In the choppy waters of international maritime disputes, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) is navigating a delicate balance between legitimacy and authority. A recent study published in *Mimbar Hukum* (translated as “Law Tribune”) by Hanif Ardiningrum Khansa, a researcher at Leiden Law School, Universiteit Leiden, delves into the tribunal’s handling of the Ukraine v. Russia case, offering insights that could reshape how maritime professionals view international dispute resolution.
Khansa’s research, which employs qualitative legal analysis, examines ITLOS’ provisional measures order in the 2019 case between Ukraine and Russia. The study highlights how the tribunal relies on state consent and procedural integrity to maintain its normative legitimacy, even as it grapples with enforcement challenges in politically charged disputes.
“ITLOS’ strict adherence to UNCLOS provisions reinforces its normative legitimacy,” Khansa explains, “yet gaps in enforcement—exemplified by Russia’s partial compliance—reveal the limits of its authority in high-stakes conflicts.”
For maritime professionals, the implications are significant. The study underscores the importance of procedural fairness in international adjudication, which can mitigate risks associated with non-participation in disputes. However, it also highlights the challenges of overcoming power asymmetries, a critical consideration for companies operating in contested maritime zones.
The research suggests that ITLOS’ procedural rigor can help level the playing field, but it stops short of being a panacea. “ITLOS’ procedural rigor mitigates non-participation risks but struggles to overcome power asymmetries,” Khansa notes, pointing to the need for pragmatic reforms.
So, what does this mean for the maritime sector? For one, it underscores the importance of clear jurisdictional guidelines and collaborative efforts in resolving disputes. Khansa recommends clarified jurisdictional guidelines, advisory opinions, and enhanced collaborations to bolster ITLOS’ role in maritime dispute resolution.
Commercially, this could open up opportunities for maritime law firms specializing in international adjudication, as well as for companies seeking to navigate the complexities of maritime disputes. It also highlights the need for robust compliance mechanisms to ensure that provisional measures are effectively enforced, reducing the risks for businesses operating in contested waters.
In essence, Khansa’s study serves as a reminder that while international tribunals like ITLOS play a crucial role in maintaining maritime order, their effectiveness is contingent on the cooperation of states and the willingness of parties to adhere to provisional measures. For maritime professionals, this underscores the importance of staying informed about the latest developments in international maritime law and being proactive in managing legal risks.
As the maritime sector continues to evolve, the insights from Khansa’s research published in *Mimbar Hukum* will be invaluable for professionals seeking to navigate the complex landscape of international maritime disputes. By understanding the nuances of ITLOS’ approach, companies can better strategize their legal positions and mitigate risks, ensuring smoother operations in the global maritime arena.