Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice, 16 October 1975
I. Facts Morocco succeeded in getting Western Sahara to be listed on the list of territories to be decolonized by Spain, and on December 20, 1966, the United Nations General Assembly called on Spain to hold a referendum on self-determination in the region. Morocco and Mauritania, however, insisted that Western Sahara be reintegrated into their territories, but Spain refused the claims. II. Issues 1. WON Western Sahara at the time of colonization by Spain a territory belonging to no one (terra nullius)? 2. WON the legal ties between this territory and the Kingdom of Morocco and the Mauritanian entity were indicative of territorial sovereignty? III. Held 1. No. In law, "occupation" was a means of peaceably acquiring sovereignty over territory otherwise than by cession or succession; it was a cardinal condition of a valid "occupation" that the territory should be terra nullius. The Court found that at the time of colonization, Western Sahara was inhabited by peoples which, if nomadic, were socially and politically organized in tribes and under chiefs competent to represent them. 2. No. Morocco failed to display any effective and exclusive State activity in Western Sahara. The tribes in the Sahara were bound to Morocco by mere legal ties of allegiance. Also, the Court noted that at the time of colonization by Spain there did not exist between the territory of Western Sahara and the Mauritanian entity any tie of sovereignty or of allegiance of tribes, or of simple inclusion in the same legal entity. To establish territorial sovereignty, there must be two elements: the intention and will to act as sovereign and the actual exercise of authority.
Legal Status of Eastern Greenland
Denmark v. Norway Permanent International Court of Justice, 5 September 1933 I. Facts A suit was instituted before the Permanent Court of International Justice by the Royal Danish Government against the Royal Norwegian Government over the legal status of certain territories in Eastern Greenland. The cause of Action for the dispute arose when Norwegian Government on July 10th, 1931 proclaimed that it proceeded to occupy certain territories of Eastern Greenland which as contented by Denmark were subject to sovereignty of Crown of Denmark. II. Issue WON Denmark established sovereignty over Greenland to render the subsequent proclamation of occupation by Norway as unlawful III. Held Yes. Denmark had peaceful and continuous display of State authority over the island. Its intention and will to exercise sovereignty over Greenland manifested in the treaties it entered into concerning Greenland. Moreover, Denmark issued legislations for the administration of Greenland, and granted concessions for the erection of telegraph lines and delineation of limits on territorial waters within the region. The Ilhen declaration, a statement of Norwegian Foreign Minister to the effect that Norway would not intrude upon Denmarks authority over the region subject of the dispute, further substantiated Denmarks claim over Greenland.