The uti possidetis principle is not a special rule which pertains solely to one specific system of IL. It is a general principle, which is logical connected to the phenomenon of independence. Its obvious purpose is to prevent the independence and stability of new states being endangered by fratricidal struggles.
uti possidetis conflicts with self-determination. However, the essential requirement of stability has induced African States to consent (deliberate choice) the principle and to take account of this when interpreting self-determination.
The Chamber cannot decide ex aequo et bono, since the Parties have not requested it to do so. It will, however, have regard to equity infra legem, that is, that form of equity which constitutes a method of interpretation of the law in force, and which is based on law.
Taking into account the jurisprudence of the Court, there are no grounds to interpret the declaration in question as a unilateral act with legal implications in regard to the dispute. The Judgment then considers the principles of delimitation approved by the Legal Sub-Commission, which, according to Burkina Faso, Mali agreed, should be taken into consideration. The Chamber concludes that, since it has to determine the frontier line on the basis of international law, it is of little significance whether Mali's approach signifies acquiescence to such principles. If those principles are applicable as elements of law, they remain so whatever Mali's attitude. The situation would only be otherwise if the two Parties had asked the Chamber to take account of them.