PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA TERHADAP KLAIM KEDAULATAN TERITORIAL DI WILAYAH LAUT CHINA SELATAN BERDASARKAN HUKUM INTERNASIONAL

• Main Authors: , Elsa Aprina, , Endang Purwaningsih, SH.,M.H.
• Format: Theses and Dissertations NonPeerReviewed
• Published: [Yogyakarta] : Universitas Gadjah Mada 2013
• Subjects: ETD
• Online Access: https://repository.ugm.ac.id/122936/; http://etd.ugm.ac.id/index.php?mod=penelitian_detail&sub=PenelitianDetail&act=view&typ=html&buku_id=63045
• Institution: Universitas Gadjah Mada

This thesis was examines the legal status of territorial sovereignty claims in the South China Sea dispute and attempt dispute settlement of territorial sovereignty claims based on international law. The aim to examine and find out the legal status of each state claim to the dispute in the implementation of the sovereignty claim on the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea. The study also aims to determine how the dispute settlement based on international law. This normative legal research using normative juridical approach adapted to the needs of the implementation. The results of this study showed that claimants, should have clear legal basis and in appropriate with international law so that the claim is recognized by the international community. Claimants such as China, Vietnam, Filipina, Malaysia and Brunei have different claims basis in claiming the same territory. China claims where the basis is not eligible and contrary to international law, claims are submitted by Vietnam to be less complete because it has not actionable with an agreement with states that are adjacent to the country. Unlike the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei are territorial requires in the Spratly Islands, South China Sea based on UNCLOS 1982, it has clear rules in claiming maritime zones. The result of the research also showed that states engaged in the dispute over territorial sovereignty claims it has done settlement efforts the dispute through diplomatic mechanisms, both through bilateral and multilateral negotiations. The claimant states have not done an attempt to track litigation hitherto, because they have not consent to take dispute to litigation track.