(29 April 2012- Sunday 12.05 am)
PULAU BATU PUTEH/PULAU BATU PUTIH/PEDRA BRANCA
“The
delimitation of maritime boundaries between the two states frequently meets and
overlaps. Therefore the line of separation has to be drawn to distinguish the
rights and obligations between these States. Discuss the rules on delimitation
of maritime boundaries between the States of Malaysia and Singapore with regards
to Pulau Batu Puteh / Pedra Branca Islet according to 1982 LOSC and under the
international law rule.”
By
Mohd. Zamre Bin Mohd. Zahir
Stephanie Alau Apui
Based of the close geographical
proximity of many States, their maritime zones often overlap to a greater or
lesser degree.[1] Based
on the literatures[2],
delimitation of maritime boundaries between the two states frequently meets and
overlaps such in the situation between Malaysia and Singapore with regards to
Pulau Batu Puteh / Pedro Bianca Islet according to United Nations Conventions of Law of the Sea 1982 (LOSC
1982) and under the rule of international law.
In Malaysia and
Singapore case, Pedra Branca is located at opposite and adjacent of these two
states. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has so far adopted Article
15 of the LOSC
1982 in
various border dispute
decisions.[3]
The delimitation of
Maritime Boundaries, the coasts of two States are opposite or adjacent to each
other and that the dividing line between two states' territorial seas should normally
be a line equidistant from the baseline
of the contending countries.[4] This method establishes a median line that at all points is equidistant from the baselines
of states with adjacent or opposite coasts.[5] The equidistance line rule referred
to be an objective test based on geometrical construction and was
designed to avoid controversy and
speculation.[6]
However, the provision also includes an exception relating
to "special circumstances" and "equitable solutions."[7] These concepts shroud the equidistance line rule in vagueness, deferring to the adjudicating body to determine what might be a "historical title or special circumstance" and the creation
of “equitable solutions” based on fairness.[8]
The dilemma of delimitation of
maritime boundaries between States with opposite or adjacent coasts like in
Pedra Branca’s situation, proved to be one of the most intractable issues of
the entire LOSC 1982 proceedings and it was not until August 1981 that
agreement was finally reached on a “compromise formula”.[9]
Mutatis mutandis, the formula is the
same for the EEZ (Article 74 of the LOSC 1982) and the continental shelf
(Article 83 of the LOSC 1982).[10]
Ravin, MOM., in his article
contends that State practice regarding the delimitation of maritime boundaries
like in Malaysia and Singapore regarding Pedra Branca could be dividing to
several categories which are the provision of international law, delimitation
by agreement and negotiation between disputing Parties, national legislation
(domestic laws) and judicial decision.[11] In short, through the observation, it is essential to the Parties
(Malaysia and Singapore) to draw the line of delimitation with regards to Pedra
Branca in the area in question.[12]
[1] Churchill, R. R. and Lowe, A.
V., The Law of the Sea, 3rd
ed., (Juris Publishing, Manchester University Press 1999).
[2] ICJ, “Sovereignty
over Pedra Branca/ Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge
(Malaysia/Singapore)”, (International Court of Justice 2008), p.1.
[3] Yoshifumi Tanaka, "Reflections on Maritime
Delimitation In The Cameroon /Nigeria Case"53 ICLQ 369, April, 2004.
[4] Ibid.
[7] Article 83 of the United Nations Conventions of Law of the Sea 1982.
[8] Derman B. Andrew et al., “Border
Disputes” (Thompson & Knight LLP).
[9] Brown, E. D., “The International
Law of the Sea: Volume 1 Introductory Manual”, (Dartmouth Publishing Company
Limited 1994).
[10] Ibid.
[11] Ravin, MOM., “Law of the Sea,
Maritime Boundaries and Dispute Settlement Mechanisms” (United Nations-The
Nippon Foundation Fellow, Germany 2005).
[12] Note 2.
No comments:
Post a Comment