OP:ED – The Rule of Law Cannot be Selective, Credibility Begins at Home

May 14, 2026 News

---

By Amanza O.R. Walton, MP

Kaieteur Sports – Guyana’s case against Venezuela before the International Court of Justice represents one of the most significant modern defenses of territorial integrity, treaty enforcement, and the rule of law in international relations.

Before the Court, Guyana’s legal team has methodically demonstrated why Venezuela’s claim to Essequibo lacks legal merit, is historically unsustainable, and is incompatible with established principles governing international borders and State conduct. At its core, Guyana’s position rests on a simple but critical principle that disputes between nations must be resolved through law, treaties, and legitimate international mechanisms, not unilateral assertion or political aggression.

The implications of this case extend far beyond Guyana and Venezuela. The issues before the Court touch and concern the very foundation of the modern international order. They are relevant to territorial disputes elsewhere in the world, including Belize and Guatemala, Ukraine and Russia, and tensions throughout parts of Asia. The stability of nations and the international legal order depends heavily upon whether borders, treaties, and international institutions are respected consistently, even when outcomes are politically inconvenient.

That is precisely why Venezuela’s posture before the Court has raised such serious concern.

While participating in the proceedings, Venezuela has continued to question the jurisdiction and authority of the International Court of Justice itself, effectively advancing the dangerous proposition that international legal institutions are legitimate only when outcomes align with political preference. Such an approach weakens confidence in the very systems designed to preserve peace and lawful dispute resolution between states.

Equally troubling has been Venezuela’s reliance on selective interpretations of the 1966 Geneva Agreement while often minimizing the Agreement’s own language preserving the existing boundary unless altered by mutual agreement between the parties. That omission is not minor, it goes directly to the credibility and coherence of the argument being advanced.

The consequences of prolonged institutional instability and disregard for constitutional order are visible across Venezuela today. Venezuela was once among the wealthiest nations in the hemisphere, strengthened by extraordinary natural resources and immense economic potential. Yet history has repeatedly shown that resource wealth alone does not guarantee national stability, democratic durability, or prosperity. Without strong institutions, constitutional governance, accountability, and respect for law, even the most resource-rich states can descend into crisis.

That lesson is one we here in Guyana are not at liberty to ignore.

As our country undergoes historic transformation through oil wealth and expanding international influence, the importance of strong democratic institutions becomes even greater, not less.  Just as money magnifies the character of a person, oil wealth magnifies the character of a State. Where institutions are strong, nations prosper sustainably. Where institutions weaken, instability eventually follows.

That is why we Guyanese must remain vigilant about our own democratic health.

No government can credibly insist upon respect for international law abroad while appearing increasingly indifferent to constitutional norms, democratic accountability, and the consistent application of law at home. The rule of law cannot become a principle invoked externally while weakened internally. Yet, this is precisely what the current Irfaan Ali led Administration is doing

It has now been an extended period since our Parliament has functioned with the regularity expected in a healthy parliamentary democracy. Parliamentary oversight, debate, committee work, scrutiny of public expenditure, and representative governance are not ceremonial exercises. They are constitutional safeguards designed to protect the people of this country from executive overreach, institutional stagnation, and democratic erosion. This is why the proper functioning of Parliament and democratic institutions must concern every one of us as Guyanese, irrespective of political affiliation.

Parliamentary democracy cannot function effectively when the National Assembly does not meet for prolonged periods and when standing and sectoral committees are left inactive despite the immense national issues confronting the country.

At a time when Guyana is asking the international community to defend our sovereignty, territorial integrity, and constitutional order before the highest court in the world, our own democratic institutions must also visibly reflect seriousness about law, accountability, and governance.

Because credibility matters.

A nation’s moral authority abroad is always strengthened by the strength of its democratic legitimacy at home.

The PPP government cannot seek protection under international law internationally while denying our citizens the equal, fair, and consistent protection of law domestically. They cannot champion constitutional order abroad while being selective in their commitment to constitutional responsibility at home.

The world is watching us not only because of the Venezuela controversy, but because of what kind of state Guyana is becoming during this defining period of our history.

Venezuela should ultimately respect the authority of the International Court of Justice.

Likewise, the Ali Government must demonstrate, through action and not merely rhetoric, that it remains committed to parliamentary democracy, constitutional governance, institutional accountability, and the rule of law.

Lawlessness, whether international or domestic, cannot become normalized.

Strong nations are not built merely on natural resources, economic growth, or political power. They are built on functioning institutions, democratic legitimacy, constitutional fidelity, and respect for law.

---

• Amanza Walton, credibility, ICJ, rule of law

---