01/01/2026
Official Explanation to the Thai Side
The Kingdom of Cambodia respectfully calls upon the Kingdom of Thailand to immediately cease all incursions into Cambodian territory. Such actions undermine peace, stability, and mutual trust between our two nations, and they risk escalating tensions that could otherwise be resolved through lawful and diplomatic means. Cambodia emphasizes that border disputes must be addressed through dialogue, established bilateral mechanisms, and, if necessary, international adjudication—not through unilateral military actions.
Attached below is a detailed explanation of the legal avenues available for Cambodia to resolve border disputes under international law:
---
Settlement of Cambodia–Thailand Border Disputes at International Courts
The process of bringing a border dispute between Cambodia and Thailand before international courts is complex, and it differs significantly depending on whether the matter is addressed at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) or the International Criminal Court (ICC).
1. International Court of Justice (ICJ)
- The ICJ (based in The Hague) adjudicates disputes between states. Cambodia successfully brought the Preah Vihear temple case in 1962 and obtained a clarification of the judgment in 2013.
- Possibility of filing a case:
- Yes, but only under strict conditions. The ICJ can hear a case if both Cambodia and Thailand accept its jurisdiction.
- Procedural options:
- Special Agreement: Both states jointly submit the dispute to the ICJ (rare, as one side may resist).
- Compulsory Jurisdiction: If both states have previously accepted ICJ jurisdiction (Thailand has withdrawn from some clauses).
- Treaty-based jurisdiction: If a treaty explicitly requires disputes to be settled at the ICJ (as in the 1962 Preah Vihear case).
2. International Criminal Court (ICC)
- The ICC does not adjudicate land or border disputes. Instead, it prosecutes individuals (leaders or military commanders) for grave crimes.
- Possibility of filing a case:
- Not for “border disputes,” but possible for war crimes or acts of aggression if military clashes occur.
- Cambodia is a party to the Rome Statute; Thailand is not.
- Procedural options:
- Crimes committed on Cambodian territory fall under ICC jurisdiction, even if committed by foreign forces.
- The Cambodian government may refer cases to the ICC Prosecutor.
- The UN Security Council may also refer cases, though this is rare for regional disputes.
---
Key Differences
| Aspect | ICJ | ICC |
|--------|-----|-----|
| Subject matter | Border disputes, sovereignty, territorial waters | War crimes, crimes against humanity |
| Defendant | States (e.g., Thailand) | Individuals (leaders, commanders) |
| Feasibility for Cambodia | Possible with clear legal basis (e.g., treaties, prior acceptance) | Possible only if armed conflict and crimes occur on Cambodian soil |
---
Additional Considerations
For current disputes (land and maritime, including the OCA), the most effective mechanism remains bilateral negotiation through the Joint Boundary Commission (JBC) or diplomatic channels. Resorting to international courts should be considered only as a last option, when negotiations are completely blocked, as such proceedings are lengthy and costly.
---
Cambodia therefore urges Thailand to respect international law, honor bilateral mechanisms, and refrain from any further incursions into Cambodian territory. Peaceful resolution through dialogue and legal frameworks is the only path that safeguards the dignity and sovereignty of both nations.
