Archipelagic Baselines: The Current State Practice and the Legal Effect of Invalid Archipelagic Baselines

Abstract

The provisions outlined in Part IV of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea pertain to the regulation of the archipelagic regime and the delineation of archipelagic baselines. The practice of archipelagic States regarding archipelagic baselines is continuously developing. Thus, it is essential to monitor these developments and analyse the legal implications of archipelagic baseline practices. The main objective of this paper is to examine the baseline practices of the archipelagic States and explore the legal effect of invalid archipelagic baselines. This research is a doctrinal legal research. Firstly, the paper begins with an overview of the evolution of the two concepts of archipelagic states and archipelagic baselines. Secondly, the article analyses the provisions outlined under Part IV of the Convention concerning the definition of archipelagic States and the establishment of archipelagic baselines. Next, a comprehensive examination of the current archipelagic baseline practices is presented. The 2023 Mauritius v Maldives Maritime Boundary Delimitation Case is also analysed where necessary in order to identify any new jurisprudence which can facilitate the clarification of the archipelagic baseline rules. It is observed that international courts or tribunals examine the entitlement of a State to its archipelagic status and the validity of its archipelagic baselines solely in instances where these matters are directly pertinent to the case at hand. The article finds that there are now 23 archipelagic States, out of which 15 States completely adhere to the archipelagic baseline rules, including 4 States that have accurately revised their archipelagic baselines.