Historical evidence and the Eastern Greenland case

The Eastern Greenland case (1931-33) is the only territorial dispute in the polar regions ever to have been decided by an international court. Norway challenged Denmark's claim to sovereignty over all of Greenland on the grounds that Denmark had established effective occupation in a limited are...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Cavell, J. (Janice)
Format: Other/Unknown Material
Language:English
Published: 2008
Subjects:
Online Access:https://ir.library.carleton.ca/pub/15602
id ftcarletonunivir:oai:carleton.ca:15602
record_format openpolar
spelling ftcarletonunivir:oai:carleton.ca:15602 2023-05-15T14:20:53+02:00 Historical evidence and the Eastern Greenland case Cavell, J. (Janice) 2008-12-01 https://ir.library.carleton.ca/pub/15602 en eng https://ir.library.carleton.ca/pub/15602 Arctic vol. 61 no. 4, pp. 433-441 Eastern greenland Polar regions Sovereignty info:eu-repo/semantics/other 2008 ftcarletonunivir 2022-02-06T21:50:48Z The Eastern Greenland case (1931-33) is the only territorial dispute in the polar regions ever to have been decided by an international court. Norway challenged Denmark's claim to sovereignty over all of Greenland on the grounds that Denmark had established effective occupation in a limited area only. The Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ) held that effective occupation in the polar regions requires relatively little actual exercise of sovereign rights, and that Denmark therefore did indeed have sovereignty over the entire island. Both parties in the dispute based many of their arguments on historical evidence, most notably the records of a series of diplomatic overtures to other states made by Denmark between 1915 and 1921. These documents, the Norwegians argued, showed that the Danes themselves did not believe that they had sovereignty over the entire island. The Danes, on the other hand, contended that their sovereignty dated back to the Middle Ages. The Court found the Danish arguments more convincing. However, the dissenting opinion of Justice Dionisio Anzilotti upheld the Norwegian interpretation. This paper re-examines the issue in the light of historical evidence, found recently in Canadian archives, that was not available to the Court. These new documents indicate that Anzilotti's view was the correct one. While the 1933 decision in favour of Denmark can be upheld on other than historical grounds, a re-assessment of the historical evidence and arguments presented to the PCIJ is essential to set the record straight. Other/Unknown Material Arctic Greenland Carleton University's Institutional Repository Greenland Norway
institution Open Polar
collection Carleton University's Institutional Repository
op_collection_id ftcarletonunivir
language English
topic Eastern greenland
Polar regions
Sovereignty
spellingShingle Eastern greenland
Polar regions
Sovereignty
Cavell, J. (Janice)
Historical evidence and the Eastern Greenland case
topic_facet Eastern greenland
Polar regions
Sovereignty
description The Eastern Greenland case (1931-33) is the only territorial dispute in the polar regions ever to have been decided by an international court. Norway challenged Denmark's claim to sovereignty over all of Greenland on the grounds that Denmark had established effective occupation in a limited area only. The Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ) held that effective occupation in the polar regions requires relatively little actual exercise of sovereign rights, and that Denmark therefore did indeed have sovereignty over the entire island. Both parties in the dispute based many of their arguments on historical evidence, most notably the records of a series of diplomatic overtures to other states made by Denmark between 1915 and 1921. These documents, the Norwegians argued, showed that the Danes themselves did not believe that they had sovereignty over the entire island. The Danes, on the other hand, contended that their sovereignty dated back to the Middle Ages. The Court found the Danish arguments more convincing. However, the dissenting opinion of Justice Dionisio Anzilotti upheld the Norwegian interpretation. This paper re-examines the issue in the light of historical evidence, found recently in Canadian archives, that was not available to the Court. These new documents indicate that Anzilotti's view was the correct one. While the 1933 decision in favour of Denmark can be upheld on other than historical grounds, a re-assessment of the historical evidence and arguments presented to the PCIJ is essential to set the record straight.
format Other/Unknown Material
author Cavell, J. (Janice)
author_facet Cavell, J. (Janice)
author_sort Cavell, J. (Janice)
title Historical evidence and the Eastern Greenland case
title_short Historical evidence and the Eastern Greenland case
title_full Historical evidence and the Eastern Greenland case
title_fullStr Historical evidence and the Eastern Greenland case
title_full_unstemmed Historical evidence and the Eastern Greenland case
title_sort historical evidence and the eastern greenland case
publishDate 2008
url https://ir.library.carleton.ca/pub/15602
geographic Greenland
Norway
geographic_facet Greenland
Norway
genre Arctic
Greenland
genre_facet Arctic
Greenland
op_source Arctic vol. 61 no. 4, pp. 433-441
op_relation https://ir.library.carleton.ca/pub/15602
_version_ 1766293366940631040