Vice Admiral Issah Adam Yakubu (Rtd), immediate past Chief of the Naval Staff of Ghana, has strongly endorsed the government of Ghana’s decision to submit the long-standing maritime boundary dispute with Togo to international arbitration.
He said the move for the international arbitration under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) was “timely, necessary, and legally sound.”
Vice Admiral Yakubu (Rtd), who is also a maritime strategist, Founder and Chair of the Gulf of Guinea Maritime Institute (GOGMI), gave the endorsement in an article copied to the Ghana News Agency (GNA).
The retired navy chief outlined the historical, legal and strategic dimensions of the dispute, arguing that eight years of sustained bilateral negotiations had failed to yield a binding agreement, thereby making arbitration the most viable pathway to a conclusive and peaceful settlement.
He noted that although the maritime boundary question between Ghana and Togo has historical roots dating back decades, formal negotiations intensified in 2018 following tensions triggered by offshore exploration activities.
According to him, despite the establishment of a Joint Boundary Delimitation Committee, multiple technical meetings, ministerial engagements, and even presidential-level discussions, the two countries were unable to finalise an agreement. Technical understandings reached at the committee level were reportedly overturned at higher political levels, prolonging the deadlock.
He explained that the turning point came after interventions by Togolese authorities in late 2017 and early 2018 halted Ghanaian seismic survey operations in waters claimed by both sides, bringing the dormant dispute into the open.
Touching on the legal framework under UNCLOS, he emphasised that Ghana’s recourse to arbitration was fully grounded in international law, stating that under UNCLOS, coastal states with overlapping maritime claims were required to negotiate in good faith, and that where negotiations fail, compulsory dispute settlement mechanisms, including arbitration, might be invoked.
He explained that international tribunals typically apply a structured three-stage methodology in delimiting maritime boundaries, which involves drawing a provisional equidistance (median) line, assessing relevant circumstances that might warrant adjustment, and conducting a proportionality test to ensure equitable results.
The past naval chief referenced the 2017 Ghana–Côte d’Ivoire maritime arbitration as precedent, where a tribunal largely adopted an equidistance line, reinforcing Ghana’s confidence in legal resolution mechanisms.
He highlighted the stark disparity in coastline lengths, with Ghana’s approximately 539 km compared to Togo’s 56 km, as a major geographic factor influencing the dispute.
According to him, Togo’s relatively short and concave coastline might produce what international law recognises as a “coastal concavity” challenge, potentially justifying arguments for equitable adjustment.
Vice Admiral Yakubu underscored the high economic stakes, as the disputed area lies within the petroleum-rich Gulf of Guinea, adding that the uncertainty has stalled fishing and hydrocarbon exploration activities in the contested zone, resulting in lost economic opportunities for both countries.
He emphasised that the absence of a clearly agreed maritime boundary has led to the suspension of oil exploration and fishing activities in the disputed zone, periodic maritime incidents and naval tensions, and diplomatic strain and uncertainty affecting investment and long-term planning.
He explained that Ghana’s position has consistently favoured an equidistance-based median line consistent with established jurisprudence, while Togo has sought adjustments to account for its shorter coastline and geographic constraints.
He warned that prolonged ambiguity risks exploitation by third parties and undermines effective maritime governance in the Gulf of Guinea.
Vice Admiral Yakubu expressed confidence that arbitration under UNCLOS Annex VII would produce a binding and equitable outcome, stressing the importance of both Ghana and Togo maintaining restraint during proceedings and continuing interim confidence-building measures, including coordinated patrols and cooperative arrangements.
He added that compliance with the tribunal’s eventual ruling would demonstrate commitment to a rule-based international order and strengthen maritime stability in West Africa.
“In choosing law over prolonged stalemate, Ghana and Togo are affirming that even complex maritime disputes can be resolved peacefully within the framework of international law,” he stated.