Latest news with #ParisTreaty
New Straits Times
2 days ago
- Business
- New Straits Times
NST Leader: 'AI is too important not to regulate'
TECH titans have finally got what they were clambering for: a free pass to artificial intelligence (AI) development, thanks to United States President Donald Trump's AI Action Plan unveiled on Wednesday in Washington, at a tech summit attended by the elites of the industry. Calling it "Winning the AI Race", he said his action plan is designed to put the US ahead of other nations. "America must once again be a country where innovators are rewarded with green light, not strangled with red tape", the media quoted him as saying. There is only one way to read Trump's "green light" message: whatever regulations that stand in the way of AI "innovation" will be removed. First to go will be whatever that remains of the former administration's regulations. Is this the right path to take on AI? While tech titans will say yes, there are others who say no because AI comes with so many unknowns. Not even the AI entrepreneurs know where the technology is taking us. Certainly, AI has promises of benefits, but they come clothed with known and unknown risks. Alphabet and Google chief executive officer Sundar Pichai writing an opinion piece in the Financial Times on May 23, 2023 said that "AI is too important not to regulate and too important to regulate well", meaning regulating in a way that balances innovation and potential harms. But a race to be first will certainly not strike the right balance. Google's promise is to develop AI responsibly, but when the profit chase becomes hot would the pledge still hold? Pichai must know AI is fast becoming a crowded space, with every company racing to shape the technology according to its business needs. In other words, profit before people and planet. Our bad old free market economic model — the myth that markets perform best when they are free of regulations — has followed us into the digital world. Myth-busting economist Ha-Joon Chang has made it crystal clear that the free market doesn't exist anywhere in the world. With this "free-to-choose" mindset, nothing can be developed responsibly, let alone AI. We have long been witnesses of irresponsible capitalism, at times victims even. Hence the call for "compassionate capitalism", a sign that the free-to-choose market model has hit the lowest of low. Innovative AI development is only possible in a regulation-free space is a similar myth by another name. This is why the European Union has opted for the AI Act, one of whose aims is to make the technology "work for people and is a force for good in society". It came into effect on Aug 1 last year, claiming the honour of being the first-ever legislation to address the risks of AI. Whether or not such a goal is enforced is a question of political will, not the fault of the law. The EU model isn't the only way to tame AI. A better approach is a global AI treaty. But this will only work in a rules-based world order. Ours isn't. The Paris Treaty on climate change is in a bit of a shambles. So are the Rome Statute and the Law of the Sea. Regional or national approach may be inevitable.
Business Recorder
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Business Recorder
ICJ backs E.Guinea in spat with Gabon over oil-rich islands
THE HAGUE: The top United Nations court on Monday sided with Equatorial Guinea in a decades-long dispute with Gabon over three tiny islands in potentially oil-rich waters. The two west African nations have been squabbling over the 30-hectare (74-acre) island of Mbanie and two smaller low-lying islets, Cocotiers and Conga, since the early 1970s. The islands themselves are tiny and virtually uninhabited but lie in an area potentially rich in oil and gas. The dispute dates all the way back to 1900, when then colonial powers France and Spain signed a treaty in Paris setting out the borders between the two countries. But Gabon argued that a later treaty, the 1974 Bata Convention, then fixed the islands' sovereignty in their favour. However, the International Court of Justice ruled that the Bata Convention "invoked by the Gabonese Republic is not a treaty having the force of law... and does not constitute a legal title." It said that the legal title to the islands was held by Spain, which then passed to Equatorial Guinea upon independence in 1968. Unlike most countries appearing before the ICJ in The Hague, which rules in disputes between states, Guinea and Equatorial Guinea agreed to ask judges for a ruling in an effort to find an amical solution. The two countries asked the court to decide which legal texts are valid -- the Paris Treaty of 1900 or the Bata Convention of 1974. Reacting to the ruling, a representative for Gabon, Guy Rossatanga-Rignault, said it was now down to the parties to negotiate in the light of the ruling. "Gabon and Equatorial Guinea have to live side-by-side, we can't move away from each other. Therefore we will have to talk it over to solve all these problems," he told reporters. The representatives for Equatorial Guinea declined to speak to reporters at the Peace Palace, the seat of the ICJ. However, in hearings in October, Equatorial Guinea argued that Gabon invaded the islands in 1972 and had occupied them illegally ever since. Lawyers for the country rubbished the Bata Convention in the October hearings, saying Gabon suddenly produced the document in 2003, surprising everyone. "No one had seen or heard of this supposed convention," Domingo Mba Esono, Vice-Minister of Mines and Hydrocarbons from Equatorial Guinea, told ICJ judges. "Moreover, the document presented was not an original but was only an unauthenticated photocopy," said Esono. Philippe Sands, a lawyer representing Equatorial Guinea, dismissed the Bata Convention as "scraps of paper". "You are being asked to rule that a state can rely on a photocopy of a photocopy of a purported document, the original of which cannot be found and of which no mention was made or any reliance placed for three decades," said Sands. Equatorial Guinea has been asking for an original copy of the Bata Convention since 2003, so far in vain. 'Badly managed' But Marie-Madeleine Mborantsuo, honorary president of Gabon's constitutional court, argued that the Bata Convention "resolves all sovereignty issues regarding the islands and border delimitation". She admitted that "sadly, neither of the two parties can find the original document", noting it was drawn up in an era before computers and databases. "Archives were badly managed because of a number of things -- unfavourable climate, a lack of trained personnel and lack of technology," said Mborantsuo. The court ruled that neither country seemed to regard the Bata Convention as binding upon them, meaning the court did not consider it the correct title in force.
Yahoo
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
ICJ sides with E.Guinea in spat with Gabon over oil-rich islands
The top United Nations court on Monday sided with Equatorial Guinea in a decades-long dispute with Gabon over three tiny islands in potentially oil-rich waters. The two west African nations have been squabbling over the 30-hectare (74-acre) island of Mbanie and two smaller low-lying islets, Cocotiers and Conga, since the early 1970s. The islands themselves are tiny and virtually uninhabited but lie in an area potentially rich in oil and gas. The dispute dates all the way back to 1900, when then colonial powers France and Spain signed a treaty in Paris setting out the borders between the two countries. But Gabon argued that a later treaty, the 1974 Bata Convention, then fixed the islands' sovereignty in their favour. However, the International Court of Justice ruled that the Bata Convention "invoked by the Gabonese Republic is not a treaty having the force of law... and does not constitute a legal title." It said that the legal title to the islands was held by Spain, which then passed to Equatorial Guinea upon independence in 1968. Unlike most countries appearing before the ICJ in The Hague, which rules in disputes between states, Guinea and Equatorial Guinea agreed to ask judges for a ruling in an effort to find an amical solution. The two countries asked the court to decide which legal texts are valid -- the Paris Treaty of 1900 or the Bata Convention of 1974. In hearings in October, Equatorial Guinea argued that Gabon invaded the islands in 1972 and had occupied them illegally ever since. Lawyers for the country rubbished the Bata Convention in the October hearings, saying Gabon suddenly produced the document in 2003, surprising everyone. "No one had seen or heard of this supposed convention," Domingo Mba Esono, Vice-Minister of Mines and Hydrocarbons from Equatorial Guinea, told ICJ judges. "Moreover, the document presented was not an original but was only an unauthenticated photocopy," said Esono. Philippe Sands, a lawyer representing Equatorial Guinea, dismissed the Bata Convention as "scraps of paper". "You are being asked to rule that a state can rely on a photocopy of a photocopy of a purported document, the original of which cannot be found and of which no mention was made or any reliance placed for three decades," said Sands. Equatorial Guinea has been asking for an original copy of the Bata Convention since 2003, so far in vain. - 'Badly managed' - But Marie-Madeleine Mborantsuo, honorary president of Gabon's constitutional court, argued that the Bata Convention "resolves all sovereignty issues regarding the islands and border delimitation". She admitted that "sadly, neither of the two parties can find the original document", noting it was drawn up in an era before computers and databases. "Archives were badly managed because of a number of things -- unfavourable climate, a lack of trained personnel and lack of technology," said Mborantsuo. The court ruled that neither country seemed to regard the Bata Convention as binding upon them, meaning the court did not consider it the correct title in force. ric/cw
Int'l Business Times
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Int'l Business Times
ICJ Sides With E.Guinea In Spat With Gabon Over Oil-rich Islands
The top United Nations court on Monday sided with Equatorial Guinea in a decades-long dispute with Gabon over three tiny islands in potentially oil-rich waters. The two west African nations have been squabbling over the 30-hectare (74-acre) island of Mbanie and two smaller low-lying islets, Cocotiers and Conga, since the early 1970s. The islands themselves are tiny and virtually uninhabited but lie in an area potentially rich in oil and gas. The dispute dates all the way back to 1900, when then colonial powers France and Spain signed a treaty in Paris setting out the borders between the two countries. But Gabon argued that a later treaty, the 1974 Bata Convention, then fixed the islands' sovereignty in their favour. However, the International Court of Justice ruled that the Bata Convention "invoked by the Gabonese Republic is not a treaty having the force of law... and does not constitute a legal title." It said that the legal title to the islands was held by Spain, which then passed to Equatorial Guinea upon independence in 1968. Unlike most countries appearing before the ICJ in The Hague, which rules in disputes between states, Guinea and Equatorial Guinea agreed to ask judges for a ruling in an effort to find an amical solution. The two countries asked the court to decide which legal texts are valid -- the Paris Treaty of 1900 or the Bata Convention of 1974. In hearings in October, Equatorial Guinea argued that Gabon invaded the islands in 1972 and had occupied them illegally ever since. Lawyers for the country rubbished the Bata Convention in the October hearings, saying Gabon suddenly produced the document in 2003, surprising everyone. "No one had seen or heard of this supposed convention," Domingo Mba Esono, Vice-Minister of Mines and Hydrocarbons from Equatorial Guinea, told ICJ judges. "Moreover, the document presented was not an original but was only an unauthenticated photocopy," said Esono. Philippe Sands, a lawyer representing Equatorial Guinea, dismissed the Bata Convention as "scraps of paper". "You are being asked to rule that a state can rely on a photocopy of a photocopy of a purported document, the original of which cannot be found and of which no mention was made or any reliance placed for three decades," said Sands. Equatorial Guinea has been asking for an original copy of the Bata Convention since 2003, so far in vain. But Marie-Madeleine Mborantsuo, honorary president of Gabon's constitutional court, argued that the Bata Convention "resolves all sovereignty issues regarding the islands and border delimitation". She admitted that "sadly, neither of the two parties can find the original document", noting it was drawn up in an era before computers and databases. "Archives were badly managed because of a number of things -- unfavourable climate, a lack of trained personnel and lack of technology," said Mborantsuo. The court ruled that neither country seemed to regard the Bata Convention as binding upon them, meaning the court did not consider it the correct title in force.
France 24
19-05-2025
- Politics
- France 24
ICJ sides with E.Guinea in spat with Gabon over oil-rich islands
The two west African nations have been squabbling over the 30-hectare (74-acre) island of Mbanie and two smaller low-lying islets, Cocotiers and Conga, since the early 1970s. The islands themselves are tiny and virtually uninhabited but lie in an area potentially rich in oil and gas. The dispute dates all the way back to 1900, when then colonial powers France and Spain signed a treaty in Paris setting out the borders between the two countries. But Gabon argued that a later treaty, the 1974 Bata Convention, then fixed the islands' sovereignty in their favour. However, the International Court of Justice ruled that the Bata Convention "invoked by the Gabonese Republic is not a treaty having the force of law... and does not constitute a legal title." It said that the legal title to the islands was held by Spain, which then passed to Equatorial Guinea upon independence in 1968. Unlike most countries appearing before the ICJ in The Hague, which rules in disputes between states, Guinea and Equatorial Guinea agreed to ask judges for a ruling in an effort to find an amical solution. The two countries asked the court to decide which legal texts are valid -- the Paris Treaty of 1900 or the Bata Convention of 1974. In hearings in October, Equatorial Guinea argued that Gabon invaded the islands in 1972 and had occupied them illegally ever since. Lawyers for the country rubbished the Bata Convention in the October hearings, saying Gabon suddenly produced the document in 2003, surprising everyone. "No one had seen or heard of this supposed convention," Domingo Mba Esono, Vice-Minister of Mines and Hydrocarbons from Equatorial Guinea, told ICJ judges. "Moreover, the document presented was not an original but was only an unauthenticated photocopy," said Esono. Philippe Sands, a lawyer representing Equatorial Guinea, dismissed the Bata Convention as "scraps of paper". "You are being asked to rule that a state can rely on a photocopy of a photocopy of a purported document, the original of which cannot be found and of which no mention was made or any reliance placed for three decades," said Sands. Equatorial Guinea has been asking for an original copy of the Bata Convention since 2003, so far in vain. 'Badly managed' But Marie-Madeleine Mborantsuo, honorary president of Gabon's constitutional court, argued that the Bata Convention "resolves all sovereignty issues regarding the islands and border delimitation". She admitted that "sadly, neither of the two parties can find the original document", noting it was drawn up in an era before computers and databases. "Archives were badly managed because of a number of things -- unfavourable climate, a lack of trained personnel and lack of technology," said Mborantsuo. The court ruled that neither country seemed to regard the Bata Convention as binding upon them, meaning the court did not consider it the correct title in force.
