5. The conduct of the parties, so far from attributing any conventional character to the said Annex 1, shows that the Parties have not treated the line marked on the said Annes 1 as the boundary in the Dang Rek; Thailand has remained in undisputed possession of all the territory at the top of the Dang Rek. Wherever there is a cliff edge in the Dang Rek the edge of the cliff is, and has been, accepted as constituting the watershed boundary established in this region by Article 1 of the said Treaty of 1904.

6. Even if the said Annex 1 were to be regarded as possessing a conventional character, the boundary line marked on it would not be binding on the parties when proved - as it has been in the disputed area - to be based on an inaccurate survey of the terrain.

II. With regard to the second claim of the revised Submissions:

I. The Court is asked not to entertain the claim, because:

(i) the claim to a region 'in the neighbourhood of the temple of Phra Viharn' constitutes an enlargement of the claim presented by the Government of Cambodia in the Application instituting these proceedings and throughout the written pleadings;

(ii) the terms of the claim are too vague to allow either the Court or the Government of Thailand to appreciate what are the limits of the territory claimed.

2. Alternatively, the Government of Thailand repeats paragraph 3 of its submissions presented at the sitting of the Court on the 20th March, 1962.

III. With regard to the third and fourth claims of the revised Submissions:

The Government of Thailand repeats paragraph 3 of its submissions presented at the sitting of the Court on the 20th March, 1962.

IV. With regard to the fifth claim of the revised Submissions:

1. The Court is asked not to entertain this claim, because it constitutes an enlargement of the claim presented by the Government of Cambodia in the Application instituting these proceedings and throughout the written pleadings.

2. Alternatively, the rejection of the first, second and third clairns of the revised Submissions must involve the rejection of this claim.

3. Alternatively, this claim should be restricted to any objects of the kinds specified in the claim proved by the evidence before the Court to have been removed from the temple since 1954 by the Thai authorities."

In its Judgment of 26 May 1961, by which it upheld its jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the dispute subrnitted to it by the Application filed by the Government of Carnbodia on 6 October 1959, the Court described in the following terms the subject of the dispute:

"In the present case, Cambodia alleges a violation on the part of Thailand of Cambodia's territorial sovereignty over the region of the Temple of Preah Vihear and its precincts. Thailand replies by affirming that the area in question lies on the Thai side of the common frontier between the two countries, and is under the sovereignty of Thailand. This is a dispute about territorial sovereignty."

Accordingly, the subject of the dispute subrnitted to the Court is confined to a difference of view about sovereignty over the region of the Temple of Preah Vihear. To decide this question of territorial sovereignty, the Court must have regard to the frontier line between the two States in this sector. Maps haven been submitted to it and various considerations have been advanced in this connection. The Court will have regard to each of these only to such extent as it may find in them reasons for the decision it has to give in order to settle the sole dispute submitted to it, the subject of which has just been stated.

The Temple of Preah Vihear is an ancient sanctuary and shrine situated on the borders of Thailand and Cambodia. Although now partially in ruins, this Temple has considerable artistic and archaeological interest, and is still used as a place of pilgrimage. It stands on a promontory of the same name, belonging to the eastern sector of the Dangrek range of mountains which, in a general way, constitutes the boundary between the two countries in this region - Cambodia to the south and Thailand to the north. Considerable portions of this range consist of a high cliff-like escarpment rising abruptly above the Cambodian plain. This is the situation at Preah Vihear itself, where the main Temple buildings stand in the apex of a triangular piece of high ground jutting out into the plain. From the edge of the escarpment, the general inclination of the ground in the northerly direction is downwards to the Nam Moun river, which is in Thailand.

It will be apparent from the description just given that a frontier line which ran along the edge of the escarpment, or which at any rate ran to the south and east of the Temple area, would leave this area in Thailand; whereas a line running to the north, or to the north and west, would place it in Cambodia.

Thailand has urged that the edge of this escarpment constitutes the natural and obvious line for a frontier in this region. In support of this view Thailand has referred to the documentary evidence indicative of the desire of the Parties to establish frontiers which would not only be "natural", but visible and unmistakable - such as rivers, mountain ranges, and hence escarpments, where they exist.

Part 6