Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> "it .'<1' <br /> , <br /> " <br /> " <br /> 'I <br /> II <br /> I' <br /> I: <br />0 II <br /> II <br />c.t <br />.. i: <br />.QI , <br /> \, <br /> ~,' I' <br /> I: <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />vi <br /> <br />RECOMMENDATIONS: <br /> <br />It is our recommendation, as a result of this study, <br />that Mexico should seek relief and redress on a country <br />to country basis rather than through individual action <br />of its citizens. In this connection we believe that the <br />best approach would be through diplomatic negotiations. <br />Only if diplomatic negotiations should fail to work out a <br />satisfactory solution would we recommend resort to <br />international tribunals. <br /> <br />In the event that negotiations between the two coun- <br />tries do not provide a satisfactory solution, it is our <br />recommendation that the most suitable course for Mexico <br />would be to seek arbitration under the 1929 treaty. In <br />such a proceeding the arbitral tribunal could be asked <br />to determine whether indemnity should be made to <br />Mexico for damage caused by Wellton-Mohawk ground- <br />waters and the amount thereof. The arbitral tribunal <br />could also be asked to determine whether such conduct <br />should be discontinued in the future. <br /> <br />As indicated, we think recourse could also be had to <br />the International Court of Justice, but we consider this <br />as being less desirable than arbitration under the 1929 <br />treaty which would be more expeditious and more prac- <br />ticable in view of the objectives to be obtained. <br /> <br />Respectfully submitted, <br /> <br />CHAPMAN and FRIEDMAN <br />932 Pennsylvania Building <br />Washington, D. C. 20004 <br /> <br />By OSCAR L. CHAPMAN <br />MARTIN L. FRIEDMAN <br />PAUL A. LENZINI <br /> <br />