The Maritime Depths of Ex Aequo et Bono: Towards an Equitable Transcendence of the Terracentric Juridical Reproduction of the Falklands/Malvinas Dispute

Abstract Differing from most territorial contests, the Falklands/Malvinas dispute is entangled in a clash of ideologies embedded in maritime and legal imaginations. From the standpoint of international law, there is no definitive answer, as conventional legal frameworks – grounded in terrestrial notions of sovereignty – find themselves ill-equipped to resolve the maritime complexities of this dispute. The rival territorial integrity and self-determination arguments respectively lodged by Argentina and the UK reveals the struggle between two nations seeking to impose their own international legal interpretation. Against these conflicting claims, this article explores the potential application of the equitable principle of ex aequo et bono as a means of transcending entrenched geopolitical binaries. By focusing on the broader implications of the law of the sea, and its emphasis on the interrelation of maritime and terrestrial space, this article reimagines sovereignty in relation to the Falklands/Malvinas not as a fixed territorial possession, but as a dynamic relational process. The use of equity, as opposed to rigid legal entitlements, provides space to reframe the dispute, allowing both Argentina and the UK to move beyond territorial impasses. In doing so, it not merely addresses legal rights, but additionally considers broader geographical, ecological, and human dimensions, fostering a cooperative framework through the principles of equity to transcend entrenched geopolitical divides and prioritise collective stewardship of the region’s ecological and resource-based future.