Singapore takes Pedra Branca – but is it a win-win?
23rd May 2008
The small and contested island of Pedra Branca, or Pulau Batu Puteh belongs to Singapore, the International Court of Justice ruled May 23rd, thus ending years of speculation as to its ownership.
In a manner that has come to be seen as characteristic of recent International Court of Justice rulings, both countries came away from the proceedings “with something,” Malaysia being awarded sovereignty over the Middle Rocks, one of the two other features over which the countries had sought a decision.
So as to keep the issue on the boil, it left the South Ledge undecided. It would, the court said to whichever party successfully claims the territorial sea.
This case is the most significant before the ICJ in a long period of time – and is a useful illustration not only of the complexity of island disputes, but the court’s current thinking on issues relating to the acquisition of territory.
The emphasis in the judgment is very much on the exercise of sovereign acts over title – which is fitting particularly given the myriad complexities of the region’s history. But it is also worth noting that several dissenting opinions were given, indicating that even (or particularly) at the highest levels of the world of international law, consensus is hardly inevitable.
At the heart of the dispute was the question as to whether Malaysia had inherited historic title to the island through the Sultanate of Johor –or whether Singapore – as successor to the United Kingdom, had inherited sovereignty over the island through its continuing maintenance of a lighthouse constructed by the British East India Company in the mid-1950s.
In its judgment, the court held that whereas Johor certainly had possessed historic title, its sovereignty had effectively been lost on account of a number of factors, including a 1953 letter written by a representative of the Sultanate of Johor to the colonial authorities in Singapore, in which the representative said it had no claim over Pedra Branca, and a lack of protest at Singaporean acts upon the island, including the construction of radio relay facilities, which the court argued were tantamount to acquiescence.
Pedra Branca is an uninhabitable granite formation the size of a football pitch. Its name (White Island) is a reference to its appearance subsequent to several centuries’ accumulation of bird droppings.
Nonetheless, since it arose, the Pedra Branca issue has been an irritant to relations between the two countries, which despite their regional rivalry are amongst each other’s most significant trading partners - and have strong economic and cultural ties.
In Singapore, the general response to the ICJ judgment has been “not bad considering.” And in Malaysia, the government has made a determined effort to present the outcome as a “win-win.” However, some opposition MPs have accused the government and the attorney-general’s office of failing to handle the case properly.
On May 28th, the Malaysian press reported an MP (from Johor) as having lambasted those responsible for the handling of the case for having lost a crucial piece of correspondence – a request from the British authorities to the Sultan of Johor for permission to build the Pedra Branca lighthouse. Had the ICJ considered the letter, he argued, the case would be altered.
Menas Borders would suggest that this is not the case. The practice of the court is to weigh all available evidence in the balance, including that relating to historic title, “sovereign acts” and recognition of other states. But one single piece of evidence is seldom sufficient in itself to “tip the scales.”
Links:
ICJ judgment in full
The small and contested island of Pedra Branca, or Pulau Batu Puteh belongs to Singapore, the International Court of Justice ruled May 23rd, thus ending years of speculation as to its ownership.
In a manner that has come to be seen as characteristic of recent International Court of Justice rulings, both countries came away from the proceedings “with something,” Malaysia being awarded sovereignty over the Middle Rocks, one of the two other features over which the countries had sought a decision.
So as to keep the issue on the boil, it left the South Ledge undecided. It would, the court said to whichever party successfully claims the territorial sea.
This case is the most significant before the ICJ in a long period of time – and is a useful illustration not only of the complexity of island disputes, but the court’s current thinking on issues relating to the acquisition of territory.
The emphasis in the judgment is very much on the exercise of sovereign acts over title – which is fitting particularly given the myriad complexities of the region’s history. But it is also worth noting that several dissenting opinions were given, indicating that even (or particularly) at the highest levels of the world of international law, consensus is hardly inevitable.
At the heart of the dispute was the question as to whether Malaysia had inherited historic title to the island through the Sultanate of Johor –or whether Singapore – as successor to the United Kingdom, had inherited sovereignty over the island through its continuing maintenance of a lighthouse constructed by the British East India Company in the mid-1950s.
In its judgment, the court held that whereas Johor certainly had possessed historic title, its sovereignty had effectively been lost on account of a number of factors, including a 1953 letter written by a representative of the Sultanate of Johor to the colonial authorities in Singapore, in which the representative said it had no claim over Pedra Branca, and a lack of protest at Singaporean acts upon the island, including the construction of radio relay facilities, which the court argued were tantamount to acquiescence.
Pedra Branca is an uninhabitable granite formation the size of a football pitch. Its name (White Island) is a reference to its appearance subsequent to several centuries’ accumulation of bird droppings.
Nonetheless, since it arose, the Pedra Branca issue has been an irritant to relations between the two countries, which despite their regional rivalry are amongst each other’s most significant trading partners - and have strong economic and cultural ties.
In Singapore, the general response to the ICJ judgment has been “not bad considering.” And in Malaysia, the government has made a determined effort to present the outcome as a “win-win.” However, some opposition MPs have accused the government and the attorney-general’s office of failing to handle the case properly.
On May 28th, the Malaysian press reported an MP (from Johor) as having lambasted those responsible for the handling of the case for having lost a crucial piece of correspondence – a request from the British authorities to the Sultan of Johor for permission to build the Pedra Branca lighthouse. Had the ICJ considered the letter, he argued, the case would be altered.
Menas Borders would suggest that this is not the case. The practice of the court is to weigh all available evidence in the balance, including that relating to historic title, “sovereign acts” and recognition of other states. But one single piece of evidence is seldom sufficient in itself to “tip the scales.”
Links:
ICJ judgment in full