I. INTRODUCTION

1. After almost five years of proceedings, extensive pleadings, an eight-day hearing on the merits and the issuance of an award that enables the parties to put an end to their dispute, Guatemala and the Tribunal now receive an "unpleasant surprise"! in the form of Claimant's Request for Supplementation and Rectification of Award ("Request") pursuant to Article 49(2) of the Convention on Settlement ofInvestment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (the "Convention").

2. Guatemala hereby presents its observations on Claimant's Request. Claimant attempts to demonstrate that the Tribunal failed to address a question presented by Claimant and made certain errors in quantifying and calculating compensation in the Award. For the reasons set forth, below this Request is without merit and should be dismissed in its entirety with a cost award in favor of Respondents.

3. The rCSrD supplementation and rectification procedure exists to address inadvertent omissions and minor technical errors in awards, respectively.2 These remedies are not designed to allow the parties to reopen arbitrations that do not go their way, nor are they intended to permit the parties to rehash arguments that were addressed and decided by the Tribunal.3

4. Disappointed by the Tribunal's rejection of their initial request for more than US$ 64 million in damages, Claimant now seeks to reopen a substantive debate on issues already decided by the Tribunal, and even to submit new material and advance new theories not previously advanced by it. As will be shown, Claimant misapplies the legal standard and misconstrues the scope of the procedure it invokes. This reconstituted Tribunal should not be beguiled by Claimant's selective quotations and misleading interpretation of article 49(2) of the Convention, into abusing the extraordinary remedy provided. In this case, it cannot be said that the Tribunal omitted to address any of Claimant's arguments on damages, nor that the Tribunal has made the type of errors set forth in Article 49(2) of the Convention. The Request should therefore be denied with an award of costs for Respondent.