Drawing Lines at Sea: Australia’s Five Decades of Maritime Boundary Delimitation

Boundaries in the ocean are man-made constructs of importance to everything from oil and gas production, to fisheries and environmental protection. How do states delineate such ownership and rights? These are the core questions examined in this article, which studies Australia’s maritime boundary agreements, starting with Indonesia in 1971 and ending with Timor-Leste in 2019. In addition to depicting and documenting the main drivers and impediments to these agreements whenever Australia has had to negotiate with a third country, it examines Australia’s approach to boundary-making at sea more generally. Drawing on international law and political science, this article shows why we need understand the interplay between security politics, legal considerations and domestic interests in order to understand what motivates states to settle their maritime disputes.

THE 1982 UNITED NATIONS LAW OF THE SEA CONVENTION: UNRESOLVED ISSUES REMAIN

Despite the 1982 United Nations Law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS) being generally viewed as one of the major successes of United Nations treaty-making, unresolved issues remain. These range from maritime boundary disputes to straight baselines to artificial islands to military activities in the exclusive economic zone to environmental issues. Four decades have altered the fundamental nature of the regime relating to the law of the sea and have created major implementational challenges. The oceans are becoming more crowded by competitive human activities and, as technology progresses and geopolitical shifts occur, it has become imperative that the unresolved issues be resolved. In so doing UNCLOS’s initial vision can be augmented. This article focuses on five of the more problematic unresolved issues.

PERSPECTIVE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW ON MARITIME DISPUTE: CASE BETWEEN KENYA AND SOMALIA

The research analysed the maritime dispute between Kenya and Somalia under the international law perspective. Both states have been experiencing maritime disputes over maritime boundaries of more than 100,000 sq km of seabed in the waters of the Indian Ocean. They began to clash after Somalia accusing Kenya of illegally granting exploration rights to resources in the waters to multinational companies, Total and Eni. As Kenya declared, the waters of the East African Coast are one of the hottest oil exploration prospects in the world, and the contested area has hydrocarbon reserves. The research method is normative legal research. Accordingly, the nature of the research was descriptive-qualitative with data collection techniques by conducting a literature study. The research shows that maritime boundary dispute has worsened diplomatic relations between Kenya and Somalia. Prior to bringing the case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the two states agreed to resolve the dispute through bilateral negotiations. However, the case was still unsettled. Therefore, Somalia decided to bring the case before the Court.

Diplomacy and the challenges of resolving maritime boundary disputes in West Africa: Weighing the options in the case of Ghana and its immediate neighbours

Over the years, the international community has ensured the peaceful resolution of conflict among states. This is reflected in the Charter of the United Nations, where peaceful resolution of international disputes is promoted to ensure global peace and security. The use of diplomacy and pacific settlement of international dispute has been promoted among conflicting states due to its perceived inherent merits. This research explores the significance of diplomacy in resolving maritime boundary disputes in West Africa, placing emphasis on the disputes between Ghana and its neighbours. It does this by looking at secondary data, as well as the unpublished meeting minutes of the parties, to assess diplomacy and other pacific channels of conflict resolution as opposed to third-party dispute processes. The paper highlights diplomacy as the most appropriate means to resolve maritime boundary disputes in West Africa, particularly those confronting Ghana and its neighbours.

The Continental Shelf Delimitation Beyond 200 Nautical Miles

The Continental Shelf Delimitation Beyond 200 Nautical Miles provides an up-to-date and informed analysis of the now fast developing, yet confusing, field of the law of maritime delimitation. It examines the procedural matters in relation to the competence of international courts and tribunals in the light of the institutional framework of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and discusses the methodological questions arising out of the delimitation process. The book engages with the key concepts of maritime entitlement, delineation and delimitation with a view to developing a coherent and consistent approach to the delimitation of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles. Essentially, it argues that the delimitation of the continental shelf will be unified with existing maritime delimitation, and a common approach to maritime boundary-making within and beyond 200 nautical miles is likely to emerge.