18/02/2026
⚠️Important context offered by Douglas Petterson in a response to the quoted article⤵️
Dear Editor,
It was disappointing to read last Saturday’s Local News headline “Foreign landowners have no ownership over adjacent marine areas” followed by the opening sentence of the article which stated, “The newly enacted Oceans Act confirms that Vanuatu’s seas and oceans cannot be privately owned by foreigners or expatriates.”
This seriously distorts both the purpose and the wording of the Oceans Act No. 25 which came into law one month ago on 9 January 2026. Both the headline and the opening sentence are misleading and unnecessarily inflammatory, so recklessly written in fact that they quickly provoked some knee jerk, racist comments on social media such as, “To all foreigners and expatriates in Vanuatu, all sea coastlines in Vanuatu are owned by indigenous landowners, not you. Keep that in your brain. Your own coastline in your own country not Vanuatu.”
In the “Interpretation” introducing the purpose of this Act there is not one mention of the words “foreigner” or “expatriate” — not one.
In fact, nowhere in this Act do the words “foreigner” or “expatriate” even appear.
In Part 6 of the Act that refers to “Offences and Penalties” the term used is “A person” not “A foreigner” and not “An expatriate.”
So, it would be logical for your readers to ask themselves what was the purpose of such a misleading headline and misplaced emphasis on “foreigners and expatriates” in this article?
The legislation states that this is “An act to provide for a sustainable management of the ocean’s space of Vanuatu through the adoption of a comprehensive Vanuatu Spatial Plan, and for related matters.”
In simple terms, the legislation was designed to define Vanuatu’s coastal zones extending out from the foreshore, create regulations for using this area of the sea, decide how it is to be managed, and by whom.
What is defined in the Act as a “Jurisdictional area” means:
1️⃣ offshore jurisdiction, which is 6 nautical miles to 200 nautical miles from shore; and
2️⃣ inshore and intermediate jurisdiction, which is from edge of the reef plus 100 meters to 6 nautical miles from shore; and
3️⃣ inshore and coastal jurisdiction, which is from the high-water mark to the edge of the reef plus 100 meters.
The definition in the Act of “the ocean space” mean:
1️⃣ the ocean space of Vanuatu from the mean high-water mark to 200 nautical miles; and
2️⃣ it comprises the archipelagic waters, territorial sea, the exclusive economic zone, the continental shelf and the extended continental shelf.
In other words, nothing to do with foreigners or expatriates (unless of course they happen to be applying as “A person” wishing to use any of these sea zones).
The Acting Director of Oceans Tony Tevi was quoted as saying “foreign landowners do not automatically have rights over adjacent sea areas.”
Firstly, there is no such entity in Vanuatu as a “foreign landowner” since foreigners cannot own land here.
Secondly, indigenous ni-Vanuatu also do not “automatically have rights over adjacent sea areas” unless they happen to be the legally recognised or declared customary landowner of an area in question.
And even where this is the case, there are often serious land disputes within families and communities, between those who are the legal landowners and those who refuse to accept someone else’s customary land rights.
Thirdly, there would surely need to have been repeated recorded incidents of “foreigners or expatriates” breaching Vanuatu’s planning and foreshore development laws to justify the tone and emphasis of this article. Has that been shown to be the case?
Did your journalist go to trouble of finding out how many penalties or “stop work” notices have been issued by our authorities for foreshore breaches, and how many of them were issued to “foreigners and expatriates.”
Those of us who have developed land and sold land titles in Vanuatu for decades know full well that Vanuatu’s seas and oceans “cannot be privately owned by foreigners or expatriates” — or by any other individual.
The Foreshore Development Act and the Physical Planning Act set out very clearly what any lessee or applicant must do, and provide, if they wish to develop beyond the Mean High Water Mark (MHWM).
This includes obtaining a landowner’s consent, which admittedly is not always easy because of land disputes or because no customary ownership declaration has yet been made, or is under appeal.
90% of Vanuatu’s land is not registered at all meaning it belongs outright to the indigenous population, and the vast majority of registered land lease titles belong to indigenous ni-Vanuatu, and this percentage has been increasing every year.
This is logical and reflects the fact that indigenous ni-Vanuatu make up about 98% of Vanuatu’s population.
So, all laws — including this one — need to recognise this fact and should be drafted accordingly.
Surely after nearly 50 years of Independence, we should be past such simplistic, shallow statements and analysis as was seen in this article?
I have no idea if the journalist who wrote this article is from Efate or if he is “Man Kam” from an outer island to Efate.
If it is the latter, he would have no more rights on Efate land — or sea — that any foreigner. Whatever his circumstances, an article like this only serves to foment needless antagonism between different groups of the population, most of whom have not, and will not, ever read this Act.
Vanuatu has faced an uphill struggle since Independence to attract foreign investment, especially significant, large scale and long-term foreign investment.
This was one of the reasons the seemingly easy option of selling passports was initiated which, unfortunately, because of how it was mismanaged and allowed to get out of control, has led instead to considerable damage to the country’s international standing, the cancellation of visa or travel privileges to certain parts of the world, and a general loss of sovereign reputation.
We tout ourselves primarily as a tourist destination, and yet the three biggest tourism properties in the country were all originally built 40 to 50 years ago, reflecting the genuine difficulty in convincing investors of scale that Vanuatu is worth the risk and long-term gamble.
Fortunately for the country, the locally based and naturalised citizens have continued to invest in the growth of Vanuatu, in tourism, agriculture, and land development.
Indeed, nearly every land subdivision has been developed by citizens — Bukura, Pangona, Bladiniere Estate, Dream Cove, Paradise Cove, Angelfish Bay, Angelfish Gardens, Bellevue Estate, Bellevue Park, Beverly Hills, Havannah, among others.
These developments have ensured that buyers receive properly registered land titles serviced with utilities, a key element, not just for personal security, but also vital for stable economic growth and commercial bank confidence.
We all — indigenous, foreign and naturalised citizens — suffer the effects of Vanuatu’s many challenges. Some are natural, like cyclones and earthquakes, over which we have no control, and for which no one can be blamed.
However, many of our problems are “man-made” of our own making — corruption, unstable governments, budget mismanagement, poorly maintained infrastructure, lack of planning, land disputes (that often interfere with a lessee’s legitimate use of their land) bureaucratic lethargy and regulatory obstacles to investment.
The public should have a reasonable expectation to believe what is reported in the only national newspaper in the country is balanced and accurate.
Anything that could potentially divide us further, especially if it is deliberate and unwarranted, is surely unwelcome and should be avoided, even condemned.
Sincerely,
Douglas Patterson,
Principal — Island Property,
Real Estate Agency & Developer
Naturalised Vanuatu Citizen
The newly enacted Oceans Act confirms that Vanuatu’s seas and oceans cannot be privately owned by foreigners or expatriates. While land may be legally purchased, ownership does not extend to surrounding marine areas.
READ MORE: https://www.dailypost.vu/news/foreign-landowners-have-no-ownership-over-adjacent-marine-areas/article_bf5b0cdd-408f-519c-ae14-e1a727dd0db4.html
