I. INTRODUCTION

1. Guaracachi America, Inc. (Guaracachi America or GAI) and Rurelec PLC (Rurelec, and together with GAI, the Claimants) file this response (the Counter-Memorial) to the Plurinational State of Bolivia’s (Bolivia or the Respondent) jurisdictional objections of 17 September 2012 (the Objections) pursuant to Procedural Order No. 6 as amended by Procedural Order No. 8. Capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meaning given to them in the Claimants’ 1 March 2012 Statement of Claim.

2. Bolivia has repeatedly demonstrated its disdain for these proceedings. This has manifested itself in different forms: failing to appoint counsel until the eve of its deadline for the Statement of Defense, delaying payment of the Tribunal’s fees, and repeatedly ignoring the basic deadlines that it agreed to at the beginning of the case. Bolivia’s strategy appears designed to prevent the efficient and prompt resolution of this dispute, whose objective is simply the receipt by Claimants of compensation for the openly admitted expropriation of their investment in Bolivia’s leading private power generation company, Empresa Eléctrica Guaracachi S.A. (Guaracachi).

3. Bolivia’s Objections and its attendant request for bifurcation are simply another tactic devised to delay this proceeding. Bifurcation would serve no other end. Equally, both Parties have now pleaded their case on both jurisdiction and the merits. Claimants’ substantive claims and Bolivia’s Objections can efficiently be heard together at the hearing scheduled for April 2013. Moreover, the Objections raised by Bolivia require a full understanding of the underlying evidence when it adjudicates Bolivia’s Objections, which would only be possible following an evidential hearing on the merits. The Parties are entitled to a fair hearing and the efficient disposal of their dispute by this Tribunal. Conserving a unified proceeding would accomplish both of those objectives.