Who Owns the Preah Vihear Temple? A Thai Position

situated on a mountain of religious significance. there was a process of expanding the first, according to the statute of the international court of justice article 59"the the watershed line is the precise frontier line between thailand and cambodia because the world cultural and natural heritage"of 1972 (convention), adopted by the united 3. the court may require previous compliance with the terms of the judgment before it admits proceedings in the court adjudicated the conflict between thailand and cambodia over the boundary between the kingdom of thailand and cambodia. the temple was listed by the integrity of thailand's border itself. therefore, the development of a full zone according to paragraph 103 of the operational guidelines for the implementation temple of preah vihear on june 15, 1962: community. both cambodians and thais enjoyed the temple for religious purposes, tt�upftw�p�aqiixb f�ij�ptjujpo 237 universal value"which means to be so exceptional as to transcend national boundaries co-operation the two countries can maintain their good relationship. temple of preah vihear and its surrounding areas or a transboundary nomination that that it sets forth the decisions taken by the said commission and that, by reason of entertained only to the extent that they give expression to grounds, and not as claims to register a protest against the decision of the international court of justice awarding promulgated over the land. the temple of preah vihear was situated on the boundary justice that the frontier line, as indicated on the map below, showed the temple to be 232 xg�lefflpoh 16 see supra note 4. respect to the court's ruling. demarcation for the land boundary (jbc) between thailand and cambodia. likewise, (christchurch 2007), available at http://whc.unesco.org/en/sessions/31com/documents (last visited on jan. 12, that the sacred site of the temple of preah vihear has outstanding universal value cambodian territory, in the ruins of the temple of preah vihear; a. the decision of the international court of justice (icj): status and judicial final submissions: situated in a territory, sovereignty or jurisdiction over which there is a claim by more 2. the proceedings for revision shall be opened by a judgment of the court expressly recording the existence of and reserved its right to recourse in the future if thailand discovered new facts and law 10 article 61 of the icj statute of states: 13 about world heritage, available at http://whc.unesco.org/en/about (last visited on jan. 12, 2009). called"overlapping area." of preah vihear despite the fact that the map in annex i was not approved by the court. unlike it is today. subsequently, without any consultation with the thai government, recognizing that countries believed that there was an evident border between them since the delimitation 15 draft decision 31 com 8b.24, decisions adopted at the 31st session of the world heritage committee 155 the icj by cambodia's unilateral application. cambodia requested judgments in five tt�upftw�p�aqiixb f�ij�ptjujpo 233 c. to adjudge and declare that the temple of preah vihear is situated in territory cambodian government used this as a reason to argue to the international court of d. to adjudge and declare that the kingdom of thailand is under an obligation to not only the establishment of a buffer zone to protect the temple, but also to deal with protection and conservation of cultural and natural heritage.13 any sites which are "the state party of cambodia and the state party of thailand are in full agreement should be noted that the world heritage committee overlooked the fact of the conducting trade, and it served as the centre between the high-khmer and the low- from the mouth of the river stung roluos, it follows the parallel from that point in an thus, the court ruled that the temple belongs to cambodia, however the court did approved by the franco-siamese mixed commission because it ceased to function the icj had never adjudicated over this matter. 5 id. at 8. (extrapolation from the map recognized by the international court of justice on june 15, 1962). unilaterally proposed the inclusion of the temple of preah vihear on the world a thai position 1 temple of preah vihear: brief description, world heritage list, available at http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1224 (last consequences architectural and historical beauty of the temple and its surrounding ancient remains. countless thais and cambodians have valued the opportunity to experience the that"his majesty's government desires to make an express reservation regarding 8 id. at 36. with the operational guidelines of the kingdom of cambodia for the implementation pottery which might, since the date of the occupation of the temple by thailand in and joins the pnom padang chain the crest of which it follows eastwards as far as the and must be inscribed on the world heritage list as soon as possible."15 annex i showed the frontier line between thailand and cambodia. the court held that: thailand as being situated in bhumsrol village, bueng malu sub-district, in the which may now fall under cambodian sovereignty. in doing so, the full value of the unresolved border dispute between thailand and cambodia with respect to the area vihear. this caused difficulties over thailand's sovereignty since this area had not yet tt�upftw�p�aqiixb f�ij�ptjujpo 235 however, there are some elements of the historic states which remain unaltered. one of treaty of february 13, 1904, it seems clear from the franco-siamese mixed commission 2. the unresolved border dispute relating to the area surrounding tt�upftw�p�aqiixb f�ij�ptjujpo 229 e. to adjudge and declare that the sculptures, stelae, fragments of monuments, (designated by the international court of justice as the annex i map)4 mekong. upstream from that point, the mekong remains the frontier of the kingdom thailand due to the unresolved border dispute relating to the area surrounding the and also to the party claiming revision, always provided that such ignorance was not due to negligence. postpone the listing of the temple of preah vihear at the 32nd session of the world memorial of cambodia) was drawn up and published in the name and on behalf management plan for the property by cambodia will not only cover the temple of the kingdom of thailand and cambodia over the sovereignty of the land surrounding c. by seven votes to five, that thailand is under an obligation to restore to cambodia (unesco) (counsel of ministers eds., 2008), available at http://www.preah-vihear.com/preahvihearproposalbyrgc.pdf that fact and also of the subsequent agreements and conduct of the parties, it world heritage committee3 raises a matter of critical concern to thailand regarding the by the thai authorities since 1954 are to be returned to the government of the 1. an application for revision of a judgment may be made only when it is based upon the discovery of some fact of franco treaties. the application of the treaty of february 13, 1904, established that the stationed at the temple, and withdrew the thai tricolor national flag from the disputed of siam, in accordance with article i of the treaty of 3 october 1893. khmer communities. the issue relating to the east and west territory was not taken into in reaching the decision, the court refrained from deciding on cambodia's 234 xg�lefflpoh world heritage list. that particular case."as a member of the united nations (un), thailand accepted the between siam and cambodia. second, the decision adopted at the 32nd session of the account. the kingdom of thailand and cambodia it is quite clear that even if the problem was an 4. the application for revision must be made at latest within six months of the discovery of the new fact. appeal. in the event of dispute as to the meaning or scope of the judgment, the court shall construe it upon the the temple of pra viharn to cambodia."11 however, for decades since the court ruling, assets, a problem has been created. it is necessary to establish a core zone and a buffer 4 kingdom of cambodia, 4 the temple of preah vihear: proposed for the inscription on the world heritage list application admissible on this ground. 7 id. at 36-37. registering the temple of preah vihear, where the entire vicinity is included in the thai (last visited on jan. 12, 2009). under the sovereignty of the kingdom of cambodia; the temple and its surrounding areas. however, this was ineffective because on july 7, such a nature as to be a decisive factor, which fact was, when the judgment was given, unknown to the court which is marked on the map of the commission of delimitation between indo- located in cambodian territory. an 800 metre north-south axis rising up the hill towards the sanctuary.1 argument. lecturer, faculty of law, chiangmai university, thailand. ll.b. (hons/chiangmai), ll.m. (chulalongkorn) 3. conclusion on october 6, 1959, the case concerning the temple of preah vihear was brought to 2008, the sacred site of the temple of preah vihear was included on the world heritage and to be of common importance for the present and future of all humanity.14 in the of the world heritage convention, prepared by the ministry of culture and fine arts of temple to be sacrificed as a hindu place of worship. there was no issue of sovereignty rule 103, available at http://whc.unesco.org/archive/opguide08-en.pdf (last visited on jan. 12, 2009). to prevent the construction of any buildings within the vicinity of the preah vihear 9 note to u.n. acting secretary-general no. (0601) 22239/2505 ministry of foreign affairs, bangkok, july 6, b.e. however, cambodia unilaterally used this map to delimit the border area of the temple decision of the court, turned over the temple to cambodia, withdrew its troops inconsistent with the express terms of article 1 of the 1904 treaty, i.e., the line of the situated on a promontory of the dangrek mountain range, which straddles the kantharalak district of the srisaket province in eastern thailand. the temple is the ancient hindu temple of preah vihear is considered to be a priceless inheritance map 1: representing the frontier line in 1908 a."to adjudge and declare that the map of the dangrek sector (annex i map to the preah vihear but will also swallowed up a large unresolved border dispute relating to accordingly, thailand acknowledged that the temple has an outstanding value to 1904, article i reads as follows: one of the intentions of the 1972 convention is to avoid conflicts and contestations easterly direction until it meets the river prek kompong tiam, then, turning north- french made map diverged from the watershed line. moreover, the map and the line that the frontier line along the dangrek mountain range was to follow the line of the would require the consent of both thailand and cambodia, the cambodian government unresolved border dispute in the area surrounding the preah vihear temple. thailand and cambodia in the area. hence, the court did not rule that the map filed as to an ambiguous frontier line constituted by the provisions of the 1904 and 1907 siam- this article discusses two issues essential to understanding the controversy between 230 xg�lefflpoh 236 xg�lefflpoh watershed. because this was accepted by both parties of the 1904 treaty, it is clear that surrounding the temple of preah vihear. because no buffer zone was proposed in the case has never been referred to the court again either by thailand or cambodia. whatever rights thailand has, or may have in the future, to recover the temple of phra proposed for listing under the convention have to be considered as of"outstanding monticha pakdeekong 2009). between the kingdom of thailand and cambodia and it was the centre of a grand over many generations. the temple holds an important place in the history of 1954, have been removed from the temple or the temple area by the thai 2505 (1962). authorities.7 any sculptures, stelae, fragments of monuments, sandstone model and ancient obligation to withdraw any military or police forces, or other guards or keepers, those elements is the issue of the border. it is a fact that a modern state requires a certain cambodia's submission relating to the frontier line between thailand and cambodia. cij.org/docket/ files/45/4871.pdf (last visited on jan. 10, 2009). neither party has ever derogated from the treaty and are thus bound by its terms. thailand's relationship with cambodia. especially after peace had come to this region, 12 the statute of the international court of justice, article 60 stipulates that "[t]he judgment is final and without subsequently, thailand took a number of steps and made certain reservations with viharn by having recourse to any existing or subsequently applicable legal process, and june 15, 1962,2 did not, as claimed by cambodia in 1959, determine any land boundary map2: area of the temple of preah vihear in the dangrek range of mountains5 nam sen and the mekong, on the one hand, and the nam moun, on the other hand, hindu faith at that time which was supported by the khymer king, who allowed the contrarily, in thailand's view, based on the pre-existing franco-siamese bilateral composed of a series of sanctuaries linked by a system of pavements and staircases on than one state shall in no way prejudice the rights of the parties to the dispute."it area.9 however, the judgment has no binding force over other states or organizations list, at the unilateral request of cambodia. request of any party." and there is no overlapping territorial claim in relation to it. thai territory to cambodia in respect of the land surrounding the temple area, or the so boundary in the eastern sector of the dangrek mountain range was to follow the issue of history and the border, by keeping in mind the mutual advantages of economic decision of the court has no binding force except between the parties and in respect of in a world of modern states, where countries depend on one another, economic before the map was produced. furthermore, the frontier line indicated on the map is been surveyed and demarcated by the thai-cambodian joint commission on 1. introduction 17 unesco world heritage centre, operational guidelines for the implementation of the world heritage convention, a. by nine votes to three, finds that the temple of preah vihear is situated in territory submission 1 and 2 which were the status of the map of the dangrek sector scale legal border. however, the issue of the exact boundary is hard to discern. the two property and its surrounding area can be realized. besides, the decision of the world indicated on it were nonetheless accepted by the parties. as a result, the map had no eventually, on march 23, 1907, the siamese concluded the boundary treaty with under the sovereignty of cambodia; delimiting that frontier. the mixed commission mapped the frontier region and the 11 supra note 9. of the mixed delimitation commission set up by the treaty of 13 february 1904, map). the court did not rule on the exact location of the boundary line between dating back to the early eleventh century, the temple of preah vihear has been an outstanding masterpiece of khmer architecture, the temple of preah vihear is of it by france a hundred years ago. but in reality, the issue was always open to clarification of the meaning or scope of its judgment. nonetheless, thailand reserved the second, the thai government registered a protest against the decision of the court right to reclaim the temple because article 60 of the statute has no limitation period. cambodia's first and second submissions, calling for pronouncements on the legal nations educational scientific and cultural organization (unesco) to ensure the the kingdom of thailand and cambodia have changed over time into modern states. that means the thai authorities have never used article 6012 to ask the court for franco, which established the franco-siamese mixed commission for the purpose of heritage committee over the temple of preah vihear is not practical because watershed line and that would place the temple in thailand. the treaty of february 13, stationed by her at the temple, or in its vicinity on cambodian territory; binding character. who owns the preah subsequent measures to be taken by either cambodia or any third party over this area in 3 decisions adopted at the 32nd session of the world heritage committee (quebec city 2008), available at referring finally to the submissions presented at the end of the oral proceedings, the taking into account the above considerations, the thai government had sought to hence, thailand still retains sovereignty over the land surrounding the temple area not rule on the land surrounding the temple, an area which remains in dispute. visited on jan. 12, 2009). however, the most crucial issue relating to the case of the preah vihear temple is world heritage sites are protected under the"convention concerning the protection of status of the annex i map and on the frontier line in the disputed region, can be 2 temple of preah vihear (cambodia v. thailand), 1962 i.c.j. 6 (june 15, 1962), available at http://www.icj- past, the inclusion of sites on the world heritage list was not regarded as a necessity the unesco world heritage list: the thailand's anxiousness b. to adjudge and declare that the frontier line between cambodia and thailand, in presents a treaty character; kingdom of cambodia by the government of thailand."6 heritage committee so that both countries could co-operate on the joint nomination of 1/200,000 (annex i map) and the corrections of the frontier line indicated on it (annex i the conflict between siam and cambodia over the temple of preah vihear was related canada.16 cambodia's application to unesco was a matter of critical concern to withdraw the detachments of armed forces it has stationed, since 1954, in in 1962, the icj refrained from deciding the status of the map in annex i to dispatched a note to formally inform the un acting secretary-general on july 6, 1962, rek mountain chain. from there it follows the watershed between the basins of the to be dealt with in the operative provisions of the judgment.8 heritage list at the 32nd session of the world heritage committee in quebec city, china and siam (annex i map to the memorial of cambodia); wards, it merges with the meridian from that meeting- point as far as the pnom dang in its favor as codified in article 61 of the statute.10 in addition, the thai government thailand was concerned that the decision of the court may have caused further loss of including unesco which proposed including the temple of preah vihear on the national park located in srisaket and ubonrachatanee provinces of eastern thailand 14 id. conflicts, in particular, tend to be avoided where economies are evenly balanced. preah vihear temple. adhering to the frontier line indicated on the map filed in the vihear temple? cambodia, the frontier line would have trespassed over thai territory and resulted in an the temple of preah vihear and the inclusion of the temple on b. [it] finds in consequence, by nine votes to three, that thailand is under an thai territory cannot be carried out without thailand's consent as a key stakeholder. portfolio submitted to the world heritage center (unesco-paris) in order to comply the map was not the work of the mixed commission and the map was never formally 6 temple of preah vihear (cambodia v. thailand), i.c.j. report(1962), at 11. sandstone model and ancient pottery which have been removed from the temple of the world heritage convention.17 hence, administrative measures are now required between states. article 11 paragraphs 3 stipulates that"...the inclusion of a property http://whc.unesco.org/en/sessions/32com (last visited on jan. 12, 2009). revision. the temple of preah vihear. first, the decision of the international court of justice on economic considerations drive and limit other relations. if the two countries can divide their economic advantages equitably, other issues become less important. in the case of the frontier between siam and cambodia starts, on the left shore of the great lake, court, for the reasons indicated at the beginning of the present judgment, finds that overlapping territorial claim of 4.6 square kilometers surrounding the temple of preah temple. tt�upftw�p�aqiixb f�ij�ptjujpo 231 the disputed region in the neighborhood of the temple of preah vihear, is that humanity and that it is right for preah vihear to be included on the world heritage list: thailand has repeatedly expressed a desire to participate in a joint nomination of the the new fact, recognizing that it has such a character as to lay the case open to revision, and declaring the the 4.6 square kilometers surrounding the temple and some parts of preah vihear 5. no application for revision may be made after the lapse of ten years from the date of the judgment.