What's new

India favours bilateral end to sea dispute

CaPtAiN_pLaNeT

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
7,685
Reaction score
0
India favours bilateral end to sea dispute

India favours bilateral end to sea dispute | Bangladesh | bdnews24.com

Sat, Mar 17th, 2012 7:59 pm BdST


Dhaka, Mar 17 (bdnews24.com) - India wants to resolve the maritime boundary dispute with Bangladesh bilaterally.

Newly-appointed Indian high commissioner to Dhaka Pankaj Saran made the remark as he called on foreign minister Dipu Moni at her office on Saturday.

His comment comes three days after Bangladesh got a historic verdict from a UN court against Myanmar settling the maritime dispute between the neighbours after 38 years.

After the meeting the Indian envoy was asked by the journalists if India would favour a bilateral settlement of the issue, he said, "I am sure, we will."

Again, to a query whether Bangladesh and India could resolve the matter bilaterally, Saran said it was possible.

"I have conveyed to the foreign minister that it was an important decision (maritime dispute verdict)," he said.

"We look forward to working bilaterally on issues that involve India and Bangladesh."

Bangladesh and India approached to the Permanent Court on Arbitration based in Hague in 2009 to settle the maritime dispute between them.

The verdict of the case which is being heard by a UN court is likely to be issued in 2014.

TEESTA WATER SHARING

On signing Teesta water agreement, he said they did discuss the issue.

"We will discuss it," he said, "This is my first call on the foreign minister. We reviewed all issues."

LAND BOUNDARY AGREEMENT

Asked if the land boundary agreement would be ratified by the Indian parliament, he said, "I would not like to go into the details now."

Bangladesh and India signed land boundary agreement in 1974, which Dhaka ratified in 1974 while India is yet to ratify it, thus hampering its implementation.

The agreement stipulates that the agreement would become effective once it is ratified by both sides.

BEST POSSIBLE TIES

The envoy said India wants to have the best relationship with Bangladesh.

"We recognised there are many others things that can be done," he said.

On Mar 7, after his arrival from India, he told the reporters at the airport that he wants to implement the vision of the leaders of the two countries with full respect for each other and mutual benefit.

Saran, an Indian Foreign Service officer, has succeeded Rajeet Mitter, who left his office on Nov 1, 2011.

In 2007, he joined on deputation as the joint foreign affairs secretary to the Indian prime minister.

Not an unfamiliar face to Bangladesh, Saran had been posted in Dhaka early in his career in the late 1980s. He was the second secretary at the high commission here from Feb 1989 to June 1992. Later, Saran worked as the first secretary at the high commission.

Saran, born on Nov 22 1958, has worked at Indian missions in Dhaka, Moscow, Washington, Cairo and Geneva as well as the India's ministry of external affairs in New Delhi.

bdnews24.com/ssz/nir/2055h
 
Screw that, we will only resolve any issues regarding our sea dispute at the intl. court.
 
PM Hasina asked to reelect her to solve the maritime dispute with India... :P


Friday, March 16, 2012
Front Page
Sea Boundary With Myanmar
Verdict already effective


http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=226514

Govt basks in success;PM wants re-election to take care of row with India
Bangladesh now gets more fishing area in the Bay. Rezaul Karim and Hasan Jahid Tusher

Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina yesterday termed the triumph over Myanmar in the maritime boundary dispute case at Hamburg a victory of the whole nation.

She credited her government with getting the verdict of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in Bangladesh's favour and criticised others for not taking any steps during their tenures.

Bangladesh on Wednesday won the landmark verdict at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in Hamburg, Germany. The court sustained Bangladesh's claim to rights over a 200-nautical-mile exclusive economic and territorial zone in the Bay of Bengal, thereby rejecting the claims of Myanmar. The verdict cannot be appealed against and has become effective immediately.

“Fortunately the people of Bangladesh voted the Awami League to power at the 2008 elections. After we formed the government in 2009, we took measures to establish our rights on our maritime boundaries. And for this reason, we had to do a lot of work,” she said at her Gono Bhaban residence while talking to district and upazila level Awami League leaders.

Later, in parliament, Hasina said, “The unresolved issue with India over maritime boundaries is expected to be settled in 2014. If people vote for us and give us scope to serve them, we will be able to bring good news for them as we did today.”

The dispute with India over maritime boundaries is scheduled to be settled in late 2014 at the UN's Permanent Court of Arbitration based in The Hague, the Netherlands, while parliamentary elections are scheduled for early January 2014 in Bangladesh.

“We will be able to bring good news as no successive government after 1975 looked into this matter,” she said, citing the Awami League-led government's measures to establish the country's rights in the Bay.

In her brief speech in the House, Hasina said, “Today is the happiest day for independent and sovereign Bangladesh, which we liberated through bloodshed.”

Earlier at the meeting with district and upazila level leaders of the Awami League, the prime minister said Bangladesh had got more than what it had wanted. “We have got 1.11 lakh square kilometres…There are many natural resources like oil, gas, mineral resources and fish. All these are now ours, we own these resources.”

She said, “Had we not come to power and placed the demand at the right time, the opportunity might have slipped away. Had the BNP come to power, it would have resorted to looting and the demand would not have been met.”

Hasina said Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman initiated discussions on the maritime boundary issue with Myanmar in 1973 for the first time. But after his murder in 1975, no government, led by former presidents Ziaur Rahman, HM Ershad or now opposition leader Khaleda Zia, took any initiative to resolve this issue as also the land boundary disputes with neighbouring states, she added.

“After coming to power in 1996, we signed the international law on maritime boundary in 1997. Although there was a provision to place Bangladesh's demand on the maritime dispute issue at the UN by 2011, the BNP which came to power in 2001 did not take any steps to this end,” she said.

VERDICT EFFECTIVE
Talking to The Daily Star over telephone from Germany, Foreign Minister Dipu Moni said, “The verdict has been made effective immediately after its pronouncement.

“There is no need for its ratification or any other formalities that could take time.” She said, “The 151-page verdict laid out all aspects of the maritime delimitation in minute detail.”

The tribunal applies the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and other rules of international laws compatible with the convention.

As per the law, all parties to a case have to accept the jurisdiction of the tribunal before the case is dealt with. The jurisdiction may be accepted either before a dispute arises or afterwards. The decisions of the tribunal are final and binding and the parties to the dispute are required to comply with them.

However, the tribunal has no means of enforcing its decisions.

The parties to a dispute are required to comply promptly with any provisional measures prescribed by the tribunal under specific articles of the UN convention.

AL ROLE IN VICTORY
Records show that since 1974, only the Awami League-led governments had pursued to establish Bangladesh's territorial rights in the Bay of Bengal.

Only three years after the country's liberation, the first step was taken by Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman who enacted the Territorial Waters and Maritime Zones Act, 1974, the first to enact in the region.

He initiated a dialogue with Myanmar and India to fix maritime boundary issues.

As a result, Bangladesh and Myanmar signed an agreement in 1974, in which Myanmar accepted Bangladesh's claim for 200 nautical miles exclusive economic zone.

However, Myanmar later changed its stance.

After the assassination of Bangabandhu, successive governments did not follow up with discussions and decisions agreed upon by Bangladesh, India and Myanmar. Despite repeated calls over decades by the UN to submit Bangladesh's claim for the continental shelf in the Bay, there had been no initiatives for scientific survey or anything.

The next progress was made after Sheikh Hasina assumed office in 1996 and ratified the long overdue United Nations Convention on the Laws of the Sea in 2001.

During the previous BNP rule (2001-2006), a project was launched regarding maritime issues, but no tangible development was achieved and a lot of money was spent on this.

After the Awami League returned to power in 2009, Bangladesh lodged cases against India and Myanmar in two separate UN courts on October 8, 2009. Bangladesh was forced to file the cases after the two neighbours unfairly cut off a significant portion of Bangladesh's maritime area in the Bay, sources said.

They said Foreign Minister Dipu Moni then took all-out efforts to prepare Bangladesh for the legal battle against India and Myanmar.

In the case with Myanmar, she, as the main agent of Bangladesh, placed Bangladesh's claims during the final hearing held between September 8 and September 24, 2011, in Hamburg.

Additional Secretary to the Foreign Ministry Rear Admiral (retd) Khurshed Alam played a crucial role as he was the main man behind all scientific surveys conducted in the Bay. Bangladesh possibly appointed the best lawyers in the world who were experts in complex maritime issues.

Due to the relentless efforts by Dipu Moni, Khurshed Alam and internationally reputed lawyers, Bangladesh came out triumphant.
 
1. India is in panic after the decision against Burma. Cases are similar. Out of 5 judges, 3 were in the case against Burma. India knows she is going to loose.

2. Therefore, she is sabotaging this. Once BD agrees to bilateral resolution the case in the Hague will stand withdrawn. Using her plants / stooges in BAL, India will obtain a deal in her favor cheating us. BD can do nothing because India will flex her muscles. Btw, bilateral resolution was abandoned by both nations because India was asking for the entire part.

3. All patriots in BD must unite against this innocent advance by India using traitors in BD.
 
1. India is in panic after the decision against Burma. Cases are similar. Out of 5 judges, 3 were in the case against Burma. India knows she is going to loose.

2. Therefore, she is sabotaging this. Once BD agrees to bilateral resolution the case in the Hague will stand withdrawn. Using her plants / stooges in BAL, India will obtain a deal in her favor cheating us. BD can do nothing because India will flex her muscles. Btw, bilateral resolution was abandoned by both nations because India was asking for the entire part.

3. All patriots in BD must unite against this innocent advance by India using traitors in BD.
India prefers bilateral treaty with everybody, but you are free to go to court, nobody can stop you.
 
India prefers bilateral treaty with everybody, but you are free to go to court, nobody can stop you.

You are not current with this. India and BD are already in the Hague Court on this issue after failing to reach a bilateral agreement. But now India is in panic because she will surely loose in the verdict due 2014.
 
You are not current with this. India and BD are already in the Hague Court on this issue after failing to reach a bilateral agreement. But now India is in panic because she will surely loose in the verdict due 2014.

What if it is other way around? Would you then blame some lobby that ruled the court in our favor?

Listen, you really need to understand that decision can swing either ways. Burma has been an eye sour for western countries due to its defiance against adopting democracy all this long so it can afford to push decisions against it. Are you seriously comparing that with us?

BTW take the waters if you like it so much. We're more interested fencing our land borders.
 
Awami League is in a tricky situation, if they settle bilaterally, they are screwed since the election is coming in 2014. I am not sure the election is going to be held in 2014 either, atleast the real one.
 
You are not current with this. India and BD are already in the Hague Court on this issue after failing to reach a bilateral agreement. But now India is in panic because she will surely loose in the verdict due 2014.

Well I am not talking about this specific issue, I was saying in general.
We should not stop talking to each other, we may get better deal out of bilateral agreement.
In this specific case, you are right, I dont think there is much room for talks once we are in tribunal.
 
Clever move by GoI. It's in our interest to go ahead with the tribunal!

Tribunal

The Members of the Arbitral Tribunal are:

Professor Dr. Rüdiger Wolfrum (President)
Judge Thomas A. Mensah
Dr. Pemmaraju Sreenivasa Rao
Professor Ivan Shearer
Professor Tullio Treves

Party Representatives

Bangladesh is represented by:

Agent:
Dr. Dipu Moni, Minister of Foreign Affairs

Deputy Agent:
Rear Admiral Md. Khurshed Alam (Retd), Additional Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Counsel:
Professor James Crawford SC, Matrix Chambers, London
Professor Philippe Sands QC, Matrix Chambers, London
Mr. Paul S. Reichler, Foley Hoag LLP, Washington, D.C.
Professor Alan Boyle, Essex Court Chambers, London
Professor Payam Akhavan, McGill University, Montreal
Mr. Lawrence Martin, Foley Hoag LLP, Washington, D.C.


India is represented by:


Agent:

Mr. Narinder Singh, Joint Secretary & The Legal Advisor, Ministry of External Affairs

Deputy Agent:

Mr. T.S. Tirumurti, Joint Secretary (BSM), Ministry of External Affairs
Mr. Suresh K. Reddy, Joint Secretary (BSM-II), Ministry of External Affairs

Counsel:
Mr. R.K.P. Shankardass
Professor Alain Pellet, University of Paris Ouest, Nanterre – La Défense
Sir Michael Wood, 20 Essex Street, London
Professor W. Michael Reisman, Yale Law School

Junior Counsel:
Mr. Benjamin Samso

-----------------------------------------

There is a person of Indian origin among the judges. How did he sneak in? :P
 
Clever move by GoI. It's in our interest to go ahead with the tribunal!

Tribunal

The Members of the Arbitral Tribunal are:

Professor Dr. Rüdiger Wolfrum (President)
Judge Thomas A. Mensah
Dr. Pemmaraju Sreenivasa Rao
Professor Ivan Shearer
Professor Tullio Treves

Party Representatives

Bangladesh is represented by:

Agent:
Dr. Dipu Moni, Minister of Foreign Affairs

Deputy Agent:
Rear Admiral Md. Khurshed Alam (Retd), Additional Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Counsel:
Professor James Crawford SC, Matrix Chambers, London
Professor Philippe Sands QC, Matrix Chambers, London
Mr. Paul S. Reichler, Foley Hoag LLP, Washington, D.C.
Professor Alan Boyle, Essex Court Chambers, London
Professor Payam Akhavan, McGill University, Montreal
Mr. Lawrence Martin, Foley Hoag LLP, Washington, D.C.


India is represented by:


Agent:

Mr. Narinder Singh, Joint Secretary & The Legal Advisor, Ministry of External Affairs

Deputy Agent:

Mr. T.S. Tirumurti, Joint Secretary (BSM), Ministry of External Affairs
Mr. Suresh K. Reddy, Joint Secretary (BSM-II), Ministry of External Affairs

Counsel:
Mr. R.K.P. Shankardass
Professor Alain Pellet, University of Paris Ouest, Nanterre – La Défense
Sir Michael Wood, 20 Essex Street, London
Professor W. Michael Reisman, Yale Law School

Junior Counsel:
Mr. Benjamin Samso

-----------------------------------------

There is a person of Indian origin among the judges. How did he sneak in? :P

They have a jew in their team, so do we. Lets see which jew wins...its the battle of the jews in the subcontinent.....rawwwr:chilli:....Sir Micheal Wood, i am scared of, he is one of the greatest legal minds of the 21st century.
 
Indian's liars, theifs, betrayers and murderers. Either a gaddar or trechurus or dumb *** will believe their words. The thing is when we have envieable social structure, healthy economy, strong military and a nuke Insh Allah, then we can do all the talking with india. Other than that, no trust in them.
 
Screw the bilateral solution. We don't trust Bharti. After the settlement with Myanmar, our case has been strengthens, thus we are to go to court with full swing and settle our sea boundary. No compromise.
 

Back
Top Bottom