BOGOTA. In the midst of a harsh letter dated last November, the US company Sea Search Armada the Government warns that failing to respect the ruling of the Supreme Court of 2007, which apparently gives half the treasure galleon San Jose the foreign company will defend “what injunctive belongs”.
However, in 1993 the government authorized the relocation of San José and therefore, a year later, sailed the ARC Malpelo, manager of such a mission and based on the coordinates given by the company in 1982 Glocca Morra in 1983 which ceded its rights Search- Sea. The July 3, 1994, the ARC Malpelo leave the search area in the reported coordinates because there was no wreck. And on August 2 of that year Species Advisory Committee shipwrecked authorized to hire the relocation of San Jose. Read also: “galleon San Jose was found in a place never referenced”. Government
In the letter of Sea Search from 19 November, Danilo Devis, a lawyer in Colombia of the US company, will This brings the Culture Minister Mariana Garces, that “since 1984 the dispute between the Nation and Sea Search Armada, as a result of the arbitrary reduction of 50 came to 5 percent of its ownership of the treasures reported, have been unsuccessful efforts to establish a dialogue that can lead to the peaceful resolution of this issue. “
Quote the American company in the document, known for the Herald, the decision of the Supreme Court Justice, dated July 5, 2007, “which restored the right violated, and declared their property in common and undivided nation with equal parts”. Also read: “No doubt, are the guns of the galleon San Jose”. Santos
And claims that “regardless of a court decision such a hierarchy, now come on confidential procedures designed to deliver to a third party rescue these treasures. “
In this situation,” abnormal “Sea Search places on record in the letter about that were required on 24 August last” information on the proposals in the pipeline “, but warns , he responded “half” on 4 November.
It also complains that “the announcement of the verification of the shipwreck in a different place” the prescribed by it on March 18, 1982, ” It is sufficient to conclude that in such proposals the maritime areas reported are included, “because” since that day the discoverer left perfect and clearly established the location of his find in a place other than the coordinates where the verification announced will take place. ”
Waste of resources. The lawyer mentioned that the July 7, 1994, the Presidency confirmed in a statement that after searches of companies represented by Thomas Thompson and Fabio Echeverri, there was no wreck in the areas reported by Sea Search. Therefore, the company warns that if the nation began a new search “would be incurred in an inexcusable waste of public money”.
Remember Devis that on May 19 met with the Government but asserts that 28 July the mincultura suspended by the absence of shipwrecks in the area reported.
As the dialogue came with the condition that the company cease actions against the Executive, Sea Search reiterates his “opposition to for exploration and / or extraction, without the express written approval, the nation or its contractor access to maritime areas reported “, as he says, as the nation was opposed to threat of military force on April 13 2010 after the company agreed to these areas.
It was a relocation
criticizes the Sea “it has come to an amazing approach, which is to foist the Supreme Court had changed the nonsense on the other the wreck signaled by who discovered “, for, he says, that the discoverer lose control.
The Sea Search finds that the Government’s decision leaves him the “only option to address a situation that has been imposed, forcing her to defend what belongs to him by court order.”
Devis, in an interview with The Herald, said that the finding made by the Government It resulted from areas Glocca Morra and denounced by the ruling prevails in this case is the Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court, which states that the underwater cultural heritage is owned by Colombia, but that implies treasure economic value must be divided equally between the exploration company and the state.
“It was a relocation (…), so it’s a kind of reconfirmation that the wreck is in those areas. He did not mention the lawsuit with the Court, nor made any criticism of the sentence. If that were located outside the areas reported by the company, it would be the first thing you have said, because it would remove the ride. What happens is that they sought and found in the areas reported. Besides all that is there, it is embargoed. (…) No one can have the treasure until the judgment of the Court, that is to divide the treasure between the state and Sea Search is fulfilled. “
He added that what was said in 2007 by the Supreme Court” is and res judicata. That can no longer be discussed before a judge on the planet. ” And in relation to the judgment of the District Court of Columbia in 2011 the Colombian government declared winner, said “those were some side suits, accessories, collateral (…). It was presented by a global issue, which was banned in 2010 access to the treasure, then as we did a few contracts with equipment and technical personnel, we demand the damages caused us this obstacle “.
No comments:
Post a Comment