OCR Text |
Show -134- Like independence, territorial supremacy does not give an unlimited liberty of action.... A State, in spite of its territorial supremacy, is not allowed to alter the natural conditions of its own territory to the disadvantage of the natural conditions of the territory of a neighbouring State-for instance, to stop or to divert the flow of a river which runs from its own into neighbouring territory.* But the flow of not-national, boundary and international rivers is not within the arbitrary power of one of the riparian States, for it is a rule of International Law that no State is allowed to alter the natural condition of its own territory to the disadvantage of the natural conditions of the territory of a neighbouring State. For this reason a State is not only forbidden to stop or divert the flow of a river which runs from its own to a neighbouring State, but likewise to make such use of the water of the river as either causes danger to the neighbour8ng State or prevents it from making proper use of the flow of the river on its part.2 As regards the utilisation of the flow of [international] lakes..., the position is the same as with regard to the utilisation of the flow of rivers.3 Brierly^ observes that: The practice of states, as evidenced in the controversies which have arisen about this matter, seems now to admit that each state concerned has a right to have a river system considered as a whole, and to have its own interests weighed in the balance against those of other states; and that no one state may claim to use 1. Loc. cit., pp. 290-91 2. Loc. cit., pp. 474-75 3. Loc. cit., p. 477, n/2 4. The Law of Nations, pp. 204-205, 5th ed. (1955) |
Source |
Original book: [State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, California, City of San Diego, California, and County of San Diego, California, defendants, United States of America, State of Nevada, State of New Mexico, State of Utah, interveners] : |