final word from the Greek side.

The 15 ICJ judges, from all around the world, are expected to decide on this case within the next six months, or by the end of the year at the latest.

Macedonian diplomats close to the ICJ case say the outcome of the lawsuit should not be linked to the ongoing “name” talks between Macedonia and Greece, held under UN auspices. They hope that a judgement in Macedonia’s favour will prevent Greece from future blockades.

In late 2009, Greek objections to Macedonia's name prevented the EU from extending a start date for Macedonia's accession talks with the bloc, despite a previous recommendation from the European Commission for negotiations to start.