3/365

Hi,

To whomever came across this blog, reading this right now. I do not know how you are here now, but, well, hello to you!

It has been very long since the last time I wrote (something that is not related to my school assignment) in this blog. At first, I thought maybe I’ll vlog, but well, my life is not as colorful and interesting for other people as other vloggers’ life, hence, the blog. More so, in blog, I can always, type, think, delete, retype, think, change, as much as I like, with vlog, it will be nearly impossible (it may be possible but I’ll spend to many time editing or taking my video), hence, blog is the most suitable media for me to talk non-sense (sometimes) and to share what is currently on my mind.

Well, to whomever who care enough to read this post, I tell you, from today onwards (I do not know how often will I post, but I do know I will regularly post), I will post anything that came across my mind which I think deserves a post, both in Bahasa, or in English.

So, for the first come-back post/ first post in 2017, in the atmosphere of celebrating new year (even if today is the third, I am still in the mood for it), I will post the mainstream blessings/lessons I got from last year and resolution in this year. Oh, but the blessings/lessons will be from the last 2/3 years, perhaps from the first time I entered the age of 22 till now when I have been going through some 20s life crisis.

So, here we go.

The blessings:

1. Life.
2. Healthiness.
3. Live comfortably under a very nice house which allows me to sleep without any disturbance every night (or day) with a full blown air-conditioner under a very warm large blanket.
4. Foods in my belly (most of the times the foods are very very delicious).
5. Parents’ healthiness.
6. Being able to commute from one place to another place without any hardship.
7. Occasional friends/family catching-up moments.
8. Access to phone/laptop/internet.
9. Graduated in 2014 (an official Bachelor of Law, yeay!).
10. Traveled to new places.
11. Currently on my third office.
12. Met new people.

The lessons:

1. You do not always get what you want.
2. You are stationed in the right place at the right time (always!).
3. Everything always happen for a reason (No matter how insignificant it is).
4. It is always important to concede to some particular things (choose your battle wisely!).
5. No matter how hard life might be, always remember that there will always be someone who are living it harder that I do (hey, I still able enjoy number 1 to 7 in my blessings).
6. Don’t always count your blessings, because it will be too many (number 8-12 above are just something that I can remember, as number 1-7 above are something that I will always remember). But never forget to be thankful, coz again, your blessings are too many.
7. Sometimes, all you got to do is to do your obligations, enjoy your life, and let Allah guides you.
8. What I always envisioned myself to be when I was younger, turns out to change when I start doing it (does not mean that I do not enjoy doing it right now, coz I do)
9. As I get older, my perspective shifts, the thing that seems so bright before, doesn’t seem like that anymore.

The resolutions:

1. To be more thankful for life, and all things in it.
2. To be able to withhold unnecessary anger.
3. To be kinder to everyone.
4. To be healthier (eat better, exercise better, sleep better).
5. To love harder.
6. To pray more.
7. To work harder and more meticulously.
8. To read more.
9. To learn more, learn better.
10. To be able to let go of everything that is not meant to be and to accept everything that is meant to be.

These resolutions are different from my goals, because I read once that we are the only persons who need to know about our goals in order to achieve it. These resolutions, I believe, are something that I needed in order to achieve my goals no matter how (kind of) simple it may seems.

My hope for these years: For the blessings to never stop coming, for the lessons to never stop appearing, and for myself to do the resolutions.

See you in another blabbering sesh!

-PMK

Mediasi sebagai Salah Satu Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa

Sengketa merupakan salah satu hal yang bisa muncul kapan saja dalam kehidupan manusia. Sengketa dapat terjadi mulai dari lingkup keluarga hingga lingkup hukum. Sejak dulu kala, penyelesaian sengketa sudah ada dalam latar budaya masyarakat Indonesia sebagai pola penyelesaian sengketa berdasarkan musyawarah, misalnya rembuk desa dan kerapatan adat. Dalam penyelesaian sengketa hukum, ada beberapa pilihan dalam menyelesaikan sengketa hukum. Penyelesaian sengketa hukum yang paling sering dilakukan dan paling dikenal oleh masyarakat adalah penyelesaian sengketa melalui pengadilan. Namun demikian, penyelesaian sengketa melalui pengadilan terkadang tidak memberikan penyelesaian sebagaimana diinginkan oleh kedua belah pihak. Penyelesaian sengketa di pengadilan juga dikenal memakan waktu yang cukup lama dan biaya yang cukup mahal. Untuk mengakomodir keinginan-keinginan para pihak ini, kemudian muncul beberapa alternatif untuk menyelesaikan sengketa antara para pihak. Beberapa alternatif tersebut antara lain: negosiasi, mediasi, evaluasi dini, pendapat atau penilaian ahli, pencarian fakta, dispute review board, dan office of special project facilitator. Alternatif penyelesaian sengketa ini memiliki beberapa keuntungan antara lain cepat dan murah, adanya kontrol dari para pihak terhadap proses yang berjalan dan hasilnya karena pihak yang mempunyai kepentingan aktif dalam menyampaikan pendapatnya, dapat menyelesaikan sengketa secara tuntas/holistik, dan meningkatkan kualitas keputusan yang dihasilkan dan kemampuan para pihak untuk menerimanya.

Mediasi, seperti alternatif penyelesaian sengketa lainnya, berkembang akibat lambannya penyelesaian sengketa di pengadilan. Mediasi muncul sebagai jawaban atas ketidakpuasan yang  berkembang pada sistem peradilan yang bermuara pada persoalan waktu, biaya, dan kemampuannya dalam menangani kasus yang kompleks. “Mediation is not easy to define”.[1] Mediasi bukanlah sesuatu yang mudah untuk didefinisikan. Hal ini terkait dengan dimensi mediasi yang sangat jamak dan tidak terbatas. Mediasi tidak memberi satu model yang dapat diuraikan secara terperinci dan dibedakan dari proses pengambilan keputusan lainnya.[2] Dalam peraturan Indonesia, pengertian mediasi dapat ditemukan di pasal 1 butir tujuh Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1 Tahun 2008 yaitu cara penyelesaian sengketa melalui proses perundingan untuk memperoleh kesepakatan para pihak dengan dibantu oleh mediator. Selain dalam peraturan ada beberapa sarjana yang mencoba untuk mendefinisikan mediasi. Gary Goodpaster menyatakan bahwa “Mediasi” adalah proses negosiasi penyelesaian masalah (sengketa) dimana suatu pihak luar, tidak memihak, netral, tidak bekerja dengan para pihak yang bersengketa, membantu mereka (yang bersengketa) mencapai suatu kesepakatan hasil negosiasi yang memuaskan.[3] Dari penjelasan diatas dapat kita lihat bahwa ada unsur-unsur mendasar dari definisi mediasi, antara lain:

1.    Adanya sengketa yang harus diselesaikan

2.    Penyelesaian dilaksanakan melalui perundingan

3.    Perundingan ditujukan untuk mencapai kesepakatan

4.    Adanya peranan mediator dalam membantu penyelesaian.

Beberapa alasan mengapa mediasi sebagai altemetif penyelesaian sengketa mulai mendapat perhatian yang lebih di Indonesia, antara lain:[4]

1.    Faktor Ekonomis, dimana mediasi sebagai altematif penyelesaian sengketa memiliki potensi sebagai sarana untuk menyelesaikan sengketa yang lebih ekonomis, baik dari sudut pandang biaya maupun waktu.

2.    Faktor ruang lingkup yang dibahas, mediasi memiliki kemampuan untuk membahas agenda permasalahan secara lebih luas, komprehensif dan fleksibel.

3.    Faktor pembinaan hubungan baik, dimana mediasi yang mengandalkan cara-cara penyelesaian yang kooperatif sangat cocok bagi mereka yang menekankan pentingnya hubungan baik antar manusia (relationship), yang telah berlangsung maupun yang akan datang.

Dalam mediasi, terdapat dua jenis mediasi yang ditinjau berdasarkan tempat pelaksanaannya yaitu mediasi di pengadilan dan mediasi di luar pengadilan. Kedua jenis mediasi ini tercantum dalam Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1 Tahun 2008. Dalam melaksanakan mediasi di pengadilan, ada dua tahap yang harus dijalani, yaitu yang pertama adalah mediasi awal litigasi, yakni mediasi yang dilaksanakan sebelum pokok sengketa diperiksa dan yang kedua adalah mediasi yang dilakukan dalam pokok pemeriksaan, yang kemudian terbagi lagi menjadi dua yaitu selama dalam pemeriksaan tingkat pertama dan selama dalam tingkat banding dan kasasi. Sedangkan mediasi di luar pengadilan merupakan mediasi yang dilaksanakan di luar pengadilan, kemudian perdamaian terjadi dimohonkan ke pengadilan untuk dikuatkan dalam akta perdamaian.[5]

Mediator dalam mediasi bukan berperan untuk mengambil keputusan, melainkan untuk membantu para pihak memahami pandangan pihak lainnya sehubungan dengan masalah yang disengketakan. Mediator sebagai pihak yang menentukan efektivitas proses penyelesaian sengketa harus bersikap netral, mendengarkan para pihak secara aktif, mencoba untuk meminimalkan perbedaan-perbedaan, serta kemudian menitikberatkan persamaan. Seorang mediator tidak boleh mempengaruhi salah satu pihak untuk mencapai tujuan yang dicita-citakan oleh pihak lainnya. Mediator sangat membutuhkan kemampuan personal yang memungkinkannya berhubungan secara menyenangkan dengan masing-masing pihak. Namun demikian, kemampuan pribadi yang terpenting adalah sifat tidak menghakimi, yaitu dalam kaitannya dengan cara berpikir masing-masing pihak, serta kesiapannya untuk memahami dengan empati pandangan para pihak. Mediator perlu memahami dan memberikan reaksi positif atas persepsi masing-masing pihak dengan tujuan membangun hubungan baik dan kepercayaan.[6] Sebagai pihak netral yang melayani kedua belah pihak, mediator berperan melakukan interaksi dengan para pihak baik secara bersama ataupun secara individu, dan membawa mereka pada tiga tahap sebagai berikut:[7]

a.    Memfokuskan pada upaya membuka komunikasi di antara para pihak;

b.    Memanfaatkan komunikasi tersebut untuk menjembatani atau menciptakan saling pengertan di antara para pihak (berdasarkan persepsi mereka atas perselisihan tersebut dan kekuatan serta kelemahan masing-masing); dan

c.    Memfokuskan pada munculnya penyelesaian.

Selain dilihat dari pendapat-pendapat para ahli yang menulis mengenai mediasi, tugas-tugas mediator juga diatur dalam peraturan yang berlaku bagi pelaksanaan mediasi di Indonesia. Tugas-tugas ini tercantum dalam Pasal 15 Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1 Tahun 2008. Tugas-tugas tersebut antara lain:[8]

1.    Mediator wajib mempersiapkan usulan jadwal pertemuan mediasi kepada para pihak untuk dibahas dan disepakati.

2.    Mediator wajib mendorong para pihak untuk secara langsung berperan dalam proses mediasi.

3.    Apabila dianggap perlu, mediator dapat melakukan kaukus.

4.    Mediator wajib mendorong para pihak untuk menelusuri dan menggali kepentingan mereka dan mencari berbagai pilihan penyelesaian yang terbaik bagi para pihak.

Berdasarkan uraian-uraian diatas, dapat kita lihat bahwa mediator bertugas untuk mengarahkan dan memfasilitasi lancarnya komunikasi dan membantu para pihak untuk memahami sengketa yang terjadi di antara keduanya, serta para pihak dapat membuat penilaian yang objektif hingga terciptalah penyelesaian akan sengketa yang dihadapi.

Mediasi seringkali menghasilkan kesepakatan di antara kedua belah pihak sehingga manfaat mediasi sangatlah dapat dirasakan. Manfaat mediasi tetap dapat dirasakan meskipun terkadang ada mediasi yang gagal. Hal ini dikarenakan adanya mediasi kemudian mengklarifikasikan persoalan dan kemudian mempersempit permasalahan yang disengketakan. Dalam menyelesaikan sengketa, mediasi memiliki beberapa keuntungan, antara lain:

a.     Mediasi diharapkan dapat menyelesaikan sengketa lebih cepat dan murah dibandingkan dengan arbitrase dan pengadilan;

b.    Mediasi dapat memberbaiki komunikasi antara para pihak yang bersengketa serta menghilangkan konflik yang hampir selalu mengiringi putusan yang bersifat memaksa;

c.     Mediasi akan memfokuskan para pihak pada kepentingan mereka secara nyata;

d.    Mediasi meningkatkan kesadaran akan kekuatan dan kelemahan posisi masing-masing pihak;

e.     Melalui mediasi, dapat diketahui hal-hal atau isu-isu yang tersembunyi yang terkait dengan sengketa yang sebelumnya tidak disadari;

f.     Mediasi memberikan para pihak untuk melakukan kontrol terhadap proses dan hasil dari mediasi tersebut.

Penyelesaian sengketa dengan cara mediasi kemudian diharapkan untuk dapat mengurangi ketidakseimbangan posisi para pihak sebagaimana yang dirasakan apabila sengketa diselesaikan melalui lembaga pengadilan maupun arbitrase.

Dalam mediasi yang sukses, dihasilkan sebuah perjanjian penyelesaian sengketa yang setelah ditandatangani akan mengikat dan dapat dipaksakan sebagaimana layaknya sebuah kontrak atau perjanjian. Di Indonesia, perjanjian hasil mediasi harus dituangkan dalam bentuk tertulis. Hal ini tidak hanya berlaku untuk mediasi di dalam pengadilan, tetapi juga untuk mediasi di luar pengadilan. Pasal 17 ayat (1) Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1 Tahun 2008 kemudian menyatakan bahwa jika mediasi menghasilkan kesepakatan perdamaian, para pihak dengan bantuan mediator wajib merumuskan secara tertulis kesepakatan yang dicapai dan ditandatangani oleh para pihak dan mediator.[9] Kemudian Pasal 6 ayat (6) Undang-undang Nomor 30 tahun 1999 menyatakan bahwa:

“Usaha penyelesaian sengketa atau beda pendapat melalui mediator sebagaimana dimaksud dalam ayat (5) dengan memegang teguh kerahasiaan, dalam waktu paling lama 30 (tiga puluh) hari harus tercapai kesepakatan dalam bentuk tertulis yang ditandatangani oleh semua pihak yang terkait.”[10]

Apabila mediasi dilaksanakan di luar pengadilan, sesuai pasal 6 ayat (7) Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2009, perjanjian tertulis yang telah disepakati oleh para pihak wajib untuk didaftarkan di pengadilan negeri paling lama 30 hari sejak perjanjian tersebut ditandatangani. Dalam hal pelaksanaan mediasi yang dilakukan di pengadilan, hakim dapat mengukuhkan kesepatakan tersebut sebagai suatu akta perdamaian. Akta perdamaian sendiri dalam pasal 1 butir 2 Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1 Tahun 2008 didefinisikan sebagai akta yang memuat isi kesepakatan perdamaian dan putusan hakim yang menguatkan kesepakatan perdamaian tersebut yang tidak tunduk pada upaya hukum biasa maupun luar biasa. [11] Perjanjian tertulis ini biasanya disusun oleh para pihak dengan bantuan mediator. Dalam membantu para pihak menyusun suatu persetujuan mediasi secara tertulis, mediator memfokuskan perhatian untuk terlebih dahulu menghasilkan rancangan perjanjian, ia harus meyakini bahwa para pihak telah memahami sepenuhnya rancangan perjanjian. Perlunya penyusunan rancangan perjanjian diakomodir dalam pasal 17 ayat (3) Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1 Tahun 2008 yang menyebutkan bahwa sebelum para pihak menandatangani kesepakatan, mediator memeriksa materi kesepakatan perdamaian untuk menghindari ada kesepakatan yang bertentangan dengan hukum atau yang tidak dapat dilaksanakan atau yang memuat iktikad tidak baik.[12]

---

[1] Laurence Boulle, Mediation:Principle, process, practice, (Sydney: Butterworths, 1996), hlm. 3

[2] Gatot P. Soemartono, Arbitrase dan Mediasi di Indonesia, (Jakarta: PT Gramedia Pustaka Utama, 2006), hlm. 116

[3] Gary Goodpaster, Panduan Negosiasi dan Mediasi, (Jakarta: Proyek ELIPS, 1999) hlm. 241

[4] “Alasan keberadaan BaMI”, www.badanmediasi.com, diunduh pada 6 Mei 2013

[5] Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia,Peraturan Mahkamah Agung tentang Prosedur Mediasi di Pengadilan, Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 01 Tahun 2008.

[6] Gatot P. Soemartono, op.cit, hlm. 135

[7] Ibid, hlm. 136

[8] Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia, op.cit, ps. 15

[9] Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia, op.cit, ps. 17 ayat (1)

[10] Indonesia, Undang-Undang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa, UU Nomor 30 Tahun 1999, LN No. 138 Tahun 1999, TLN No. 3872, ps. 6 ayat (6).

[11] Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia, op.cit, ps. 1 butir 2

[12]  Ibid, ps. 17 ayat (3)

Archipelagic waters

Archipelagic waters are the waters inside and around an archipelago. Article 46 of The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982 (UNCLOS 1982) treats “archipelago” as a group of islands, including parts of islands, interconnecting waters and other natural features which are so closely interrelated that such islands, waters and other natural features form an intrinsic geographical, economic and political entity, or which historically have been regarded as such. It has to be noted here that archipelagic waters which are waters within the archipelagic baselines are not internal waters. The legal concept of archipelagic waters is without prejudice for the right of the state to draw lines for the delimitation of internal waters in accordance with Articles 9, 10, and 11[1] for the mouths of rivers, bays, and ports. Such lines of delimitation are known as closing lines rather than baselines as in the territorial sea concept,[2] as they serve only as the boundary for waters completely outside the jurisdiction  of the Convention (internal waters) and do not act as the starting point for establishing zones. There is no right of innocent passage in internal waters enclosed by closing lines, even if they were not considered internal waters previously, a further contrast to the territorial sea concept.[3] If we refer to those articles, we can see that there are two kinds of baselines within the Archipelagic State. The first one is the baseline which is usually used in bays, mouths of rivers, and ports, that makes the waters inside that baseline recognized as internal waters where no rights of innocent passage allowed. The second one is the Archipelagic Baseline, which has been described in the previous section. The waters inside this baseline are recognized as Archipelagic Waters where there are some rights given to international community.

The sovereignty of an archipelagic State extends to the waters enclosed by the archipelagic baselines drawn in accordance with article 47, described as archipelagic waters, regardless of their depth or distance from the coast.[4] And this sovereignty extends to the air space over the archipelagic waters, as well as to their bed and subsoil, and the resources contained therein.[5] From these two paragraphs above, we can see that an archipelagic State has sovereignty over its archipelagic waters, moreover it also extends to the air space over the archipelagic waters, as well as to their bed and subsoil, and the resources contained therein. However, this sovereignty is subject a number of rights enjoyed by third states.

Those rights are specifically explained on the UNCLOS 1982 in Article 51, Article 52, and Article 53. Paragraph 1 Article 51 indicated that an archipelagic State shall respect existing agreements with other States. This provision was presumably inserted to avoid any possible conflict between an archipelagic State’s rights under UNCLOS 1982 and its obligations under prior agreements, and is an exception to the general provision under article 311 dealing with the relationship of the Convention and prior treaties.[6] Moreover, this paragraph also stated that archipelagic state shall recognize traditional fishing rights and other legitimate activities of the immediately adjacent neighboring States in certain areas falling within archipelagic waters. In paragraph 2, Article 51 then gives explanations about existing submarine cable. If we read that article, we can see that Archipelagic States are to respect existing submarine cables laid by other States and passing through their waters without making a landfall. And the archipelagic stare are to permit the maintenance and replacement of such cables upon receiving due notice of their location and the intention to repair or replace them. Then, an archipelagic state may not forcibly revoked foreign country’s submarine cables if there is no agreement from that country who laid the cables. The foreign states do not have any rights to plant any new submarine cables after a country has declared itself to be an archipelagic state. Foreign states have rights only with regard to existing cables. In part IV of UNCLOS 1982, we can only see the regulations about the submarine cable. There are no provisions that regulate pipelines along the archipelagic waters. Because of that, there is a possibility that an archipelagic state can require pipelines removal to a state that is also a party to UNCLOS 1982. However, if the State owning the pipelines is a non UNCLOS 1982 party, the relationship between the archipelagic state and the State owning the pipelines will be governed by the customary international law or by agreements that concluded between countries. For example, Indonesia and Malaysia signed an agreement in 1982. This agreement has provisions guaranteeing navigation and over flight between East and West Malaysia, deals with cables linking East and West Malaysia and passing through Indonesian waters, and permits Malaysian fisherman to fish by traditional methods in part of Indonesia’s archipelagic waters east of the Anambas Islands, an area where Malaysian fishermen have fished for decades. After that, this agreement also permits Malaysia to lay new cables and pipelines through Indonesian waters provided that this does not interfere with the exploitation of sea-bed mineral resources by Indonesia within its territorial sea and archipelagic waters, and requires Indonesia to protect existing cables and pipelines.[7]

            Article 52 and 53 of UNCLOS 1982 then regulating matters concerning navigational rights that given to foreign countries by the archipelagic states. These navigational regimes were a debate issue in the production of the Law of the Sea Convention. The debate was specifically discuss about the will of archipelagic states that wanted to be recognized as complete and encompassing nations, coastal states that wanted to increase the limit of their territorial seas, and maritime countries were determined to retain their vital commercial and strategic access to sea lanes through these coastal states. But finally, the debate resulted in provisions about right of innocent passage and archipelagic sea lanes passage that stated in Article 52 and 53 UNCLOS.

            Article 19 paragraph 1 of UNCLOS 1982 decribed that passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State.[8] This innocent passage according to UNCLOS 1982 applies only to the territorial seas of the state. According to article 52 paragraph 1 UNCLOS 1982, the ships of all States enjoy in archipelagic waters the same right of innocent passage as they enjoy in the territorial sea. And in addition, in article 52 paragraph 2 it is stated that this right may only be suspended temporarily and in specified areas, for security reasons, after due notice has been given. Based on Article 53 of UNCLOS, archipelagic sea lane passage means the exercise of the rights of navigation and over flight in normal mode solely for the purpose of continuous, expeditious and unobstructed transit between one part of the high seas or an exclusive economic zone and another part of the high seas or an exclusive economic zone.[9] This right could be exercised in two instances, first, in all normal passage routes used for international navigation or over flight through or over archipelagic waters and its adjacent territorial sea; second, in sea lanes or air routes which the concerned archipelagic state has specifically designated.[10]

            This particular regime of archipelagic sea lanes passage guarantees that ships and aircrafts of other States have the right to pass through and over archipelagic waters on designated sea lanes and air routes.[11] It is very different with what we understand about the right of innocent passage. The following instances constitute distinctions between two principles of innocent passage and archipelagic sea lane passage with regard to passage through archipelagic waters:[12]

1.      The right of innocent passage requires that submarines and other under water vehicles should navigate on the surface, showing their flags; whereas in archipelagic sea lane passage, underwater vehicle is allowed to navigate under normal mode which is possible that it pass underwater;

2.      There is no right of over flight in areas where innocent passage is allowed while in    archipelagic sea lane, over flight is permitted;

3.      The right of innocent passage  could be suspended in certain cases like when there is military exercise or the State has to deal with local crises but archipelagic sea lane passage cannot be suspended, it may only be substituted;

4.      With regard to warships, there are no precise rules under international law that would require countries to give prior notice on innocent passage of warships; other countries necessitate prior notice while some do not require but in archipelagic sea lane passage, prior notification on the passage of warship through it is explicitly not required; 

5.      The provisions on archipelagic sea lane do not include the possibility of cooperation between the archipelagic State and user States in terms of establishment of safety rules on navigation and the prevention and control of pollution from ship through archipelagic sea lane are not covered by this concept.

We can see from what has been mentioned above, that regulations about archipelagic sea lanes passage is not as strict as the regulations about the right of innocent passage. Beside the differences between the archipelagic sea lanes passage and innocent passage, there are similar characteristics between archipelagic sea lanes passage and transit passage through and over straits used for international navigation. Article 54 of UNCLOS specifically states that provisions on transit passage in article 39, 40, 42, and 44, shall be applied mutatis mutandis  to the regime of archipelagic sea  lane passage. Emphasis should be made on the following similarities:[13]

1.      The rights of transit passage and archipelagic sea lane passage include overflight for aircraft as well as navigation for ships;

2.      Ships exercising right of transit or archipelagic sea lane passage may use their normal mode of transit, hence, surface warship may pass through sea lane in a manner necessary for their security to include formation steaming and recovery of aircraft;

3.      Both rights may never be suspended for reason of national security, even temporarily.

The foregoing circumstances do not apply to right of innocent passage. On the other hand, these rights differ from one another under the following aspects:[14]

1.      Transit passage signifies exercise  of freedom, while archipelagic sea lanes passage is the exercise of the rights of navigation or overflight; 

2.      As a matter of general right, ships and aircrafts enjoy right of transit passage through straits. On the other hand, they  enjoy a general right of sea lanes passage if the archipelagic state designates; otherwise this right “may” be exercised through the routes used for international navigation;

3.      Unlike in the case of transit passage, both sea lanes and air routes must be established on axis lines within archipelagic waters

4.      All normal passage routes used for  international navigation should be included in designating archipelagic sea lanes and air routes, whereas; it is not a requirement in transit passage;

5.      The right of overflight under archipelagic sea lanes passage is restricted to air routes above sea lanes, unlike in the freedom of overflight within transit passage regime. This means that overflight should be made strictly above the designated sea lanes or routes normally used for international navigation, in the absence of designated sea lanes.

Basically, archipelagic sea lanes cater to the needs of user states so they could have uninterrupted navigation through archipelagic waters. They facilitate the unobstructed passage of military vessels and aircrafts over the waters of the archipelagic state. [15]In order to protect its maritime security in relation to the establishment of archipelagic sea lane passage, the archipelagic state may, under Article 42 UNCLOS,  adopt laws and regulations relating to sea lane passage in respect of safety of navigation, prevention and control of pollution, prevention of fishing and the loading and unloading of any commodity, currency or person or sanitary laws or regulation.[16]While it is true that designating archipelagic sea lane passage is the ultimate responsibility of archipelagic States to the international community, it shall also be considered that maintaining territorial integrity is paramount to other obligations. There are certain important interests which the archipelagic state cannot give up, for instance its maritime security, to satisfy concerns  of the user states. Hence, designation of archipelagic sea lanes shall be viewed as the greatest contribution of archipelagic states to the international community, particularly to major maritime powers because their right to navigation through archipelagic waters is being upheld and guaranteed.[17] 

Indonesia, as one of the biggest archipelagic States that exist in this world, without any doubt already has the archipelagic sea lanes passage that has been published by the IMO. This archipelagic sea lanes passage was accepted by the IMO in the 1998. The accepted proposal of Indonesia consists of the following three north-south routes of archipelagic sea lanes passage:[18]

·         ASL I:   Sunda Strait – Karimata Strait – Natura Sea – South China Sea 

·         ASL II: Lombok Strait – Makasar Strait – Sulawesi Sea

·         ASL III A: Sawu Sea – Ombai Strait – Banda Sea (West part of Burn Islands) – Seram Sea (Eastern part of Mongole Island) – Maluku Sea - Pacific Ocean 

·         ASL III B: Timor Sea – Leti Strait – Banda Sea (West part of Burn Islands) – Seram Sea (Eastern part of Mongole Island) – Maluku Sea - Pacific Ocean 

·         ASLIII C: Arafura Sea – Banda Sea (West part of Burn Islands) – Seram Sea (Eastern part of Mongole Island) – Maluku Sea - Pacific Ocean 

ASL I facilitates navigation from the Indian Ocean, through Sunda Strait while ASL II, the central route, facilitates navigation from Indian Ocean through Lombok Strait and Makassar Strait and to Sulawesi Sea and Pacific Ocean and Philippine waters and lastly ASL III, which is in the southern part with three branches, facilitates the navigation from Timor Sea and Arafura Sea to the Pacific Ocean through Sawu Sea, Banda Sea, Seram Sea and Molucca Sea. [19]All these routes were indicated in the map submitted to the IMO. It may be noted that the designation did not include east-west route although the user states insist on this issue.

This IMO resolution was implemented by Indonesia through Indonesian Government Decree No. 37/2002 dated 28 June 2002 and referred to as Alur Laut Kepulauan Indonesia (ALKI). With this sea lanes passage, Indonesia hold the title to be the very first archipelagic State to designate archipelagic sea lanes passage.

---

[1] Art 50

[2] Art 5

[3] Art 8 para 2

[4] Art 49 para 1

[5] Art 49 para 2

[6] R.R. Churchill and A. V. Lowe, The Law of The Sea, 3rd edn (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1999), p. 125.

[7] Ibid, p. 27.

[8] Art 19

[9]  Mark J. Valencia and James Barney Marsh, ‘Access to Straits and Sea lanes in Southeast Asian Seas:

Legal, Economic and Strategic Considerations’, Journal of Maritime Law and Commerce, 16 (1985) p.522

[10] Constance Johnson, ‘A Right of Passage: the IMO Consideration of the Indonesian Archipelagic Sea

Lanes Submission’, The International Journal Of Marine and Coastal Law, 15 (2000) p.318

[11] Vivien Jane Evangelio Cay, ‘Archipelagic Sea Lanes Passage and Maritime Security in Archipelagic Southeast Asia’ (M.Sc. thesis, World Maritime University, 2010), p. 34

[12] Ibid, p. 35

[13] Ibid, p. 36

[14]Ibid, p. 37

[15] Ibid

[16] Ibid

[17] Ibid, p. 38

[18] Ibid, p. 44

[19] Ibid, p. 45