Assessing the Effectiveness of Settling Indonesian Sea Border Disputes through Litigation and Non-Litigation Paths

Conflicts or disputes over maritime boundaries often occur, disputes that cause two or more countries are one of the authorities of their respective countries to conduct negotiations so as not to cause prolonged conflict or dispute. Border disputes between sea, island, and state are included in the affairs of the international court through the role of international law, such as the dispute between Indonesia and Vietnam in the Natuna Sea region which mutually claims sea borders both the continental shelf boundaries and the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) boundaries, disputes between Indonesia and Malaysia in the Malacca Strait, the South China Sea Dispute, and so on. The existence of unilateral claims from each country there are still problems regarding sea borders that cause relations between countries experiencing conflict. Problems that cause disputes between countries are caused because the negotiations between the two parties have not been completed, violations occur by the disputing countries, there are still unclear sea boundaries, and others. The United Nations Convention on The Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) 1982 is an international maritime law that applies in the resolution of disputes at sea, but only countries that have ratified UNCLOS can apply this international sea law. In resolving this dispute a country can do with two channels namely litigation and non-litigation, where litigation is used for the last point in this dispute through ITOLS. The purpose of writing this article is to find out how the effectiveness of sea base dispute resolution in Indonesia through litigation and non-litigation.