Navigating Jurisdictional Tides: Reconciling UNCLOS with Bilateral Fishing Rights in the India–Sri Lanka Maritime Boundary

Abstract

Abstract: The India–Sri Lanka maritime boundary dispute precariously rests at the intersection of international law and constitutional federalism, alongside human rights. While the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) takes a holistic approach to maritime jurisdiction, the realities of Tamil fishing communities on the ground demonstrate the disconnect between codified sovereignty and customary usages. The 1974 and 1976 bilateral treaty agreements between India and Sri Lanka that transferred Katchatheevu to Sri Lanka resulted in significant and enduring legal ambiguities and humanitarian complexities that undermined sovereignty-based customary fishing. This article describes the evolution of traditional transboundary violations and increased constitutional conversations in India about the legitimacy of ceding territory in the absence of Parliament approvals. It frames UNCLOS Articles 19, 21, and 56 against practices of historic use, and argues that sovereignty claims and historic use can co-exist in semi-enclosed areas such as the Palk Bay. The analysis demonstrates that treaties were compliant, but concurrently there was a legal void with respect to livelihoods and cultural rights, exacerbating ongoing arrest/detention and ecological issues, and demonstrating the lack of resolution between treaty obligations and customary rights. By situating the issue in an international and constitutional law framework, the article concludes with a clarion call for jurisdictional certainty, human rights, and socio-economic justice.