Cambodia to bring border dispute with Thailand to the International Court of Justice

Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet forms a high-level documenting committee to build a case for the ICJ, while Thai leadership favors resolving the issue through direct dialogue

Phnom Penh: Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet has announced that his government will take the long-standing border dispute with Thailand to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). To support this move, Cambodia has established a high-level documenting committee tasked with gathering the necessary evidence and documents for the case. This step comes as both countries prepare for a Joint Boundary Commission (JBC) meeting on June 14 in Phnom Penh to discuss the contentious border issues.

The Cambodian government revealed the formation of the “Committee to Prepare Documents for Filing a Case with the International Court of Justice Regarding the Areas of Mom Bei, Ta Moan Thom Temple, Ta Moan Tauch Temple, and Ta Krabei Temple.” Local reports indicate that the committee, chaired by Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Affairs Minister Prak Sokhonn, will have full authority to represent the Kingdom of Cambodia before the ICJ.

---

In contrast, Thailand remains committed to resolving the border dispute through bilateral negotiations. Thai Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra confirmed that discussions with her Cambodian counterparts including conversations with Prime Minister Hun Manet and former premier Hun Sen had led to a mutual pledge for a peaceful dialogue. “Our commitment to a peaceful approach has yielded positive results,” she said, adding that the June 14 meeting will proceed as planned.

However, as Cambodia prepares its case for the ICJ, Thai authorities have reiterated that they will not accept the Court’s jurisdiction over the matter. The disagreement deepened after an incident on May 28 when soldiers from both nations exchanged gunfire at the Emerald Triangle border area, resulting in the death of a Cambodian soldier.

This development marks a critical juncture in the dispute, with differing approaches underscoring the challenge of finding a resolution in a region marked by historical tensions.