Legal Analysis of the ICJ Judgment on the Border Dispute Between Gabon and Equatorial Guinea

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling on May ۱۹, ۲۰۲۵, concerning the border dispute between the Republic of Gabon and the Republic of Equatorial Guinea, stands as a significant judgment in the domain of territorial delimitation and the clarification of the concept of 'legal title' under public international law. Using an analytical-documentary method, this article examines the legal foundations of the decision. The focus is primarily on evaluating the credibility of historical conventions (e.g., the ۱۹۰۰ Paris Convention), analyzing inter-state instruments such as the ۱۹۷۴ Bata Convention, and assessing the legal ownership of the disputed islands (Mbanié, Cocoteros, and Conga). The ICJ, by evaluating legal principles such as state succession, customary international law, and effective control, concluded that Equatorial Guinea holds a valid legal title over the islands. Moreover, the Court distinguished between behavioral norms and binding instruments, recognizing UNCLOS as a framework for maritime negotiations rather than a boundary-defining authority. The findings of this study show that the ICJ ruling, beyond resolving a specific dispute, serves as a reliable model for similar claims in other regions.

کلیدواژه ها:

International Court of Justice ، Gabon ، Equatorial Guinea ، legal title ، delimitation ، UNCLOS ، Bata Convention