The election of Professor Dr. Bimal N. Patel as a Judge of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) is more than a personal distinction or a routine diplomatic achievement. It represents India’s growing ability to shape the international maritime order through legal expertise rather than military or economic coercion. At a time when the world’s oceans are becoming the principal arena of geopolitical competition, influence is no longer exercised solely by naval fleets and maritime infrastructure.
Increasingly, it is also determined by those who interpret the legal framework governing the oceans. Patel’s election therefore marks an important moment in India’s emergence as a normative maritime power. The significance of the appointment lies not in the assumption that an Indian judge will advance India’s national interests from the bench. Judges of ITLOS function independently and are bound by international judicial ethics rather than national instructions. The real strategic value lies elsewhere. Representation within one of the world’s most influential international judicial institutions enhances India’s visibility as a country capable of contributing to the development of international law.
It reflects international confidence in Indian legal scholarship and reinforces India’s credentials as a responsible stakeholder committed to the rules-based maritime order established under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). For decades, maritime power has been measured primarily in terms of naval strength, commercial shipping capacity and control over strategic sea lanes.
However, the 21st century has witnessed the emergence of law as an equally important instrument of maritime influence. Questions relating to maritime boundaries, freedom of navigation, fisheries management, deep seabed mining, marine environmental protection, underwater infrastructure and the governance of emerging technologies increasingly depend upon legal interpretation. Courts and tribunals have become central institutions in clarifying these norms, making legal expertise an increasingly valuable component of statecraft. India’s maritime ambitions have expanded considerably over the past decade.
The country’s SAGAR vision, its Indo-Pacific strategy, growing engagement with island states, investments in the Blue Economy, anti-piracy operations and increasing participation in regional maritime security initiatives all reflect an aspiration to become a leading maritime power. Yet these strategic initiatives ultimately operate within the legal architecture of UNCLOS. The ability to contribute to the interpretation and evolution of that legal framework therefore strengthens India’s broader maritime strategy in ways that extend beyond traditional diplomacy. Patel’s election also reflects an important evolution in India’s foreign policy.
New Delhi has consistently advocated reform of global governance institutions while simultaneously seeking greater representation within them. Success in elections to international judicial bodies demonstrates that India’s diplomatic outreach enjoys broad international credibility across regional groupings. Such victories cannot be secured solely through political influence; they require confidence in the professional competence and international standing of the candidate.
In this respect, Patel’s election serves as recognition of India’s growing intellectual and institutional capital in the field of international law. The appointment also enhances India’s maritime soft power. Joseph Nye’s conception of soft power traditionally emphasised culture, political values and foreign policy. Today, legal expertise has emerged as another important source of attraction and influence. States that contribute respected jurists, arbitrators and legal scholars to international institutions acquire what may be described as normative authority.
They participate in shaping the principles, precedents and jurisprudence that guide international behaviour. This form of influence is subtle yet enduring because it is exercised through ideas, institutions and legitimacy rather than coercion. For India, this is particularly relevant in the Indo-Pacific, where strategic competition increasingly intersects with legal contestation. Maritime disputes in the South China Sea, debates over exclusive economic zones, questions surrounding marine biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction, and negotiations concerning seabed resources all underscore the centrality of international law in managing geopolitical rivalry.
While ITLOS does not resolve every maritime dispute, its decisions and advisory opinions contribute significantly to the interpretation of UNCLOS and influence the conduct of states. There is also an important domestic dimension to this achievement. India’s maritime discourse has traditionally been dominated by naval strategy and security studies, while comparatively less attention has been devoted to international maritime law. Patel’s election highlights the importance of investing in legal scholarship, maritime research, specialised education and institutional expertise.
As India’s economic and strategic interests become increasingly ocean-centric, developing a strong ecosystem of maritime legal professionals will be essential for protecting national interests in future negotiations and dispute resolution mechanisms. More broadly, the election illustrates how international influence is becoming multidimensional. Military capability remains essential, but it is no longer sufficient. Countries that aspire to shape the international order must also contribute to the institutions that govern it.
Judicial appointments, leadership positions in international organisations and participation in norm-making processes have become important indicators of global standing. They enhance a country’s credibility, expand its diplomatic networks and strengthen its ability to shape international conversations over the long term. Patel’s election should therefore be viewed as a strategic investment in India’s long-term maritime influence rather than merely a diplomatic success. It signals that India is increasingly recognised not only as a major maritime state but also as a contributor to the legal and institutional architecture governing the global commons.
(THE WRITER, CO-AUTHOR OF CREATIVITY AND CRITICAL PEDAGOGY IN EDUCATION, WRITES ON EDUCATION, INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, AND PUBLIC POLICY.)