The Hague, 6 March 1997 (RFE/RL) - Legal proceedings continue at the International Court in The Hague, as Hungarian and Slovak representatives present more arguments in the Gabcikovo dam dispute.
Slovakia's argument is that Bratislava merely tried to complete construction of the original Gabcikovo project, which Hungary backed out of due to environmental concerns. The project envisioned diverting the Danube, which forms the common border.
Hungarian representatives argue that Slovakia's unilateral diversion of a common border violates international law.
Slovakia's representatives say Bratislava continued the $500 million project, while Hungary argues that Slovakia altered the project, and it is essentially different from the power plant system that Hungary and then-Czechoslovakia agreed to build in 1977.
The Court is expected to deliver its non-binding ruling on the case in the fall.
Slovakia's argument is that Bratislava merely tried to complete construction of the original Gabcikovo project, which Hungary backed out of due to environmental concerns. The project envisioned diverting the Danube, which forms the common border.
Hungarian representatives argue that Slovakia's unilateral diversion of a common border violates international law.
Slovakia's representatives say Bratislava continued the $500 million project, while Hungary argues that Slovakia altered the project, and it is essentially different from the power plant system that Hungary and then-Czechoslovakia agreed to build in 1977.
The Court is expected to deliver its non-binding ruling on the case in the fall.