Head of Research Center for Development Studies of Marine and Maritime Civilizations Suhana asks the Government aware of the incident fisheries supervisor of Marine and Fishery Ministry (NOA) in waters off Bintan, Riau Islands, end up like the case of Sipadan and Ligitan.
"It takes us examine in depth, the incident Bintan waters must not become a strategy to claim territory waters Bintan as its sovereignty," said Suhana in Jakarta, Thursday.
As known to the present negotiations the Indonesian border with Malaysia in the waters of Bintan, where the incident is still experiencing an impasse, says Suhana. Therefore the Government should firmly against Malaysia's attitude over the incident.
According to him, the Malaysian Government had also previously claimed as territorial waters by issuing a sovereign territory on the map, but the Indonesian government had lifted the rejection of the map.
However, Malaysia's efforts to claim these waters did not stop there, they continue to make efforts to show that these waters come into their sovereignty, he added.
"Therefore do not let inadvertence Indonesian fisheries supervisor utilized. We know that the number of ship operating days of Marine and Fisheries Supervisor 2010 this had decreased from 180 days to 100 days, resulting in theft monitoring fish in Indonesian waters become complacent," said Suhana.
So do not be surprised if the activity of fish in Indonesian waters theft today tend to increase, he said.
Data Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (2010) indicated that until the end of June 2010 carrying 116 illegal fishing vessels caught fishing vessel supervisors, 112 of whom are foreign fishing vessels, including ships of Malaysia.
Reduced day oversight of vessel operations, he believes the impact of the policy the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries in reallocating budget (NOA) in 2010.
"We suspected there was intentional conduct five Malaysian fishing boats fish in waters of the theft of Bintan. Because if there is no act of protest from the Indonesian authorities, they can claim sovereignty of the region is a region," continued Suhana.
He said if the shift of the document review and Ligitan Sipadan Island, where the talks Indonesia and Malaysia when it experienced the deadlock and finally agreed on the status quo.
But in a status condition, the Government of Malaysia has advantage of a Government of Indonesia for the oversight of those islands by granting permission to make a variety of tourism facilities.
"The effort was successful because there was no protest from the Government of Indonesia," he asserted.
In 2002 the International Court of Session, had decided that none of the Government of Indonesia and Malaysia are entitled to Ligitan and Sipadan based on treaties.
However, further consideration of the Court in favor of having the right of ownership (title) of the islands dispute based on the mastery of effective (effectivites) proposed by them.
In this regard, Suhana explain the Court determines whether the claim sovereignty of the parties based on the activities that prove the existence of a real action, execution authority is continuously on the two islands, among others, for example (they are) good faith and willingness to act as a manifestation of sovereignty.
Based on these effectivites hence on December 17, 2002 International Court of Justice recognizes that effective control has been carried out by the Malaysian Government over Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan, and effective control over those no claim or protest from the Indonesian government.
"We therefore strongly urge the Government to the negotiations related to the border, immediately increased surveillance at the border, and pressing other countries that do not immediately resolve the border negotiations with reviewing the cooperation that has been done in two countries," said Suhana.
As known to the present negotiations the Indonesian border with Malaysia in the waters of Bintan, where the incident is still experiencing an impasse, says Suhana. Therefore the Government should firmly against Malaysia's attitude over the incident.
According to him, the Malaysian Government had also previously claimed as territorial waters by issuing a sovereign territory on the map, but the Indonesian government had lifted the rejection of the map.
However, Malaysia's efforts to claim these waters did not stop there, they continue to make efforts to show that these waters come into their sovereignty, he added.
"Therefore do not let inadvertence Indonesian fisheries supervisor utilized. We know that the number of ship operating days of Marine and Fisheries Supervisor 2010 this had decreased from 180 days to 100 days, resulting in theft monitoring fish in Indonesian waters become complacent," said Suhana.
So do not be surprised if the activity of fish in Indonesian waters theft today tend to increase, he said.
Data Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (2010) indicated that until the end of June 2010 carrying 116 illegal fishing vessels caught fishing vessel supervisors, 112 of whom are foreign fishing vessels, including ships of Malaysia.
Reduced day oversight of vessel operations, he believes the impact of the policy the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries in reallocating budget (NOA) in 2010.
"We suspected there was intentional conduct five Malaysian fishing boats fish in waters of the theft of Bintan. Because if there is no act of protest from the Indonesian authorities, they can claim sovereignty of the region is a region," continued Suhana.
He said if the shift of the document review and Ligitan Sipadan Island, where the talks Indonesia and Malaysia when it experienced the deadlock and finally agreed on the status quo.
But in a status condition, the Government of Malaysia has advantage of a Government of Indonesia for the oversight of those islands by granting permission to make a variety of tourism facilities.
"The effort was successful because there was no protest from the Government of Indonesia," he asserted.
In 2002 the International Court of Session, had decided that none of the Government of Indonesia and Malaysia are entitled to Ligitan and Sipadan based on treaties.
However, further consideration of the Court in favor of having the right of ownership (title) of the islands dispute based on the mastery of effective (effectivites) proposed by them.
In this regard, Suhana explain the Court determines whether the claim sovereignty of the parties based on the activities that prove the existence of a real action, execution authority is continuously on the two islands, among others, for example (they are) good faith and willingness to act as a manifestation of sovereignty.
Based on these effectivites hence on December 17, 2002 International Court of Justice recognizes that effective control has been carried out by the Malaysian Government over Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan, and effective control over those no claim or protest from the Indonesian government.
"We therefore strongly urge the Government to the negotiations related to the border, immediately increased surveillance at the border, and pressing other countries that do not immediately resolve the border negotiations with reviewing the cooperation that has been done in two countries," said Suhana.
