Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T02:50:06.199Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Offshore Boundary Disputes in Southeast Asia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 April 2011

Lee Yong Leng
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The seventh session of the Third U.N. Conference on the Law of the Sea has just ended after three months (28 March to 19 May, and 22 August to 15 September 1978). There seems to be general agreement that territorial waters should be extended from the traditional 3-mile limit out to 12 miles (19 kilometres) offshore, and that every coastal state is entitled to an economic zone reaching 200 miles. More than 40 countries have established, or are in the process of establishing, 200 miles (320 kilometres) offshore as a fishery zone, economic zone, or territorial sea. To many states, the 200-mile economic zone is already a fact of international law. But there is still some disagreement over how much control coastal states should exercise over the adjacent 200 miles of water.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Southeast Asian Studies , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , March 1979 , pp. 175 - 189
Copyright
Copyright © The National University of Singapore 1979

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The policy of closed seas, to which a single state asserted and enforced its own control, was first propounded by John Selden of Britain in his Mare Clausum of 1635.

2 Indonesia, Act No. 4 of 18 Feb. 1960.

3 Emergency (Territorial Waters) Ordinance, 1969, and Territorial Waters Act, 1971.

4 Leng, Lee Yong, “Malacca Strait, Kra Canal and International Navigation”, Pacific Viewpoint 19 (1978): 65–74.Google Scholar

5 U.N. A/CONF. 62/C. 2/L. 39.

6 General Statement by Mr. H.T. Chao, deputy leader of the Delegation of Singapore at Caracas, 9 July 1974.

7 Prescott, J.R.V., The Political Geography of the Oceans (London, 1975), p. 94.Google Scholar

8 U.N. A/CONF. 62/C. 2/L. 49.

9 Prescott, op. cit., p. 106.

10 Polomka, Peter, ASEAN and the Law of the Sea (Singapore, 1975), p. 6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11 As quoted by Leifer, M. and Nelson, D., “Conflict of Interest in the Straits of Malacca”, International Affairs 49, 2 (1973): 191, 200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

12 Beeby, C.D., “The U.N. Conference on the Law of the Sea: A New Zealand View”, Pacific Viewpoint 16, 2 (1975): 113–42.Google Scholar

13 Árcher, A.A. and Beazley, P.B., “The geographical Implications of the Law of the Sea Conference”, Geographical Journal 141 (1975): 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

14 About 40 countries have continental margins which extend beyond the 200-mile limit.

15 Siddayao, C.M., The Off-Shore Petroleum Resources of Southeast Asia (Kuala Lumpur, 1978), p. 76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

16 Far Eastern Economic Review, 3 Feb. 1978, p. 23.

17 Prescott, op. cit., pp. 191–92.

18 Far Eastern Economic Review, 10 Mar. 1978, p. 79

19 For details of claims, see Siddayao, op. cit., p. 84.

20 Far Eastern Economic Review, 2 Feb. 1978, p. 11.