<![CDATA[Maritime boundary disputes between Indonesia and Malaysia reflect the structural complexity of applying the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS 1982). This normative legal research analyzes the normative ambivalence within UNCLOS 1982 specifically Articles 15, 74, 83, and 121 and its implications for the Sipadan-Ligitan and Ambalat Block disputes. The findings reveal distinct resolution mechanisms for each case: the Sipadan-Ligitan dispute was definitively resolved through international litigation at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 2002 based on the principle of effectivités, whereas the Ambalat dispute remains unresolved in terms of final boundary delimitation and continues to be managed via non-litigious diplomatic negotiations. This study argues that international litigation poses significant risks of permanent territorial loss for Indonesia. Consequently, a non-litigious approach specifically a combination of sustained diplomatic negotiations, provisional arrangements, and joint development agreements under Article 83(3) of UNCLOS constitutes the most appropriate, pragmatic, and mutually beneficial mechanism for resolving maritime boundary overlaps in the Ambalat Block.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
