Legal Status of Eastern Greenland

PCIJ Sept. 5, 1933

Facts:

- The area in contention here is Eastern Greenland, which Norway insists as terra nullius and so was open to the
subsequent occupation of Norway, to which Denmark argues that the same was under its sovereignty considering
that it is the whole of Greenland that the latter has a claim to.
o Basically, Norway argues that it is only the western coast of Greenlandas opposed to the whole of it
that Denmark has a claim. Denmark, however, evinces through historical treaties, documents, and
conventions that its claim is the whole of Greenland.
- The Court then detailed the long history of Danish and Norwegian occupation in Greenland. Some notable facts:
o When the Kingdoms of Norway and Denmark separated (with Denmark ceding Norway to Sweden),
Greenland remained with Denmark.
o Denmark granted concessions to a long list of persons and companies for trading purposes and for the
exploration of Greenland.
o For the longest time, Denmark concluded treaties and conventions (some of it with Norway as a party)
with a note, except for Greenland or Convention/Treaty not applying to Greenland.
- During the peace conference following the conclusion of WWI, Denmark sought recognition from other foreign
governments as to its own sovereignty over the whole of Greenland.
o USA was the first to give this affirmation of Denmarks sovereignty over Greenland in a declaration,
following the conclusion of their (US and Denmarks) own treaty regarding some other territory.
o Denmark then moved to get the assent of Norway (damoves ni Denmark):
First, Denmark gave Norway the assurance that the former did not have any interest in
Spitzbergen (a separate island northeast of Greenland that Norway has been eyeing/claiming).
In making this assurance, Denmark pointed out its own anxiety to obtain the recognition of all
pertinent parties as to its own sovereignty over Greenland, and that the US has already
acknowledged Denmarks right. It then stated that it counted on the Norwegian Government not
[to make] any difficulties with regard to such extension. Norway responded that the question
will be considered.
Subsequently, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Norway (Mr. Ihlen) made a statement to the
Danish Minister that the Norwegian Government would not make any difficulties in the
settlement of this question. These were the words recorded in the minute by Mr. Ihlen himself
(Ihlen declaration).
According to the report made by the Danish Minister to his own Government, however,
the Ministers words (or how he understood it) were that "the plans of the Royal [Danish]
Government respecting Danish sovereignty over the whole of Greenlandwould meet
with no difficulties on the part of Norway".
- After securing like declarations from different foreign governments (France, Britain, Japan, Italy), all recognizing
Denmarks claim over Greenland, Denmark then sent a memorandum to Norway which repeated its desire for
Norways recognition. It mentioned the acknowledgement of the Powers regarding Denmarks claim, and that
Norway already assented to the same, although verbally, via the Ihlen Declaration.
o Norway, however, denied this claim.
- To solve this issue, both Denmark and Norway agreed to conduct negotiations while leaving first the legal status
of the contested part of the Island undefined.
o Norway proceeded to occupy a part of the contested area, and so Denmark submitted to the Court the
issue.
Held:

- WoN the Ihlen Declaration is a recognition of the existing sovereignty of Denmark in Greenland (as what has
been argued by Denmark)? NO
o A careful examination of the words used and of the circumstances in which they were used, as well as of
the subsequent developments, shows that Minister Ihlen cannot have meant to be giving then and there a
definitive recognition of Danish sovereignty over Greenland, and shows also that he cannot have been
understood by the Danish Government at the time as having done so.
o In the text of M. Ihlen's minute, submitted by the Norwegian Government (which has not been disputed
by the Danish Government) the phrase used by M. Ihlen is couched in the future tense: ne fera pas de
difficulties or will not cause difficulties.
- Whether the Ihlen declarationeven if not constituting a definitive recognition of Danish sovereignty
constitutes an engagement obliging Norway to refrain from occupying any part of Greenland. YES
o It can be seen that the Danish attitude in the Spitzbergen question and the Norwegian attitude in
the Greenland question were regarded in Denmark as interdependent, and this interdependence
appears to be reflected also in M. Ihlen's minutes of the conversation.
o Even if this interdependence is not held to have been established, it can hardly be denied that what
Denmark was asking of Norway ("not to make any difficulties in the settlement of the Greenland
question") was equivalent to what she was indicating her readiness to concede in the Spitzbergen question
(to refrain from opposing "the wishes of Norway in regard to the settlement of this question").
o What Denmark desired to obtain from Norway was that the latter should do nothing to obstruct the
Danish plans in regard to Greenland. The declaration which the Minister for Foreign Affairs gave
on July 22nd, 1919, on behalf of the Norwegian Government, was definitely affirmative : "I told the
Danish Minister today that the Norwegian Government would not make any difficulty in the
settlement of this question.
o The Court considers it beyond all dispute that a reply of this nature given by the Minister for
Foreign Affairs on behalf of his Government, in response to a request by the diplomatic
representative of a foreign Power on a question falling within his province, is binding upon the
country to which the Minister belongs.

Note: the pertinent part of Minister Ihlens minutes for easy reference:

"I. The Danish Minister informed me today that his Government has heard from Paris that the question of Spitzbergen
will be examined by a Commission of four members (American, British, French, Italian). If the Danish Government is
questioned by this Commission, it is prepared to reply that Denmark has no interests in Spitzbergen, and that it has no
reason to oppose the wishes of Norway in regard to the settlement of this question.

Furthermore, the Danish Minister made the following statement:

The Danish Government has for some years past been anxious to obtain the recognition of all the interested Powers of
Denmark's sovereignty over the whole of Greenland, and it proposes to place this question before the above-mentioned
Committee at the same time. During the negotiations with the U.S.A. over the cession of the Danish West Indies, the
Danish Government raised this question in so far as concerns recognition by the Government of the U.S.A., and it
succeeded in inducing the latter to agree that, concurrently with the conclusion of a convention regarding the cession of
the said islands, it would make a declaration to the effect that the Government of the U.S.A. would not object to the
Danish Government extending their political and economic interests to the whole of Greenland.
The Danish Government is confident (he added) that the Norwegian Government will not make any difficulties in the
settlement of this question.

I replied that the question would be examined.

"II. To-day I informed the Danish Minister that the Norwegian Government would not make any difficulties in
the settlement of this question.