{"id":249393,"date":"2026-10-15T19:45:42","date_gmt":"2026-10-15T14:15:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/?p=249393"},"modified":"2026-10-15T19:45:42","modified_gmt":"2026-10-15T14:15:42","slug":"katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\/","title":{"rendered":"Katchatheevu: From Ownership To Maritime Boundaries"},"content":{"rendered":"

By\u00a0P M Amza<\/a>\u00a0\u2013<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"

P M Amza<\/p><\/div>\n

The long-running Indian political and legal controversy over Katchatheevu<\/a><\/span> took an important turn in New Delhi on 6 October 2026. While hearing petitions concerning the constitutional validity, from the Indian perspective, of the arrangements surrounding the 1974 and 1976 India-Sri Lanka maritime agreements, a two-judge Bench of the Supreme Court of India made observations that deserve careful attention in Sri Lanka.<\/p>\n

The Bench, comprising Justices Sanjay Kumar and Sanjeev Sachdeva, orally observed that Tamil Nadu fishermen should be sensitised against crossing the maritime boundary into Sri Lankan territorial waters. Attorney General R. Venkataramani, appearing for the Union Government, reportedly explained that fishermen had been told not to enter Sri Lankan waters but continued to do so, referring also to depletion of fish resources on the Tamil Nadu side.[1]<\/p>\n

The Court has not delivered a final judgment on the constitutional challenge. The matter is to be considered further in February 2027.[2]<\/p>\n

That qualification is important. But equally important, particularly from Sri Lanka\u2019s perspective, is another distinction.<\/p>\n

Settled for Sri Lanka, constitutionally contested within India<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

For Sri Lanka, the status of Katchatheevu and the maritime boundary is not an unresolved bilateral issue.<\/p>\n

The Agreement between Sri Lanka and India on the Boundary in Historic Waters between the Two Countries and Related Matters<\/i> was concluded in June 1974 and entered into force the following month.[3] It established the maritime boundary and placed Katchatheevu on the Sri Lankan side.<\/p>\n

The agreement provides that each country shall have sovereignty and exclusive jurisdiction and control over the waters, islands, continental shelf and subsoil falling on its side of the boundary.[4]<\/p>\n

The maritime delimitation was extended in 1976 through agreements relating to the Gulf of Mannar and the Bay of Bengal.[5] These arrangements have governed maritime relations between the two States for five decades.<\/p>\n

From Sri Lanka\u2019s standpoint, therefore, there is no outstanding bilateral sovereignty question over Katchatheevu.<\/p>\n

What remains unresolved is a domestic constitutional question within India.<\/p>\n

The petitioners contend that, if Katchatheevu constituted Indian territory, its transfer required an amendment to the Indian Constitution. During the latest proceedings, Senior Advocate P. Wilson reportedly argued that Schedule I of the Constitution should have been amended.[6]<\/p>\n

This distinction is fundamental: a matter concluded through bilateral agreements between two sovereign States continues to be constitutionally contested within one of those States.<\/p>\n

The existence of domestic litigation in India should therefore not be confused with the existence and operation of the bilateral treaty framework.<\/p>\n

Indeed, the position expressed by the Indian Union Government before the Supreme Court is particularly relevant. When the Court inquired whether the treaty question was being discussed with Sri Lanka, the Attorney General reportedly indicated that the Government did not wish to reopen it and referred to India\u2019s excellent relationship with Sri Lanka.[7]<\/p>\n

For Colombo, that is an important reaffirmation of continuity.<\/p>\n

Moving from ownership to the real problem<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

The latest proceedings are significant for another reason. They move attention away from the politically emotive question\u2014\u201cWho owns Katchatheevu?\u201d<\/b>\u2014towards the practical question confronting the two countries: why are Indian fishing vessels crossing the established maritime boundary and fishing in Sri Lankan waters?<\/b><\/p>\n

In my earlier writing on Katchatheevu, I argued that the sovereignty question surrounding the island and the continuing fisheries dispute should not be conflated. Whatever political resonance Katchatheevu possesses in Tamil Nadu, its so-called \u201cretrieval\u201d would not by itself resolve the fisheries conflict in the Palk Bay.<\/p>\n

The Supreme Court proceedings reinforce this distinction.<\/p>\n

Katchatheevu has continued to possess considerable political symbolism in Tamil Nadu. Political parties have periodically called for its \u201cretrieval\u201d, while litigation has questioned the constitutional procedure by which the 1974 arrangement was concluded.<\/p>\n

Those are matters for India\u2019s democratic and constitutional institutions.<\/p>\n

For Sri Lanka, however, the relevant interstate framework remains the agreements concluded between the two sovereign Governments.<\/p>\n

What the Court actually said<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

Care is nevertheless necessary in interpreting the proceedings.<\/p>\n

The Supreme Court has not pronounced upon the constitutional arguments before it. Sri Lanka therefore should not portray the 6 October hearing as a final judicial endorsement of the 1974 and 1976 agreements.<\/p>\n

It was not a final verdict.<\/p>\n

But the Court\u2019s observations are nevertheless important.<\/p>\n

Justice Sanjay Kumar reportedly suggested that fishermen should be sensitised \u201cnot to go beyond a particular point\u201d. The Attorney General responded that Indian fishermen had already been told not to enter Sri Lankan territorial waters but nevertheless continued to venture there.[8]<\/p>\n

This exchange acknowledges something sometimes obscured by the political controversy: there is a maritime boundary, and crossing it has legal consequences.<\/b><\/p>\n

The Attorney General reportedly acknowledged that Indian fishermen entering Sri Lankan waters could face arrest by Sri Lankan authorities.[9]<\/p>\n

The discussion thus shifts towards the actual challenge confronting both countries\u2014the repeated crossing of the maritime boundary for fishing.<\/p>\n

The revealing issue of depleted fish stocks<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

Perhaps the most revealing aspect of the hearing was the Attorney General\u2019s explanation of why Indian fishermen continue crossing into Sri Lankan waters.<\/p>\n

He reportedly referred to depletion of fish availability on the Tamil Nadu side and marine pollution.[10]<\/p>\n

This goes to the heart of the Palk Bay dispute.<\/p>\n

The problem cannot simply be portrayed as fishermen accidentally crossing an invisible line at sea. There is a structural economic and environmental dimension.<\/p>\n

The Palk Bay is a narrow and ecologically sensitive body of water. Intensive mechanised fishing, particularly destructive practices associated with bottom trawling, has placed considerable pressure on marine resources.<\/p>\n

Sri Lanka\u2019s Northern fishermen suffered for decades from restrictions associated with the armed conflict. When they were finally able to return more fully to their traditional livelihoods, they encountered another serious challenge: mechanised Indian trawlers entering waters on which their livelihoods depended.<\/p>\n

There is therefore a human dimension on both sides of the International Maritime Boundary Line.<\/p>\n

Indian fishermen have genuine livelihood concerns. But so do Sri Lankan fishermen. The welfare of one community cannot sustainably be protected at the expense of the other.<\/p>\n

Katchatheevu is not the fishery<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

This is precisely why \u201cretrieving\u201d Katchatheevu cannot be regarded as a solution to the fisheries dispute.<\/p>\n

The island and the fishery are not synonymous.<\/p>\n

Even a hypothetical alteration concerning ownership of a small island would not automatically confer a right to exploit marine resources throughout another State\u2019s territorial waters.<\/p>\n

The fundamental questions are therefore different: Where does fishing take place? What methods are employed? Are fishermen crossing the International Maritime Boundary Line? Are marine resources being exploited sustainably? And are the sovereign rights of the neighbouring State being respected?<\/p>\n

The Supreme Court\u2019s intervention is important because it brings the maritime boundary back to the centre of the discussion.<\/p>\n

Instead of concentrating exclusively on who owns Katchatheevu, the Court has raised the practical issue of preventing fishermen from going beyond the maritime boundary.<\/p>\n

Humanitarian considerations and sovereign rights<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

There is undoubtedly a humanitarian dimension to the recurring arrests of Indian fishermen. Those arrested are breadwinners, and detention creates hardship for their families. India and Sri Lanka have repeatedly used diplomatic channels to facilitate releases, and such humanitarian engagement should continue.<\/p>\n

But humanitarian considerations cannot mean that maritime boundaries cease to have meaning.<\/p>\n

Nor should livelihood difficulties faced by fishermen in Tamil Nadu simply be transferred across the boundary to fishermen in Sri Lanka\u2019s Northern Province.<\/p>\n

A continuing cycle of incursion, arrest, diplomatic intervention, release and renewed incursion is not a sustainable fisheries policy. It manages the consequences without addressing the underlying causes.<\/p>\n

A durable solution requires greater awareness of the International Maritime Boundary Line, effective vessel monitoring, transition away from destructive bottom trawling, alternative livelihood assistance where necessary and continued dialogue between fishermen\u2019s representatives and the two Governments.<\/p>\n

Modern navigation and vessel-monitoring technology should also make repeated inadvertent crossings increasingly avoidable.<\/p>\n

If depletion of fish stocks on the Indian side is indeed one of the principal drivers of incursions, as the Attorney General\u2019s observations appear to acknowledge, then sustainable fisheries management within India must form part of the long-term solution.<\/p>\n

An opportunity for diplomacy<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

The Supreme Court proceedings provide an opportunity for Colombo and New Delhi.<\/p>\n

Sri Lanka should not approach the latest development triumphantly. India is Sri Lanka\u2019s closest neighbour, and this sensitive issue requires cooperation rather than competing nationalism.<\/p>\n

Nor does Sri Lanka need to enter India\u2019s internal constitutional debate over the manner in which the 1974 agreement was concluded. That is for India\u2019s constitutional institutions to determine.<\/p>\n

Sri Lanka\u2019s position can remain straightforward.<\/p>\n

Two sovereign States concluded agreements establishing their maritime boundary. Those agreements entered into force and have governed their maritime relations for more than half a century. From Sri Lanka\u2019s standpoint, the bilateral question was settled.<\/p>\n

The constitutional challenge pending within India does not alter the practical necessity for the existing maritime boundary to be respected unless and until the two sovereign States themselves agree otherwise.<\/p>\n

The Government of India\u2019s indication before its Supreme Court that it does not intend to reopen the treaty issue with Sri Lanka therefore assumes particular diplomatic significance.<\/p>\n

From Katchatheevu to the Palk Bay<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

For more than five decades, Katchatheevu has possessed political symbolism far greater than its physical size. It has figured in elections, legislative resolutions, litigation and political speeches in Tamil Nadu.<\/p>\n

But fishermen on either side of the Palk Strait cannot survive on symbolism. They need sustainable marine resources and a peaceful sea in which to pursue their livelihoods.<\/p>\n

That is why the proceedings of 6 October 2026 may eventually prove more significant than their immediate legal effect suggests.<\/p>\n

The Indian Supreme Court has not decided the constitutional challenge. That question remains before it.<\/p>\n

But from Sri Lanka\u2019s perspective, an equally important reality should not become blurred by India\u2019s domestic litigation: Katchatheevu and the maritime boundary were settled bilaterally in 1974 and further defined through the maritime arrangements of 1976.<\/p>\n

What remains unresolved from Sri Lanka\u2019s standpoint is not the sovereignty of Katchatheevu.<\/p>\n

What remains unresolved is the fisheries problem<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

The latest Supreme Court proceedings provide an opportunity to make that distinction clearer than ever.<\/p>\n

After more than half a century of arguments surrounding a small island, perhaps the conversation should move from \u201cWho owns Katchatheevu?\u201d to the question that matters most to fishermen on both shores:<\/p>\n

How can India and Sri Lanka protect their fishermen while respecting the agreed maritime boundary and preserving the Palk Bay for future generations?<\/p>\n

That is the question diplomacy must now resolve.<\/p>\n

Footnotes<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

1.<\/b> A.K. Selvaraj v. Union of India, Ministry of External Affairs Secretary<\/i>, W.P.(C) No. 561\/2008, proceedings before the Supreme Court of India, 6 October 2026; LiveLaw, \u201cSensitise Indian Fishermen Not To Cross Into Sri Lankan Waters: Supreme Court Tells Centre,\u201d 6 October 2026.<\/p>\n

2.<\/b> Ibid. The matter was adjourned for further consideration in February 2027.<\/p>\n

3.<\/b> Agreement between Sri Lanka and India on the Boundary in Historic Waters between the Two Countries and Related Matters<\/i>, signed at Colombo\/New Delhi on 26\/28 June 1974, United Nations Treaty Series, Vol. 1049, Registration No. 15802; entered into force in July 1974.<\/p>\n

4.<\/b> Ibid., Article 4, concerning sovereignty and exclusive jurisdiction and control over the waters, islands, continental shelf and subsoil falling on each State\u2019s side of the boundary.<\/p>\n

5.<\/b> Agreement between Sri Lanka and India on the Maritime Boundary between the Two Countries in the Gulf of Mannar and the Bay of Bengal and Related Matters<\/i>, 23 March 1976, and related 1976 maritime arrangements.<\/p>\n

6.<\/b> LiveLaw, 6 October 2026; The New Indian Express<\/i>, \u201cSensitise Tamil fishermen against entering Sri Lanka waters, SC tells Centre,\u201d 7 October 2026. Senior Advocate P. Wilson reportedly argued that Schedule I of the Indian Constitution required amendment.<\/p>\n

7.<\/b> LiveLaw, 6 October 2026. Attorney General R. Venkataramani reportedly indicated that the Government did not wish to reopen the treaty question and referred to India\u2019s \u201cexcellent relationship\u201d with Sri Lanka.<\/p>\n

8.<\/b> Ibid. Justice Sanjay Kumar reportedly suggested sensitising fishermen not to go beyond a particular point.<\/p>\n

9.<\/b> Ibid. The Attorney General acknowledged during the proceedings that Indian fishermen entering Sri Lankan territorial waters for fishing could face arrest.<\/p>\n

10.<\/b> Ibid. The Attorney General referred to depletion of fish availability on the Tamil Nadu side and marine pollution in discussing continuing incursions.<\/p>\n

*The author is a former Sri Lankan Ambassador to the European Union, Belgium, T\u00fcrkiye, Ukraine and Saudi Arabia. He also served Sri Lanka\u2019s Deputy High Commissioner in Chennai<\/b><\/em><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

[…]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3023,"featured_media":249394,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-249393","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-colombotelegraph","category-editorial"],"yoast_head":"\nKatchatheevu: From Ownership To Maritime Boundaries - Colombo Telegraph<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Katchatheevu: From Ownership To Maritime Boundaries - Colombo Telegraph\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"[…]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Colombo Telegraph\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-10-15T14:15:42+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/Katchatheevu.jpeg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"700\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"400\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"P M Amza\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"P M Amza\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/index.php\\\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/index.php\\\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"P M Amza\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/a7f5f3aa44272a16b9d94dcbdbb86149\"},\"headline\":\"Katchatheevu: From Ownership To Maritime Boundaries\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-10-15T14:15:42+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/index.php\\\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":2040,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/index.php\\\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/10\\\/Katchatheevu.jpeg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Colombo Telegraph\",\"Opinion\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/index.php\\\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/index.php\\\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/index.php\\\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\\\/\",\"name\":\"Katchatheevu: From Ownership To Maritime Boundaries - Colombo Telegraph\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/index.php\\\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/index.php\\\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/10\\\/Katchatheevu.jpeg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-10-15T14:15:42+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/a7f5f3aa44272a16b9d94dcbdbb86149\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/index.php\\\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/index.php\\\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/index.php\\\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/10\\\/Katchatheevu.jpeg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/10\\\/Katchatheevu.jpeg\",\"width\":700,\"height\":400},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/index.php\\\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Katchatheevu: From Ownership To Maritime Boundaries\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/\",\"name\":\"Colombo Telegraph\",\"description\":\"In journalism truth is a process\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/a7f5f3aa44272a16b9d94dcbdbb86149\",\"name\":\"P M Amza\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/bf95114366c2bf887cbef76601d24c8c3739b33d4085f6c09b3c3861309803c7?s=96&d=identicon&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/bf95114366c2bf887cbef76601d24c8c3739b33d4085f6c09b3c3861309803c7?s=96&d=identicon&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/bf95114366c2bf887cbef76601d24c8c3739b33d4085f6c09b3c3861309803c7?s=96&d=identicon&r=g\",\"caption\":\"P M Amza\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.colombotelegraph.com\\\/index.php\\\/author\\\/pam\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Katchatheevu: From Ownership To Maritime Boundaries - Colombo Telegraph","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Katchatheevu: From Ownership To Maritime Boundaries - Colombo Telegraph","og_description":"[…]","og_url":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\/","og_site_name":"Colombo Telegraph","article_published_time":"2026-10-15T14:15:42+00:00","og_image":[{"width":700,"height":400,"url":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/Katchatheevu.jpeg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"P M Amza","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"P M Amza","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\/"},"author":{"name":"P M Amza","@id":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/#\/schema\/person\/a7f5f3aa44272a16b9d94dcbdbb86149"},"headline":"Katchatheevu: From Ownership To Maritime Boundaries","datePublished":"2026-10-15T14:15:42+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\/"},"wordCount":2040,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/Katchatheevu.jpeg","articleSection":["Colombo Telegraph","Opinion"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\/","url":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\/","name":"Katchatheevu: From Ownership To Maritime Boundaries - Colombo Telegraph","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/Katchatheevu.jpeg","datePublished":"2026-10-15T14:15:42+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/#\/schema\/person\/a7f5f3aa44272a16b9d94dcbdbb86149"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/Katchatheevu.jpeg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/Katchatheevu.jpeg","width":700,"height":400},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/katchatheevu-from-ownership-to-maritime-boundaries\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Katchatheevu: From Ownership To Maritime Boundaries"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/","name":"Colombo Telegraph","description":"In journalism truth is a process","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/#\/schema\/person\/a7f5f3aa44272a16b9d94dcbdbb86149","name":"P M Amza","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/bf95114366c2bf887cbef76601d24c8c3739b33d4085f6c09b3c3861309803c7?s=96&d=identicon&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/bf95114366c2bf887cbef76601d24c8c3739b33d4085f6c09b3c3861309803c7?s=96&d=identicon&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/bf95114366c2bf887cbef76601d24c8c3739b33d4085f6c09b3c3861309803c7?s=96&d=identicon&r=g","caption":"P M Amza"},"url":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/author\/pam\/"}]}},"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/Katchatheevu.jpeg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/249393","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3023"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=249393"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/249393\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":249395,"href":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/249393\/revisions\/249395"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/249394"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=249393"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=249393"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=249393"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}