See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/357527051

" SETTLEMENT OF INTERNATIONAL MARITIME BOUNDARY DISPUTES

BETWEEN TIMOR LESTE AND AUSTRALIA "

Article · January 2022

CITATIONS READS

0 161

1 author:

Andi Fatimah Syahra Mb

Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta
4 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

“ ASPECTS OF DIFFERENT RELIGION MARRIAGES PERFORMED OUTSIDE THE TERRITORY OF INDONESIA IN THE PERSPECTIVE OF INTERNATIONAL CIVIL LAW “ View project

“ ASPECTS OF DIFFERENT RELIGION MARRIAGES PERFORMED OUTSIDE THE TERRITORY OF INDONESIA IN THE PERSPECTIVE OF INTERNATIONAL CIVIL LAW “ View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Andi Fatimah Syahra Mb on 03 January 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 “ SETTLEMENT OF INTERNATIONAL MARITIME BOUNDARY
DISPUTES BETWEEN TIMOR LESTE AND AUSTRALIA ”

By: Andi Fatima Syahra

Faculty of Law, Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta

Jalan Brawijaya, Tamantiro, Kasihan, Bantul, Daerah

Istimewa Yogyakarta 55183, Indonesia.

E-mail: a.fatima.law19@mail.umy.ac.id

Abstract
This research explains the efforts of Timor Leste resolve the maritime boundary disputes
with Australia. Perspective that used in this research is neorealism perspective. All countries in the
international system are made functionally equal by structural pressure, This research also uses the
track two diplomacy theory. This theory is assumed to be an extension of track one diplomacy,
whose actors are non-government actors who are able to carry out diplomatic activities, analyze,
prevent and resolve a international conflict. The results of this research can show that Timor Leste
and Australia had succeeded reach an agreement on their maritime boundaries. The agreement
resulted of Timor Leste’s efforts to resolved maritime boundary disputes with Australia under the
Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) Conciliation based on Article 298 and Annex V of the
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Timor Leste signed their Maritime
Boundary Agreement on 6 March 2018 at United Nations Headquarters, New York. The settlement
of the maritime boundary resulted better deal than before and opened a new chapter for bilateral
relations between Timor Leste and Australia.
Keywords : Neorealism perspective, Maritime boundary agreement, UNCLOS, Conciliation.

A. BACKGROUND

East Timor or what is now known as the Democratic Republic of East-Leste is

a former Portuguese colony and was once part of the territory of the Unitary

State of the Republic of Indonesia (NKRI) which is called the first level area of

East Timor. Timor Leste is a relatively young sovereign country that became

independent on 20 May 2002. 1Timor Leste's struggle for independence has

been through a long struggle between the two regimes that ruled it. Australia is

a country that played a role in the independence of Timor Leste from the 1999

1
Geoffrey C. Gunn,2005, “500 Years of East Timor”, INSIST Press, Yogyakarta, p. 21.
 referendum process to independence in 2002. After Timor Leste became

independent and apart from the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia, the

issue of the Timor Gap arose.

The Timor Gap or Timor Gap is the territorial waters between the islands of

Timor, Indonesia and Australia. It is called the Timor Gap because it forms a

sea border between Australia and Indonesia. This area of the Timor Gap is in a

straight line with the territory of Western Australia if drawn straight to the

south. The position of the Timor Gap itself is factually located at 0.8.18 South

Latitude and 125.34 East Longitude.2The cause of this dispute is due to

different interpretations of the maritime line of the median line, while Australia

is based on the continental shelf. In addition, there is natural wealth of oil and

gas in the Timor Gap. The oil and gas fields in the Timor Sea between Timor

Leste and Australia include Elang-Kakatua, Bayu-Undan, Greater Sunrise,

Laminaria-Corallina.

During independence, Timor Leste and Australia have agreed on 3 treaties

regarding maritime boundaries, namely the 2002 Timor Sea Treaty (Timor Sea

Treaty), the 2003 Sunrise International Unification Agreement (IUA) and the

2006 Certain Maritime Arrangements in the Timor Sea (CMATS) Agreement.

However, in the agreement, Timor Leste and Australia have not yet determined

a permanent maritime boundary. The CMATS Agreement was signed in 2006

resulting in an agreement on a 50:50 share of oil and gas from the Greater

2
Wayan Parthiana, S.H., M.H, 2005, “Continental Shelf in International Law of the Sea”, Mandar Maju Publishers, Bandung, p.
115.
 Sunrise field and a delay in delimiting permanent marine areas for the next 40-

50 years.

However, according to the Timor Leste government, the distribution of the

proceeds was unfair because it was imposed on a newly independent country.

Timor Leste alleges that Australia committed fraudulent wiretapping involving

the Australian Secret Intelligence Service (ASIS) during the negotiation

process in 2006. In addition, where Timor Leste relies on Australia, it has also

violated other laws against Timor Leste by forcibly seizing important

documents related to The Timor Gap issue carried out by the Australia Security

Intelligence Organization (ASIO) in one of the East Timor lawyers' offices in

Canberra, namely Bernard Collaery on 3 December 2013.3

On 17 December 2013 Timor Leste brought the case to the International Court

of Justice (ICJ). Through a lengthy process, in 2015 the Court was authorized

to return data and documents and copies thereof to Timor Leste.

After returning the data, in 2016, Timor Leste and Australia again discussed

the issue of determining maritime boundaries betwe en the two countries.

Timor-Leste commenced the conciliation process under Article 298 and Annex

V of UNCLOS under the assistance of the Permanent Court of Arbitration

(PCA) to resolve differences with Australia on maritime boundaries in the

Timor Sea.4

3
Maria Afonso de Jesus, 2002, “Buletin la’o Hamutuk oleh institute Pemantau dan Analisis Rekontruksi Timor
Leste”, Tasi timor , Vol.4, No.5, p.3.
4
Viji Menon, 2019, “Timor-Leste-Australia Maritime Boundari Treaty: Victory for Dili?”, RSIS Commentary, p.2.
The agreement, which was signed at United Nations Headquarters in New

York, ended a 10-year dispute over rights to oil and gas reserves in the waters.

With the right of both parties' approval, Timor Leste will now receive the

majority of future oil and gas sector revenues. After Timor-Leste became

independent and seceded from Indonesia in 2002, there was no permanent

border separating the country from Australia.

So far, the two countries have based their borders on an interim agreement,

although East Timor has later argued that the agreement was unfairly imposed

by Australia.

It is believed that Australia gets a greater share of access to gas and oil fields in

the Timor Sea which are worth tens of billions of dollars. On that basis, in 2016

Timor Leste filed a complaint against the temporary agreement with the

Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, Netherlands.

The historic agreement signed by Australia and Timor Leste applies maritime

boundaries that are in line with the United Nations Convention on the Law of

the Sea (UNCLOS).

In accordance with Article 298 and Annex V, the conciliation between Timor-

Leste and Australia was initiated by Timor-Leste on 11 April 2016 by written

notification addressed to Australia. The notification appointed Judge Abdul G.

Koroma from Sierra Leon, a former ICJ judge and diplomat nd Judge Rüdiger

Wolfrum from Germany, a former ITLOS judge, as conciliators. Of note,

neither was on the UNCLOS List of Conciliators at the time of appointments.

 Judge Rüdiger Wolfrum was on the List of Arbitrators only. Twenty-one days

after being notified to East Timor on May 2, 2016, Australia sent a response to

East Timor in accordance with Article 3 of Annex V. In response, Australia has

appointed a PhD. Rosalie Balkin of Australia and Professor Ronald McDonald

of New Zealand and Canada will arbitrate. The designation of an Australian

arbitrator was important as it showed that Australia was involved in the

proceedings, as opposed to China in the South China Sea arbitration and Russia

in the Arctic sunrise arbitration. Dr. Balkin and Professor McRae were not on

the list of arbitrators at the time of appointment. Dr. Balkin was nominated for

a list by Australia on April 10, 2017, a year after East Timor began the process.

Article 3 of Annex V provides that the first four arbitrators appoint a fifth

arbitrator from the list of arbitrators within 30 days of their appointment. In this

case, this has never been made public, but since the rights have been granted

under Section 3, the parties must have agreed in different ways.5 First, it was

agreed to extend the deadline for the appointment of the fifth arbitrator, and

secondly, those who were not on the list at the time of appointment. On June

25, 2016, 54 days after the appointment, four arbitrators were appointed after

consultation. The arbitration committee is chaired by Ambassador Peter Taxo

Egensen, an experienced diplomat and lawyer.6 Ambassador Taxo Egensen

was selected from a list of candidates accepted by both parties. The

appointment of Ambassador Taksøe Jensen suggests that the parties were

5
Tiara Ika Winarni, 2015, “Pelanggaran Prinsip Iktikad Baik Terhadap Negosiasi Treaty on Certain Maritime
Arrangements in the Timor Sea (Kesepakatan Maritim Khusus di Laut Timor) oleh Australia, Jurnal Ilmu Hukum,
Vol.2, No.1, p.2.
6
Mauna Boer, 2000, “Pengertian Peranan dan Fungsi dalam Era Dinamika Global”, PT.Alumni: Jakarta, p.42.
looking for an experienced diplomat with bargaining skills to lead the process.

It also shows that including arbitrators in the UNCLOS list was not an

important factor in selecting the arbitrators of the parties. On May 11, 2016,

nine days after the first four arbitrators were appointed, the parties agreed to

select PCA as the law firm for arbitration proceedings. This was the initiative

of the parties. As mentioned earlier, unlike other arbitration proceedings,

Annex V does not include any institutional support. Given the nature of the

conflict between East Timor and Australia, the PCA was a logical choice for

the parties and the Commission. Based on their experience, the PCA served as

a record of many interstate maritime disputes, including those raised under Part

XV of UNCLOS. In fact, without such institutional support from the PCA, it

would be very difficult for the Commission to play the positive role that Annex

V expects, especially in holding meetings and hearings with Parties. You may

have noticed. The committee was finally launched on June 25, 2016, 75 days

after East Timor began the arbitration process. It happens relatively quickly. By

comparison, it took about five months to set up a committee in the ICSID

arbitration process. This is a comparison of Tesoro Petroleum Corporation and

Trinidad and Tobago, which consisted of only one arbitrator. The South China

Sea Arbitration Court between the Philippines and China was established 123

days after the Philippines began proceedings. Also, it usually takes 5 to 13

months to form an arbitral tribunal with ICSID arbitration. The Commission

was empowered to adopt its own rules of procedure under Article 4 of Annex

V, in which case the Commission developed the rules of procedure through

 extensive consultation with the parties. Three aspects of the rules of procedure,

finaled on 22 August 2018 and attached to the Commission's report, deserve

emphasis. First, they allow the Commission to meet with the parties separately.

Second, they permit the Commission to provide information provided that one

party is not disclosed to the other.7 Finally, allow the committee chair or

delegation to meet with one of the contracting parties and report fully to the

committee. These provisions seek engagement later without worrying that the

parties will have such flexibility. These three characteristics are essential for

arbitration, as explained below, and arbitration and judicial proceedings. It

should not be used in and is seen when partial communication with the parties

is explicitly prohibited. Previously, Australia wanted the border to be at the

end of its continental shelf so as to make the border closer to Timor Leste.

Thanks to the agreement, Timor-Leste will practically receive at least 70% of

revenues from the largest oil field, Greater Sunrise, which is estimated to be

worth US$40 billion (Rp551 trillion). In the previous agreement, revenues

were divided 50-50 between the two countries. The meaning of the deal also

means Australia will lose its jurisdiction over the oil field which is now

controlled by both countries.

A. FORMULATION OF PROBLEM

- What are East Timor's efforts to settle the Timor Sea dispute with Australia?

7
P.Anthonius Sitepu, 2011, “Studi Hubungan Internasional” , Graha Ilmu: Yogyakarta, p.163.
 B. DICUSSION

The maritime boundary dispute between Australia and Timor-Leste was not a

central issue in the Committee's review of amendments to the CMATS Treaty

before it was terminated. Various Timor Leste's efforts to achieve its interests

in maritime boundary disputes brought Australia to the International Court of

Justice in an espionage case. In addition, Timor Leste has also made diplomatic

efforts with Australia through the assistance of the Permanent Court of

Arbitration (PCA) as a mediator.8

Efforts to Settle through Legal Path The spy scandal carried out by Australia

against the government of Timor Leste began in 2004 when Australia and

Timor Leste were in the process of negotiating the CMATS Agreement. This

wiretapping was carried out under the pretext of Australian assistance in

renovating the cabinet workspace and building a new workspace for the Prime

Minister of Timor Leste. At that time, former ASIS agents and operators served

as aid workers deployed by AusAid, who assisted in conducting the

wiretapping mission.The former ASIS agent was tasked with installing

wiretapping equipment in the renovated workspace so Australia could obtain

information about internal discussions conducted by the government of Timor

Leste.

8
Puriana Septi Nauli, Stivani Ismawira Sinambela, 2021, “Efforts for Resolving the Maritime Board Delimitation
Dispute in the Greater Sunrise Area Between Timor Leste and Australia From the Perspective of the Study of
International Agreements”, Jurnal PIR , Vol.6, No.1, p.7.
 Based on information from the former ASIS agent, the Timor Leste

government then took further action by submitting the cancellation of the

CMATS agreement to the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague

with the principle of "good faith". The cancellation of the CMATS Agreement

was filed on 23 April 2013 based on the provisions of Article 23 paragraph b of

Annex B Timor Sea Treaty 2002.9

Timor Leste's prosecution is supported by evidence in the form of documents

regarding the justification of the act of espionage carried out by Australia

which will be submitted in March 2014. However, before the documents were

submitted, on December 3, 2013, officers from the Australia Security

Intelligence Organization (ASIO) raided the East Timor lawyer's office. Leste,

namely Bernard Collaery, an Australian citizen who was in Canberra and

confiscated and confiscated documents and data. International Court Of Justice,

Apart from Collaery's lawyer, a former ASIS agent was also targeted in the

ASIO attack.

Subsequently, on 17 December 2013, Timor Leste brought this case to the ICJ

to prosecute Australia's displeasing conduct and also to submit a request for

provisional indications to protect its rights and to prevent the use of data and

documents confiscated by Australia against its interests in the arbitral tribunal.

pending and related to others such as matters relating to the Timor Sea and its

resources.On 3 March 2014, the ICJ granted Timor Leste's request that

9
Tiara Ika Winarni, 2015, ”Violation of the Principle of Good Faith in the Negotiations of the Treaty on Certain
Maritime Arrangements in the Timor Sea by Australia”, Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 2, p. 2.
 Australia ensure that the documents and data that had been confiscated were

not used in cases arbitration to the detriment of Timor Leste. 10

On 25 March 2015, Australia indicated that it would return the data and

documents confiscated in the office of Bernard Collaery, the lawyer

representing Timor Leste on 3 December 2013. Leste on 22 April 2015.20

The Australian espionage case has been withdrawn by Timor-Leste as part of

negotiations in the hope of resolving a longstanding dispute over a permanent

maritime boundary in the Timor Sea. After conciliation talks in Singapore,

Timor Leste and Australia agreed to end the espionage case as part of "good

faith" negotiations to resolve maritime boundary disputes.

On 25 March 2015, Australia indicated that it would return the data and

documents confiscated in the office of Bernard Collaery, the lawyer

representing Timor Leste on 3 December 2013. Leste on 22 April 2015.

The Australian espionage case has been withdrawn by Timor-Leste as part of

negotiations in the hope of resolving a longstanding dispute over a permanent

maritime boundary in the Timor Sea. After conciliation talks in Singapore,

Timor Leste and Australia agreed to end the espionage case as part of "good

faith" negotiations to resolve maritime boundary disputes.11

Diplomacy between Timor Leste and Australia through the Permanent

Court of Arbitration (PCA)

• Conciliation Process

10
Winda Trisen, 2020, “The Efforts of Timor Leste to Resolve the Maritime Boundary Disputes with
Australia in 2016-2018”, Jurnal JOM FISIP, Vol.7, No.3, p.6.

11
Rizki Roza, 2018, “Penyelesaian Sengketa Celah Timor dan Implikasinya bagi Indonesia”, Jurnal Kajian Singkat
Terhadap Isu Aktual dan Strategis, Vol.10, No.6, p.5.
 The conciliation process related to maritime boundaries is carried out under

Article 298 and Annex V of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the

Sea (UNCLOS). Article 55 UNCLOS defines the Exclusive Economic Zone as

a zone that adjacent and outside of the territorial sea. The article also explains

the rights, jurisdiction, and freedom of the state in the Exclusive Economic

Zone, which must be obeyed by coastal countries as well as other countries. 12

The Conciliation Commission consists of five members who are appointed by

Australia and Timor Leste and are empowered to make recommendations but

are not legally binding on the government.The trial is confidential for both

countries in accordance with the rules adopted by the Conciliation

Commission. This conciliation serves to assist the parties to reach a settlement.

The Conciliation Commission started in late 2016 and will last until September

2017. 13January 16-20, the two sides, namely Australia and Timor Leste, held a

meeting in Singapore with the agenda of the parties submitting legal

submissions to the Commission regarding the position of their maritime

boundaries. The meeting opened with the release of a press statement jointly

informing the parties and the Commission of the termination of CMATS and

the commitment to negotiate maritime boundaries; and concludes with a related

review of further records noting that the commission has begun to explore the

12
Yordan Gunawan, Verocha Jayustin Sastra, Adyatma Tsany Prakosa, Mutia Ovitasari, Lathifah Yuli Kurniasih,
2020, “The Validity of Turkey-Libya’s Agreement on Maritime Boundaries in International Law”, Jurnal Hukum dan
Peradilan, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 170-185.

13
Ummi Yusnita, 2018, “Penyelesaian Sengketa batas Laut antara Indonesia dan Malaysia dalam Perspektif
Hukum Internasional”, Vol.7, No.1, p.6.
 parties' positions on which maritime boundaries in the Timor Sea should be

established.

March 26-31 2017, a meeting in Washington DC, with the agenda of the

Commission providing the parties with a paper not setting out a possible

resolution, designed to provoke and challenge the parties to their “bottom line

position.”

6-9 June 2017, the Commission attempted to gain a deeper understanding of

the diving factors that affect the position of each party on the maritime

boundary issue by holding a compenhagen meeting. The Commission

examines the assumptions put forward and held by each of the two parties and

their resilience.14

24-28 July 2017, meeting in Singapore. The Chair noted good intentions on

both sides, but difficult issues remain, including the resources and location of

the Timor Sea bed boundaries. 29-1 August 2017, Chairman and Judge Abdul

Koroma together with members of the Board of Registration (from the

Permanent Court of Arbitration), visited Dilli and met with the Chief

Negotiator and East Timorese leaders namely President Francisco Guterres Lu-

Olo and former Prime Minister Dr Mari Alkatiri, Minister for Agents of Timor-

Leste Agio Pereira, Prime Minister Dr Rui Araujo, Minister for Oil and

Mineral Resources Alfredo Pires and former President Dr. Jose Ramos-Horta.

30 August 2017, based on a proposal made by the Commission, Timor Leste

and Australia have reached agreement on the Comprehensive Package

14
Tiara Ika Winarni, 2015, “Pelanggaran Prinsip Iktikad Baik Terhadap Negosiasi Treaty on Certain Maritime
Arrangements in the Timor Sea (Kesepakatan Maritim Khusus di Laut Timor) oleh Australia”, Jurnal Ilmu Hukum,
Vol. 2, No. 1, p.2.
 Agreement on the main elements of delimitation of the sea between them in the

Timor Sea.

9-13 October 2017, a meeting was held in The Hague. After hours of

negotiating the agreement over several weeks by teleconference, the parties

met in person to finalize the text of the agreement. The Conciliation

Commission, together with Timor Leste and Australia and the Greater Sunrise

Joint Venture, continued discussions in Brisbane in early November and in

Singapore on 18 November, followed by meetings in Sydney from 29 January

to 2 February 2018.15

19 February 2018, the Conciliation Commission held a series of recent

meetings in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia with Timor Leste, Australia and the

Greater Sunrise Joint Venture. The Conciliation Commission communicates its

conclusions to the two countries, with a view to providing them with an

information basis for make decisions regarding the development of shared

resources.

• Treaty Between the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste and Australia

Establishing Their Maritime Boundaries in the Timor Sea (2018)

The Maritime Boundary Agreement between Timor Leste and Australia has

been successfully agreed and signed by the two countries on March 6 2018, at

the United Nations Headquarters in New York. The signing of the new

15
Putriana Septi Nauli, Stivani Ismawira Sinambela, 2021, ” Upaya penyelesaian Sengketa Delimitasi batas
Maritim di Wilayah Greater Sunrise Antara Timor Leste dan Australia dari Perspektif Kajian Hukum Perjanjian
Internasional”, Jurnal Power in International Relation, Vol.6, No.1, p.7.
Maritime Boundary Agreement took place at 5 pm and hosted by the Secretary

General of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres, and witnessed together with

the Chair of the Conciliation Commission, Peter Taksøe-Jensen, and members

of the Conciliation Commission Dr. Rosalie Balkin, Judge Abdul G. Koroma,

Professor Donald McRae, and Judge Rüdiger Wolfrum. This agreement was

signed by Timor Leste's Minister of Border Affairs, Agio Pereira, and

Australia's Minister of Foreign Affairs, Julie Bishop.

The two countries agreed that the maritime boundary was located in the middle

of the distance between the two countries (the median line). The treaty on

maritime boundaries is comprehensive and final and covers the boundaries of

the two continental shelves (which requires the right to exploit The two

countries agreed that the maritime boundary was located in the middle of the

distance between the two countries (the median line). Treaties on maritime

boundaries are comprehensive and final and cover the boundaries of both the

continental shelf (which requires the right to exploit seabed resources, such as

petroleum) and the Exclusive Economic Zone (which requires the right to

exploit resources in the water column, such as fisheries). The agreement also

addresses the legal status of the Greater Sunrise gas field, the establishment of

the Greater Sunrise Special Regime, and the pathways to resource

development. The map above shows the location of the maritime boundaries

established by the Treaty Between the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste

and Australia Establishing Their Maritime Boundaries in the Timor Sea.The

southern boundary is the boundary of the seabed and water column (from point
 TA-5 to TA- 10). Segment west of the southern boundary line (TA-5 to TA-6)

runs slightly above the median line, while the eastern segment of the southern

boundary (TA-6 to TA-10) runs along the median line. The line connecting

points TA-1 and TA-2, 16 and the line connecting the points TA-11, TA-12, and

TA-13 is a condition that the location of the continental shelf is still temporary.

According to Article 3 of this agreement, the points that are still temporary will

be adjusted after Timor Leste fixes maritime boundaries with Indonesia.

Furthermore, the determination of the EEZ is determined in Article 4, namely

from TA-5 to TA-10 with the possibility for both countries to extend the EEZ

boundary. From the results of Timor Leste's efforts in resolving maritime

boundary disputes, resulting in maritime boundaries determined according to

the UNCLOS law of the sea and located in the median line of the two

countries. If the maritime boundary between Timor Leste and Australia is

based on the continental shelf, most of the Greater Sunrise field falls into

Australian territory. However, with strong diplomacy, Australia agreed that the

maritime boundary with Timor Leste was determined based on the median line.

• Greater Sunrise Special Regime

In addition to the maritime boundary treaty establishing maritime boundaries,

the most important thing for both countries is Greater Sunrise's resources.

Appendix B to this Treaty outlines the details regarding the Special Regime,

both Timor Leste and Australia have rights as a coastal state in accordance with

16
Shana Lia Mifroh, 2021, “Analisis Hubungan Antara Timor Leste dan Australia Terkait Perebutan Sumber Daya
Minyak dan Gas pada Sengketa Celah Timor (Timor Gap)”, Jurnal Polinter, Vol.6, No.2, p.3.
Article 77 of UNCLOS and both countries are entitled to all petroleum

produced in the Greater Sunrise field.33 As for the distribution of revenues

from this Greater Sunrise field regulated in Article 2 (2). Upstream revenue is

divided as follows:

a) If Greater Sunrise is developed via a pipeline to Timor Leste, 70% of the

upstream revenue will go to Timor Leste, and 30% to Australia; or

b) If developed by pipeline to Australia, 80% will go to Timor Leste, and 20%

to Australia. 17 In addition, this agreement also creates a two-tier regulatory

structure for the regulation and administration of the Greater Sunrise Special

Regime, consisting of a Designated Authority and a Governance Board. Article

6 of the agreement states that the Designated Authority has the responsibility to

carry out regulations and day-to-day management of petroleum activities in the

Special Regime Region. Accordingly, the Designated Authority acts on behalf

of East Timor and Australia and reports to the Governing Council.The

Governing Council is a strategic oversight body consisting of three sovereign

representatives, namely two representatives from Timor Leste and one

representative member from Australia whose function is to oversee, conduct

audits, approve regulations on oil exploration activities and intervene with

Designated Authorities in relation to development strategy issues.The third

body, the Dispute Resolution Committee does not have a regulatory role, but

has the authority to make decisions on disputes on issues strategic issues that

cannot be resolved at the Governing Council level.

• Ratification of the Maritime Boundary Treaty between Timor Leste and

Australia On 30 August 2019, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison visited

Dili. The two countries exchanged notes to complete the process of ratification

of the Maritime Boundary Treaty.39 Timor Leste and Australia agreed to ratify

maritime boundaries so that the Treaty has entered into force for both

countries. Although the percentage share of the rations received by the two

countries from the Greater Sunrise field is still a problem.

Citing a study conducted by oil and natural gas consultants Poten and Partners,

Damon Evans said the socio-economic benefits of building a Liquefied Natural

Gas plant (LNG) in Timor Leste reached 154.48 million dollars over five

years.40 However, Damon Evans also mentioned that building a 286 kilometer

long pipeline from Greater Sunrise to Timor Leste has difficulties and is not an

easy task, because the pipeline must pass through the Timor Trench which is

about 2,800 meters deep. Construction of the LNG plant is quite a process.

complex, requires very expensive costs, contains great risks and uncertainties

in its implementation. Based on the experience of developing LNG plants in

the world so far it takes a long time, which is about 15-20 years from the

beginning of the discovery of natural gas to shipping. From the description

above, it can be seen that the role of the WUC in handling the conflict in

Xinjiang has paved the way for voicing the Uyghur ethnic conflict with

the Chinese government in the international world. As well as many roles

in voicing cases of human rights violations including the rights of the Uyghur

ethnic children. However, it has not been fully effective in producing conflict
resolution solutions. It is due to China's strong position in the international

world. As one of the superpowers that have significant influence in the world,

China's strength is so durable that it becomes a challenge for the WUC to carry

out its mission of liberating Uyghurs.The first LNG was carried out. Oil and

natural gas consultant Jeffry Feynman said it needed 24 billion dollars to build

an LNG processing plant in Timor Leste. To plan the construction of an LNG

plant, Timor Leste needs to prepare a strategy, technical and financial

understanding, as well as detailed steps to support success in the negotiation

processes regarding the construction of the LNG plant to be carried out.

However, clarity regarding maritime boundaries with Australia is an

achievement and achievement for Timor Leste. Based on the settlement process

and Timor Leste's efforts, such as the cancellation of the CMATS agreement to

involving the International Court of Justice in dealing with maritime boundary

issues, it seems that Timor Leste is bearing fruit. Efforts were made quite

effectively by bringing the case to the International Court of Justice. Through

the 2018 treaty, the two countries agreed on permanent maritime boundaries

(except for some temporary points which are subject to future adjustments and

the Greater Sunrise special regime for development and drafting), which is a

successful example of PCA conciliation demonstrating the potential for

conciliation as a means of dispute resolution. effective and useful. The Timor

Gap dispute has brought Timor Leste into a bad situation as a country that has

just gained its independence. Timor Leste has not even really conquered its

sovereignty, as far as maritime borders are concerned. During independence,

 Timor-Leste and Australia have agreed on 3 treaties regarding maritime

boundaries, namely the 2002 Timor Sea Treaty (Timor Sea Treaty), the 2003

Sunrise International Unification Agreement (IUA) and the 2006 Certain

Maritime Arrangements in the Timor Sea (CMATS) Agreement. But the

agreement that has been agreed still shows the uncertainty of permanent

maritime boundaries between the two countries. Efforts made by Timor Leste

in resolving maritime boundary disputes are pursued through legal and

diplomatic channels. Timor-Leste brought Australia's espionage case to the

PCA and ICJ and canceled the CMATS Treaty. Meanwhile, Timor Leste also

carried out diplomatic efforts through the assistance of the PCA by conducting

a conciliation process. The International Criminal Court (ICC) was established

in 2002 as a permanent court to prosecute persons for genocide, crimes against

humanity, and war crimes as defined by international agreements, particularly

the Rome Statute.18This conciliation lasted until September 2017, and was

successfully agreed by the two countries on March 6, 2018 in New York. The

success of diplomacy under PCA conciliation is also highly dependent on the

cooperative attitude of the two countries. There is good faith and cooperation

with the Commission. First, Australia has historically refused to settle the

Timor Sea dispute with the UNCLOS and ICJ dispute resolution mechanisms.

However, because Australia violated international law by espionage against

18
Yordan Gunawan, 2012, “Penegakan Hukum terhadap Pembajakan di Laut Melalui Yurisdiksi Mahkamah Pidana
Internasional”, Jurnal Media Hukum, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 72-86.
Timor Leste, after its initial objection to the Conciliation Commission's

authority was rejected (by the commission), it was no longer possible for

Australia to challenge the legality or suspend the procedure, and then switch

and commit to negotiating with Timor Leste through PCA conciliation process.
CONCLUSION

The Timor Gap dispute has brought Timor Leste into a bad situation as a country

that has just gained its independence. Timor Leste has not even really conquered

its sovereignty, as far as maritime borders are concerned. During independence,

Timor-Leste and Australia have agreed on 3 treaties regarding maritime

boundaries, namely the 2002 Timor Sea Treaty (Timor Sea Treaty), the 2003

Sunrise International Unification Agreement (IUA) and the 2006 Certain

Maritime Arrangements in the Timor Sea (CMATS) Agreement. But the

agreement that has been agreed still shows the uncertainty of permanent

maritime boundaries between the two countries. Efforts made by Timor Leste in

resolving maritime boundary disputes are pursued through legal and diplomatic

channels. Timor-Leste brought Australia's espionage case to the PCA and ICJ

and canceled the CMATS Treaty. Meanwhile, Timor Leste also carried out

diplomatic efforts through the assistance of the PCA by conducting a

conciliation process. This conciliation lasted until September 2017, and was

successfully agreed by the two countries on March 6, 2018 in New York. The

success of diplomacy under PCA conciliation is also highly dependent on the

cooperative attitude of the two countries. There is good faith and cooperation

with the Commission. First, Australia has historically refused to settle the Timor

Sea dispute with the UNCLOS and ICJ dispute resolution mechanisms.

However, because Australia violated international law by espionage against

Timor Leste, after its initial objection to the Conciliation Commission's authority

was rejected (by the commission), it was no longer possible for Australia to

challenge the legality or suspend the procedure, and then switch and commit to

negotiating with Timor Leste through PC conciliation process.

 BIBIOGRAPHY

Book

Menon, Viji. (2019). Timor-Leste-Australia Maritime Boundari Treaty: Victory for Dili?.
RSIS Commentary..

Parthiana, Wayan. (2005). Continental Shelf in International Law of the Sea. Bandung:
Mandar Maju Publishers.

Gunn, Geoffrey C. (2005). 500 Years of East Timor. Yogyakarta: Insist Press.

Mauna, Boer. (2000). Pengertian Peranan dan Fungsi dalam Era Dinamika
Global, Jakarta: PT.Alumni.
Sitepu, P Anthonius. (2011). Studi Hubungan Internasional. Yogayakarta: Graha Ilmu.

Journal

Jesus, Maria Afonso De. (2002). “Buletin la’o Hamutuk oleh institute Pemantau dan
Analisis Rekontruksi Timor Leste”. Tasi timor, Vol. 4, No.5, p. 3.

Winarni, Tiara Ika. (2015). “Pelanggaran Prinsip Iktikad Baik Terhadap Negosiasi Treaty
on Certain Maritime Arrangements in the Timor Sea (Kesepakatan Maritim
Khusus di Laut Timor) oleh Australia”. Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Vol. 2, No.1, p. 2.

Yusnita, Ummi. (2018). “Penyelesaian Sengketa batas Laut antara Indonesia dan
Malaysia dalam Perspektif Hukum Internasional”. Vol. 7, No.1, p. 6.

Mifroh, Shana Lia. (2021). Analisis Hubungan Antara Timor Leste dan Australia
Terkait Perebutan Sumber Daya Minyak dan Gas pada Sengketa Celah Timor
(Timor Gap)”. Jurnal Polinter, Vol. 6, No. 2, p. 3.

Septi, Putriana Naila, Stivani Ismawira Sinambela, 2021, Upaya penyelesaian

Sengketa Delimitasi batas Maritim di Wilayah Greater Sunrise Antara Timor
Leste dan Australia dari Perspektif Kajian Hukum Perjanjian Internasional,
Jurnal Power in International Relation,Vol. 6, No. 1, p. 7.

Mifroh, Shana Lia , 2021, Analisis Hubungan Antara Timor Leste dan Australia
Terkait Perebutan Sumber Daya Minyak dan Gas pada Sengketa Celah Timor
(Timor Gap). Jurnal Polinter, Vol. 6, No. 2, p. 3.

Nauli, Putriana Septi , Stivani Ismawira Sinambela, 2021, Upaya penyelesaian

Sengketa Delimitasi batas Maritim di Wilayah Greater Sunrise Antara Timor
Leste dan Australia dari Perspektif Kajian Hukum Perjanjian Internasional.
Jurnal Power in International Relation, Vol. 6, No. 1, p .7.

Gunawan Y, Sastra VJ, Prakosa AT, Ovitasari M, Kurniasih LY, 2020, The Validity of
Turkey-Libya’s Agreement on Maritime Boundaries in International Law. Jurnal
Hukum dan Peradilan. Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 170-185.

Gunawan Y, 2012, Penegakan Hukum terhadap Pembajakan di Laut Melalui Yurisdiksi

Mahkamah Pidana Internasional, Jurnal Media Hukum. Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 72-86.
 Tiara, Ika Winarni. (2015). “Violation of the Principle of Good Faith in the Negotiations
of the Treaty on Certain Maritime Arrangements in the Timor Sea by Australia”
Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 2, No. 2, p. 4.

View publication stats