2

Law of Natural Resources

LLMF-3232
RESEARCH TOPIC OUTLINE
Student Name

Md. Mahfuzur Rahman

Student Number

2013220301095

LLM. (Final) Batch :

28 (C)

Dept of Law & Justice.

Lecturer Name

Dr. Chowdhury Ishrak Ahmed Siddiky.

Topic Name

Sea Limit Row with India: An analysis regarding Profits

and losses

Brief Outline

(This study has been segmented on 5 parts. Part-I deals with

Introduction. Part-II is about Background of This

Issue. Part-II

advocates the theory of Delimiting Issues and Factors. Part-IV

states the account of Profits and losses. Part- V finally organized
the concluding findings.)

Student Declaration
I declare that my assignment is on a topic I have not previously researched for an
assignment. I am aware that penalty for submitting work that has been prepared for
submission in another subject or course will be a mark of 0.I am aware that this
declaration is in addition to the University rules on plagiarism, which I am bound to
comply with.

Signed: .................................

Sea Limit Row with India: An analysis

regarding Profits and losses

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgement

Page- 5

Methodology

Page- 6

Picture-1

Page- 7
PART-I

Introduction

Page- 8

PART-II
Background

Page- 9

Picture-2

Page- 10

PART-III
Delimiting Issues And Factors

Page- 11-13

PART-IV
Profits & Losses

Page- 14-18

PART-V
Findings

Page- 19

Reference

Page- 20

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
In the arduous road to make an term paper, I acknowledging the help that I have received from
others in the work presented here I must begin by recording that my greatest debt is to
Dr. Chowdhury Ishrak Ahmed Siddiky. who inspired me to work in this area. He is also a
marvelous teacher over many years and his ideas continue to influence me when I reach with some
of his conclusion. I acknowledged debt to my friends Md. Shahedul Islam, Md. Abdullah Al
Mamun, Md. Anyet Hossain who taken an attempt to finalized my work.

METHODOLOGY
The present study followed an analysis research design in which both primary and secondary
data were obtained using qualitative and quantitative data collection instrument. Primary data
were obtained incompliance with the specific objectives of the study from the Bangladesh-India
Maritime Delimitation Case with a view to realization the real Scenario.

PICTURE-1

PART-I
INTRODUCTION
In a Landmark Judgment, the international arbitral tribunal yesterday rejected Indias maritime
claim and upheld Bangladeshs claim of 200 nautical miles exclusive economic zone and
territorial rights in the Bay of Bengal.
The verdict of the United Nations Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), based in The Hague,
went largely in favor of Bangladesh, (Except the south Talpotti Island) as it gave the country a
substantial share of the extended continental shelf beyond 200 NM.
The tribunal awarded Bangladesh 19,467 Sq km area out of the disputed 25,602 sq km. The
judgment is final and binding on both countries, it can't be appealed.
This study has been segmented on 5 parts. Part-I deals with Introduction. Part-II is about
Background of This Issue. Part-III advocates the theory of Delimiting Issues and Factors. PartIV states the account of Profits and losses. Part-V finally organized the concluding findings.

PART-II
BACKGROUND OF THIS ISSUE
Truly speaking right of access to sea would be determined as a gift for mankind by the Allah.
The vast region (45% of the earths total surface) with next to do governance or rule of law is the
high Seas-nearly two-thirds of the global ocean that lies outside of any countrys Jurisdiction.
How it is possible after all there is the legally binding 1982 United Nations convention on the
law of the sea (UNCLOS) which has been ratified by 166 states and the European union. It is
believed that water territory posses more property, wealth and resources then the land territory.
There are various kinds of living and non living resources such as fisheries, flora, fauna, oil,
gases, minerals etc among those a little portion has been collected yet due to the technological
know how along with political and other issues. The lion portion of words export and Import
trade conducted by sea route.
Geographically Bangladesh fenced by (3) three sides land territory of India and Myanmar. The
south sides of this country is open to enter into the Bay of Bengal. 54 trans boundary rivers
water follows from India through Bangladesh to the Bay. Due to the reasons of delimitation of
maritime dispute with India & Myanmar. Bangladesh has been depriving to enjoy, access to Sea
and Sea resources for a long time.

10

PICTURE-2

11

PART-III
DELIMITING ISSUES AND FACTORS
In Bay of Bengal against counter claim by India & Myanmar, Bangladesh has a little to remains
to own. Among 28 oil and gas blocks in the southern Bay of Bengal claim lodged by Myanmar.
On 17 blocks and India on 10 blocks respectively. For the enslavement of those dispute
regarding delimitation of maritime boundaries issues, Bangladesh learn to seek remedy against
India, on 8th oct2009 before International forum that is Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA)
on Peace Palace at Hague in Nether land. The PCA at the Hague officially conveyed the result to
both parties on 7th July 2014. The judgment is final and cannot be appealed against. Earlier
Bangladesh won judgment in the case against Myanmar on March 14 2012.
It is noted that area of dispute with India in the bay of Bengal is much smaller than that
between Bangladesh and Myanmar which was 2,83,463 square kilometers. Tribunals awarded
Bangladesh 19,467 sq km area out of total disputed 25,602 sq km: with India, Bangladesh now
owns 1,18,413 sq km: territorial sea with an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) extending to 200
nautical miles.
Although Bangladesh and India sea boundary talks started in 1974, renewed in 1978 and
1982, it could not be resolved because of the differences over methods of delimiting the
boundary between the two sides.
Bangladesh submitted its statement of claim by May 2011 to the court of Arbitration.
India submitted Counter memorial by July 2012. Rejoinder by Bangladesh was lodged on 31st
January and Indias reply was submitted by 31st July 2013. Oral hearing from both sides were
heard by the Arbitration court in December 2013 (9th-18th December.)
The court of Arbitration consists of three jurists as Arbitrators Tullio Treves of Italy, I.A. Shearer
of Australia and Rudigar Wolfrum of Germany and one each nominated by Bangladesh and

12
India. Bangladesh nominated former Judge Thomas Mensah from-Ghana and India nominated
Dr. P. Sreenivasa Rao, former legal Adviser of the External Attains ministry.
Five arbitrators comprise the court presided over by Rudigar wolfrum of Germany. In July 2013
Treves resigned and a French jurist Jean Pierre cot was appointed in his place in consultation
with both parties. On behalf of India Lawyers, RKP Shankardass, Alain Pellet, Michcal Reisman
and Sir Michael Wood argued, while for Bangladesh Lawrence Martin, Philippe Sands, Payam
Akhavan, Paul Reichler, Alan Boyle and James Crawford.
Since the sea boundary could not be resolved bilaterally since 1974, Bangladesh government on
8th October 2009 initiated arbitration proceedings against India before the Court of Arbitration
in The Hague. UNCLOS provides a general guidelines of delimitation under Articles 15
(territorial sea) 74, (delimitation of EEZ) and 83 (delimitation of continental shelf). The
interpretation and application of maritime law of delimitation have been expounded by the
International Court of justice and Tribunals.
3rd United Nation Convention on the law of sea adopted in 1982 and came into force in 1994.
India adopted on 27 June in 1995 and Myanmar adopted on 21st May 1996. According to
section 287 Annexure VII Article 1, Bangladesh has already been raised its claim. It should be
noted that Bangladesh Enacted Territorial water and Maritime zone Act. 1974 through an official
gazette Notification.
The most significant precedent in the case of Bangladesh-India maritime dispute is arguably the
judgment delivered by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) on march 14th
2012 in the Bangladesh-Myanmar Maritime Delimitation Case.
The ITLOS judgment accepted Meghna estuary as part of relevant coast. It upheld Bangladesh
cannot be a Sea-locked state by cutting off its boundary line from Myanmar side in the Bay of
Bengal. It Recognized Bangladeshs 12-mile territorial sea, 200 mile exclusive economic Zone,
and the rights of Bangladesh to the outer continental shelf beyond the economic zone (another
260 miles). Bangladesh has total rights over the undersea natural resources within continental

13
shelf as many nations have asserted mineral and land rights to their continental shelves. Most
importantly Bangladesh has access to the open sea.
The most important fact is that the judgment of the Court of Arbitration together with the ITLOS
judgment in 2012 has resulted in a clear maritime boundary which will allow Bangladesh, India
and Myanmar unhindered exploration of living resources (fishing and other living marine
species) and non- living (oil, gas and minerals) resources in the Bay of Bengal. Bangladesh will
have now not only 19,467 sq. kilo in the west but also 1,11,631 sq. kilo in the east (ITLOS
judgment) in the Bay of Bengal for exploration and exploitation of its resources. One of the
sources of food as well as oil and gas could be found from marine resources. As land resources
deplete more attention falls on the marine resources. Another fact stands out is that Bangladesh
and its neighboring states- India and Myanmar- have peacefully settled the maritime boundary
through the legal mechanism under the UNCLOS and it demonstrates all three countries have
been committed to have peaceful settlement.

PART-IV
PROFITS & LOSSES
Verdict brings new hope
The resolution of the maritime boundary dispute is a pleasant surprise for Petrobangla as
it will lose very little in terms for areas in six offshore oil and gas blocks bordering India in the
western Bay of Bengal.
We will go for international bidding as soon as possible. At the same time, we will see
whether we can explore any of the offshore blocks on our own, as it does not cost much,

14
Petrobangla Chairman Hussain Monsur said while welcoming the verdict of United Nations
Permanent court of the Arbitration.
Another Petrobangla high official noted, If the government is willing, we can to for the
third-round offshore oil and gas exploration did by the third quarter of next year.
Out of six, two deep-sea blocks down south will need redesigning as their boundaries will
require realignment by five to six kilometers each. The remaining four-including two
shallowones---will undergo minor changes, he said.
However, to attract international oil companies in the deep seas, the government must
tailor the did terms and conditions in line with international practices--especially those
international practices---especially those.
In 2008 and 2012, the government floated two separate block bids and only one American
company, Conocophillips, is practically working in the deep seas upon signing a production
sharing contract (PSC).
Both bids had failed to adequately attract bidders because of the maritime dispute with
Myanmar---which was resolved in 2012---and with India. In addition to uncertainty over the
boundary, international oil companies were not very attracted by the incentives offered by
Bangladesh.
Now with the whole dispute clearing up, oil companies will not have any worries to did in
Bangladeshi maritime blocks.
The government now has some experience in dealing with one company Conocophillips
have met high officials several times and conveyed to the government that the government must
change the existing format to have oil companies work in the deep-sea blocks. the official noted.
Based on its seismic survey, the American company assessed that there was a prospect of
a gas resources of 5 to 7 trillion cubic feet.

15
However, the possibility of success to find this gas is just 17 percent. So investment
here is highly risky, said the official. The location of this prospect is around 350 kilometres
away from the Chittagong coast.
In this light Conocophillips wants the government to amend the PSC and hike the gas
price so that it proceeds with exploratory works.
We actually have no idea about the dimension of investment required for deep sea
exploration, he added.
If we dont want foreign investment, its fine. But as we understand the subject,
Bangladesh has no expertise or finances to tap this resource. Gas will stay where it is now, the
official pointed out.
Bogged down with a gas crisis of 500 million cubic feet a day (mmcfd), which in one
fifth of the demand, Bangladesh has had hard luck finding any new major gas field since 1998
when the Bibiyana gas field since 1998 when the Bibiyana gas field was discovered. All follow
up discoveries were inadequate to meet the spiralling demands.
This had prompted the government to go for off-shore exploration bids in 2008 and
2012. There were 28 blocks--- each having exploration area of between 3,000 to 7,000 sq km.
Side by side the government had taken the initiative to import liquefied natural gas
(LNG) from the Middle East.
If we are okay with paying $ 15 dollars per mmcfd LNG, why cant we pay, say $ 10 to
fetch gas directly from the deep sea through a pipeline? Its all about mindset, quips an expert.
Bangladesh had only one producing field in the shallow waters of the Bay, the sangu
field, which died two years back. According to online energy magazine Geo Expro, from April
2009 India has been producing 2.1 billion cubic feet per day from different fields in Dhirubhai
deep-water block in the Bay which has 25 trillion cubic feet (tcf) gas in place. This is located in
Krishna Godavari Basin the midpoint of Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Indian Reliance Industries
in leading the discoveries.

16
This has virtually doubled Indias gas output. Other Indian discoveries in the Bay are
closer to Bangladesh, having another 5to 6 tcf gas.
We lost south Talpotti Island
But through this delimitating Judgment BD has lost the right over south Talpotti Island.
It should be reminded that south Talpotti has been raising after the cyclone of 1970. This island
situated in the south corner of khulna and Bagherhat district. This island has been raised on
between our Raymongol and Hariabhanga river. This 2050 sq. km island has been identified by
American satellite is 1974 later on the area of this island increases into 10,000 sq Km. India
claimed this island and Indias west Bengal state government flagged in 1978 on this island
Although this island know as south Talpotti by Bangladesh, India Called it by New more
However, Bangladesh proposed for Joint survey regarding this island, India did not accept it,
Indian NAVY arrived on 9th May in 1987. Bangladesh requested to sent back India NAVY
troops but India did not accept it also Recently it was claimed by India that there is no sign of
Talpotti island. International law relating to Maritime issues advocates the theory of requiring
any place in the sea territory to be an island. Indian High commissioner stated there is no sign of
Talpotti island really and it was also affirmed by Bangladesh External Affairs Ministry. How it
could be possible?
It could only be determined by scientific survey that whether Talpotti has been lost its
existence due to the reason of green house that affects on sea water level raising. And in the same
time south Talpotti is a mangrove forest and for this reason at went into water while high tide.
Another question is there whether Bangladesh presented and exhibited sufficient
evidence for proving ownership of this island.
Officials of External Ministry of Bangladesh admit it on a press conference that in 2010
maps made by Bangladesh government, there is no existence of south Talpotti Island in this map.

17
Court (PCA) also pointed out in its judgment that there is no existence of south Talpotti
island. By this judgment we have lost it forever. Because PCAS judgment cant be appealed
against. Once we include this area in Block-21 with a view to the exploration of oil and mineral
resources. (oil, gas and fossil fuel) were reserved in this island. And for this reason India were
keen to acquire and thereby won this offshore oil and gas reservoirs that is nothing but south
Talpotti island.
Till today there has been no conducting of exploration of ail of gas but by the virtue of
this judgment India now entitled to explore offshore oil and gas.
It should be noted that in 1947 sir Radcliff determined the middle water flows line of
Hariabhanga river as a boundary line for East Pakistan and India.
If 1800 straight line has been drawn from the middle water flows of Hariabhanga river to
the sea then Bangladesh has gotten the Talpotti island. Bangladesh losses this island because
boundary line drawn from the main point of land to the sea in 177.3 0.

In this question

Bangladesh favored a principal based on equity while India favored equidistance system to
get larger maritime areas.
Bangladesh had won in both the cases and the majority of 28 oil blocks came in the
water territory of Bangladesh.
The maritime affairs chief said, India clamed 10 blocks and Bangladesh got all the 10
that India claimed.
On the question of south Talpotti Dr. Khurshed Said the island did not exist anymore and
that it went under water after the cyclone at Urir Char in 1985. And as per the Radcliffe
boundary delimitation and all the maps published by Bangladesh till 1980, south Talpotti was
never a part of Bangladesh.
The judgment may assist Bangladesh concretise the Japanese proposal for a Bay of
Bengal Industrial Growth Belt(BIG-B) for Japanese trade and investment. Its ushers in a new era
of cooperation with the neighbors in maritime area.

18

PART-V
FINDINGS
The verdict of the United Nations permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), base in the Hague,
upholds, Countrys economic, territorial right over 200 nautical Miles from coast, Bangladesh
now owns 1,18,813 sq km. territorial sea and owns an exclusive economic zone extending to
200 nautical miles. Tribunal awarded Bangladesh all the 10 blocks claimed by India. We lost
south Talpotti Island forever. Which would be strongly believed that Talpotti is a reservoir of

19
offshore oil mine. The area went to Indian territory. As since the Judgment is final and bending
on both countries, and cant be appealed against.

REFERENCE
1.

ANDRES VELASCOS Article on lawless sea

2.

The United Nation Convention on law of the sea (UNCLOS-III).

3.

The Daily star, July 9 2014.

4.

Article Published by Ex. Judge, and political, Economical, Constitutional expert Iktder
Ahmed.

20
5.

Internet from goole. com.