Bottom Line
Demarcating maritime zones in the Bay of Bengal
IT is common knowledge that India is hungry for energy and its search for oil and gas has been put on a high gear. It is understandable that India will explore the areas within its territory, including in the maritime zones, for oil and gas.
It has been recently reported in the media that India has earmarked certain areas in the Bay of Bengal for oil and gas exploration. If the reported news is correct, Bangladeshi legal experts are of the opinion that India will be laying its hands on the blocks of marine areas that have been claimed by Bangladesh since 1974.
In 1974, when Bangladesh allocated a few off-shore blocks of the Bay of Bengal to a foreign oil company, India vigorously objected to the Bangladesh government because the sea boundary had yet to be drawn between the two countries.
Furthermore India sent a letter to the foreign company without any communication to Bangladesh indicating that the company would be at its risk because the sea boundary between the two countries remained to be settled.
As a result, the foreign company withdrew, to the disappointment of Bangladesh. Bangladesh felt let down by India.
Bangladesh's claimed areas
It is reported by scientists that resources on sea are much more endowed with living and non-living assets than those on the land. As the land-resources deplete, it will be necessary for Bangladesh to depend increasingly on sea resources. With the increase of population in Bangladesh (242 million by 2050, according to the UN), Bangladesh will have to turn its attention to marine resources for food and other needs of its people. Recognising the need for marine resources, in 1974, among all the countries in South Asia, Bangladesh was the first country that had declared its jurisdictions in July of that year, among others, on: (a) territorial waters, (b) economic zones, and (c) continental shelf, through a legislation of the Parliament, known as the Territorial and Maritime Zones Act 1974. The economic zone of Bangladesh under the law is extended to 200 nautical miles from its baselines and the continental shelf goes to a distance of 350 miles. The baseline from which the territorial sea, and economic zone is measured has been described in geographical co-ordinates (longitudes and latitudes) through a gazetted public notification of the government so that other nations could know the exact claim of Bangladesh. The declarations were well before the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea was adopted in 1982. UN Convention on the Law of the Sea
Under the 1982 UN Law of the Sea Convention, a state is entitled to claim 200 nautical miles within its jurisdiction. The first twelve miles are known as territorial sea and the next adjoining 188 miles as its Economic Zone. The sea-bed (continental shelf) of a state can go further distance (350 miles) depending on the geophysical characteristics of the sea bed. Method of delimitation of sea-boundary
Legal experts believe that negotiations on the delimitation of sea boundary between states have become much easier because of Articles 76 and 82 of the UN Convention. These articles lay down the methods of delimitation of sea boundary between adjacent states (distinct from opposite states, such as Sri Lanka and India). The states shall settle the boundary through negotiations. If negotiations fail, the principle of equity will apply, implying that justice and fairness must be the hallmark of settlement. Since 1982, negotiations with India have stalled and no date has yet been fixed for negotiations. Brief history of Bangladesh-India negotiations
Bangladesh and India commenced negotiations on delimitation of maritime boundary in 1974 (the writer was involved with the negotiations as Director General, South Asia from Foreign Office). The sea boundary line could not be settled because India's proposed line was contrary to international law as decided by the World Court in 1969 in the North Sea Continental Shelf Case. The proposed boundary would leave little maritime areas for Bangladesh in the Bay of Bengal, turning Bangladesh into a "sea-locked" country. Several meeting took place between 1974 and 1982 on the subject but India reportedly remained firm in its position that was not only contrary to international law but also ignored the special circumstances of the coasts (including the indented nature of coastal belt of Bangladesh including concavity of its coasts). Bangladesh's case is straightforward and simple. The coastal state is entitled to claim maritime areas beyond the land territory. One of the positions, Bangladesh argued with India was that since its land domain is rectangular in shape, it gives Bangladesh the right to claim marine areas in rectangular orientation extending 200 nautical miles to the south in the Bay of Bengal from the extremities of its land territory. That will give Bangladesh an open sea, instead of becoming a "sea-locked" country. The fact whether a country is located opposite or adjacent plays an important part in delimitation of sea boundary and equitable principles come into play in the case of adjacent states. The delimitation of sea boundary between two lateral or adjacent states, such as Bangladesh and India, is different from that of opposite states such as India and Sri Lanka. The method of delimitation (equidistant method) between two opposite states does not apply to that of between adjacent states because it grossly distorts the boundary, contrary to the principles of fairness and justice (equity). This position finds support in the UN convention. Since the boundary between the two states in the Bay of Bengal has yet to be delimited, India's reported action is contrary to the spirit of good neighbourliness and goes against international law as codified in the UN convention. By all canons of international law and legal precedents, coupled with the 1974 domestic law on the subject, it is strongly argued the areas in the Bay of Bengal that India has reportedly claimed fall within the Bangladesh territory. The marine areas adjoining in the Bay of Bengal need to be resolved and demarcated between the two countries in order to avoid unnecessary tension between the two neighbouring countries. It is hoped that both countries may commence negotiations as soon as practicable on the important subject, and, until then, India may desist in exploring oil and gas in the maritime areas that are claimed by Bangladesh for the sake of friendship and goodwill.
It is reported by scientists that resources on sea are much more endowed with living and non-living assets than those on the land. As the land-resources deplete, it will be necessary for Bangladesh to depend increasingly on sea resources. With the increase of population in Bangladesh (242 million by 2050, according to the UN), Bangladesh will have to turn its attention to marine resources for food and other needs of its people. Recognising the need for marine resources, in 1974, among all the countries in South Asia, Bangladesh was the first country that had declared its jurisdictions in July of that year, among others, on: (a) territorial waters, (b) economic zones, and (c) continental shelf, through a legislation of the Parliament, known as the Territorial and Maritime Zones Act 1974. The economic zone of Bangladesh under the law is extended to 200 nautical miles from its baselines and the continental shelf goes to a distance of 350 miles. The baseline from which the territorial sea, and economic zone is measured has been described in geographical co-ordinates (longitudes and latitudes) through a gazetted public notification of the government so that other nations could know the exact claim of Bangladesh. The declarations were well before the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea was adopted in 1982. UN Convention on the Law of the Sea
Under the 1982 UN Law of the Sea Convention, a state is entitled to claim 200 nautical miles within its jurisdiction. The first twelve miles are known as territorial sea and the next adjoining 188 miles as its Economic Zone. The sea-bed (continental shelf) of a state can go further distance (350 miles) depending on the geophysical characteristics of the sea bed. Method of delimitation of sea-boundary
Legal experts believe that negotiations on the delimitation of sea boundary between states have become much easier because of Articles 76 and 82 of the UN Convention. These articles lay down the methods of delimitation of sea boundary between adjacent states (distinct from opposite states, such as Sri Lanka and India). The states shall settle the boundary through negotiations. If negotiations fail, the principle of equity will apply, implying that justice and fairness must be the hallmark of settlement. Since 1982, negotiations with India have stalled and no date has yet been fixed for negotiations. Brief history of Bangladesh-India negotiations
Bangladesh and India commenced negotiations on delimitation of maritime boundary in 1974 (the writer was involved with the negotiations as Director General, South Asia from Foreign Office). The sea boundary line could not be settled because India's proposed line was contrary to international law as decided by the World Court in 1969 in the North Sea Continental Shelf Case. The proposed boundary would leave little maritime areas for Bangladesh in the Bay of Bengal, turning Bangladesh into a "sea-locked" country. Several meeting took place between 1974 and 1982 on the subject but India reportedly remained firm in its position that was not only contrary to international law but also ignored the special circumstances of the coasts (including the indented nature of coastal belt of Bangladesh including concavity of its coasts). Bangladesh's case is straightforward and simple. The coastal state is entitled to claim maritime areas beyond the land territory. One of the positions, Bangladesh argued with India was that since its land domain is rectangular in shape, it gives Bangladesh the right to claim marine areas in rectangular orientation extending 200 nautical miles to the south in the Bay of Bengal from the extremities of its land territory. That will give Bangladesh an open sea, instead of becoming a "sea-locked" country. The fact whether a country is located opposite or adjacent plays an important part in delimitation of sea boundary and equitable principles come into play in the case of adjacent states. The delimitation of sea boundary between two lateral or adjacent states, such as Bangladesh and India, is different from that of opposite states such as India and Sri Lanka. The method of delimitation (equidistant method) between two opposite states does not apply to that of between adjacent states because it grossly distorts the boundary, contrary to the principles of fairness and justice (equity). This position finds support in the UN convention. Since the boundary between the two states in the Bay of Bengal has yet to be delimited, India's reported action is contrary to the spirit of good neighbourliness and goes against international law as codified in the UN convention. By all canons of international law and legal precedents, coupled with the 1974 domestic law on the subject, it is strongly argued the areas in the Bay of Bengal that India has reportedly claimed fall within the Bangladesh territory. The marine areas adjoining in the Bay of Bengal need to be resolved and demarcated between the two countries in order to avoid unnecessary tension between the two neighbouring countries. It is hoped that both countries may commence negotiations as soon as practicable on the important subject, and, until then, India may desist in exploring oil and gas in the maritime areas that are claimed by Bangladesh for the sake of friendship and goodwill.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments