Territorial disputes can ignite tensions and reshape geopolitical landscapes, as seen in various high-stakes conflicts worldwide. For instance, the Pedra Branca case between Singapore and Malaysia concluded in an International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling that awarded the island to Singapore, while nearby Middle Rocks were granted to Malaysia. Similarly, the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands remain a contentious point between Japan and China, with both nations fiercely asserting their claims over these strategically significant islands.
The Falkland Islands dispute, which erupted into war between the United Kingdom and Argentina in 1982, continues to highlight the unresolved sovereignty issues. Against this backdrop, the dispute over Ligitan and Sipadan Islands between Indonesia and Malaysia was settled by the ICJ in 2002, which ruled in favor of Malaysia based on its effective occupation and administration of the islands. This landmark decision not only resolved a long-standing conflict but also emphasized the importance of legal frameworks in settling territorial disagreements.
Background Information
Ligitan and Sipadan are two small but significant islands located in the Celebes Sea, off the southeastern coast of the Malaysian state of Sabah. These islands were once the center of a territorial dispute between Indonesia and Malaysia, which was ultimately resolved by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 2002. The ICJ awarded sovereignty over both islands to Malaysia, based on the principle of “effective occupation,” recognizing Malaysia’s consistent administration of the islands.
Ligitan Island, while less developed than its counterpart, is known for its rich marine biodiversity. It serves primarily as a site for scientific research and conservation efforts, playing a crucial role in preserving the region’s ecological balance. In contrast, Sipadan Island has gained international fame for its exceptional scuba diving opportunities. Rising 600 to 700 meters from the seabed, this oceanic island is renowned for its vibrant marine life, including turtles, sharks, and diverse coral reefs, making it one of the world’s premier diving destinations.
Both islands are situated within the Celebes Sea, a major body of water in the western Pacific Ocean. Bordered by the Sulu Archipelago and Sulu Sea to the north, the Philippine island of Mindanao to the northeast, the Sangihe Islands to the east, Sulawesi (Celebes) to the south, and Borneo to the west, the Celebes Sea covers a vast area of approximately 110,000 square miles. Known for its deep waters, with depths reaching up to 6,220 meters, the sea is both an important geographical feature and a hub of marine biodiversity in Southeast Asia.
II. Historical Claims
Indonesia and Malaysia both laid historical claims to the Ligitan and Sipadan Islands, which culminated in a territorial dispute that was ultimately resolved by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 2002. Each country’s claim was rooted in different interpretations of historical treaties and activities in the region.
Indonesia’s Claim
Indonesia’s claim to Ligitan and Sipadan was primarily based on the 1891 Convention between Great Britain and the Netherlands, which established the 4 degree 10 minute north parallel of latitude as the dividing line between British and Dutch territories in the region. According to Indonesia, the islands, located south of this parallel, should have been considered part of the Dutch East Indies, and therefore, belong to Indonesia as its successor state. Additionally, Indonesia cited historical presence and activities in the surrounding waters, such as the presence of Indonesian fishermen and administrative actions. However, these activities were not consistently documented, nor as continuous as those put forward by Malaysia.
Malaysia’s Claim
Malaysia, on the other hand, based its claim on the principle of “effective occupation,” which became a decisive factor in the ICJ’s ruling. Malaysia argued that it had administered the islands through its predecessor, Great Britain, and continued that administration following independence. Malaysia presented evidence of its longstanding involvement, including the establishment of a bird sanctuary on Sipadan in 1933 and the regulation of activities on the islands.
Moreover, Malaysia demonstrated its continuous control through the construction of lighthouses, the regulation of turtle egg collection, and the development of tourism infrastructure on Sipadan. These activities, documented over a long period, showcased Malaysia’s effective and sustained administration, which ultimately led the ICJ to rule in its favor, granting sovereignty over the islands to Malaysia.
III. The Dispute
Initial Dispute (1969)
The territorial dispute between Indonesia and Malaysia over the Ligitan and Sipadan Islands emerged in 1969, following Indonesia’s discovery of Malaysia’s ongoing activities on Sipadan. Malaysia had established a bird sanctuary on the island as early as 1933 and continued to regulate activities such as turtle egg collection and the development of tourism. This discovery marked the beginning of tensions between the two nations, as Indonesia believed that these actions infringed on what it considered its territory.
Indonesia further claimed that there had been a verbal agreement with Malaysia in 1969 to discuss the sovereignty of the islands. However, Malaysia denied any such agreement, asserting that the islands had always been part of the Malaysian state of Sabah. This misunderstanding fueled the initial discord between the two countries.
Escalation (1991)
The dispute escalated significantly in 1991 when Indonesia intensified its claims over the islands. The trigger for this escalation was Malaysia’s construction of tourist facilities on Sipadan, including chalets and a pier for a private dive company. Indonesia objected to these developments and requested Malaysia to cease its activities. However, Malaysia proceeded with its plans, heightening tensions between the two nations. The construction of these tourist facilities played a crucial role in demonstrating Malaysia’s effective occupation and administration of Sipadan, a key point that later influenced the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to rule in Malaysia’s favor in the final settlement of the dispute.
IV. Legal Proceedings
In 1998, Indonesia and Malaysia took a significant step toward peacefully resolving their territorial dispute over the Ligitan and Sipadan Islands by agreeing to submit the case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). This decision was formalized through a Special Agreement signed on May 31, 1997, and officially brought before the ICJ on November 2, 1998. The choice to pursue legal arbitration reflected both nations’ commitment to international law and diplomacy, ensuring that the dispute would be settled through peaceful and lawful means rather than escalating tensions.
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) played a pivotal role in facilitating this agreement. As a regional body focused on promoting peace and stability in Southeast Asia, ASEAN encouraged Indonesia and Malaysia to resolve their conflict through legal channels.
On December 17, 2002, the ICJ delivered its final ruling, decisively awarding sovereignty over the Ligitan and Sipadan Islands to Malaysia. The Court’s decision, by a 16-to-1 vote, was primarily based on the principle of “effective occupation,” which Malaysia had clearly demonstrated.
While Indonesia based its claim on the 1891 Convention between Great Britain and the Netherlands, the ICJ concluded that the convention did not clearly define boundaries that would include the disputed islands under Indonesian control.
V. Aftermath and Current Status
Following the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling in 2002, Malaysia and Indonesia took deliberate steps to implement the decision peacefully. Malaysia maintained its administration over Ligitan and Sipadan Islands, focusing primarily on conservation and the development of tourism, particularly on Sipadan, which is world-renowned for its diving spots. Indonesia, respecting the ICJ’s verdict, adjusted its maritime boundaries accordingly. In 2008, Indonesia enacted Government Regulation Number 37, which formally recognized new maritime basepoints that excluded Ligitan and Sipadan.
As of now, Ligitan and Sipadan Islands are administered by Malaysia and fall under the jurisdiction of the state of Sabah. In 2019, Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad agreed in principle to transfer the management of the islands from the National Security Council (NSC) back to the Sabah state government. Specifically, the Sabah Tourism, Culture, and Environment Ministry now oversees the islands, with the aim of promoting sustainable tourism and conservation efforts.
However, despite resolving the sovereignty issue, Malaysia and Indonesia continue to face challenges in delimiting their maritime boundaries in the Celebes Sea. The overlapping claims in the Ambalat and East Ambalat sea blocks have led to occasional diplomatic tensions and even naval standoffs. These areas, rich in strategic and economic value, remain the subject of ongoing negotiations as both nations seek a mutually acceptable solution to the complex maritime boundary issue.
The peaceful resolution of the Ligitan and Sipadan dispute through the ICJ set a valuable precedent for handling territorial conflicts in Southeast Asia, demonstrating the efficacy of international law and diplomacy. However, the continued maritime boundary disagreements between Malaysia and Indonesia highlight the broader geopolitical challenges in the region, where overlapping claims often fuel tensions. These disputes highlight the need for sustained regional cooperation, with ASEAN playing a crucial role in promoting peace, stability, and dialogue among its member states.
VI. Conclusion
Indonesia and Malaysia’s territorial dispute over the Ligitan and Sipadan Islands was resolved in 2002 by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which awarded sovereignty to Malaysia based on its effective occupation and administration of the islands. Indonesia’s claim, rooted in the 1891 Convention between Great Britain and the Netherlands, argued that the islands were part of the Dutch East Indies, but this was ultimately rejected by the ICJ.
The decision was a landmark moment in Southeast Asia, facilitated by ASEAN, and highlighted the importance of peaceful, legal resolutions to territorial disputes. While Malaysia has since focused on conservation and tourism development on the islands, and Indonesia has respected the ruling by adjusting its maritime boundaries, challenges remain in delimiting maritime boundaries in the Celebes Sea, particularly in the Ambalat and East Ambalat sea blocks, demonstrating that broader regional geopolitical issues persist.
Click here to learn more!
