What role did nearly 100 maps play in the Pulau Batu Puteh case?

Question

Accepted Answer

Nearly 100 Maps Played a Significant Role in the Pulau Batu Puteh Case by Indicating the Parties' Views on Sovereignty

In the Pulau Batu Puteh case, approximately 100 maps were presented to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), with both Malaysia and Singapore agreeing that none individually established title to the island. However, these maps served as crucial evidence for indicating each party's stance and claims regarding sovereignty over Pulau Batu Puteh, particularly through annotations and their publication history.
Malaysian and Singaporean Maps Presented to the ICJ

Both Malaysia and Singapore submitted a substantial number of maps to the ICJ as part of their arguments. While Malaysia highlighted a 1995 Singapore government map as the sole instance of Pulau Batu Puteh being depicted within Singapore's territory, it also referred to older maps from 1926 and 1932. These earlier maps, published by the Surveyor-General of the Federation of Malay States and Straits Settlements, were suggested by Malaysia to potentially place the island within Johor.
Significance of Malayan and Malaysian Maps (1962-1975)

A key focus for the Court was a series of six maps published between 1962 and 1975 by the Malayan and Malaysian Surveyor General and Director of National Mapping. These maps included Pulau Batu Puteh and bore annotations such as "Lighthouse 28, P. Batu Puteh, (Horsburgh), (SINGAPORE) or (SINGAPURA)." The inclusion of "(SINGAPORE)" or "(SINGAPURA)" under the island's name, mirroring its appearance on another island unequivocally under Singapore's sovereignty, was seen by Singapore as a significant admission against Malaysia's interest.
Court's Interpretation of Map Annotations and Disclaimers

The ICJ found the annotations on the 1962-1975 maps to be clear and supportive of Singapore's position. While Malaysia argued that maps do not create title and that admissions require incorporation into treaties or use in negotiations, the Court cited precedent suggesting admissions can arise in other circumstances. The Court referred to a previous case where a state-produced map, even if against its own interest, was considered a statement of geographical fact, and concluded that these Malayan and Malaysian maps indicated Malaysia's official position rather than creating title.
Maps as Indicators of Sovereignty and Conduct

Ultimately, the ICJ concluded that the maps published by Malaya and Malaysia between 1962 and 1975 tended to confirm that Malaysia considered Pulau Batu Puteh to fall under Singapore's sovereignty. This interpretation of the maps, combined with an assessment of the parties' conduct, formed the basis of the Court's decision. The maps, alongside Singapore's consistent exercise of sovereign functions and Malaysia's inaction or lack of response, reflected a convergent evolution of the parties' positions regarding title to the island.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

What role did nearly 100 maps play in the Pulau Batu Puteh case?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends