Dispute Concerning Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary between Bangladesh and Myanmar in the Bay of Bengal (Bangladesh/Myanmar) [2012]
ITLOS Reports 2012, p. 4 · International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea · International
Issue
How should the maritime boundary between Bangladesh and Myanmar be delimited in the territorial sea, EEZ, and continental shelf, including the shelf beyond 200 nautical miles?
Held
ITLOS delimited the boundary using the equidistance/relevant circumstances method. For the territorial sea, it drew a simplified equidistance line. For the EEZ and continental shelf within 200 nm, it adjusted the equidistance line to account for the concavity of the coast and the presence of St. Martin's Island. For the continental shelf beyond 200 nm, it applied the same method and recognized a 'grey area' where the shelf of one State extends under the EEZ of the other.
Exam use
When analyzing a maritime delimitation problem, always start with the three-stage approach: provisional equidistance line, adjustment for relevant circumstances, and disproportionality check. Relevant circumstances may include coastal concavity, the presence of islands, and the cut-off effect. For the continental shelf beyond 200 nm, remember that delimitation is possible and may create a 'grey area'. Use this case to argue for an adjusted line if the equidistance line produces an inequitable result.
Summary
ITLOS delimited the maritime boundary between Bangladesh and Myanmar in the Bay of Bengal, addressing the delimitation of the territorial sea, exclusive economic zone, and continental shelf. The Tribunal applied the equidistance/relevant circumstances method and recognized the concept of a 'grey area' where the continental shelf extends beyond 200 nautical miles. It also addressed the status of the 'St. Martin's Island' as a relevant circumstance.
Facts
Procedural History
Issue
How should the maritime boundary between Bangladesh and Myanmar be delimited in the territorial sea, EEZ, and continental shelf, including the shelf beyond 200 nautical miles?
Held
ITLOS delimited the boundary using the equidistance/relevant circumstances method. For the territorial sea, it drew a simplified equidistance line. For the EEZ and continental shelf within 200 nm, it adjusted the equidistance line to account for the concavity of the coast and the presence of St. Martin's Island. For the continental shelf beyond 200 nm, it applied the same method and recognized a 'grey area' where the shelf of one State extends under the EEZ of the other.
Ratio Decidendi
The delimitation of the territorial sea is governed by Article 15 of UNCLOS, which provides for the equidistance method unless special circumstances justify a different line. For the EEZ and continental shelf, the Tribunal applied the three-stage approach: (1) draw a provisional equidistance line, (2) consider relevant circumstances that may require adjustment, and (3) check for disproportionality. Relevant circumstances included the concavity of the coast, which caused a cut-off effect, and the location of St. Martin's Island, which was given reduced effect. The Tribunal also held that the continental shelf beyond 200 nm can be delimited by the same method, and that a 'grey area' may arise where the shelf of one State extends under the EEZ of the other.
Obiter Dicta
The Tribunal noted that the concept of a 'grey area' is not explicitly provided for in UNCLOS but is a logical consequence of the delimitation of the continental shelf beyond 200 nm. It also observed that the rights of the coastal State in the EEZ and on the continental shelf are distinct and can coexist in the same area.
Reasoning
Plain-English Explanation
Essay-Ready Explanation Generator
Version 1 of 4
Reference to Dispute Concerning Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary between Bangladesh and Myanmar in the Bay of Bengal (Bangladesh/Myanmar) (ITLOS Reports 2012, p. 4) strengthens a Law of the Sea answer because the case reflects the principle that The delimitation of the territorial sea is governed by Article 15 of UNCLOS, which provides for the equidistance method unless special circumstances justify a different line. For the EEZ and continental shelf, the Tribunal applied the three-stage approach: (1) draw a provisional equidistance line, (2) consider relevant circumstances that may require adjustment, and (3) check for disproportionality. Relevant circumstances included the concavity of the coast, which caused a cut-off effect, and the location of St. Martin's Island, which was given reduced effect. The Tribunal also held that the continental shelf beyond 200 nm can be delimited by the same method, and that a 'grey area' may arise where the shelf of one State extends under the EEZ of the other. Applied to a problem question, the case should be used after identifying the issue as How should the maritime boundary between Bangladesh and Myanmar be delimited in the territorial sea, EEZ, and continental shelf, including the shelf beyond 200 nautical miles? The stronger essay move is to connect the material facts to the court's holding, then explain whether the present facts support the same conclusion or justify distinguishing the authority.
Underlying Concepts
- maritime delimitation
- equidistance/relevant circumstances
- continental shelf beyond 200 nm
- grey area
- cut-off effect
Precedents Applied
- UNCLOS Articles 15, 74, 83
- North Sea Continental Shelf Cases
- Maritime Delimitation in the Black Sea
Later Treatment
- Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Atlantic Ocean (Ghana/Côte d'Ivoire)
- Dispute concerning the Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary between Mauritius and Maldives in the Indian Ocean
Key Passages
- The equidistance method is the starting point for delimitation of the EEZ and continental shelf.
- The concavity of the coast may constitute a relevant circumstance requiring adjustment of the equidistance line.
Significance
Related Cases
- Maritime Delimitation in the Black Sea (Romania v. Ukraine)ICJ Reports 2009, p. 61
- North Sea Continental Shelf CasesICJ Reports 1969, p. 3
Exam Tips
Revision Checklist
- Name the issue before discussing facts so the marker sees the legal question immediately.
- State the holding in one sentence, then use the ratio to explain why the court reached that result.
- Use the citation and jurisdiction to show why this authority matters for the problem you are answering.
- Pair this case with one supporting or contrasting authority if the question tests limits, policy, or exceptions.
Problem Question Use
Common Pitfalls
- Forgetting to apply the three-stage approach in order.
- Assuming that islands always get full effect; they may be given reduced effect.
- Overlooking the possibility of delimiting the continental shelf beyond 200 nm.