Thailand-Cambodia maritime dispute conciliation process gets underway
The process to settle a long-running maritime boundary dispute under the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) has begun, after Thailand submitted a letter to Cambodia formally accepting participation in compulsory conciliation proceedings, Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maratee Andamo said.
Maratee said Thailand submitted its response on June 19, after Cambodia formally had initiated the process on June 2nd.
She stressed that Thailand's participation is aimed solely at resolving the maritime boundary delimitation dispute between the two countries and does not involve any other issues.
Speaking at a news briefing, she said the Thai response reaffirmed that the objective of the process is limited to maritime boundary delimitation, appointed Foreign Minister Sihasak Phuangketkeow as Agent and Songchai Chaipatiyut, Thailand's ambassador to Kuwait, as Deputy Agent.
Cambodia was informed of Thailand's appointment of two internationally recognised experts as conciliators, namely Judge Albert J. Hoffmann of South Africa and Judge Rüdiger Wolfrum of Germany.
Maratee said that, under UNCLOS procedures, the four conciliators appointed by Thailand and Cambodia must select a fifth conciliator to chair the conciliation commission within 30 days.
The commission is expected to spend about 12 months gathering information, consulting both parties, conducting negotiations and preparing a report containing recommendations.
The recommendations will not be legally binding, but are intended to provide a framework for further negotiations between the two countries.
"Conciliation is not a court proceeding," Maratee noted, adding that "The conciliators are independent experts, not advocates for either side. Their role is to consider the positions of both countries and propose balanced recommendations acceptable to all parties."
She emphasised that Thailand, as a state party to UNCLOS and a responsible member of the international community, had decided to participate in accordance with its treaty obligations and hopes the process will contribute to a peaceful and sustainable settlement of the dispute.
Benjamin Sukanjanajtee, director-general of the Department of Treaties and Legal Affairs, said Thailand has chosen to prioritise maritime delimitation because previous efforts, under the 2001 Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), which linked maritime boundary negotiations with discussions on joint development of overlapping claims areas, had produced little progress over the past 25 years.
He said Thailand believes a clear maritime boundary should be established before discussions on any remaining overlapping areas can move forward.
He noted that, in many international cases, maritime boundaries could be settled relatively quickly, while negotiations on joint development areas often take significantly longer.
"When it comes to jointly developing the remaining overlapping areas, however, the process tends to take much longer… Maritime boundary delimitation may take only around two years, but reaching an agreement on a joint development area can take as long as 10 years. As a result, the benefits may not be realised for a considerable period. That is why Thailand is prioritising maritime boundary delimitation as its primary objective," he said
Benjamin pointed out that any final maritime boundary agreement resulting from the conciliation process would require approval by both the Cabinet and Parliament, because it concerns sovereign rights and national territory.
Addressing concerns about possible political interference, he said the process is governed by international law and that the conciliators are internationally recognised figures. They will not risk their credibility by allowing politics to influence the process.
Benjamin added that Thailand preferred compulsory conciliation to litigation before an international court, because the process encourages dialogue and mutually acceptable solutions and that the process could generate useful recommendations and provide a basis for continued bilateral negotiations.
Asked whether Thailand could be disadvantaged if the commission's recommendations prove unfavourable to it, Benjamin said it was inappropriate to view the process in terms of winners and losers, arguing that both countries stand to benefit from a clearly defined maritime boundary after more than two decades of uncertainty that has hindered effective use of marine resources.
"We believe both sides can ultimately emerge as winners if a fair and workable maritime boundary is established," he said.
Benjamin also noted that Thailand has prepared extensive historical, legal and technical evidence, including records of previous negotiations, academic studies, developments in international law and advanced cartographic analysis.
He stressed that the maritime conciliation process is separate from any land border issues and broader bilateral relations, and said progress on the maritime dispute could help strengthen cooperation between Thailand and Cambodia in other areas.