- Gabon and Equatorial Guinea are presenting their territorial dispute over three islets—Mbanié, Cocotier, and Conga before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) after decades of conflict dating back to the 1970s.
- The dispute centres on a 1900 agreement and the contested validity of the 1974 Bata Convention, with Gabon asserting sovereignty and Equatorial Guinea accusing it of illegal occupation.
- The ICJ’s ruling could impact the balance of power in the region, either reinforcing Gabon’s claims or forcing it to relinquish control. At the same time, both nations emphasise the need for a sustainable agreement to promote future cooperation.
Gabon and Equatorial Guinea escalated their territorial dispute to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The conflict involves three islets: Mbanié, Cocotier, and Conga. This disagreement has persisted since the 1970s and fuels competition for energy resources. Both nations aim to assert their influence over a maritime zone rich in hydrocarbons.
The dispute’s roots date back to a 1900 agreement between colonial powers France and Spain. This agreement attempted to define maritime boundaries but soon proved inadequate. In 1974, the two countries reportedly signed a new accord called the Bata Convention to clarify the situation. However, Equatorial Guinea now questions its validity. Malabo claims Gabon presented an unauthenticated photocopy of the document in 2003, undermining its official status.
While the main issue revolves around maritime boundary delineation, the stakes extend beyond territorial claims. The disputed area holds significant economic potential, with both nations eager to exploit its hydrocarbon wealth. Gabon currently occupies the islets and asserts sovereignty based on the Bata Convention. Meanwhile, Equatorial Guinea accuses Gabon of illegal occupation since 1972.
During the hearings in The Hague, Domingo Mba Esono, Equatorial Guinea’s Deputy Minister of Mines and Hydrocarbons, emphasised that Gabon has not produced an original copy of the Bata Convention. Gabon insists that the existing document reflects a formal agreement between the two countries. The ICJ must now determine the validity of these documents to provide a legal framework for resolving the conflict.
Both countries brought the matter to the ICJ in 2016 to avoid escalating tensions. They seek a peaceful resolution to this long-standing dispute. The nations request the court to rule on the legality of the contested documents without directly addressing sovereignty.
As Gabon prepares to present its arguments, the outcome could significantly impact the balance of power between the two states. If the ICJ upholds the validity of the Bata Convention, Gabon will strengthen its control over the disputed islets. Conversely, a ruling favouring Equatorial Guinea could force Gabon to relinquish its claims, affecting its energy prospects.
The ICJ’s decision may carry broader implications beyond this specific case. A ruling in favour of Gabon may encourage Equatorial Guinea to challenge other border agreements, risking further tensions in a region already marked by territorial disputes. Conversely, a decision favouring Malabo might compel Gabon to withdraw from the territories, impacting its ambitions in the energy sector.
Both countries emphasise the importance of reaching a sustainable agreement. They hope this approach could pave the way for future cooperation, particularly in joint oil exploration. This cautious strategy proves crucial for maintaining regional stability and attracting foreign investment in the hydrocarbon sector.
The hearings represent a critical juncture for Gabon and Equatorial Guinea. As they await the court’s ruling, the potential for increased cooperation hangs in the balance. Both nations keenly avoid confrontation and prioritise a diplomatic resolution to the dispute over the islets. The coming days will prove pivotal as they present their cases and await the ICJ’s decision, which could reshape the energy landscape in Central Africa.