TheJakartaPost

Please Update your browser

Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.

Jakarta Post

Understanding border issues in Camar Bulan, Tanjung Datu

Border issues are by no means new to Indonesia and Malaysia

I Made Andi Arsana (The Jakarta Post)
Wollongong, Australia
Thu, October 20, 2011

Share This Article

Change Size

Understanding border issues in Camar Bulan, Tanjung Datu

B

order issues are by no means new to Indonesia and Malaysia. One may predict that the current border issue between Indonesia and Malaysia in Camar Bulan and Tanjung Datu will certainly not be the last.

The two countries have too many pending boundaries to finalize. In the case of Camar Bulan, news reports said that Malaysia was trying to take over Indonesia’s territory, which does not seem to be the case.

Official information and reports have been provided by the Indonesian government. That many people have not yet understood what has happened is a different story.

Indonesia and Malaysia established their land border in Borneo based on a previous agreement between Great Britain and the Netherlands.

This is an application of the uti possidetis juris principle governing that territory and borders of a country are the same as that of its predecessor. In other words, Indonesia’s territory was inherited from the Netherlands, while Malaysia possesses former British territory.

Accordingly, the land border in Borneo demarcated by Indonesia and Malaysia follows the same border lines established by their two predecessors.

This article is not so much to clarify what happened in Camar Bulan and Tanjung Datu, as the government of Indonesia through relevant institutions has diligently done so.

Therefore, I am not going to reinvent the wheel. Alternatively, this article is trying to provide a perspective from a boundary-making point of view.

Borrowing the view of Stephen Jones, boundary making involves four important steps: allocation, delimitation, demarcation and administration. Allocation deals with territory allocation where parties agree on a broad division of territory.

In the delimitation step, parties involve political, legal and technical experts to decide on a precise alignment of boundaries and to illustrate them on maps.

The points and lines agreed in the delimitation stage are then defined on the ground where they are physically marked with pillars, posts, fences, etc. this is called demarcation. The last step is administration, involving activities of maintaining the boundaries, including comprehensive development for people residing around border areas.

What is the problem with Indonesia and Malaysia’s land border in Borneo? Allocation and delimitation are not an issue since the two steps have been accomplished by Britain and the Netherlands. Demarcation is what the two countries are currently dealing with.

Border demarcation conducted by Indonesia and Malaysia is essentially an effort of interpreting the agreements between Britain and the Netherlands made in 1891, 1915 and 1928. The demarcation process is to “convert” borders from the old agreements, which are descriptive in nature, into accurate points and lines expressed in coordinates.

The 1891 agreement, for example, states that the border line around Tanjung Datu follows watershed, an area or ridge of land that separates waters flowing to different rivers or basins.

To identify watershed, a survey was conducted in 1976 by Indonesia and Malaysia. Camar Bulan is relatively flat, making watershed difficult to visually ascertain.

However, a joint team was able to define watershed in a way that both parties agreed upon even after resurveying. As a result, a memorandum of understanding (MoU) was signed in 1978 to confirm the Indonesia-Malaysia land boundary around Camar Bulan.

Why have the Camar Bulan and Tanjung Datu border areas made it into national headlines if they have been finalized? Various parties in Indonesia have different opinions regarding the boundary in Camar Bulan.

Some think that the 1978 MoU is not what it should have been. They opine that since the area is relatively flat and watershed is not easy to define, Indonesia and Malaysia could have used alternative methods to define the border.

Drawing a straight line from one point to another point in the area in question is one of the suggestions. This might be viewed as practical, but it certainly is a violation of the 1891 convention, which requires border lines to follow watershed.

Another opinion is that a different line should be used on another map that is significantly different from the border line in the 1978 MoU.

By comparing the different possibilities of lines, it is not surprising that someone might think that the current line based on the 1978 MOU is not the best option for Indonesia, as it forms a pouch in such a way that the pouch of territory falls within Malaysia’s side of the line.

Speculation has spread that Indonesia was left at a disadvantage by the 1978 MoU and lost about 1,500 square kilometers in territory. The case became worse because lawmakers and local government officials also have such views.

It is worth noting that the use of the phrase of “territory lost” in this case is inaccurate. How can Indonesia lose territory that it never possessed? In addition, it is clear that the border in Camar Bulan should be defined by the 1891 agreement using watershed, not using other options.

Accordingly, the current border line cannot be compared to any other lines that are not defined based on the 1891 agreement. In short, the land border around Camar Bulan and Tanjung Datu is legally final.

Say that one can find evidence that the 1978 MoU is flawed; canceling it is not straight forward. Even though the Mo U is not a treaty, it may be seen as binding as a treaty, which, according to the 1969 Vienna Convention, cannot be terminated by change of circumstances.

Land border demarcation is undoubtedly important and Indonesia should not let other countries grab its territory. However, in area where demarcation has been finalized, the more important thing is boundary administration.

The Indonesian government needs to make sure that people residing around border areas are well-treated. This is the primary duty of the government by optimizing the role of, among other things, the newly-established National Agency for Border Management. In dealing with border areas, it should no longer be only a security approach but a prosperity approach.

The writer, a lecturer and researcher on boundary issues at the Department of Geodetic Engineering, Gadjah Mada University, is a PhD candidate at the University of Wollongong, Australia. The views expressed are his own.

{

Your Opinion Counts

Your thoughts matter - share your experiences, suggestions, and any issues you've encountered on The Jakarta Post. We're here to listen.

Enter at least 30 characters
0 / 30

Thank You

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. We appreciate your feedback.