scholarly journals ALTERNATIF PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA WILAYAH LAUT INDONESIA-MALAYSIA

2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ayub Torry Satriyo Kusumo ◽  
Handojo Leksono
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Literature Study ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Maritime Boundary ◽  
Equity Principle ◽  
Border Dispute ◽  
The Unclos ◽  
Mutual Agreement

<p align="center"><strong>A</strong><strong>b</strong><strong>s</strong><strong>t</strong><strong>rac</strong><strong>t</strong></p><p><em>T</em><em>his study discusses alternative resolutions on maritime boundary dispute between Indonesia and Malay- sia. It was based on a legal research, which used statutes and case approach. The research materials were collected by literature study and analyzed by applying the interpretation analysis technique.T</em><em>he result shows that the alternative resolutions of Indonesia-Malaysia border dispute can be carried out through several mechanisms. First, by referring to the UNCLOS 1982, through Bilateral Mutual Agreement on drawing an equidistant line using the equity principle and considering relevant circumstances. Second, by means of ASEAN; and third, by means of International Court of Justice mechanism regarding the equitable principle and relevant circumstances.</em></p><p><strong><em>Keywords: </em></strong><em>the outermost islands, border management, maritime dispute settlement, archipelagic state</em></p><p> </p><p align="center"><strong>A</strong><strong>B</strong><strong>S</strong><strong>T</strong><strong>R</strong><strong>A</strong><strong>K</strong></p><p>Penelitian ini membahas alternatif penyelesaian sengketa batas maritim antara Indonesia dan Malaysia. Kajian ini berdasarkan penelitian hukum dengan menggunakan pendekatan undang-undang dan pendekatan kasus. Pengumpulan bahan hukum melalui studi kepustakaan dan dianalisis dengan teknik analisis interpretasi hukum. Hasil pembahasan menunjukkan alternatif penyelesaian sengketa batas wilayah Indonesia-Malaysia dapat dilakukan dengan beberapa cara. <em>Pertama</em>, mengacu pada UNCLOS 1982 melalui <em>Bilateral Mutual </em><em>Agree- ment </em>dalam menarik garis sementara yang menggunakan prinsip sama jarak dan mempertimbangkan faktor yang relevan, <em>kedua,  </em>melalui mekanisme ASEAN, dan k<em>etiga</em>, melalui mekanisme Mahkamah Internasional dengan mengedepankan <em>equitable principle </em>dan <em>relevant circumstances.</em></p><p><strong>Kata kunci : </strong>Pulau-pulau terluar, pengelolaan batas wilayah, penyelesaian sengketa maritim, negara kepulauan</p>

Dispute Settlement Under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea: Survey for 2007

2008 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 601-642 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Churchill
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
The Other ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Arbitral Tribunal ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Maritime Boundary ◽  
The Law

AbstractThis is the fourth of a projected series of annual surveys reviewing dispute settlement under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. 2007 was the busiest year for dispute settlement in the law of the sea for some time. The main developments under Part XV of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea were the award of the arbitral tribunal in the Guyana/Suriname Case and two prompt-release-of-vessel judgments by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. Outside the framework of the Convention, the International Court of Justice gave judgments in two maritime boundary cases—one on the merits (Nicaragua v. Honduras) and the other on jurisdiction (Nicaragua v. Colombia).

Progress in International Maritime Boundary Delimitation Law

1994 ◽  
Vol 88 (2) ◽  
pp. 227-256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan I. Charney
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Third Party ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Boundary Disputes ◽  
International Court ◽  
Maritime Boundary ◽  
Maritime Boundary Delimitation

Judgments of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and awards of ad hoc arbitration tribunals carry special weight in international maritime boundary law. On its face, the international maritime boundary law codified in the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea is indeterminate. For the continental shelf and the exclusive economic zone, the legal obligation of coastal states is to delimit the boundary “by agreement on the basis of international law, as referred to in Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, in order to achieve an equitable solution.” The article on the delimitation of maritime boundaries in the territorial sea is no more determinative despite the fact that it makes direct references to the equidistant line, special circumstances and historic title. In spite of this indeterminacy, if not because of it, coastal states have found that third-party dispute settlement procedures can effectively resolve maritime boundary delimitation disputes. As a consequence, there are more judgments and awards on maritime boundary disputes than on any other subject of international law, and this trend is continuing.

scholarly journals Dispute Settlement in the Law of the Sea: Survey for 2012

2013 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 563-614 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Churchill
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Maritime Boundary ◽  
The Law ◽  
Maritime Boundary Delimitation

Abstract This is the latest in a series of annual surveys reviewing dispute settlement in the law of the sea, both under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and outside the framework of the Convention. The main developments during 2012 were the delivery of judgments by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) in the Bangladesh/Myanmar case and by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the Nicaragua/Colombia case, both concerned with maritime boundary delimitation; and the institution of Annex VII arbitration by Argentina against Ghana relating to the arrest of a State-owned vessel and the subsequent order of provisional measures by the ITLOS. These and other developments are reviewed in detail below.

Dispute Settlement under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea: Survey for 2008

2009 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 603-616 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Churchill
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Maritime Boundary ◽  
The Law

AbstractThis is the fifth of a series of annual surveys reviewing dispute settlement under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. The main developments during 2008 were the fourth triennial elections to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea; an order made by the Tribunal further continuing the suspension of proceedings in the Swordfish case; and the referral of a maritime boundary dispute between Peru and Chile to the International Court of Justice.

Dispute Settlement under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea: Survey for 2009

2010 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 457-482 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Churchill
Keyword(s):  
Black Sea ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
The Black Sea ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Maritime Boundary ◽  
The Law

AbstractThis is the sixth of a series of annual surveys reviewing dispute settlement in the law of the sea both under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and outside the framework of the Convention. The main developments during 2009 were the judgment of the International Court of Justice in the Maritime Delimitation in the Black Sea (Romania v. Ukraine) case and the commencement of three new maritime boundary cases (between Bangladesh and India, Bangladesh and Myanmar, and Croatia and Slovenia, respectively).

Maritime Delimitation in the Indian Ocean

2017 ◽  
Vol 111 (3) ◽  
pp. 725-731 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beatrice I. Bonafé
Keyword(s):  
Indian Ocean ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Maritime Boundary ◽  
The Indian Ocean

On February 2, 2017, the International Court of Justice (ICJ or Court) delivered a judgment rejecting preliminary objections to its jurisdiction in Maritime Delimitation in the Indian Ocean. The underlying contentious case between Somalia and Kenya concerns the establishment of a single maritime boundary between the two states. The decision on preliminary objections provides important insights on the Court's interpretation of optional clause declarations that include a reservation for alternative methods of dispute settlement.

12. The peaceful settlement of disputes

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anders Henriksen
Keyword(s):  
Security Council ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Peaceful Settlement ◽  
International Court ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Settlement Of Disputes ◽  
Advisory Opinions ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter discusses some of the more relevant methods for peaceful dispute settlement. It begins by introducing a number of non-adjudicatory settlement mechanisms and providing a brief overview of the role played by the UN. It then discusses the adjudicatory means of settling disputes, including international arbitration; the competences and powers of the International Court of Justice; issues of access to the Court and the Court's jurisdiction in contentious cases; the power of the Court to issue provisional measures; the effects of the Court's decisions; the relationship between the Court and the UN Security Council; and the Court's competence to issue advisory opinions.

Dispute Settlement in the Law of the Sea: Survey for 2018

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 539-570 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Churchill
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Maritime Boundary ◽  
The Pacific ◽  
Timor Leste ◽  
The Pacific Ocean ◽  
The Caribbean ◽  
The Law

AbstractThis is the latest in a series of annual surveys in this Journal reviewing dispute settlement in the law of the sea, both under Part XV of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and outside the framework of the Convention. It covers developments during 2018. The most significant developments during the year were the judgment of the International Court of Justice in Costa Rica v. Nicaragua, delimiting the maritime boundaries between the two States’ overlapping maritime zones in both the Caribbean Sea and the Pacific Ocean; the report of the Conciliation Commission concerning maritime boundary arrangements between Timor-Leste and Australia; and the findings of a dispute settlement body of the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organization.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document