Haenam-gun Unable to Confirm Maritime Boundary Jurisdiction in Manho Sea Dispute Area

Constitutional Court Dismisses Jurisdictional Dispute on Maritime Boundary in Manho Waters

Manho Sea Area Jurisdiction Dispute Judgment Petition Map (Photo by Haenam-gun)

[Haenam=Asia Economy Honam Reporting Headquarters Reporter Kim Hyun] On the 27th, the Constitutional Court dismissed the jurisdictional dispute trial regarding the maritime boundary jurisdiction between Haenam-gun and Jindo-gun in the Manho sea area.

Dismissing means a judgment that ends the case without a detailed trial when the requirements for litigation are not met.

Earlier, in October 2020, Haenam-gun filed a jurisdictional dispute trial with the Constitutional Court, claiming that Jindo-gun’s aquaculture license disposition and future planned dispositions in the disputed Manho sea area might infringe on Haenam-gun’s autonomous authority.

The jurisdictional dispute trial was filed on the grounds that, according to the equidistant median line principle in maritime boundary delimitation, “the jurisdiction over the eastern sea area of the equidistant median line based on inhabited islands belongs to Haenam-gun.”

The Manho sea area has been pioneered by Haenam-gun fishermen since 1982, who first started seaweed farming. The distance from the mainland is about 3.2 km for Haenam-gun and about 8 km for Jindo-gun, but the dispute has continued as Jindo-gun claims jurisdiction over the area.

In the decision document, the Constitutional Court explained the legal opinion, stating, “It is inappropriate due to the expiration of the filing period of 60 days from the date of learning of Jindo-gun’s license disposition in 2020, and the future planned license extension approval is an exceptional case where the disposition may not be made. Even if the disposition is made in 2030, it is difficult to see the necessity to preemptively protect the situation 10 years later.”

Accordingly, three constitutional justices presented dissenting opinions, arguing that the trial request for future dispositions regarding the fishing license disposition is legitimate and that the main judgment on maritime boundary jurisdiction should be made.

As a result of this decision, the maritime boundary in the disputed area remains unresolved, and it is now possible to contest again through a jurisdictional dispute trial in case of future infringements.

A military official said, “It is regrettable that the Constitutional Court denied the possibility of authority infringement regarding future dispositions without a concrete judgment on the facts, but since this is not a decision to confirm the maritime boundary in the disputed area between the two counties, we will prepare future response measures through consultations with fishermen.”

Haenam=Asia Economy Honam Reporting Headquarters Reporter Kim Hyun alwatros@asiae.co.kr

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.