Indonesia negligent over its maritime boundaries

Indonesia negligent over its maritime boundaries

After 25 years of negotiations, Indonesia and Vietnam signed an
agreement on their maritime boundary during President Megawati
Soekarnoputri's visit to Hanoi last month. Hasjim Djalal,
professor of international relations and law at Padjadjaran
University, told The Jakarta Post's Kornelius Purba that
Indonesia had failed to settle sea boundary disputes with its
neighbors.

Question: We have settled maritime boundary problems with
Vietnam. What about our other neighbors?

Answer: Under the sea law convention, which was ratified by
Indonesia in 1985, there are several maritime boundaries that
Indonesia has to settle nationally and with neighbors. The
convention allows Indonesia to chart internal waters within its
exclusive economic zone (EEZ), in which there is no right of
passage for foreign ships .... Internal waters will be completely
under the sovereignty of Indonesia.

At this moment Indonesia has not yet decided or legislated on
the limitation of these internal waters.

This is one of the things that Indonesia is neglecting. In
fact nobody cares outside of Indonesia. But this is in
Indonesia's national interests. I mentioned this hundreds of
times, but nobody has listened to me.

Indonesia has to determine its baseline, for the mapping of
its outermost islands and then use this to determine its
archipelagic waters. We did that in the 1960s and amended the law
in 1996. Then we reformulated those points last year. But the
baseline has not yet been submitted to the UN because apparently
there are still unclear points.

Q: How about the archipelagic waters?

A: In the archipelagic waters, outside the internal waters that
we have not drawn, the rights of innocent passage are recognized,
although this is our national territory. It also recognizes
specific parts of the archipelagic waters that are normally used
for international navigation. We have worked for that for many
years, and we have drawn the line, and the limitation. And it has
been accepted by the International Maritime Organization (IMO),
and now three north to south sea-lanes have been established.

And the understanding that we reached before the approval of
the three partial sea-lanes was that it will be done in
accordance with the law. That is the point now not very clear.
But the limitation has been done. There are two kinds of
limitations. First is establishing the baseline for territorial
sea and the other is for establishing the lines for the sea-
lanes. We have done it.

Second, is the limitation of 12-mile territorial sea. All we
have to do is measure 12 miles from the baseline. But with narrow
seas you have a problem. With Malaysia we have problems in the
Malacca Strait because it is less than 24-miles wide.

So if Indonesia measures 12 miles from its baselines and
Malaysia draws up 12 miles there are overlapping lines. So you
have to negotiate with Malaysia. We have done it with Malaysia in
the Malacca Strait where territorial sea boundaries overlap. The
same with Singapore, but only in the central part of the Straits
of Singapore. In the western part, the lane has not been
connected yet with the Malaysia line.

We have all kinds of problems there, for instance sand mining,
environmental management problems, or people are cleaning their
tanks because they think they are in international waters.

Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore must complete the triangular
line.

Q: Can we claim sovereignty over the Malacca Strait?

A: We have claimed this territorial sea, it is not international
waters. The Malacca Strait is used for international navigation.
But the waters belong to Indonesia. Towards the eastern part of
the Straits of Singapore, south of Johor and north of Bintan and
Batam again we do not have a limitation, with Singapore or
Malaysia.

The problems there are caused by a territorial dispute between
Singapore and Malaysia. Other problem areas include the dispute
between the Philippines and Indonesia over Indonesia's Miagas
island, which is also claimed by the Philippines. Indonesia has
used Miagas to measure its territorial sea. But the Philippines
claim that Miagas is inside waters given to them by the Spanish
and American agreements. The Philippine's argues that though
Indonesia owns the island, it was in Philippine waters. Indonesia
of course does not recognize that.

Under the sea law convention we can also claim another 12
miles beyond the territorial sea limit. The problem, again, is
that Indonesia has not legislated for this contiguous zone.

Q: How about the exclusive economic zone (EEZ)?

A: You can have an economic zone for 200 miles. Problems arise
when these boundaries overlap, like in the South China Sea
between Malaysia and Indonesia's Natuna island. There are also
problems with the Philippines and now with Malaysia. It could
also be a problem in the Pacific Ocean, between Indonesia and
Palau, and between Indonesia and PNG and in the Arafura Sea and
Timor Sea.

We have not done much on the economic zone. Despite all our
problems with Australia, we have agreed on our maritime borders.
We have also not agreed on the EEZ between India's Andaman
Islands and Indonesia's Nicobar Islands.

With Thailand in the northern Malacca Straits and with
Malaysia in the northern part of the state of Malaka there is no
economic zone boundary. In the South China Sea between Natuna and
Peninsula Malaysia, and Natuna and Sarawak there are still no
boundaries. In the northern part of Papua there is no economic
zone boundary. We have to do a lot more on that.