Sea territory an agenda item for regional elections<\/p>\n
I Made Andi Arsana, Sydney<\/p>\n
The local leadership elections currently taking place are one
\nof the most important current issues in Indonesia.<\/p>\n
This article will not dwell on the politics behind the
\nelections or issues of democratization, but instead look at the
\npowers of local governments as regards maritime territory.<\/p>\n
A candidate standing in a local election needs to
\nfully understand the rules governing maritime territory, aside
\nfrom other important matters, as two-thirds of the country
\nconsists of ocean.<\/p>\n
The first fundamental matter of which a candidate should be
\naware is the change in the legislation governing local autonomy
\n-- Law No. 22\/1999 has been superseded by Law No. 32\/2004.<\/p>\n
With regard to maritime territory, these two laws differ quite
\nsignificantly. Law No. 22\/1999 states that the jurisdiction of a
\nregional local authority consists of inland areas and marine
\nareas up to twelve nautical miles measured from the coastline.<\/p>\n
The legislation is intended to govern the division of
\nauthority between the central government and local governments --
\nnot necessarily to carve up territories.<\/p>\n
This has now been further explained by Law No. 32\/2004. It is
\nworth emphasizing that the power provided is only to manage
\nresources, not to fully possess a maritime territory. This is
\ndifferent from the situation regarding land territory.<\/p>\n
Law No. 32\/2004 also deals explicitly with traditional types
\nof fishing. It says that such fishing shall not be restricted by
\nthe division of maritime territory. In other words, fishing
\nconducted by traditional fishermen can be carried out regardless
\nof the existence of a maritime boundary between two or more
\nregions. However, a governor or regent has to be aware of the
\ndefinition of \"traditional fishermen\" to avoid potential
\ninterregional conflicts.<\/p>\n
A few weeks ago, a national daily reported that Maluku
\nprovince was demanding special maritime autonomy. The province
\nargues that Maluku, geographically dominated by maritime
\nterritory, deserves special powers to manage this territory.
\nMinister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, Freddy Numberi, has
\npositively responded to the demand. What a good news!<\/p>\n
This, once again, reminds us that it is essential for local
\ngovernments to secure power over their maritime territories as it
\nstrongly affects their ability to utilize natural resources. As a
\npart of an archipelagic country, a regency\/municipality, the main
\nholders of autonomy, should be entitled to optimally exploit
\ntheir maritime resources.<\/p>\n
Law No. 32\/2004 also states that each province is entitled to
\nmanage maritime territory of up to 12 nautical miles (NM)
\nmeasured from the province's outermost point. A regency, on the
\nother hand, can claim one third the maritime area of that of a
\nprovince.<\/p>\n
This principle is crucial as in defining maritime territory,
\nit is quite possible that a province will not be able to claim
\nthe full 12 NM. Bali and East Java, for instances, cannot claim
\n12 NM of maritime territory in the Bali Strait as it is less then
\n12 NM wide. It is different in the case of South Kalimantan,
\nwhich can easily claim 12 NM in the archipelagic waters south of
\nBorneo island.<\/p>\n
Unfortunately, there are no technical regulations as yet that
\ncan be used for interpreting the rules set out in Law No.
\n32\/2004. Consequently, no official technical standards have been
\nset to govern the division of local authority powers in the
\nmaritime sphere. However, there are guidelines for Law No.
\n22\/1999, and these may prove to be of help. Given that these
\nguidelines refer to the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea,
\nthey should still be applicable having regard to Law No. 32\/2004,
\nat least until ancillary regulations have been issued.<\/p>\n
The guidelines were published by the Coastal Resource
\nManagement Project (CRMP), and were written by such experts as
\nProf. Jacub Rais in 2003. The project was carried out by the
\nIndonesian Government in collaboration with Coastal Resources
\nCenter at the University of Rhode Island, and funded by USAID.
\nThe fundamental issued dealt with in the guidance include the
\ndefinition of adjacent and opposite provinces; the use of
\nreferences for height definitions; the definition of a bay;
\nbaselines and basepoints; the cases of small islands and
\nfringing islands; the choice of charts; and administrative
\naspects.<\/p>\n
Understanding the concepts and rules governing the delineation
\nof maritime territory is important for the candidates running in
\nthe 2005 local leadership elections. With autonomy, local leaders
\nshould be able to optimally manage and exploit the resources of
\ntheir regions. Without a comprehensive understanding, governors
\nand regents will not be aware of the limits to the maritime areas
\nthey can exploit. How can they optimize the exploitation of
\nresources without an awareness of territory? So, if you happen to
\nattend an election meeting, don't forget to ask the candidate in
\nquestion about his or her strategy as regards maritime territory.<\/p>\n
The writer is a lecturer in the Department of Geodetic
\nEngineering, Gadjah Mada University, and is currently studying
\nthe technical aspects of maritime boundary delineation at the
\nUniversity of New South Wales, Sydney<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/sea-territory-an-agenda-item-for-regional-elections-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}