Maritime boundary dispute judgement scheduled
ITLOS to read judgement on Mauritius/Maldive case
LEGAL: The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) will deliver the judgement on the dispute concerning the delimitation of the maritime boundary between Mauritius and the Maldives on Friday, 28 April.
The Special Chamber that was formed to interrogate the issue will be read at a public sitting at 11 am.
The case dates back to 2019 when the two countries agreed to transfer the arbitral proceedings instituted on 18 June 2019 by Mauritius under Annex VII of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea to a special chamber of the Tribunal during consultations in September of that year.
The judgement on the preliminary objections raised by the Maldives in 2019 was read on 28 January 2021 in a hybrid session convened during the pandemic. The Maldives initially contended that the ITLOS Special Chamber did not have the jurisdiction to rule on the dispute between the two countries.
The Special Chamber concluded that “it has jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the dispute concerning the delimitation of the maritime boundary between the Parties in the Indian Ocean and that the claim submitted by Mauritius in this regard is admissible”
Oral proceedings took place in October last year where the final positions of both countries were heard. At this time it also became clear that the islands had undertaken additional communication and fostered some good will that resulted in friendlier relations between the two parties.
Speaking at the close of those proceedings, Ibrahim Riffath, Attorney General for Maldives summed up the situation well; “At the end of the day, whatever maritime boundary is established by adversarial proceedings, it is the spirit of mutual cooperation and friendly relations that will allow two neighbours to build a better future for their peoples, not least as they struggle with sea-level rise and other existential threats. In this respect, we trust that, in the years ahead, ITLOS will play an important role in defining the obligations of States Parties to protect and preserve the marine environment, and thus help small island 39 States to confront the perils of catastrophic climate change.”
337