Interpretasi Perjanjian Internasional Terkait Historical Rights Dalam UNCLOS 1982

(Studi Kasus: Sengketa Laut Cina Selatan antara Republik Rakyat Cina v. Filipina dan Sengketa Kepulauan Chagos antara Mauritius v. Britania Raya)

  • Ninne Zahara Silviani Universitas Padjadjaran


People’s Republic of China with 9-dash-lines designed in 1947, claimed almost 90% of the South China Sea’s Area. Generally known the line not only overlapping in one Asean Country but five other countries which, The Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam and Brunei Darussalam. The Philippines took its fight over its territory to the Permanent Court of Arbitration, Den Haag in 2013.  In 12th July 2016, Permanent Court of Arbitration Award declared that China has no legal basis for claiming territorial waters in the South China Sea. Yet, the PRC does not accepted the Award. PRC denied the decision due to the PRC’s interpretation to UNCLOS 1982 regulation and declared their sovereignty across the archipelagic islands in South China Sea by historical reasons. A Similar disputes was happen between Mauritius v. United Kingdom in 2010-2015 due to the Maritime Protected Area in Chagos Islands on Indian Ocean whose claimed by Mauritius because of historical reasons. This article will examine how VCLT 1969 reacted to the violation of UNCLOS 1982 which known as a package deal in accordance to regulate the sovereignty of water territory. This article is a normative legal research with secondary data, which obtained from library study descriptively.


A. Buku

Aust, Anthony. Modern Treaty Law and practices. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Brownlie, Ian. Principles of Public International Law, London: Clarendon Press, Oxford, 2008, 7th edition.

Dixon, Martin, Robert McCorquodale, Sarah Williams. Cases & Materials on International Law. London: Oxford University Press, 2016.

Gavouneli, Maria. Functional Jurisdiction in the Law of The Sea, Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2007.

Latipulhayat, Atip. Sumber-sumber hukum Internasional (Hegemoni dalam Harmonisasi). Bandung: Universitas Padjadjaran 2018.

Malanczuk, Peter. Akehurst’s Modern Introduction to International Law. London: Routledge, 1998.

Shaw, Malcolm N. International law, 7th Edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014.

B. Jurnal

Ian, James Storey, Creeping Assertiveness: China, the Philippines and the South China Sea Dispute, Contemporary Southeast Asia, April 1999: Volume 21. Issue 1.

Usmawadi, Tinjauan Singkat Tentang Interpretasi Perjanjian Internasional Menurut Konvensi Wina Tahun 1969, Jurnal Hukum dan Pembangunan, April 1988.

C. Internet

Pascal S. Bin Saju, “Pangkalan Militer China di Laut China Selatan Siap Digunakanâ€,, diakses pada 18 November 2018.

Juridical Regime of Historic waters including historic bays - Study prepared by the Secretariat,, diakses pada 20 Desember 2018

Hikmahanto Juwana, “Substansi Putusan Permanent Court of Arbitration†dalam, diakses pada 20 Desember 2018

Contracting Partiesâ€, , diakses 22 desember 2018.

Hanan Beech, “Just Where Exactly Did Cina Get the South Cina Sea Nine-Dash Line From?†, diaskes pada 23 Desember 2018.

Damos D. Agusman and Gulardi Nurbintoro, “ASEAN, UNCLOS, and Birth of a New Legal Orderâ€, diakses pada 15 November 2018

D. Peraturan Perundang-undangan dan Konvensi

Vienna Convention on The Law of Treaties 1969

United Nations Convention On the Law of The Sea 1982

International Law Commission Juridical Regime on Historical Waters including Historical Bays 1962

Permanent Court Of Arbitration Arbitration Rules 2012

How to Cite
Silviani, Ninne Zahara. “Interpretasi Perjanjian Internasional Terkait Historical Rights Dalam UNCLOS 1982: (Studi Kasus: Sengketa Laut Cina Selatan Antara Republik Rakyat Cina V. Filipina Dan Sengketa Kepulauan Chagos Antara Mauritius V. Britania Raya)”. Jurnal Selat 6, no. 2 (August 26, 2019): 154-171. Accessed September 28, 2022.