{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016149068322981366, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009937888198757764, 'mean_word_length': 4.716312056737588, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A Note on the Nicaragua v. Colombia Case

The 2012 Nicaragua v. Colombia Case is the second instance where the International Court of Justice has employed the standard method in maritime delimitation since the 2009 Black Sea Case. The “standard method” involves three stages with the construction of a provisional equidistance line as the core of the methodology. There is no legal basis under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea or customary law for the a priori position given to an equidistance line. Moreover, questions can be raised about the Court's operation at the second stage, which should consist of an adjustment or shifting of the provisional line rather than replacing it. Finally, the use of the disproportionality test as the touchstone for equity of the delimitation line is doubtful.