Friday
22nd Nov 2024
Dhivehi Edition
Dr.Munavvaru
Accepting Mauritius’ claim over Chagos sovereignty will cost Maldives dearly: Munavvaru
Dr.Munavvar. Photo: TMJ
Expert on Law of the Seas and former Attorney General of the Maldives, Dr. Mohamed Munavvaru who specialized in International Law, stated that accepting and supporting Mauritius’ claim over ownership and sovereignty of Chagos Islands is expected to cause profound damage to Maldives.
Speaking at a news conference held on Monday, Dr. Munavvaru stated that the initial stand taken by the Maldives when Mauritius submitted its complaint at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) was that Mauritius was attempting to use these proceedings to settle its territorial dispute with the United Kingdom at the expense of the Maldives and that Maldives did not believe that an ITLOS Chamber can hear a maritime delimitation claim that requires it to resolve a sovereignty dispute.
Mauritius and the Maldives have been fighting over a 37,000-square-mile expanse of the Indian Ocean since 2019, with both claiming the fish-rich waters as their own economic zones. This was also the reason why Maldives had always voted against Mauritius’ claim of sovereignty on Chagos Islands.
However, explaining the timeline Dr. Munavvaru stated that the Attorney General Riffath Ibrahim declared that Maldives will vote with Mauritius at U.N. in the case of Chagos Islands and the President of the Maldives, Ibrahim Mohamed Solih had already expressed those intentions to the Prime Minister of Mauritius in a letter, while arguing the case between Mauritius and Maldives before ITLOS, on Thursday.
Mauritius initiated legal proceedings against both Maldives and the United Kingdom. Its action against the United Kingdom resulted in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issuing an advisory opinion in 2019. Mauritius brought an action against Maldives before ITLOS, when in July 2010, Maldives submitted its claims to the United Nations for an extended continental shelf and new coordinates that claimed the full 200 nautical miles of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).
Dr. Munavvaru said that even though the government asserts the individuality of these two issues, the ruling of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 2019 that the Chagos Islands were rightfully part of Mauritius, was an advisory opinion and was not a mandatory order to follow. He also highlighted that there was no clear order acknowledging Mauritius’ sovereignty over Chagos, to date.
Dr. Munavvaru also stated that if those two issues were separate in nature, AG Riffath would not have spoken of the sovereignty issue at an ITLOS hearing between Maldives and Mauritius.
The reason for former administrations to have gone against Mauruitus on its claims was the maritime border demarcation conflict and the proportion of the EEZ the Maldives is bound to lose should it be set for equidistant delimitation.
Mauritius has expanded claims of Chagos’ EEZ measured from new baselines, creating even greater overlap of their EEZs of some 96,000 square kilometers. ITLOS is currently hearing this case of territorial dispute in Germany. The Maldives is claiming 200 nautical miles from its suggested baseline whereas the Chagos Islands expects equidistant delimitation of the mutual EEZ.
Dr. Munavvaru claimed that the damage to Maldives is not limited to the proportion of EEZ being lost. He said that since Mauritius’ form of fishing method was net casting, Mauritius’ acquisition of part of the southern waters will lead to loss of fishing territory for fishermen who go to the area.
Dr. Munavvaru asserted that equidistant delimitation of the maritime border within the EEZ mutual to Chagos Island and the Maldives, as desired by Mauritius, will result in the loss of 37,000 nautical miles from the Maldivian EEZ.
Dr. Munavvau said that according to the latest press release by the government, they claim to have no control over the situation, however, it cannot be accepted as a situation beyond control. He stated that there will be a magnitude of measures the government could take.
Dr. Munavvaru urged the government to express its intentions and reasoning to the parliament and discuss the matter with representatives of the people.