You are on page 1of 20

MALAYSIA TERITORIAL

DISPUTES:

SIPADAN – LIGITAN
(INDONESIA)
UNIVERSITI UTARA
MALAYSIA

COLLAGE OF LAW
GOVERNMENT AND Decision Rendered On Dec 17, 2002
INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

GFPP 2223: FOREIGN POLICY


PRIDHIVRAJ NAIDU (127445)
 Territorial dispute is a disagreement over
the possession or control of land
between two or more states or over the
possession or control of land by one
state after it has conquered it from a
former state no longer currently
recognized by the occupying power.
Pulau sipadan and ligitan is a very small
islands in the Celebes Sea of the
northeast coast of the islands of borneo,
which divided between Indonesia and
Malaysia
BACKGROUND OF CASE
The dispute between Indonesia and
Malaysia, sticking out in 1967
 Malaysia and Indonesia held several
meetings to delineate their CSB from
September 9 to September 22, 1969 in
Kuala Lumpur
The problem was discussed by the
Malaysian Prime Minister Hussein Onn
and Indonesian President Suharto in a
meeting on March 26, 1980
 In 1976, the Treaty of Friendship and
Cooperation in Southeast Asia, or TAC
(Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in
Southeast Asia) in the first ASEAN Summit
in Bali Island
 In October 1991, established the Joint
Working Group (JWG)
 The JWG met on July 6, 1992, January
26-27, 1994 and on September 8, 1994
respectively. All meetings broke down.
 On September 14, 1994, following the
failure of JWG, Tun Mahathir proposed to
Indonesia to have the dispute referred
to the ICJ.
Cont..
During his visit to Kuala Lumpur on
October 7, 1996, President Soeharto
finally approved the proposal of Prime
Minister Mahathir to bring the case to
ICJ.
On November 2, 1998, Indonesia and
Malaysia submitted their intention to
the ICJ by notifying its Registrar of the
compromise signed by both countries on
May 31, 1997 in Kuala Lumpur.
 It entered into force on May 14,
1998.
EFFECTIVE OCCUPATION

SIPADAN DIVE RESORT


(60% GOVT OWNED)
*On 17 December 2002
the International Court of
Justice (ICJ) handed down
its final and binding
judgment on the case
concerning,
*Sovereignty over Pulau
Sipadan and Pulau Ligitan
finding by 16 votes to one
that Malaysia has
sovereignty over the
islands.
PERSPECTIVE OF ANALYSIS
RATIONAL ACTOR MODAL

The model adopts the state as the primary


unit of analysis, and inter-state relation as
the context for analysis.
The state is seen as a monolithic unitary actor,
capable of making rational decisions based
on preference ranking and value
maximization.
According to the rational actor model, a
rational decision making process is used by a
state.
BASIC UNIT OF ANALYSIS

 TERITORIAL INTERGRITY

 ECONOMIC IMMPORTANCE
ORGANISING CONCEPTS
 NATIONAL ACTOR
- Malaysia (Tun Mahathir)
- Indonesia (President Soeharto)

 THE PROBLEM
- Territorial dispute

 STATIC SELECTION
- Dialogues
- Compromise by both states (1997)
- ICJ
ACTION AS RATIONAL CHOICE
(INSTRUMENTS OF FP)

GOALS & OBJECTIVES

TERRITORY: SOVEREIGNITY IS
TERRITORIAL IN NATURE

BOTH COUNTRIES ARE


SAFEGOURDING THEIR TERRITORIAL
INTERGRITY
ACTION AS RATIONAL CHOICE

OPTIONS
 MILITARY (EFFECTIVE OCCUPATION)
 ECONOMIC
 DIPLOMATIC (BILATERAL)
 PROPAGANDA
 INTELLIGENCE (REGARDING
ACTIVITIES OF THE PLAINTIF)
ACTIONS AS RATIONAL
CHOICE
CONSEQUENCES
 EACH DECISIONS MADE BRINGS
EFFECT, CONCERNS OF THE OTHER
PARTY
 LARGELY DIPLOMATIC
 LIMITED MILITARY INVOLVEMENT
 THIS CASE TOOK IN TO ACCOUNT
THE OTHER PARTIES MIGHT &
CAPABILITY TO RETALIATE IN ALL
ASPECTS
ACTIONS AS RATIONAL
CHOICE
CHOICE

 RATIONAL CHOICE IS MADE IN


ORDER TO MAXIMIZE
VALUE/OUTCOME
 CONSIDER
 DIPLOMATIC MEANS & ICJ
DOMINANT INFERENCE PATTERN

 An action took by a state is presumed to


have assurance over the result at its
favor. This assures the action is value
maximizing means.
 Action taken by Malaysia in this case, it is
assured by the legal means it pursued in
the international court of justice (ICJ)
CONCLUSION
 Through this paradigm of foreign policy
we could see the systematic and rational
decisions made by the states as the
primary actor of analysis.
 Also gives a clear picture on how
decisions are made in a complete and
professional manner at national levels.
THANK
YOU