Pernyataan Dr. Marty Natalegawa

Tulisan ini tentu saja tidak mampu membahas semua aspek yang terkait dengan sengketa Indonesia Malaysia. Fokusnya adalah aspek geospasial dan hukum terkait kewilayahan dan kewenangan negara atas kawasan laut.

PBB, New York (ANTARA News) – Negara-negara Pihak pada Konvensi Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa tentang Hukum Laut 1982 (SPLOS), Senin, sepakat memilih diplomat handal Indonesia, Arif Havas Oegroseno, sebagai Presiden bagi pertemuan mereka untuk periode 2010-2011.

Dengan penunjukan itu, Arif Havas Oegroseno — saat ini menjabat sebagai Direktur Jenderal Hukum dan Perjanjian Internasional – Kementerian Luar Negeri RI, menjadi orang Indonesia pertama yang bertindak sebagai presiden untuk pertemuan negara-negara pihak UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) 1982 tersebut.

Havas terpilih sebagai presiden dalam pertemuan ke-20 SPLOS yang berlangsung di Markas Besar, PBB, New York,

Pertemuan ke-20 itu sendiri akan berlangsung pada 14-18 Juni 2010.

Sebagai presiden, Havas selama satu tahun ke depan akan memimpin dan mengatur pembahasan menyangkut berbagai isu penting soal hukum laut.

Isu-isu yang akan dibahas oleh SPLOS antara lain isu yang berkaitan dengan laporan Pengadilan Internasional untuk Hukum Laut (ITLOS); laporan Sekretaris Jenderal Badan Otoritas Dasar Laut Internasional (ISA); pengaturan beban kerja Komisi Batas Landas Kontinen (CLCS); serta masalah-masalah anggaran.

Kuasa Usaha Ad Interim Perwakilan Tetap RI untuk PBB-New York, Duta Besar Hasan Kleib, mengungkapkan perasaan bangga atas terpilihnya Indonesia sebagai Presiden Pertemuan ke-20 SPLOS 2010-2012.

“Ini bukti pengakuan internasional atas peranan Indonesia dalam berbagai perundingan di PBB terkait dengan peningkatan implementasi Konvensi Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa tentang Hukum Laut 1982,” kata Hasan.

Para diplomat Indonesia sendiri telah secara aktif terlibat dalam pengembangan hukum laut sejak adanya upaya penyusunan dan penyatuan hukum laut internasional pada tahun 1973.

“Upaya tersebut akhirnya berhasil membentuk Konvensi PBB tentang Hukum Laut pada tahun 1982, yang telah menjadikan Wawasan Nusantara kita dapat diterima oleh dunia internasional,” tambah Hasan Kleib.

Konvensi PBB tentang Hukum Laut tahun 1982 atau UNCLOS adalah kerangka hukum menyeluruh yang mengatur pemanfaatan dan sumber daya kelautan.

Konvensi yang mulai berlaku pada tahun 1994 itu antara lain berisi ketetapan menyangkut wilayah laut, zona perbatasan, landas kontinen dan zona ekonomi eksklusif.

UNCLOS 1982 juga berisi ketetapan soal perlindungan lingkungan kelautan, penelitian ilmiah kelautan, pembangunan serta pemindahan teknologi kelautan.

Setidaknya 160 negara, termasuk Indonesia, telah meratifikasi UNCLOS 1982. (TNY/K004)

source: antaranews.com

Year: 2010

ISBN: 978 90 04 18040 6

Hardback

List price EUR 180.- / US$ 256

Thirty-four experts on marine affairs and the law of the sea, from six continents, examine the emerging challenges for our World Ocean. The accumulating consequences of human activities on the seas indicate that the Earth may already have entered a new epoch, the Anthropocene, dominated by the human impact. This volume analyses developments in the interface of law, technology and science in some central law-of-the-sea issue-areas. These are explored systematically in sections on the World Ocean in the Anthropocene epoch (Part I); combatting illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (Part II); combatting illegal oil spills from ships (Part III); marine genetic resources and bioprospecting (Part IV); and the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles from the baselines (Part V).

India dan Bangladesh terlibat sengketa berkepanjangan terkait batas maritim. Selain itu, ada sengketa terkait kedaulatan atas sebuah pulau kecil yang bernama South Talpatty (oleh Bangladesh) atau New Moore atau Purbasha (oleh India) yang berada di hilir sungai Hariabhanga. Sengketa kepemilikan ini juga mengakibatkan kedua negara tidak bisa melanjutkan perundingan batas maritim. Kasus ini sudah terjadi sejak tahun 1980an.

Sesungguhnya, penyebutan istilah “pulau” bagi New Moore sendiri masih kontroversial. Beberapa sumber menyebutkan bahwa New Moore memang tenggelam saat air pasang. Artinya dia tidak memenuhi syarat sebuah pulau yang diatur dalam Pasal 121 UNCLOS.

Beberapa waktu lalu, media di banyak negara memberitakan bahwa pulau yang disengketakan itu tenggelam akibat naiknya permukaan laut karena efek pemanasan global. Perubahan iklim adalah faktor yang dituding menjadi penyebab kejadian ini. Berbeda dengan dampak perubahan iklim lain yang umumnya dirasakan negatif, kali ini perubahan iklim dipandang berdampak positif karena hilangnya pulau tersebut berarti hilangnya sumber masalah antara kedua negara. Benarkah demikian?

Dalam satu pemberitaan di Sydney Morning Herald, Prof Sugata Hazra, kepala Oseanografi di Jadavpur University, mengatakan bahwa pulau/karang itu hanya nampak sedikit di permukaan laut saat air sangat-sangat surut. Dikatakan, ’‘Only small parts can be seen in very, very low tide conditions.’ Hal ini sangat menarik karena jika memang obyek itu masih nampak di permukaan laut saat surut maka dia bisa disebut sebagai Low Tide Elevation (LTE) yang menurut Pasal 13 UNCLOS masih berhak atas laut teritorial dalam kasus tertentu. Artinya New Moore tetap ada dan tetap akan berpengaruh pada delimitasi batas maritim antara India dan Bangladesh.

Selain itu, perlu diperhatikan bahwa menuduh perubahan iklim sebagai penyebab tenggelamnya sebuah pulau bisa jadi adalah keputusan tergesa-gesa. Kenyataannya sebuah pulau atau daratan tenggelam karena dua hal yaitu peningkatan permukaan laut atau penurunan daratan itu sendiri. Sebuah buku berjudul Sea-lever Rise and Coastal Subsidence menyebutkan indikasi adanya penurunan permukaan kawasan pesisir (coastal  subsidence) di Bay of Bengal, tempat New Moore berada.

Persoalan ini masih perlu diteliti dan dirundingkan. Yang jelas ada hal-hal utama yang patut diperhatikan seperti dijelaskan di atas. Kita lihat bagaimana kedua negara menyelesaikan kasus ini.

Hanoi – Foreign ministers of the 10 members of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) Thursday signed a protocol on dispute resolution that could be used in several ongoing regional conflicts.

The ASEAN ministers are attending the organization’s annual summit meeting in Hanoi amidst disagreements over handling human rights issues in Myanmar and several territorial disputes.

While the procedures of the protocol have not been finalized, some experts said it could mark a major step forward.

“ASEAN used to operate on the basis of consensus, and a single member could block progress,” said South-East Asia expert Carl Thayer of the Australian Defence Academy.

Thayer said that while the body would still operate consensually, the protocol provided a mechanism for deciding what to do when member states disagreed. The protocol provides for arbitration in case of dispute, followed by a binding decision by the ASEAN Summit.

Thayer said the protocol did not specify what sanctions might follow if a member state refused to comply with an ASEAN decision.

The mechanism is, however, likely to be limited to disputes between ASEAN member states, not internal issues.

The dispute mechanism could be invoked in Thailand’s border dispute with Cambodia over an area near the temple at Preah Vihear, which led to armed clashes in 2008 and 2009.

Nazery Khalid of the Maritime Institute of Malaysia said the protocol could help ASEAN member states reach agreement on disputes over maritime territory in the South China Sea.

Host country Vietnam is seeking to convince ASEAN members to settle their internal disagreements over maritime territory in the South China Sea so that the group can negotiate as a bloc with China, which claims most of the sea for itself.

China has resisted that approach and insists on bilateral negotiations with each country. Khalid said Beijing’s success in the bilateral approach was a reflection of “ASEAN’s weakness.”

“ASEAN needs to work towards addressing that, and come up with a more united front,” Khalid said.

ASEAN consists of Brunei, Myanmar, Cambodia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, the Philippines, Singapore, Laos and Indonesia.

Kupang, E Nusa Tenggara (ANTARA News) – Defense Minister Purnomo Yusgiantoro said Indonesia objected to the Timor Leste government`s guide on boundaries at three RI-Timor Leste border points.

“We don`t agree, and are still having negotiations,” he said concluding his working visit to the RI-Timor Leste border region on Sunday.

Indonesia and Timor Leste were planning to settle their border problem at 5,000 points, 907 of which had been approved, but only 103 realized.

Of this number, three points are still being discussed with difficulty by the two governments, namely Noel Besi-Citrana, Manusasi and Memo.

Indonesia and Timor Leste still have their differences on the foundation to set the boundaries in the three points. Indonesia is oriented on river flows to the mouth of Noel Besi river, while Timor Leste on the the borderline of the royal region once in existence there.

“So, we have to make further and more comprehensive discussions,” Purnomo said.

In his working visit to East Nusa Tenggara, the defense minister was in the company of Udaya Division chief Major General Hotma Mangaraja Pandjaitan, Wirasakti military chief Colonel Dody, Defense Strategy Director General Major General Syarifuddin Tippe, and Defense Planning Director General Rar Admiral Gunadi.

Purnomo also made an aerial inspection of the RI-Timor Leste sea boundary from an army Mi-17 helicopter from an altitude of 3,000 meters. He observed three land conflicting points of the RI-Timor Leste border and the existence of outermost islands in the sea border areas of the two countries, including Batek island.

Purnomo also saw the immigration post set up by the Timor Leste government in Noel Besi still in conflict with Indonesia.

“This is only one violation committed by Timor Leste, because the three still conflicting points must remain free of any activities of the two countries,” Hotma Mangaraja Pandjaitan pointed out.

Despite the differences of view between the two sides, security in the border regions of the two countries were still good. Colonel Dody Usodo, as well as Timor Leste National Police Border Commander at the RI-Timor Leste land border main gate at Mota`ain, Atambua, Lt Colonel Nano, said the same thing. (*)

I Made Andi Arsana , New South Wales, Australia | Sun, 03/28/2010 9:54 AM | Opinion

After a reasonably long wait, an agency dealing specifically with border management has finally been established. Through Presidential Regulation No. 12/2010, the government established the National Agency on Border Management (BNPP). The establishment of the BNPP is mandated by the 2008 law on national territory. The law, promulgated in November 2008, requires the agency to be established within six months after the promulgation. It seems that the government failed to act swiftly to fulfill the mandate concerning maritime boundaries. Even though a little too late, the finally established agency is an achievement.

Indonesia has been facing serious boundary issues. It has at least 10 neighboring states to deal with. They are India, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, the Philippines, Palau, Papua New Guinea (PNG), Australia and Timor Leste. Indonesia has been working hard to establish its international boundaries, both on land and at sea. However, it has to be admitted that issues concerning boundary disputes are still there. Border crossing on the Timor Islands, border post displacement in Borneo, the infamous Ambalat case, and fisherman seizures in the Timor Sea to mention a few.

Referring to the classic theory of Stephen B. Jones (1945), boundary making involves four main steps: allocation, delimitation, demarcation and administration. Allocation deals with territory allocation where parties agree on a broad division of territory. In Indonesia’s case, allocation was made clear at the time of independence where Indonesia inherited Dutch territory based on the principle of uti posidetis juris. In the delimitation step, parties involve political, legal and technical experts to decide on a precise alignment of boundaries and illustrate them on maps. Indonesia’s land boundaries delimitation is nearly complete. However, some maritime boundary segments have yet to be delimited. Indonesia has yet to settle maritime boundaries in 15 different locations involving 26 boundary segments.

Demarcation is required on the ground. The points and lines agreed in the delimitation stage are then defined on the ground where they are physically marked with pillars, posts, fences, etc. Demarcation is conducted to define precise coordinates through geodetic surveys using adequate technology, equipment and methods. There are some undemarcated land boundary segments between Indonesia and Timor Leste, Malaysia, and PNG. The relevant technical teams are currently working on this issue. The word “demarcation” is however seldom applicable to maritime boundaries since they are rarely amenable to being physically marked.

The last step is administration, involving activities to maintain the boundaries. Not only that, the most important thing in administration is the development of border areas. This is even more critical in populated border areas. Border areas are generally sensitive because of the close interaction with neighboring states. Due to extensive exposure to other cultures and lives, nationalism may easily be questioned in border areas. Pragmatically speaking, people tend to compare what they have at home with what they can see on the other side of the fence. In this sensitive area, public facilities for the good of people (education, health, economy, etc) are crucial.

Not to ignore the first three steps in boundary making, it seems that administration has a great influence on the lives of people in border areas. Accordingly, this step requires more attention from the government. This seems to be the reason, among others, of the establishment of the BNPP. Apparently, the role of this agency will focus on border administration or management. Its emphasis is on policy making and coordination rather than execution/implementation.

This agency involves several ministries such as the Coordinating Political, Legal and Security Affairs Ministry (steering chair), the Coordinating Economic Ministry and Coordinating Public Welfare Ministry (deputy steering chair I and II respectively). It also has 15 members including several ministries, the Indonesian Military commander, the National Police chief, the chief of the State Intelligence Agency, the head of the Coordinating Agency for Surveys and Mapping and relevant governors. The home minister is assigned to be the head of the BNPP.

There is doubt that the BNPP will be able to work effectively if it is chaired by a minister, a point raised by one of the legislative members (Antara, Jan. 18, 2010). It is viewed that a politically stronger figure is required to coordinate officials at ministerial level. Accordingly, the legislative member opined that the president or vice president is required to fill the position. This view might be adequately grounded. However, this concern of coordination seems to have been addressed in the presidential regulation by placing three other ministries at the chief coordinator levels. Accordingly, this agency is not chaired by only one minister but by four.

Apart from having a permanent and dedicated secretariat with three deputies and several directorates, the BNPP may establish working groups and groups of experts consisting of professionals from relevant disciplines. This may be seen as a positive sign that enables the BNPP to collaborate with independent professionals, including researchers and academicians. This will benefit both. The BNPP’s policy will theoretically be supported by strong academic and professional consideration. On the other hand, professionals and researchers can gain invaluable experience from being involved in real policy making.

The BNPP may have been well-designed. However, implementation and enforcement is another thing. It is evident that planning is always easier than doing. There is a high expectation that this agency can really offer something better in border management in Indonesia. It will be a waste of resources if it becomes just another agency of no significant achievement. We are hoping for the best from this new approach to border management.

The writer is a lecturer in the Department of Geodetic Engineering, Gadjah Mada University and is the author of Beyond Borders. He is currently a PhD candidate at the University of Wollongong, Australia. This is his personal opinion.

Sejak diberlakukannya otonomi daerah, bermunculan masalah yang sebelumnya tidak diharapkan. Salah satu masalah yang hingga kini masih belum tuntas adalah batas wilayah laut antara beberapa daerah.

Sebagaimana disebutkan di dalam Undang-undang nomor 32 tahun 2004 tentang Pemerintah Daerah, pada pasal 18 ayat 4 menyebutkan wilayah kewenangan pengelolaan laut oleh daerah yaitu 12 mil laut untuk provinsi dan 1/3-nya (atau 4 mil) untuk kabupaten/kota.

“Masalahnya, apakah wilayah provinsi tertentu masih dapat memiliki kewenangan melebihi 12 mil laut,” ungkap Sobar Sutisna, Kepala Pusat Pemetaan Batas Wilayah BAKOSURTANAL, ketika menerima beberapa anggota DPRD Sumatera Barat di BAKOSURTANAL, Cibinong (10/3/2010).

Menurut Sobar, hukum yang berlaku untuk negara kepulauan seperti Indonesia di dalam UNCLOS (sebagai kesatuan wilayah yang utuh – red), tidak berlaku untuk daerah. Di luar batas 12 mil laut bukan lagi kewenangan pemerintah daerah. Namun, tidak menutup kemungkinan jika dalam keadaan tertentu melalui proses politik kewenangan itu dapat diberikan kepada Provinsi jika pemerintah pusat menyetujuinya.

“Perlu pengaturan terhadap kasus-kasus tertentu. Sangat tidak praktis jika (pengelolaan wilayah di luar 12 mil – red), dilakukan oleh pusat,” kata Sobar Sutisna.

Hal ini dapat saja terjadi karena batas 12 mil laut akan menghasilkan “enclove” kewenangan pusat diantara wilayah kewenangan pengelolaan laut oleh Provinsi secara utuh. Seperti contoh kasus di Sumatera Barat, terdapat wilayah di luar 12 mil laut antara Kepulauan Mentawai dan daratan Sumatera, yang diistilahkan seperti ‘koridor ‘. Kondisi ini pun dijumpai di daerah-daerah lain.

‘Koridor’ inilah yang dipertanyakan oleh pihak Pemerintah Provinsi Sumatera Barat, karena terkait dengan pemberian ijin usaha perikanan. Sedangkan praktik di lapangan jika ada kapal nelayan dari provinsi lain yang menangkap ikan di wilayah tersebut tidak diijinkan oleh pihak Sumatera Barat, sebagaimana dikatakan Yosmeri, Kepala Dinas Perikanan dan Kelautan Provinsi Sumataera Barat.

Deputi Bidang Pemetaan Dasar, Chaerul Hafidin, berpendapat semestinya siapa saja selama dia masih nelayan Indonesia berhak menangkap ikan di wilayah itu, karena yang berlaku di situ adalah kewenangan nasional , mengacu pada undang-undang.

Permasalahan yang diutarakan oleh DPRD Sumatera Barat tersebut untuk mencari bahan acuan dalam penyusunan Peraturan Daerah tentang Pengelolaan Wilayah Pesisir dan Pulau-pulau Kecil, sebagai turunan dari Undang-undang nomor 27 tahun 2007 tentang Pengelolaan Wilayah Pesisir dan Pulau-pulau Kecil.

Sobar Sutisna memberikan apresiasi yang tinggi kepada Provinsi Sumatera Barat, karena baru pertama kalinya Provinsi Sumatera Barat melakukan konsultasi ke BAKOSURTANAL sebelum memutuskan suatu peraturan daerah.

Dalam pertemuan yang dipimpin oleh Deputi Bidang Pemetaan Dasar BAKOSURTANAL tersebut, pihak Sumatera Barat mendapat penjelasan secara teknis bagaimana melakukan penentuan batas wilayah di laut. BAKOSURTANAL juga menyatakan bersedia membantu Sumatera Barat untuk menyediakan data geospasial yang diperlukan dalam penyusunan perda ini.