A

mid relentless diplomatic efforts, many seem unaware that the South China Sea dispute has entered a new phase as the Philippines, one of the claimants of the maritime territory, is seeking a legal settlement of China'€™s territorial claims at the Court of Arbitration in The Hague.

Can the legal approach resolve the decades-long dispute and provide justice for the claimants, and can the verdict reduce tension and create security and stability in the region?

In its diplomatic note filed with the court in January 2013, the Philippines proposed five points against China'€™s claims in the South China Sea, which are: First, China is not entitled to exercise '€œhistoric rights'€ over the region; second, China'€™s nine-dash line has no international legal basis; third, China'€™s claims are related to geographical bodies that under international law do not confer Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) status; fourth, China has violated the sovereign rights and jurisdiction of the Philippines; and finally, China has violated the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) by damaging the regional marine environment.

China has refused to participate in the legal mechanism and named president of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, Thomas Mensah, as its representative, but its absence does not hinder the arbitration tribunal, which is expected to be completed in mid-2016.

Currently Indonesia considers the '€œnine-dot line'€ claim as lacking an international legal basis and contrary to the provisions of the UNCLOS, but invites all disputant countries to come to a peaceful and sustainable solution in accordance with the principles and spirit enshrined in the Declaration on the Conduct (DoC) of state parties in the South China Sea in 2002.

The South China Sea dispute stems from the issue of title to the island/rock/natural geographical features that pit claimant countries against each other, as well as maritime boundary issues, which are not only contested by claimant countries but will also affect other countries like Indonesia.

Therefore, the determination of the legal status of the island/rock/ natural geographical features should be decided in advance, then from these geographical features will be determined the maritime boundaries through agreements or other mechanisms.

The next issue is whether each country may determine its maritime zones without specifying the legal status of the geographical features within the waters or without specifying legal mechanisms to draw the maritime delimitation.

The UNCLOS does not set such requirements; it only stipulates historical bays as sea space that can be claimed as part of a state'€™s territory. However, in international legal literature, the historical title to the waters is acknowledged although not regulated by the UNCLOS.

Although Indonesia is neither a claimant nor a party in the legal battle, whatever resolution the court will issue �will affect the country. The court may decide that it does not have any jurisdiction on the claim filed by the Philippines, grant all Philippines'€™ claims or support the position of China.

Indonesia'€™s continental shelf and EEZ will be impacted by the decision of the court, because although the court will not decide the ownership status of the island/ rock/ other natural formations in the South China Sea, it will decide the legal status of waters and other formations associated with the nine- dot line.

Vietnam and Taiwan have intervened in the case and it is possible for other interested countries in the South China Sea to follow suit in asserting their rights and interests. Indonesia, which has maritime zones in the South China Sea, should declare its position on this issue as well.

The rising tension before and after the court ruling will spill over to Indonesia sooner or later. Therefore, Indonesia should immediately take a position associated with the Court of Arbitration proceedings. This position will certainly affect the role of Indonesia, which has been one of honest broker as an initiator of dispute resolution.

Indonesia should invite all conflict parties to keep promoting a peaceful solution and avoid the use of force as agreed in the DoC.

The South China Sea dispute with the diverse interests looks like a never-ending story. The determination of the ownership of the island/ rock/geographical features as well as the maritime boundary is unlikely to be resolved anytime soon.

The urgent issue, however, does not lie in the determination of the status of ownership and maritime boundaries, but how the region can remain conducive, safe and can be developed by all countries.