CAMBODIA v THAILAND

Case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear

Topic: Modes of Acquisition

FACTS:

The Temple of Preah Vihear stood on a promontory of the Dangrek range of mountains which
constituted the boundary between Cambodia and Thailand. The dispute had its fons et origo in
the boundary settlements made in the period 1904-1908 between France, then conducting the
foreign relations of Indo-China, and Siam (Thailand). The application of the Treaty of 1904 was,
in particular, involved. That Treaty established the general character of the frontier the exact
boundary of which was to be delimited by a Franco-Siamese Mixed Commission. In the
eastern sector of the Dangrek range, in which Preah Vihear was situated, the frontier was to
follow the watershed line. The Presidents of the French and Siamese sections traveled along
the Dangrek range in order to make the survey of the eastern part of the range. The boundary
line was established and a map was prepared by the French officials. The map showed
Temple of Preah Vihear on the Cambodian side. The map was never formally approved by the
Mixed Commission as it ceased to function sometime before the creation of the map. Since
there was no reaction on the part of the Siamese authorities, either then or for many years,
they must be held to have acquiesced. The maps were moreover communicated to the
Siamese members of the Mixed Commission, who said nothing. Basta sinasabi dito na
maraming chance yung Thailand na mag-object sa map pero di nila ginawa. Thailand had
nevertheless continued also to use and indeed to publish maps showing Preah Vihear as lying
in Cambodia. If the Siamese authorities accepted the Annex I map without investigation, they
could not now plead any error vitiating the reality of their consent. The natural inference was
that she had accepted the frontier at Preah Vihear as it was drawn on the map. Thailand
contended that the map has no binding effect not being made by the Mixed Commission.

ISSUE: W/N Thailand may claim the Temple of Preah Vihear as part of its territory

HELD: NO.

The court concluded that Thailand had accepted the Annex I map (yung nasa Cambodia side
yung Temple).

Thailand was not precluded from asserting that she had not accepted it since France and
Cambodia had relied upon her acceptance and she had for fifty years enjoyed such benefits as
the Treaty of 1904 has conferred on her. Estopped na yung Thailand.

As a result, Thailand was under an obligation to withdraw any military or police forces, or other
guards or keepers, stationed by her at the Temple, or in its vicinity on Cambodian territory.
Furthermore, Thailand was under an obligation to restore to Cambodia any sculptures, stelae,
fragments of monuments, sandstone model and ancient pottery which might, since the date of
the occupation of the Temple by Thailand in 1954, have been removed from the Temple or the
Temple area by the Thai authorities.