CYIL Vol. 7, 2016

SOMA HEGDEKATTE CYIL 7 ȍ2016Ȏ why a line of 177° 30´ 00 azimuth was chosen. Moreover, this is the first time a grey area has been created. As pointed out by Dr. PS Rao, the practical consequences of this creation are yet to be seen. However, on the whole the award is lucid and well reasoned. The tribunal based its verdict on prior judgments, thus establishing a system of uniformity and transparency in the process of delimitation of maritime boundaries. Moreover, the verdict did leave both countries satisfied – India’s dissatisfaction was appeased by the New Moore Island decision. The basic objective of an international forum of adjudication is to reduce conflict and harbour peace. This verdict is in congruence with the objectives of UNCLOS and international law. This award is historic for varied reasons. For one, this dispute stands as an illuminating example for other countries to use dispute settlement mechanisms like international arbitration to resolve long standing disputes. 50 What makes arbitration more lucrative is the fact that it is a perfect blend of authority and liberty. Parties are allowed to decide its arbitrators, flattering the pride that countries usually hold. At the same time, the presence of a third party gives a sense of authority that is needed for putting an end to a dispute. Moreover unfruitful, half-baked bilateral negotiations still gives scope for violence in the future. The involvement of an international body and an international dispute settlement mechanism lessens the possibility of retraction or use of aggression in the future. Another reason would be the fairness it highlights. History stands witness to various occurrences where a big country just bullies itself out of a conflict with a smaller country. India is a big country with massive resources compared to Bangladesh. Yet the attitude with which India peacefully abided with the rules of international law is commendable. Moreover the tribunal has showcased that both countries are equal in their eyes. The approach taken by all the parties involved in this award stands as a basking example for other maritime disputes in the area where both countries are not economically on the same page. Principally, this award is a victory for peace. In today’s world of resource crunch, an unresolved dispute on maritime boundaries is a disaster in waiting. Especially in the Bay of Bengal, where the delta is rich and the relations between the countries is volatile. But the prompt resolution seen through the Bangladesh-Myanmar judgment and the India-Bangladesh arbitration has impeded any such possibility. The verdict has created a path of optimism for both countries to thread on. India’s ratification (June 2015) of the Land Boundary agreement 51 in relation to 50 HARUN UR RASHID ‘India-Bangladesh: UNCLOS and the Sea Boundary Dispute’, (14 July 2014) < http://www.ipcs.org/article/india/india-bangladesh-unclos-and-the-sea-boundary-dispute-4557. html>, Last accessed 1 May 2016. 51 Text of Exchange of Modalities for implementation of India- Bangladesh Land Boundary agreement Land Boundary Agreement 1974 and Protocol of 2011 to the Land Boundary Agreement (Ministry of External Affairs India June 06 2015), , last accessed 1 May 2016.

386