Preface

Summary

The conclusion of the First United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea in 1958 (UNCLOS I) and the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea in 1982 (UNCLOS III) caused a flurry of activities among coastal states in Southeast Asia and many other areas to extend their jurisdiction over seas and oceans based on the new limits permitted for the extension of the territorial sea and the exclusive economic zone (EEZ). The result was that the territorial seas and EEZs of many nationstates overlapped, producing in their wake a trail of rival territorial claims and disputes. The dispute between Indonesia and Malaysia concerning sovereignty over the two islands of Sipadan and Ligitan, situated on the northeast coast of Borneo, was one such case that arose in 1969 while the two countries were in the midst of delimiting their continental shelf boundaries. Both countries advanced rival sovereignty claims over the two islands, but as the issue could not be resolved even after prolonged negotiations, the two countries decided in 1996 to place the case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for settlement. The case was filed with the ICJ in 1998 and the verdict delivered in 2002. Malaysia's case, and that of Indonesia as well, was fought by renowned international lawyers. However, long before the lawyers came into the picture, a great deal of meticulous, precise and laborious preparation for collecting, arranging and developing evidence for the case had already taken place. Although a number of agencies, representing different types of expertise, specializations and disciplines were involved in this massive task, there was one field and discipline which played an important role without which no country can have a case to present and without which no international lawyers would have a case to prepare; and this is the discipline of History. I can vouch for this statement as I was appointed as team leader by the Malaysian Government to prepare the historical evidence for its case concerning sovereignty over the Sipadan and Ligitan Islands.

While analysing the verdict of the ICJ in the Sipadan and Ligitan case and about that of Pulau Batu Puteh/Pedra Branca, it became evidently clear to me that the ICJ gives priority consideration to the possession of a legal title based on historical developments.