As of February 2004 the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) which has been accepted by many as the "Constitution for the Oceans" have been ratified by 127 coastal States and 17 landlocked States. However, out of the 159 original signatories, 29 have not yet ratified the Convention. It should be recalled that on many occasions the UN General Assembly has called upon States to harmonize their national legislation with the Convention's provisions to ensure that they are in conformity with the Convention.

　

 November 16, 2004 marks ten years after the Convention's entry into force. By virtue of Article 312 of the 1982 UNCLOS, any State Party may, by written communication addressed to the Secretary General of the United Nations, proposed specific amendments to the Convention. It is, therefore, in this context, proposals for a New Concept of Ocean Security, could be based on the comprehensive provisions of the Convention.

　

 This paper will try to analyze efforts at the national level that has been carried out by the Indonesian government to try to response to the Secretary General's request for harmonization of their national legislations to that with the Convention. The paper will try to describe the difficulties in trying to work on a cross-sectoral manner due to the absence of an integrated national ocean policy.

　

　

 The adoption of the archipelagic regime as embodied in Part IV of the 1982 LOS Convention confirms Indonesia's struggle for recognition of its special geographical configuration by international law. This recognition also confirms the country's exclusive rights over the resources contained within the Indonesian archipelago. The national language for fatherland as tanah air, meaning land and water, best describes the importance of the sea to Indonesia.

　

 The effectiveness of the 1982 Conventions depends heavily on its becoming a binding force and this could be best achieved through formal ratification. It is under this consideration that on December 31, 1985 Indonesia decided to enact Law No. 17 concerning Indonesia's ratification. Even though the Convention was not yet in force, Indonesia has tried not only to think of ways of implementation but also of deciding on how to use the available law for the benefit of the country.¹

　

 The 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea is one of the most complex treaties ever produced. It deals with a range of issues concerning baselines, and various maritime jurisdictional zones of internal waters, territorial sea, and straits used for international navigation, archipelagic waters, contiguous zone, continental shelf, exclusive economic zone, high seas and the international seabed area. It also deals with various activities such as navigation, fishing, and marine scientific research, marine pollution, delimitation of maritime boundaries and military uses of the sea. It also contains special provisions for landlocked and geographically disadvantaged states, and settlement of disputes.

　

 The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, according to Friedheim :²

　

 It is based on such position that this article try to proposed that political will, policy and institutional framework for the implementation of the "Securing the Oceans" concept can be carried out through the implementation of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. However, based on Indonesia's experience as one of the parties to the Convention, without a comprehensive national ocean policy, implementation efforts proved to be a complex and difficult undertaking.

　

 Given the length and complexity of the Convention, the policy makers and their advisers will need to have a close analytical scrutiny of the Convention, in order to have an adequate understanding of this new law of the sea. The implementation of the Convention can be based on its provisions which can be described through activities of a legislative, regulatory, administrative or co-operative nature, in order to illustrate the nature of the tasks involved from the different perspectives of, for example, a legislator, enforcement officer or administrator.

　

 The listing of activities, therefore, should be made in such a way so it can be used more readily by the various personnel from different sectors who may be engaged in reviewing existing activities in the light of a new legal regime. Many countries will face important decisions of an administrative or organizational nature whether with respect to policy-making, or preparation of legislation, so that some administrative implications should be dealt with in some detail. Indeed, administrative matters may be regarded as providing a central focus for the listings of activities as a whole since it is from that viewpoint that the consideration of policy and implementation questions may be undertaken.

　

 Going through the Conventions provisions, implementation activities may be carried out in the following categories :³

　

 In addition to that list there are some scientific and technical aspects that should also be taken into consideration. Many of the provisions of the Convention will depend for their effective application on scientific and technical capabilities in the marine sector and on international co-operation to develop and improve the capabilities of the developing countries. Those dealing with the preparation of charts and maps, for instance, require specific technical capabilities.

　

　

 According to Hinds, the institutional framework for ocean management was established upon two pillars: (1) centralized UN system global programmes with regional components, and (2) nation states' activities representing decentralized autonomous country specific activities.⁴ He also noted that decades of UN programming primarily in areas under the jurisdiction of sovereign states and their activities, has not produced results that are consistent with what should be reasonably expected. Such failure were also identified by the World Commission on the Oceans in its reports in 1998, that :⁵

　

 At the international level policy making is an integral part of international co-operation, which in most cases are carried out through international organizations such as FAO, IMO, UNESCO-IOC, and UNEP. Little has been carried out though at the regional level, such as that of ASEAN, except for some "pressing issues", such as that of maritime crimes, piracy and terrorism. Indonesia is contemplating on a proposal for an agenda on maritime co-operation with ASEAN member countries.

　

 At the national level policy making is often carried out within the constitutional mandates of the related government agencies. The executive leaders of these agencies play key role in the policy making process, and they are the one who can legally commit their respective agencies to determine policy and implement programmes of activities. The outputs of such undertaking, understandably, will take a very sectoral approach with very limited linkage to a comprehensive national policy. In some countries such as Australia, Canada, Korea and the United States the respective governments took the initiative by producing national ocean policies.

　

　

 As in the case of the formation of the new law of the sea into the 1982 Convention, the implementation of this new law in Indonesia has taken an evolutionary way. Before the establishment of the new law of the sea in 1982 Indonesian laws and regulation governing sea activities were mostly based on the four 1958 Geneva Conventions on the Law of the Sea.

　

 Before Indonesia ratified the 1982 Convention there exist a great number of laws and regulations dealing with ocean activities. Most of these laws and regulations were either enacted during the colonial period, or established after independence taking into account the four 1958 Geneva Conventions. In 1980, however, Indonesia took what may be called as the first attempt at implementation of the 1982 Convention by asserting its claim to a 200 miles exclusive economic zone, which was then followed by an enactment of Law No. 5 of 1983 on the Indonesian EEZ.

　

 Indonesia was prompted to assert its claim based on a consideration that there is a need to preserve the living resources of the sea outside the Indonesian territorial sea to guarantee a supply of protein for the Indonesian people. In line with the government's program of development there also exists a need to preserve and provide a rational management of the living resources of the sea for the welfare of the country. Indonesia is also aware of the fact that claims to an exclusive economic zone is already part of customary international law as is evidenced by State practice.

　

 To regulate the utilization, planning and control of the national territory as an archipelagic State for development purposes, including areas outside of national territory where Indonesia may exercise its law under sovereign rights for the management of natural resources, or under other legitimate rights govern by international law, in 1992 Indonesia enacted Law No. 24 of 1992 concerning Spatial Planning,⁶ which provides for principles of :

　

 In 1996 the government enacted a new Law No. 6 on the Indonesian Territorial Waters.⁷. As a revision of Law No. 4 of 1960, using principles embodied in the 1982 UNCLOS. Basically the new Law upholds some old principles like the one on the breadth of the territorial sea of 12 nautical miles. The old provision of straight baselines from point to point is adjusted accordingly with the new straight archipelagic baselines. An illustrative map is attached to the Law showing the possible new baselines, the territorial sea, outer limit of the exclusive economic zones, and special lines showing the unfinished or still negotiated boundaries with Indonesia's neighbouring countries. The new baselines is determined by the enactment of Government Regulation No. 38 of 2002.

　

 Several new concepts such as the right of transit passage and the right of archipelagic sea-lanes passage, and the right of access and communication are also included. The provisions on the right of innocent passage are adjusted accordingly, and are further regulated by Government Regulation No. 36 of 2002. Since transit passage is only applicable in the combined Straits of Malacca and Singapore, further regulations on this right will be a matter for the three littoral states of Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore. The new right of archipelagic sea-lanes passage is applicable in the archipelagic sea-lanes in the direction of north-south vv., adopted by IMO with the agreement with Indonesia. Rights of foreign vessel and aircraft are regulated in Government Regulation No. 37 of 2002.

　

 In order to optimally utilize of our marine resources including fisheries, Indonesia has fulfilled its capability with the efforts to provide relevant national legislation. The Indonesian Government ratified the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea through the enactment of Law No.17 of 1985 as well as putting into effect Law No. 9 of 1985 on Fisheries and the above mentioned Law. No.6 of 1996 on the Indonesian Territorial Waters. Apart from that, Indonesia has also enacted Law No. 21 of 1992 on Sea Transportation and Law No.23 of 1997 on Basic Provisions for the Management of Living Environment.

　

　

 There are specific issues, namely illegal fishing, piracy and armed robbery at sea, which has emerged as issues receiving regional and international concerns.

　

 For several years, one of the problems facing marine and fisheries development is the illegal fishing in the Indonesian territorial waters and EEZ. Today the exploitation of fisheries resources remained high; however, the benefit derived from it is not as high as expected. This happen because from about 7.000 Indonesian flagged vessels which already obtained permit to operate within the Indonesian EEZ, a great number of them belongs to foreign companies of a number of the Southeast Asian countries as well as from countries outside Southeast Asia. As a consequence of this transfer of status of the foreign vessels, it is calculated that the Indonesian Government's total lost is about US$ 1.36 billion annually. Apart from that, in accordance with the FAO Report (2001), a total number of illegal fishing has reached to about 1.5 million ton annually.

　

 To strengthen the national capabilities to deal with the problems within our territorial waters, the Indonesian Government has established the Department of Marine Affairs and Fisheries. Apart from that, Indonesia has also conducted a number of efforts to combat the problems of illegal fishing, among others by:

　

 Recently Indonesia has enacted a new Law No. 31 of 2004 on Fisheries which contains some more stringent sanctions against illegal fishing. In its implementation the Department of Marine Affairs and Fisheries still need to cooperate with other relevant agencies.

　

 In recent years a number of pirate attacks occurred in waters within the national jurisdiction of Indonesia, mostly are armed robbery against ships, actual or attempted attacks and whether the ships are berthed at anchor or at sea. Taking into consideration the large area of the Indonesian territorial waters and as the impact of the recent financial crisis, the numbers of armed robbery against ships are increasing tremendously. This happened because of insufficient law enforcement officers and lack of technological equipment in monitoring and controlling the territorial waters.

　

 As far as national legislation is concerned, Indonesia has ratified the UNCLOS (1982) through the enactment of Law No.17/1985. In terms of law on piracy, for the purpose of law enforcement, the Indonesian Penal Code has regulated "piracy" and "armed robbery against ships" in Articles 438-443 and 447-451. In addition to that, "piracy" has also been articulated in the 1939 Territorial Waters Ordinance, particularly in Articles 13 and 14. For the safety of navigation in our territorial waters, the Indonesian Government has circulated relevant IMO Circulars, namely: MSC/CIRC 622/Rev.1 and MSC/CIRC 623/Rev.l, to the respective government agencies, ship owners and operators, masters and crews. In addition to this, in order to support the apprehension of criminals of foreign countries, Indonesia has a number of agreements on extradition with Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand and Australia.

　

 In order to strengthen its national capabilities, particularly in law enforcement efforts, the Indonesian Government has established an inter-department agency called "BAKORKAMLA " (Maritime Security Coordinating Agency) under the coordination of the Indonesian Navy, consisting of in-line agencies such as the National Police, Directorate General of Sea Communication, Directorate General of Immigration, Directorate General of Custom, Directorate General of Taxation, National SAR Agency, and Attorney General Office. Apart from that, Indonesia has established "PUSKODAL" (Command and Control Center) in the Batam Island, which is also equipped with an anti-piracy unit.

　

 For security and safety reason, "marine police" (POLAIRUD) and "KPLP" have been attached to the respective regional police headquarters and ports throughout the country. In addition, Indonesia has conducted coordinated anti-piracy patrol with neighboring countries such as Malaysia and Singapore in the Malacca and Singapore Straits, which to some extent, have resulted in a significant reduction of piracy in that region.

　

 For the purpose of monitoring, with the assistance of the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), Indonesia has set up the "Marine Safety and Information System" (MSIS) in Tanjung Uban, Batam, Dumai, Belawan and Jakarta.

　

 In view of maintaining and strengthening navigation and safety, particularly in the Straits of Malacca and the Straits of Singapore, Indonesia appeals to all countries to consider in implementing Article 43 of the 1982 UNCLOS.

　

 In dealing with the two issues above the cross sectoral approach in the form of coordination between in-line agencies seems to have work well. However, in other issues there are still a lot of cross-sectoral issues that were not as easy to be solved.

　

 In the old days Indonesia used to have Basic Guidelines for National development which prescribes for programs of development in every sector of the government, which is usually set out for a five year period. Such guidelines do not exist anymore; each sectoral agency has its own development programs. It can easily be seen that such approach will bring competing issues. Perhaps, a national ocean policy is the answer to this problem?