Geopolitical and Legal Analysis of Maritime Dispossession in the Eelam Tamil Homeland (Tamileelam)

By

Disclaimer

This report is intended for research and analytical purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information synthesized herein is based on publicly available bilateral agreements, state documents, academic studies, and reports from civil society organizations as of early 2026. While every effort has been made to ensure accuracy, the geopolitical landscape in the Indian Ocean Region is rapidly evolving. The perspectives on "occupation" and "sovereignty" presented are based on the documented political positions of Eelam Tamil stakeholders and civil society.

Editor's Note

The terminology used in this report, including "Tamil Eelam," "Eelam Tamil homeland," and "occupied territory," reflects the specific historical, cultural, and political claims of the Tamil people in the Northern and Eastern Provinces of Sri Lanka. These terms are utilized to accurately represent the framework through which local stakeholders interpret bilateral maritime and energy projects. This report seeks to provide a balanced analysis by juxtaposing state-led development goals against the rights-based and sovereignty-based concerns of the local population.

Executive Summary

Since the conclusion of the civil war in 2009, the Northern and Eastern Provinces of Sri Lanka—the Eelam Tamil homeland—have become a frontier for a post-conflict surge in maritime and energy infrastructure development. This report analyzes this phenomenon through the lens of "ocean grabbing," a process where control over marine resources is captured by powerful state and corporate actors, often marginalizing traditional communities.1

Key findings include:

●       Surge in Bilateralism: A total of 16 major MoUs and agreements have been identified between India and Sri Lanka since 2009, covering sectors from maritime security (MRCC) to massive renewable energy hubs (Adani/NTPC).

●       The Occupation Paradigm: Tamil political and civil society actors maintain a formal stance of non-recognition regarding these MoUs, arguing that the North and East are occupied territories under the effective control of the Sri Lankan military. They assert that agreements made without the Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) of the Tamil people violate international law.

●       Expectation of Homeland Integrity: A central demand of Tamil stakeholders is that the territorial integrity of the Tamil homeland must be recognized and respected by both India and Sri Lanka as a prerequisite for any regional cooperation.

●       Corporate Agency: Major Indian entities, including PSUs like NTPC and Indian Oil, and private conglomerates like the Adani Group, are the primary operators of this resource appropriation.4

●       Socio-Ecological Impact: The decimation of small-scale fisheries due to bottom trawling and industrial dredging, combined with the militarization of coastal commons, has led to a collapse in local livelihoods and food security.6

The report concludes with a detailed sample (Draft) petition designed for submission to the United Nations, calling for a shift toward a joint management framework that recognizes the sovereignty of the Tamil homeland.

Methodology

The research for this report was conducted using a multi-disciplinary approach that integrates legal analysis, geopolitical tracking, and socio-economic impact assessment. The primary data sources include:

1.     Bilateral Instruments: Analysis of official Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) and joint statements released by the Indian Ministry of External Affairs and the Sri Lankan Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

2.     Corporate Disclosures: Review of project portfolios and annual reports from Indian Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs) and private infrastructure conglomerates active in the region.5

3.     Civil Society Testimonies: Integration of findings from Independent People's Tribunals on the Blue Economy, which documented field evidence of resource dispossession and fisherfolk exclusion.

4.     Legal Frameworks: Evaluation of maritime activities against the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), and international humanitarian law regarding the rights of people in occupied territories.7

5.     Political Resolutions: Synthesis of statements and resolutions from Tamil political parties (e.g., TNPF, Northern Provincial Council) regarding territorial integrity and the illegitimacy of state-led enclosures.

A Study of Ocean Grabbing and Indo-Lanka Bilateral Frameworks

The global maritime landscape is undergoing a transformative shift, driven by the convergence of resource scarcity, geopolitical competition, and the emergence of the "Blue Economy" as a dominant development paradigm. This transformation has given rise to the phenomenon of "ocean grabbing," a process of dispossession and appropriation of marine resources and spaces that systematically diverts wealth and control away from local populations toward powerful state and corporate actors. In the Northern and Eastern Provinces of Sri Lanka—regions historically identified as the Eelam Tamil homeland—this process has intensified with remarkable velocity since the formal conclusion of the civil war in 2009. The strategic re-orientation of the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) has positioned the maritime commons of the Tamil people at the center of a complex web of bilateral agreements, industrial projects, and military surveillance initiatives. This report provides an exhaustive analysis of these developments, framing them within the context of international law and evaluating their profound impact on the socio-economic and cultural integrity of the Tamil people, who maintain that these agreements are an illegal imposition upon an occupied territory and demand respect for their homeland's territorial integrity.

Ocean grabbing is fundamentally characterized by the capturing of control by powerful economic and political actors over crucial decision-making regarding marine resources.1 This capture includes the power to decide how resources are used, managed, and conserved, both in the present and for future generations.1 Unlike traditional land grabbing, which is often visible through fences and physical enclosures, ocean grabbing frequently manifests through the invisible enclosure of legal and policy frameworks.1 These frameworks often adopt the language of human rights, food security, and poverty eradication to mask the underlying privatization of property rights and market-based conservation blueprints.1

The "Blue Economy" has emerged as the primary conceptual vehicle for this enclosure. While international institutions such as the World Bank promote the Blue Economy as a pathway for sustainable development, field evidence suggests that its implementation often leads to the marginalization of small-scale fishers and the erosion of customary governance.2 In the Indian Ocean region, the Blue Economy framework has been linked to an "illicit grab" on coastal commons, where natural resources are transformed into economic assets for industrial sectors, bypassing the collective rights of traditional fishing communities.2 This process is not merely a byproduct of development but a strategic exclusion of local stakeholders from the very spaces they have occupied and managed for centuries.

From a legal perspective, ocean grabbing intersects with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which provides the comprehensive regime for maritime jurisdiction.7 However, the application of UNCLOS often prioritizes state sovereignty and the enforcement of hard maritime boundaries over the human rights and customary tenure systems of indigenous populations.8 The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) guidelines on small-scale fisheries emphasize the need to protect the tenure rights of local communities, a requirement that is frequently overlooked in the high-stakes bilateral negotiations between India and Sri Lanka.9

The Northern and Eastern Provinces of Sri Lanka possess a unique maritime geography that has historically shaped the identity and economy of the Eelam Tamil people. This homeland encompasses the Palk Bay, the Gulf of Mannar, and the deep-water harbor of Trincomalee—one of the finest natural harbors in the world. The Palk Bay, a shallow stretch of sea barely 30 nautical miles wide at its narrowest point, has been a shared maritime commons for Tamil fishers from both India and Sri Lanka since time immemorial.8

The sovereignty of this maritime space has been a point of contention for decades, particularly following the 1974 and 1976 maritime boundary agreements between India and Sri Lanka.12 These agreements delineated the International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL) and ceded the island of Katchatheevu to Sri Lanka, a decision made without the ratification of the Indian Parliament.8 For the Tamil people, the imposition of the IMBL transformed a culturally and economically contiguous sea into a militarized zone, creating the legal conditions for the systematic arrest and harassment of fishers.8

In the post-2009 era, the Sri Lankan state, supported by Indian strategic investment, has sought to consolidate its control over these regions through a combination of militarization and industrial development. The designation of High Security Zones (HSZs) and the establishment of large-scale energy hubs in the East have effectively limited the access of Tamil communities to their traditional homelands and coastal resources.13 This "security-first" paradigm treats the Tamil maritime homeland as a strategic buffer zone, prioritizing geopolitical stability and regional energy integration over the human security and self-determination of the local population.

 

Since the end of the civil war in 2009, the bilateral relationship between India and Sri Lanka has been increasingly defined by a series of Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) and agreements that facilitate Indian entry into the Northern and Eastern Provinces. These instruments cover maritime security, renewable energy, digital infrastructure, and port development.

Date

Title of Agreement/Instrument

Primary Sector

Key Objectives and Scope

2011

Trilateral Maritime Security Cooperation Agreement

Defence/Security

Established a framework between India, Sri Lanka, and Maldives to address threats in the IOR.

2017 (May)

Kankesanthurai (KKS) Port Renovation Agreement

Infrastructure

Initial approval for the renovation of KKS Port with Indian grant assistance.

2019 (July)

Maho-Omanthai Railway Refurbishment

Infrastructure

$91.27 million Indian assistance for Northern railway modernization.

2019 (Dec)

Project Management Consultant Services (KKS)

Infrastructure

Formalizing the consulting framework for the northern port development.14

2022 (Mar)

Renewable Energy MoU (Mannar & Pooneryn)

Energy

Agreement with the Adani Group to develop wind power projects (484 MW) in the North.

2022 (Mar)

Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre (MRCC) Grant

Security

$6 million grant from India to establish an MRCC for enhanced maritime surveillance.15

2023 (July)

Renewable Energy Cooperation MoU

Energy

Framework for broader green energy partnership signed during Wickremesinghe's visit.

2024 (Apr)

KKS Port Full Funding Grant

Infrastructure

Indian government agreed to grant $61.5 million to cover the entire KKS redevelopment.

2024 (Apr)

Riverine Fairway Development MoU (NER)

Infrastructure

Agreement involving DCI for maintaining navigational depths in the region.17

2024 (June)

MRCC Operationalization Agreement

Security

Commissioning of the MRCC for the Sri Lankan Navy by the Indian EAM.18

2024 (Dec)

Rehabilitation of Karainagar Boatyard MoU

Infrastructure

Grant for northern maritime industry support.

2024 (Dec)

Joint Statement on Northern Port Cooperation

Infrastructure

Reiteration of joint work on northern ports using Indian grant assistance.

2025 (Mar)

Vadhavan Port Bidding Framework

Maritime

Consortium involving Adani Ports for major dredging/reclamation works.19

2025 (Apr)

5-Year Defence Cooperation MoU

Defence

Comprehensive agreement structuring joint exercises and maritime surveillance.18

2025 (Apr)

Sampur Solar Power Project Phase I

Energy

Groundbreaking ceremony for a 120 MW solar plant in Trincomalee via NTPC-CEB JV.21

2025 (Apr)

Trincomalee Regional Energy Hub (Trilateral MoU)

Energy

UAE-India-SL deal for refinery, pipeline, and tank farm infrastructure.23

2025 (Apr)

Digital Transformation & Health MoU

Socio-Economic

$15.5 million (LKR 2.37 billion) for Eastern Province development.

2025 (Apr)

Critical Minerals Cooperation MoU

Resources

Framework for joint exploration/extraction of vital minerals.26

2025 (Apr)

Electricity Grid Interconnection Agreement

Infrastructure

Planning for a bi-directional power cable between India and Sri Lanka.

The execution of these MoUs is driven by a diverse array of Indian entities, including central government public sector undertakings (PSUs), large private conglomerates, and specialized maritime service providers. These actors represent the operational hand of "ocean grabbing," translating high-level policy into physical infrastructure and resource control.

Entity Name

Status

Primary Projects/Roles

Implications for Resource Control

NTPC Limited

State-Owned (PSU)

Sampur Solar Power Project; Trincomalee Power Company Ltd (JV).27

Facilitates large-scale land and ocean enclosures in the East for energy.8

Adani Group

Private Conglomerate

Mannar & Pooneryn Wind Projects; Colombo Port West Container Terminal (WCT).4

Holds controlling stakes in strategic maritime and renewable energy hubs.

Indian Oil Corporation (IOCL/LIOC)

State-Owned (PSU)

Trincomalee Oil Tank Farm; Bunker fuel supply; Trilateral refinery project.29

Integrates Sri Lanka's energy security with India's national system.29

Dredging Corporation of India (DCI)

State-Owned (PSU)

Maintenance and capital dredging in northern/eastern ports.17

Alters maritime ecology to accommodate large-scale industrial shipping.17

IRCON International

State-Owned (PSU)

Railway restoration and infrastructure development in the North.

Enhances logistical connectivity required for industrial extraction.

ITD Cementation

Private

Marine engineering and port construction for Vadhavan/KKS.19

Executes the physical construction of maritime enclosures.

Knowledge Marine & Engineering (KMEW)

Private

Specialized dredging and niche maritime services.31

Provides technical expertise for shallow-water and port deepening.

International Seaport Dredging (ISDPL)

Private (L&T JV)

Capital dredging and offshore reclamation.32

Leverages global dredging fleets for major land and ocean reclamation.32

Larsen & Toubro (L&T)

Private

Infrastructure development and maritime engineering (partner in ISDPL).

Major engineering force in industrial maritime hubs construction.

Alliance Air / IndiGo

State/Private

Chennai-Jaffna (Palaly) air route operations.

Solidifies regional connectivity and business-to-business ties.

The cumulative effect of these agreements and the presence of these entities has profoundly impacted the lives and livelihoods of the Eelam Tamil people. The transformation of their maritime homeland into a site for industrial and strategic expansion has resulted in several distinct forms of dispossession.

For generations, the sea has been the primary source of nutrition and economic stability for the Tamil people in the Northern Province. However, the encroachment of mechanized Indian trawlers, primarily from Tamil Nadu, has led to a catastrophic depletion of fish stocks.6 These trawlers engage in bottom trawling, a highly destructive practice that involves scraping the seabed with heavy nets, indiscriminately capturing everything in their path and destroying coral reefs and seagrass beds.6

Local Tamil fishers report that they now need to put in five times more effort to catch the same quantity of fish than they did in previous decades.6 The ecological damage is accompanied by direct financial loss; Indian trawlers frequently operate at night, cutting through the nets of local fishers and destroying their primary assets.6 This has created a cycle of debt and poverty, forcing many families to abandon their traditional occupation or fish in less productive nearshore areas to avoid conflict.6

In the Eastern Province, particularly in the Trincomalee district, the Sampur Power Project serves as a critical case study in ocean and land grabbing. The project, which was delayed for nearly two decades due to environmental and community opposition, involves the enclosure of vast areas of community land for energy infrastructure.33 The displacement of war-affected Tamil families is exacerbated by the designation of High Security Zones (HSZs) and the restricted movement of people to their traditional moaring sites.13

The transformation of Trincomalee into a "regional energy hub" involves not only land-based infrastructure but also the development of undersea pipelines and bunkering facilities.29 These projects are often executed through trilateral agreements involving foreign powers like the UAE, further distancing the decision-making process from the local population.24 For the Tamil residents of Trincomalee, this "development" represents a form of modern colonization where their land and sea are used to fuel the regional economy while they remain marginalized.

The maritime agreements between India and Sri Lanka are deeply intertwined with a militarized security architecture. The 2025 Defence MoU and the establishment of the Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre (MRCC) provide the Sri Lankan Navy with enhanced surveillance capabilities.18 While framed as a response to piracy or smuggling, this militarization has direct consequences for the Tamil people. The Navy frequently arrests and harasses local fishers, and there have been numerous reports of custodial violence and the destruction of fishing gear.8

The presence of the armed forces in the Northern Province is seen as a primary barrier to the recovery of the fishing sector.2 Navy-governed coastal spaces and "no-access" zones prevent fishers from moaring their boats near their traditional homes, forcing them to make long and difficult journeys to engage in their trade.13 This strategic exclusion of the Tamil people from their maritime commons is a fundamental violation of their rights to life, work, and cultural expression.8

A critical dimension of the maritime conflict is the formal position of Eelam Tamil political and civil society representatives, who do not recognize the legitimacy of MoUs signed between the Indian and Sri Lankan governments. This non-recognition is rooted in the belief that the Northern and Eastern Provinces (Tamil Eelam) are an occupied territory under the effective control of the Sri Lankan military.

Mainstream Tamil political forces, such as the Tamil National People's Front (TNPF), argue that any bilateral agreement concerning the Tamil homeland made without the Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) of the Tamil people is a violation of international law. They maintain that the Sri Lankan state lacks the sovereign mandate to lease or develop Tamil maritime resources, as its presence in these regions is viewed as an "illegal occupation" aimed at demographic reconfiguration and "Sinhalization".

The TNPF and other nationalist groups emphasize that the 1987 Indo-Lanka Accord and its subsequent MoUs have failed to deliver a political solution, instead trapping Tamil politics in a "unitary state" framework that provides neither accountability nor genuine autonomy. Consequently, many Tamils believe that both the Indian and Sri Lankan governments are acting in violation of international legal norms by commodifying "occupied" maritime commons for geopolitical and corporate gain.

A fundamental tenet of the Tamil political stance is that any durable solution must include the recognition of an identified Tamil homeland and the guarantee of its territorial integrity. Tamil activists argue that the British initially violated this integrity in 1833 by merging distinct units of rule, and that subsequent unitary constitutions have continued this erosion. Consequently, they maintain that external forces, including India, must subject the "territorial integrity of the Sri Lankan state" to the prior recognition and respect of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Eelam Tamil nation in the North-East.

Tamil civil society has increasingly called for the international community to recognize the North-East as a "Non-Self-Governing Territory" under international law. This perspective asserts that the current developmental and maritime projects—such as the Adani wind farms and the Trincomalee energy hub—are extensions of structural genocide, designed to undermine the territorial integrity and contiguity of the Tamil homeland. They advocate for a pre-constitutional political treaty, comparable to the Good Friday Agreement, that recognizes Tamil sovereignty and constituent power as a prerequisite for any resource-sharing agreements.

The actions of the Indian and Sri Lankan states in the Northern and Eastern provinces can be critically analyzed under several international legal frameworks. These frameworks suggest that the bilateral MoUs and the projects they facilitate constitute a breach of established norms.

While both India and Sri Lanka are parties to UNCLOS, their bilateral dealings in the Palk Bay and Trincomalee have consistently bypassed the convention's requirements for environmental protection and cooperative management.

●       Articles 123 and 197 (Duty to Cooperate): These articles mandate that states bordering a semi-enclosed sea must cooperate in the exercise of their rights and duties.35 The failure to engage in transparent consultation with all stakeholders, including local fishing unions, is a significant breach of this obligation.35

●       Article 206 (Assessment of Potential Effects): This article requires states to assess the potential effects of activities under their jurisdiction that may cause significant harm to the marine environment.35 Transboundary Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) for joint energy projects have been largely absent or opaque.

●       Article 194 and 204 (Prevention of Pollution): The continued use of bottom trawlers by Indian fleets, supported by the state's lack of enforcement, represents a failure to protect the marine environment from the devastating effects of industrial exploitation.35

The "ocean grab" in the Tamil homeland is a direct violation of the rights of indigenous and traditional communities under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).

●       Right to Territory and Resources: UNDRIP protects the rights of indigenous peoples to the lands and territories they have traditionally occupied. The enclosure of Tamil maritime commons for industrial "Blue Economy" projects without FPIC is a fundamental breach.

●       Marginalization of Customary Governance: The replacement of traditional community-led management of fisheries with state-controlled, market-based supply chains systematically erodes the customary governance of the Tamil people.1

The UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food has explicitly categorized ocean grabbing as a serious threat to global food security. In the Eelam Tamil homeland, the depletion of fish stocks by industrial fleets and the restriction of access to coastal lands undermine the community's ability to feed itself.8

The diversion of marine resources to meet export demands or power regional energy grids violates the fundamental right to food for millions of people. This is exacerbated by the climate crisis, as rising sea levels and shifting migration patterns further increase the vulnerability of the Tamil fishing community.

The rapid proliferation of MoUs since 2009 is driven largely by the intense rivalry between India and China for influence in the Indian Ocean Region. India views the Northern and Eastern provinces as its immediate "backyard" and is deeply sensitive to Chinese presence in projects like the Hambantota port or hybrid energy initiatives on the northern islands.

New Delhi's strategy involves utilizing both public sector undertakings (NTPC, DCI, IOC) and private entities (Adani) to secure strategic infrastructure.37 By funding the KKS port renovation and the Trincomalee tank farm, India ensures that no "hostile country" can use these facilities for military purposes.29 However, this geopolitical maneuvering often treats the Eelam Tamil homeland as a pawn in a larger game. The "security-first" approach prioritizes maritime stability over the human rights and political aspirations of the Tamil people, effectively institutionalizing a new form of regional hegemony that is viewed by the local population as a reinforcement of the Sri Lankan occupation and a violation of their territorial integrity.

The systematic dispossession of the Eelam Tamil people from their maritime homeland through "ocean grabbing" represents a significant violation of international law and a profound threat to their socio-economic survival. The transition of the Northern and Eastern regions from a site of ethnic conflict to a frontier of the "Blue Economy" has not brought prosperity to the local population; instead, it has replaced the physical enclosure of war with the legal enclosure of industrial bilateralism.

1.     Enclosure through Bilateralism: The MoUs signed between India and Sri Lanka since 2009 have created a legal framework for the appropriation of Tamil maritime resources for regional energy and infrastructure goals without the consent of the local population.2

2.     The Occupation Paradigm: Tamil stakeholders explicitly reject these agreements, viewing the regions as occupied territory where state and corporate actors are violating international human rights and the territorial integrity of the Tamil nation.

3.     Ecological and Economic Collapse: Destructive practices like bottom trawling and industrial dredging are leading to the collapse of the small-scale fisheries sector, which is the backbone of the Tamil economy.6

4.     Militarization of the Commons: The institutionalization of maritime security through joint patrols and MRCCs serves to consolidate state control over the Tamil people, violating their rights to life, work, and movement.18

●       Establishment of a Joint Management Authority: India and Sri Lanka must move toward a joint management framework that includes direct representation from Northern Sri Lankan and Southern Indian fishing unions, recognizing the unique status and territorial integrity of the Tamil homeland.38

●       Mandatory Transboundary EIAs: All future industrial and energy projects in the Palk Bay and Trincomalee regions must be subject to independent, transboundary Environmental Impact Assessments that analyze the impact on small-scale fishers and local nutrition.35

●       Adherence to FPIC Standards: India must respect the principle of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent when engaging in projects in the North and East, recognizing that bilateral MoUs cannot supersede the rights of the Tamil people to their traditional resources and territory.

●       Enforcement of Trawling Bans: Both states must commit to an immediate and effective ban on bottom trawling, with Indian authorities taking responsibility for preventing their fleets from encroaching on Sri Lankan waters.6

●       International Legal Redress: The Tamil people should seek redress through international forums such as the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) to challenge the validity of bilateral agreements that bypass environmental and human rights obligations over an occupied territory.

The maritime future of the Eelam Tamil homeland must be defined by the principles of social justice, food sovereignty, and the right to self-determination. Only by dismantling the occupation paradigm and restoring the integrity of the Tamil people's territory can a sustainable and lawful regional order be established.

 

1. Conceptualizing Ocean Grabbing in International Law

Ocean grabbing refers to the dispossession, marginalization, or exclusion of local communities from marine resources and coastal spaces. While "ocean grabbing" is not defined as a singular, codified crime within international tribunals, the practices it encompasses intersect heavily with violations of established United Nations (UN) conventions, treaty-based maritime rights, and international human rights law. In regions subjected to heavy militarization and geopolitical contestation, state-driven maritime appropriation frequently exploits legal ambiguities to displace historical fishing communities and consolidate territorial control.¹

2. UNCLOS and the Limits of State Sovereignty

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) serves as the primary international treaty governing global maritime spaces. While UNCLOS grants coastal states sovereign rights over their Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) and territorial waters, these rights are neither absolute nor exempt from human rights considerations. States are legally bound to manage marine resources equitably and without prejudice to traditional fishing rights. The systemic exclusion of traditional fishing communities from their historical waters—whether through state-sponsored coastal militarization or aggressive maritime boundary enforcement—contravenes the equitable utilization and access principles embedded in UNCLOS.²

3. International Human Rights and Customary Law Frameworks

The appropriation of coastal lands and marine resources directly violates several core international human rights conventions and declarations:

●       The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR): State-sponsored ocean grabbing deprives communities of their right to an adequate standard of living and the right to work, specifically targeting the traditional livelihoods of coastal populations.³

●       UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP): This framework emphasizes the inherent rights of indigenous and historical communities to own, use, develop, and control their traditional lands, territories, and coastal waters, prohibiting forced dispossession.⁴

●       UN Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas (UNDROP): Explicitly protects the rights of artisanal fishers to access marine resources and participate in the management of these coastal ecosystems, ensuring food sovereignty.⁵

4. The "Blue Economy" and Environmental Pretexts

A critical mechanism of modern ocean grabbing involves the weaponization of treaty-based environmental conservation efforts. States often utilize international environmental mandates to establish Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) or "Blue Economy" development zones. While ostensibly aligned with UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), these designations are frequently implemented without the Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) of local communities. Consequently, environmental treaties are repurposed as a legal pretext to enclose coastal areas, restrict access to traditional fishers, and facilitate state or corporate control over maritime resources.⁶


5. Application to the Eelam Tamil Homeland

In the context of the Eelam Tamil homeland, ocean grabbing manifests through heavy naval presence, the establishment of coastal high-security zones, and the encroachment of state-backed commercial or foreign geopolitical interests into traditional fishing waters. Viewing these actions through the lens of international law reveals a systematic breach of both maritime and human rights treaties. Addressing these violations necessitates international accountability mechanisms and the stringent application of UN frameworks to protect the Tamil community's historical maritime rights against state-engineered demographic and economic marginalization.⁷


Endnotes / References

1.     Transnational Institute (TNI), The Global Ocean Grab: A Primer, 2014.

2.     United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), 1982, Articles 56, 61, and 62.

3.     UN General Assembly, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), 1966, Articles 1, 6, and 11.

4.     UN General Assembly, United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), 2007, Article 26.

5.     UN General Assembly, United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas (UNDROP), 2018.

6.     Barbesgaard, M., "Blue Growth: Savior or Ocean Grabbing?", Journal of Peasant Studies, 2018.

7.     Application of Customary International Law and UN mechanisms to transitional justice, geopolitical resource conflicts, and minority rights.

You may use the example Petition provided below at no cost.

Subject: Formal Petition for Immediate Intervention and Investigation into State-Led Maritime Dispossession ("Ocean Grabbing") in the Occupied Eelam Tamil Homeland (Northern and Eastern Provinces of Sri Lanka).

To:

1.     UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC)

2.     UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food

3.     UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

4.     UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights

5.     UN General Assembly Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization)

We, the representatives of the Eelam Tamil nation, formally submit this petition to alert the international community to the systematic and intensified dispossession of our maritime resources and ancestral homelands. Since 2009, the Eelam Tamil homeland has been subject to a "Blue Economy" development paradigm that serves as a tool of structural genocide, displacing traditional communities and destroying the socio-economic foundation of our people within an illegally occupied territory.

1.     Violation of Sovereignty and Territorial Integrity: The Northern and Eastern Provinces constitute the historically identified homeland of the Eelam Tamil nation. Any bilateral agreement (MoU) signed between the Governments of India and Sri Lanka concerning these territories without the Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) of the Tamil people is a violation of international law.

2.     Ocean Grabbing as a Violation of the Right to Food: The continued encroachment of mechanized Indian bottom trawlers and the establishment of industrial energy hubs (Adani/NTPC) have decimated fish stocks and destroyed marine habitats (coral reefs and seagrass beds). This constitutes a direct threat to the food security and livelihoods of over 200,000 Tamil fishing families.6

3.     Illegal Occupational Enclosures: Large-scale energy and infrastructure projects in Mannar, Pooneryn, and Trincomalee are being executed under military supervision and within High Security Zones (HSZs), effectively enclosing maritime commons and preventing customary access for Tamil fishers.

4.     Corporate Accountability and Lack of Due Diligence: Indian entities, including Adani Ports, NTPC, and the Dredging Corporation of India, are active in the region without conducting comprehensive, transboundary Environmental and Human Rights Impact Assessments.

1.     Recognition of Non-Self-Governing Status: We urge the UN General Assembly to refer the question of the Eelam Tamil homeland to the Fourth Committee for recognition as a "Non-Self-Governing Territory" under international law.

2.     Independent Monitoring Mechanism: We request the establishment of a specialized UN mechanism to monitor the human rights and ecological impact of large-scale infrastructure projects in the Northern and Eastern Provinces.

3.     Halt to Destructive Practices: We demand an immediate, UN-enforced moratorium on all bottom-trawling activities in the Palk Bay and Gulf of Mannar to prevent the total collapse of local fisheries.10

4.     Verification of FPIC: We call upon the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights to investigate whether Indian and Sri Lankan state and private entities have adhered to the principle of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent in the planning and execution of all renewable energy and port projects since 2009.

5.     Referral to the ICJ/ITLOS: We seek an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) or the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) regarding the validity of bilateral maritime agreements signed over a territory under military occupation and without the consent of the indigenous nation.

Works cited

1.     The Global Ocean Grab - Transnational Institute, accessed February 22, 2026, https://www.tni.org/files/download/the_global_ocean_grab.pdf

2.     Untitled - Blue Economy Tribunal, accessed February 22, 2026, http://blueeconomytribunal.org/wp-content/uploads/International-Tribunals-Report-on-BE.pdf

3.     Ocean grabbing: when the sea becomes a battlefield for power - Blue Conservancy Ets, accessed February 22, 2026, https://blueconservancy.org/en/ocean-grabbing-when-the-sea-becomes-a-battlefield-for-power

4.     After port terminal deal, Adani group bags power projects in Sri Lanka - The Hindu, accessed February 22, 2026, https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/after-port-terminal-deal-adani-group-bags-power-projects-in-sri-lanka/article65219949.ece

5.     Joint Ventures and Subsidiaries for various sectors - NTPC Limited, accessed February 22, 2026, https://ntpc.co.in/business-development/joint-ventures-and-subsidiaries-various-sectors

6.     Indian trawlers leave Sri Lankan small-scale fishers a ravaged ..., accessed February 22, 2026, https://news.mongabay.com/2025/04/indian-trawlers-leave-sri-lankan-small-scale-fishers-a-ravaged-bereft-sea/

7.     United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea - International Maritime Organization, accessed February 22, 2026, https://www.imo.org/en/ourwork/legal/pages/unitednationsconventiononthelawofthesea.aspx

8.     extraterritorial jurisdiction challenges: india and sri lanka's conflict in the palk strait and its implications for fishermen's rights - Indian Journal of Integrated Research in Law, accessed February 22, 2026, https://ijirl.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/EXTRATERRITORIAL-JURISDICTION-CHALLENGES-INDIA-AND-SRI-LANKAS-CONFLICT-IN-THE-PALK-STRAIT-AND-ITS-IMPLICATIONS-FOR-FISHERMENS-RIGHTS.pdf

9.     Ocean Grabbing, accessed February 22, 2026, https://ihrb-org.files.svdcdn.com/production/assets/uploads/briefings/Ocean_Platform_Briefing_Series_OceanGrabbing.pdf

10.  'Ocean-grabbing' as serious a threat as 'land-grabbing' – UN expert on right to food - ohchr, accessed February 22, 2026, https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2012/10/ocean-grabbing-serious-threat-land-grabbing-un-expert-right-food

11.  'troubled waters': maritime issues in palk strait, indian ocean - ResearchGate, accessed February 22, 2026, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336236075_'TROUBLED_WATERS'_MARITIME_ISSUES_IN_PALK_STRAIT_INDIAN_OCEAN

12.  INTERNATIONAL LAW PERSPECTIVE ON FISHERMEN DISPUTE BETWEEN INDIA AND SRI LANKA - IJRAR, accessed February 22, 2026, https://ijrar.org/papers/IJRAR19J2146.pdf

13.  Sri Lanka News Articles from January 2020 to April 2022 - ICSF, accessed February 22, 2026, https://icsf.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Sri-Lanka_from_SamudraNewsAlerts_SouthAsiaNewsAlerts.pdf

14.  India to grant full cost of Lanka northern port development - ET Infra, accessed February 22, 2026, https://infra.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/ports-shipping/india-to-grant-full-cost-of-lanka-northern-port-development/109733407

15.  Sri Lanka caught in the crossfire of India–China maritime rivalry | East Asia Forum, accessed February 22, 2026, https://eastasiaforum.org/2024/09/19/sri-lanka-caught-in-the-crossfire-of-india-china-maritime-rivalry/

16.  India–Sri Lanka Joint Cooperation Towards Maritime Security, accessed February 22, 2026, https://www.impriindia.com/insights/policy-update/india-sri-lanka-joint-cooperation/

17.  Building Fairways: Dredging initiatives in the north-eastern region - Indian Infrastructure, accessed February 22, 2026, https://indianinfrastructure.com/2025/10/08/building-fairways-dredging-initiatives-in-the-north-eastern-region/

18.  India-Sri Lanka MoU on Defence Cooperation: An Important Shift in ..., accessed February 22, 2026, https://www.icwa.in/show_content.php?lang=1&level=3&ls_id=12855&lid=7855

19.  Two strong bidding groups to vie for ₹19239 crore dredging and offshore reclamation contract for Vadhvan Port - DredgeWire, accessed February 22, 2026, https://dredgewire.com/two-strong-bidding-groups-to-vie-for-%E2%82%B919239-crore-dredging-and-offshore-reclamation-contract-for-vadhvan-port/

20.  Jan De Nul and DEME joint venture signs letter of award for dredging works at Vadhavan Port in India, accessed February 22, 2026, https://www.jandenul.com/news/jan-de-nul-and-deme-joint-venture-signs-letter-award-dredging-works-vadhavan-port-india

21.  Ground Breaking Ceremony for 50 MW Solar Power Project in Sri Lanka - NTPC Limited, accessed February 22, 2026, https://ntpc.co.in/media/press-releases/ground-breaking-ceremony-50-mw-solar-power-project-sri-lanka

22.  Sri Lanka and India sign agreement for long awaited solar power ..., accessed February 22, 2026, https://tamilguardian.com/content/sri-lanka-and-india-sign-agreement-long-awaited-solar-power-plants-trincomalee

23.  Three-way energy play: The India-Sri Lanka-UAE deal in Trincomalee | Lowy Institute, accessed February 22, 2026, https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/three-way-energy-play-india-sri-lanka-uae-deal-trincomalee

24.  UAE, India, Sri Lanka sign tripartite MoU to develop Trincomalee as regional energy hub, accessed February 22, 2026, https://gulfnews.com/uae/government/bj1itz6-uae-india-sri-lanka-sign-tripartite-mou-develop-1.500084411

25.  UAE, India, Sri Lanka sign tripartite MoU to develop Trincomalee as regional energy hub, accessed February 22, 2026, https://www.bna.bh/en/UAEIndiaSriLankasigntripartiteMoUtodevelopTrincomaleeasregionalenergyhub.aspx?cms=q8FmFJgiscL2fwIzON1%2BDv02pkkXRsoas%2BW8emXp4XY%3D

26.  India, Sri Lanka Sign Agreements on Energy, Defence, and Digital Cooperation, accessed February 22, 2026, https://indiasworld.in/current-affair/india-sri-lanka-sign-agreements-on-energy-defence-and-digital-cooperation/

27.  Sampur Power Station - Wikipedia, accessed February 22, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampur_Power_Station

28.  Sri Lanka Starts Construction Of $700M Port Project - Marine Link, accessed February 22, 2026, https://www.marinelink.com/news/sri-lanka-starts-construction-m-port-500810

29.  India's takeover of the Trincomalee Oil Tank Farm will help build energy interdependence with Sri Lanka | Lowy Institute, accessed February 22, 2026, https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/india-s-takeover-trincomalee-oil-tank-farm-will-help-build-energy-interdependence

30.  Dredging Corporation of India to commence dredging operations in North East: Sonowal, accessed February 22, 2026, https://dredgewire.com/dredging-corporation-of-india-to-commence-dredging-operations-in-north-east-sonowal/

31.  Knowledge Marine vs Dredging Corporation: Who Leads India's dredging sector?, accessed February 22, 2026, https://dredgewire.com/knowledge-marine-vs-dredging-corporation-who-leads-indias-dredging-sector/

32.  International Seaport Dredging Private Limited - Project Exports, accessed February 22, 2026, https://projectexports.com/co-international-seaport-dredging-private-limited/150/index.html

33.  Hidden hand behind opposition to Adani wind power project in Sri ..., accessed February 22, 2026, https://www.southasiamonitor.org/spotlight/hidden-hand-behind-opposition-adani-wind-power-project-sri-lanka

34.  Sri Lanka: Sampur Solar PV Power Project Financing - AIIB, accessed February 22, 2026, https://www.aiib.org/en/projects/details/2025/proposed/sri-lanka-sampur-solar-pv-power-project-financing.html

35.  The Fishing Wars: Maritime Border Conflicts between Sri Lanka and India - Michigan Journal of International Law, accessed February 22, 2026, https://www.mjilonline.org/the-fishing-wars-maritime-border-conflicts-between-sri-lanka-and-india/

36.  International Environmental Responsibility : a case for Sri Lanka and India - the United Nations, accessed February 22, 2026, https://www.un.org/depts/los/nippon/unnff_programme_home/fellows_pages/fellows_papers/mendis_0607_srilanka_PPT.pdf

37.  Vision Versus Reality: The Promise of India-Sri Lanka Connectivity - Stimson Center, accessed February 22, 2026, https://www.stimson.org/2024/vision-versus-reality-the-promise-of-india-sri-lanka-connectivity/

38.  Strengthening India- Sri Lanka Ties - Drishti IAS, accessed February 22, 2026, https://www.drishtiias.com/daily-updates/daily-news-editorials/strengthening-india-sri-lanka-ties

z

Comments

Post a Comment

We would love to hear your thoughts! Whether you have feedback, questions, or ideas related to our initiatives, please feel free to share them in the comment section below. Your input helps us grow and serve our community better. Join the conversation and let your voice be heard!- ABC Tamil Oli (ECOSOC)