Today's Ambalat: Neglecting the Basepoints of Sipadan and Ligitan Islands for Maintaining the Equidistance Principle in the Disputed Area

• Author: M. Hendrapati et al.
• Pages: 283-284

East Asian Observer

283

X JEAIL 1 (2017)

Today

’

s Ambalat: Neglecting the Basepoints

of Sipadan and Ligitan Islands for Maintaining

the Equidistance Principle in the Disputed Area

M. Hendrapati, M. Ashri, A. Ruslan, S. Muchtar,

F. Patittingi, S.M. Noor, R. Hambali & J. Sumardi

∗

The “Sipadan and Ligitan” dispute was settled by the ICJ (2002), but its impact on

basepoint for baseline and maritime delimitation on the Ambalat remains a contentious

issue until now. Since the islands are used as basepoints by Malaysia that results in

controversy between Indonesia and Malaysia. This essay will investigate the current

situation over Ambalat regarding two basepoints islands for maintaining Equidistance

Line in Disputed Area. It will discuss why Malaysia has no right to use the straight

baseline or straight archipelagic baseline to connect the basepoints of Sipadan and Ligitan

at Sabah and suggest measures to maintain equidistance line in Ambalat.

Keywords

Neglecting, Basepoint, Straight Archipelagic Baseline, Ambalat, Maritime

Delimitation, Separate Opinion.

1. Introduction

Sipadan and Ligitan islands are owned by Malaysia as per the International Court

of Justice’s (“ICJ”) decision on December 16, 2002.

1

In 1996, President Soeharto of

Indonesian Republic and Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad of Malaysia agreed

that both would obey any decision reached by the ICJ and implement it in order to

∗ Marcel Hendrapati, Muhammad Ashri, Achmad Ruslan,Syamsuddin Muchtar, Farida Patittingi, Syamsuddin

Muhammad Noor, Ruslan Hambali & Juajir Sumardi. The authors are lecturers in the Faculty of Law, Hasanuddin

University, Indonesia. The corresponding author is Marcel Hendrapati. He may be contacted at: marcel.hendrapati@

unhas.ac.id

1 Souvereignty over Pulau Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan (Indon. v. Malay.), Judgment, 2002 I.C.J. Rep. 263 (Dec. 17),

available at http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/102/10570.pdf (last visited on May 3, 2017).

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14330/jeail.2017.10.1.13