ISLAND OF LAS PALMAS CASE (US VS NETHERLANDS)

Background:
Island of Palmas Case was a case involving a territorial dispute over the Island of
Palmas (or Miangas) between the Netherlands and the United States which was heard
by the Permanent Court of rbitration! Palmas was declared to be a part of
the Netherlands "ast Indies and is now part of Indonesia!
Fac! o" #$ ca!$:
Palmas (Miangas) is an island of little economic value or strategic location! It is two
miles in length# three$%uarters of a mile in width# and had a population of about &'( in
)*+,# when the case was decided! Palmas lies between Mindanao# the southernmost
part of the Philippines# and the Nanusa Islands# the northernmost part of Indonesia
other than Palmas!
In )-*-# Spain ceded the Philippines to the United States in the .reaty of Paris
()-*-) and Palmas lay within the boundaries of that cession to the U!S! In )*(/# the
United States discovered that the Netherlands also claimed sovereignty over the island#
and the two parties agreed to submit to binding arbitration by the Permanent Court of
rbitration! 0n ,+ 1anuary )*,'# the two governments signed an agreement to that
effect! .he arbitrator in the case was Ma2 3uber# a Swiss lawyer!
.he %uestion before the arbitrator was whether the Island of Palmas (Miangas)# in its
entirety# was a part of the territory of the United States or the Netherlands!
.he legal issue presented was whether a territory belongs to the first discoverer# even if
they do not e2ercise authority over the territory# or whether it belongs to the state which
actually e2ercises sovereignty over it!
R%g# &' D%!co($r'
n the first of its two arguments# the United States argued that it held the island because
it had received actual title through legitimate treaties from the original 4discoverer4 of the
island# Spain! .he United States argued that Spain ac%uired title to Palmas when Spain
discovered the island and the island was terra nullius! Spain5s title to the island#
because it was a part of the Philippines# was then ceded to the United States in
the .reaty of Paris ()-*-) after Spain5s defeat in the Spanish$merican 6ar! .he
arbitrator noted that no new international law invalidated the legal transfer of territory via
cession!
3owever# the arbitrator noted that Spain could not legally grant what it did not hold and
the .reaty of Paris could not grant Palmas to the United States if Spain had no actual
title to it! .he arbitrator concluded that Spain held an inchoate title when Spain
7discovered8 Palmas! 3owever# for a sovereign to maintain its initial title via discovery#
the arbitrator said that the discoverer had to actually e2ercise authority# even if it were
as simple an act as planting a flag on the beach! In this case# Spain did not e2ercise
authority over the island after ma9ing an initial claim after discovery and so the
merican claim was based on relatively wea9 grounds!
Con%gu%'
.he United States also argued that Palmas was merican territory because the island
was closer to the Philippines than to the Netherlands "ast Indies! .he arbitrator said
there was no positive international law which favored the United States approach
of terra firma# where the nearest continent or island of considerable si:e gives title to the
land in dispute! .he arbitrator held that mere pro2imity was not an ade%uate claim to
land noted that if the international community followed the proposed merican
approach# it would lead to arbitrary results!
Con%nuou! d%!)*a' o" !o($r$%gn'
.he Netherlands5 primary contention was that it held actual title because the
Netherlands had e2ercised authority on the island since )/&&! .he arbitrator noted that
the United States had failed to show documentation proving Spanish sovereignty on the
island e2cept those documents that specifically mentioned the island5s discovery!
dditionally# there was no evidence that Palmas was a part of the ;udicial or
administrative organi:ation of the Spanish government of the Philippines! 3owever# the
Netherlands showed that the <utch "ast India Company had negotiated treaties with
the local princes of the island since the )&th century and had e2ercised sovereignty#
including a re%uirement of Protestantism and the denial of other nationals on the island!
.he arbitrator pointed out that if Spain had actually e2ercised authority# then there would
have been conflicts between the two countries but none are provided in the evidence!
Conc*u!%on:
.3="" important rules for resolving island territorial disputes were decided>
?irstly# title based on contiguity has no standing in international law!
Secondly# title by discovery is only an inchoate title!
?inally# if another sovereign begins to e2ercise continuous and actual
sovereignty# (and the arbitrator re%uired that the claim had to be open and public
and with good title)# and the discoverer does not contest this claim# the claim by the
sovereign that e2ercises authority is greater than a title based on mere discovery!