Search

An unintended consequence of the sanctions on the Russian Federation, Iran, and Venezuela is the creation of a ‘dark fleet’ of oil tankers that do not comply with the International Maritime Organization (IMO) regulations on the safety of navigation and protection of the marine environment. These tankers are environmental disasters waiting to happen and present a serious threat to the marine environment of coastal States. In this article, we examine these issues and explore the options that coastal States can take under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC) to protect their marine and coastal environment from the tankers in the dark fleet. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractThis article explores one of the arguably most innovative ideas in the new legal instrument under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) concerning biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction (the BBNJ Agreement): the establishment of a digital open-access platform (the “clearing-house mechanism”) to provide and share information. While the BBNJ’s clearing-house mechanism may not be a new tool, it is unique in its attitude towards traditional knowledge associated with marine genetic resources held by Indigenous Peoples and local communities, in the sense that it might allow for the exclusion of such knowledge from the mechanism. This article sheds light on this exclusion and examines the right of Indigenous Peoples and local communities to protect their knowledge vis-à-vis the treaty’s digital platform—the clearing-house mechanism. In doing so, the article suggests a development of what might be a new “digital right” in the emerging discourse of “digital human rights”—the right not to have a “digital presence.” The article argues that the proposed new right fits with the current scholarship on digital human rights, and specifically with “second generation rights,” in terms of its justifications. This framework should focus not only on private companies in the field of technology, but also on states’ initiatives, as was recognized in the BBNJ. This analysis also fits with the general discourse on Indigenous Peoples’ rights and contribute to further develop this subject-field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractTo combat the adverse effects of climate-change-driven sea-level rise, an increasing number of states have started preserving baselines. In this context, preservation means making baselines permanent despite changes to the coastline resulting from sea-level rise. In 2023, the International Law Commission’s Study Group on Sea-level rise in relation to international law released its Additional Paper on the impact of sea-level rise on the law of the sea. The Additional Paper focused on the states’ views concerning the possibility of preserving baselines irrespective of coastal changes caused by sea-level rise. However, the Additional Paper did not include a convincing methodological framing of the question of baseline preservation. This article frames this question as one of custom formation or treaty interpretation, arguing that neither framing would allow one to conclude that positive international law sanctions the preservation of baselines, but that there are viable solutions de lege ferenda to achieve it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the global community intensifies efforts to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions, active carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is being planned alongside emission reductions. The open ocean, which already absorbs a substantial portion of anthropogenic carbon dioxide, is increasingly seen as a promising site for various types of marine CDR (mCDR). All of these approaches are in the preliminary stages of development, and many questions remain with regard to their assessment and governance. This paper discusses the potential role of the newly established Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement) in assessing and governing mCDR. A step-by-step mapping of the various stages of the BBNJ environmental impact assessment process shows that the new Clearing House Mechanism (CHM) could facilitate knowledge pluralism and contribute to the holistic assessment of mCDR proposals. The paper concludes by identifying challenges in operationalizing the CHM and putting forward recommendations to strengthen its capacity for fostering knowledge pluralism in decision-making on mCDR research and implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractFacing the Anthropocene, the ocean legal order encounters hurdles to address rapid, uncertain and unprecedented changes. This study assesses the capacity of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) to respond adeptly to complex challenges. Examining the social framework of UNCLOS spanning four decades, this study shows that ocean governance is characterized by a polycentric and dynamic institutional framework. While states are central to this social framework, other structural regulatory forces have enabled and conditioned the evolution of ocean governance. Facing the Anthropocene, this social framework has contributed to UNCLOS’ adaptation, yet not enough to break the liberal pattern generated by its foundational principles or to shift away from a state-centred approach to ocean governance. Through this analysis, the study enriches the current dialogue on the adaptive potential of international legal instruments in addressing complex global challenges amidst the Anthropocene. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This commentary examines a proposal, currently supported primarily by the European Union, to establish an Intergovernmental Panel on Ocean Sustainability (IPOS). It contextualises this proposal by explaining the broader perception of a set of problems with international ocean governance. While emphasising that the IPOS is a good idea, the commentary highlights that its lack of attention to reform of the legal and institutional architecture through which ocean governance is delivered is a potential problem. One way to address this would be to complement IPOS’ orientation towards unifying scientific knowledge by empowering an attached governance body to coordinate how the scientific advice tendered by the IPOS is implemented, or to design an alternative body. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent main global scientific assessments underscore the alarming deteriorating state of the marine environment. Following an overview of pressures and threats, which are widespread and severe or serious, and relevant policy outcomes, this article evaluates the effectiveness of the international legal regime in addressing these pressures and threats, highlighting implementation, compliance, and enforcement challenges. Some recent developments to address crimes against the environment will be highlighted, in particular initiatives to develop and define a crime of ecocide at international and national levels. Based on the existing definitions of ecocide, the article analyses whether ecocide could be applied in a marine context, with particular attention given to thresholds and the nature of the act. It then considers the potential application in a marine context of some of the components of the definitions of ecocide, with bottom trawling selected for a deeper analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While it is universally accepted that the advisory opinions rendered by the International Court of Justice (ICJ or Court) are not binding as such, scholarly discourse continues to ponder upon whether these opinions can confer any definitive legal effects. The scope of the legal implications stemming from such opinions is considerably broad, encompassing statements of solely evidentiary significance, determinations demanding due consideration, through to authoritative 'givens' that are beyond contestation. Examples elucidating these diverse interpretations permeate both academic literature and international practice with the most recent example being the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) Special Chamber's Mauritius/Maldives Judgment, wherein the findings presented in the Chagos Advisory Opinion were treated as authoritative pronouncements of international law with opposable legal effects. This article posits a departure from the mainstream standpoint, contending that while the ICJ's advisory determinations are non-binding, they are capable of being authoritatively definitive in declaring what international law is in a specific context. The article also suggests that the authority vested in a judicial pronouncement, determining the content of international law, may go beyond its bindingness contingent upon the stature of the authoring entity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On 21 May 2024, the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) delivered a ground-breaking and authoritative advisory opinion on States' obligations under Part XII of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC). After confirming its jurisdiction over the request, ITLOS ruled that greenhouse gas emissions cause 'deleterious effects on the marine environment' and therefore constitute pollution under the LOSC. ITLOS explained the relationship between obligations under the LOSC and climate law and clarified the due diligence nature of the LOSC obligations to prevent marine pollution and to protect the marine environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In a previous publication in IJMCL , the author discussed a case of interference by environmental activists with the operations of a deep sea mining contractor in May 2021. While concluding that the actions could be considered unlawful, one of the most important findings was that adequate enforcement and effective remedies are mostly lacking. In November 2023, protest actions by Greenpeace from a Dutch-flagged vessel against deep sea mining activities resulted in media attention and a response by the International Seabed Authority (ISA), and led to a decision by an Amsterdam district court. This article examines the legal issues arising from both the ISA response and the Dutch court decision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For a long time, the full impacts of armed conflicts on the marine environment have been ill-defined and largely neglected. World War I and II-era remnants of war at sea pose increasing threats to human and marine life, particularly over the coming decade, as they contaminate, pollute, or detonate toxic and hazardous substances into coastal and benthic ecosystems. The International Law Commission's Principles for Protection of the Environment in Relation to Armed Conflicts aim to enhance protections for the marine environment before, during, and after conflict. In practice, this means navigating an uncoalesced legal regime and relying on established principles of international environmental law – particularly the duty to cooperate and share information. However, considerable knowledge gaps need to be addressed to remedy the vast legacy of war in the ocean, as the majority of remnants of war at sea remain under-assessed, in part, due to financial and technical constraints. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Together with its mineral resources, 'the Area' – comprising the seabed and subsoil beyond the boundaries of national jurisdiction – is designated as the 'common heritage of mankind'. One of the predominant motivations behind the principle of the common heritage of mankind was to ensure fair sharing of the benefits derived from the Area by preventing a first-come first-serve race to the bottom of the ocean, which would mainly entitle developed nations – possessing the necessary expertise, technology and financial means to engage in deep sea mining – to the mineral resources of the deep seabed and would exclude most developing States from these economic opportunities. This important objective ought to be effected through a number of measures, but most of these measures have not yet been implemented by the International Seabed Authority or seem to be undermined by current developments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article addresses the international law of ocean nuclear power plants (ONPPs) with a particular focus on the Arctic. Encompassing norms under the law of the sea, maritime law, environmental law, nuclear energy law and humanitarian law, the article discusses how existing fundamental legal regulations apply to ONPPs in the Arctic. Additionally, the legal role of some relevant institutions, such as the International Atomic Energy Agency, the International Maritime Organization, and the Arctic Council, is considered. While the military nuclearisation of the Arctic has been the subject of much scholarly concern, the civil nuclearisation has not – at least not from an international law perspective. International law provides States with a considerable degree of freedom when it comes to the development and deployment of ONPPs, but there are several challenges and legal gaps, not least regarding special legal regulations for the Arctic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Matters concerning maritime pilotage have only been dealt with in a few individual points in international maritime law, as pilotage services generally are regulated in the respective territorial waters in accordance with national law. However, especially in view of the possible further expansion of use of deep-sea pilots, it seems worthwhile taking a closer look at the obligations and powers under international law to provide pilotage services. This applies in particular to the establishment of compulsory pilotage and its limitation by the freedom of navigation rights under international law in the various maritime zones. Considerable legal ambiguities become apparent in this context. Hence there are arguments in favour of explicitly regulating maritime pilotage by including it in the provisions on maritime services in Chapter V of the Annex to the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This is the latest in a series of annual surveys in this Journal reviewing dispute settlement in the law of the sea, both under Part XV of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and outside the framework of the Convention. The most significant developments during 2023 were the judgments on the merits of a Special Chamber of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) in the Dispute concerning Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary between Mauritius and Maldives in the Indian Ocean (Mauritius/Maldives) case and of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the Question of the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf between Nicaragua and Colombia beyond 200 Nautical Miles from the Nicaraguan Coast (Nicaragua v. Colombia) case; the commencement of two new cases before the ITLOS and the ICJ concerning the seizure and detention of vessels and climate change obligations, respectively; and the findings and recommendations of a panel established by the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation to consider the validity of one of its fisheries conservation and management measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Environmental phenomena shed light on the fiction that inter-state borders constitute on some level, and the limitations of state-based environmental governance. Transboundary watersheds, in particular, flow across borders of different kinds, evincing the interdependence of water bodies, both human and nonhuman. The lack of cross-border comprehensive environmental governance imposes regional forms of inequity and inefficient forms of water protection. In Central America, to address such problems, citizens have created a legal prototype for how transboundary watersheds could be governed as a commons going forward. This endeavour has been led by Salvadorans, concerned as they are by their country's position as a lower co-riparian and their significant interdependence with transboundary water bodies. I argue that, in addition to destabilizing established approaches to environmental governance, the legal prototype opens avenues for forms of earthly politics and multispecies justice by placing the reproduction of life, human and nonhuman, side by side. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rapid advancement of unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs) has presented complex legal challenges in international maritime law. This article explores UUVs' legal status and navigational rights in various maritime zones, analysing legal considerations related to innocent passage, and the potential for port access and sovereign immunity for UUVs. It contends that UUVs should be entitled to sovereign immunity when used for non-commercial government purposes. It also investigates the possibility of potential enforcement actions under the law of the sea against UUVs engaged in unauthorized activities. Additionally, it scrutinizes UUVs' compliance with international standards, addressing security concerns and their role in international law of armed conflict. Subsequently, it touches upon the ongoing debate surrounding lethal autonomous weapons systems to provide a prospective outlook in a cursory manner. The conclusion underscores the necessity of proactive international initiatives to address the legal challenges posed by UUVs and proposes the recognition of UUVs as a distinct vessel category to ensure uniformity and predictability in their deployment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On 27 July 2024, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea declined Luxembourg’s request for provisional measures in the ‘Zheng He’ case. Following two orders of the International Court of Justice, this marked the third consecutive decision in which provisional measures were denied. The question asked in this Note is whether this signals the end of a low threshold for granting provisional measures. Two points of view are possible: either the undertakings given by the respondents are being taken more seriously, or international courts have grown at least somewhat frustrated with the frequent requests for provisional measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Graphic novels have been previously recognized by scholarly research as a valuable conceptual lens for thinking critically about law. Asserting the need for a deeper engagement with the material foundations, ontological beliefs and epistemological grids that lie under the development of international law of the sea, this article delves into the imaginary oceanic universe of Hugo Pratt's classic graphic novel series, Corto Maltese. In conjunction with the comic series, "law and comics" literature, Indigenous studies, and new materialism thinking, the article examines different ontological values related to the material oceanic universe that are incorporated in the graphic narrative, juxtaposing them with beliefs embedded in the Western legal understanding of the ocean systems. Using the graphic novel series as a methodological device, the article thus seeks to revisit some of the law of the sea's fundamental assumptions and ground future discussions towards a material turn of international law of the sea, and not least Western philosophy as a whole. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article "Exam exam on maritime law and law of the sea: Highway to Hell: Coastal fires out of control" deals with a case in which a fire breaks out on a transport ship carrying electric cars. Maritime law and law of the sea questions are addressed, in particular the liability for value replacement and the right of innocent passage in the coastal sea. The companies involved are Motzdo-AG, Wolfo-AG, Gapag-Floyd GmbH, and B-GmbH. It is discussed whether claims for value replacement and salvage claims exist. The proposed solutions are based on German law. [Extracted from the article]

This article critically examines the current benefit-sharing regime on the international seabed (the Area) and the proposed modalities for benefit-sharing. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea contains few and vague rules on this issue. The only obligation is that benefit-sharing should be ‘equitable’ and the interests of developing States must be considered. To determine what may constitute equitable sharing the practice of other law of the sea legal regimes are examined and proposed distribution mechanisms are critically analysed. The article offers a unique perspective by trying to identify the scope of the vague equitable criterion for sharing or distributing benefits, rather than referring to it as a general goal or principle. Doing so, the article offers a practical account for the feasibility of different distribution modalities, which may yield new insights for institutional design to better deal with challenges in this well-researched but still unclear issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article highlights developments at the United Nations International Law Commission on Sea-Level Rise. Topics discussed include potential legal effects of sea level rise on the Law of the Sea, possible legal effects on statehood, exercise of sovereignty, maritime borders and rights to maritime zones, and potential legal effects on the protection of persons in areas of human rights, statelessness, migration, refugees, self-determination, diplomatic protection and consular services.

The legal systems for ocean governance and climate change governance are based on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, respectively. However, due to differences in their negotiation backgrounds, legal scope, goals, and tasks, there is a lack of interaction between the two at the legal system level. The ocean plays a crucial role in regulating the Earth's climate system, yet its value is often underestimated in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The aim of this study is to analyze the effectiveness of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in addressing climate change. Specifically, we will examine the Convention's ability to mitigate and adapt to climate change, and identify areas where it falls short, such as inadequate regulation of sea level rise, ocean acidification, and ocean fertilization. Based on this, proposals for governance paths from the perspective of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea include developing the Agreement relating to the climate change and ocean governance and reinterpreting the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in accordance with the Paris Agreement. The content should be adapted more flexibly to current climate change challenges, and provisions related to sea level rise and maritime boundaries should be reinterpreted to fill legal gaps. In addition, it is important to establish coordinated regulatory rules and framework agreements to address the issues of ocean fertilization and ocean acidification. Finally, to remedy the shortcomings in proving causation, scientific theories and due diligence obligations should be attributed. Through these measures, effective ocean law governance paths that address climate change can be explored. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article considers some recent jurisprudence in maritime boundary delimitation that results in the creation of ‘grey areas’. Such grey areas have generated uncertainty in practice, specifically concerning claims to entitlements and the rights that States may exercise in such areas. The article reviews the two Bay of Bengal cases (International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea 2012 and the Annex VII Tribunal 2014) and two cases before the International Court of Justice (Somalia v. Kenya 2021; Nicaragua v. Colombia 2023), indicating the need for delimitation of maritime areas and legal rights to reflect the ‘physical reality at the time of delimitation’. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The jurisprudence concerning the continental shelf delimitation beyond 200 nautical miles (nm) over the past decade converged on distinguishing delineation from delimitation, which justifies the appropriateness of the judiciary to delimit the continental shelf beyond 200 nm in the absence of the recommendations issued by the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS). Mauritius/Maldives decided by a special chamber of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea departs from the established jurisprudence. By applying a 'significant uncertainty' standard that puts the relationship between entitlement and delimitation in the centre, Mauritius/Maldives reasons against exercising jurisdiction over the delimitation beyond 200 nm without affirmative recommendations of the CLCS. Mauritius/Maldives reflects judicial restraint in contrast with a more proactive approach prevailing in previous jurisprudence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article addresses three key aspects of the importance of gender equality within ocean and maritime law-making: the employment of gender sensitive language in recognising the roles and responsibilities of 'all people' who work and benefit from ocean activities; the low representation of women in male-dominated ocean governance structures; and a human rights approach to gender equality as a critical means of using law to effectively improve working conditions and support systems for women. In the past decades, gender equality in maritime and ocean affairs has been evolving in international legal instruments in terms of progress in the inclusion of gender sensitive language and specific provisions. Reviews of these legal instruments demonstrate the need to overcome gender blindness and promote equality in maritime and ocean domains. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article analyzes ECS maritime disputes through two lenses: as a globally comparable case study mediated through LOS and as a distinct regional case that differs in several respects from disputes outside East Asia. This study focuses on the Senkaku/Diaoyu island dispute but also examines broader EEZ and ADIZ disputes between China, Japan, and South Korea and the Ieodo dispute between China and South Korea. It finds that global dynamics are applicable to the ECS disputes, as countries depend on LOS rules even while attempting to interpret them for unilateral advantage whenever possible, and parties avoid formal arbitration, when possible, in favor of bilateral agreements. However, regional factors impact these dynamics. The sudden and sometimes violent transition from the Sino-Centric tributary system to the Westphalian system has undermined the legitimacy of LOS and western international law regionally. Finally, the presence of China as a party to almost all ECS disputes limits the application of LOS because China's position as a near-peer competitor with the US gives it additional options to unilaterally impose its will. Unlike relatively weaker parties to these disputes, China may be less concerned about flouting LOS that it does not see as necessary for protecting its maritime claims. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The BBNJ Agreement, adopted on June 19, 2023, is considered to be the third implementation agreement of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea after the 1994 Part XI Implementation Agreement and the 1995 High Seas Fisheries Agreement. Of the four themes of the BBNJ Agreement, namely marine genetic resources, area-based management measures, environmental impact assessment, and capacity building and technology transfer, only the part relating to marine genetic resources is explicitly excluded from the scope of the BBNJ Agreement. There are no explicit exclusions in relation to area-based management measures and environmental impact assessments. Therefore, the sections on area-based management instruments and environmental impact assessments may conflict with fisheries issues in other international fisheries instruments during the implementation of the BBNJ Agreement. Although the BBNJ Agreement has a so-called "not-undermine" provision to ensure that it does not conflict with international fisheries instrument represented by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the 1995 High Seas Fisheries Agreement, and regional fisheries management organizations, it cannot be ruled out that the BBNJ Agreement may conflict with regional fisheries organizations' area-based management measures and environmental impact assessments. However, the potential for conflicts also implies the potential for developmental outcomes if they are harmoniously interpreted and implemented. First of all, the emergence of the BBNJ Agreement as a comprehensive treaty covering the high seas and the Area provides an opportunity to build an integrated mechanism for international fisheries insturments that were previously fragmented by regions and species. In addition, the BBNJ Agreement can establish a cooperation system with existing regional fisheries management organizations in the process of establishing area-based management measures and environmental impact assessment of cumulative fishing activities. In line with this, regional fisheries organizations may evolve in the future to proactively adopt legal framework changes and environmental protection measures that emerge from the implementation of the BBNJ Agreement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the global community intensifies efforts to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions, active carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is being planned alongside emission reductions. The open ocean, which already absorbs a substantial portion of anthropogenic carbon dioxide, is increasingly seen as a promising site for various types of marine CDR (mCDR). All of these approaches are in the preliminary stages of development, and many questions remain with regard to their assessment and governance. This paper discusses the potential role of the newly established Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement) in assessing and governing mCDR. A step-by-step mapping of the various stages of the BBNJ environmental impact assessment process shows that the new Clearing House Mechanism (CHM) could facilitate knowledge pluralism and contribute to the holistic assessment of mCDR proposals. The paper concludes by identifying challenges in operationalizing the CHM and putting forward recommendations to strengthen its capacity for fostering knowledge pluralism in decision-making on mCDR research and implementation.

The recent judgments of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in Nicaragua v. Colombia and of a special chamber of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in Mauritius/Maldives provide significant developments to the legal regime of the continental shelf within the law of the sea, as well as its relationship to the exclusive economic zone. Specifically, the ICJ stated that the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles cannot overlap with the area within 200 nautical miles of another State’s baselines. This decision potentially creates a new constraint line to a coastal State’s entitlement to a continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles. Furthermore, the two decisions blur the distinction between delineation and delimitation of the continental shelf. They hold significant implications for the concept of a ‘single continental shelf’ and raise questions about the necessity of establishing grey areas in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Maritime security is an essential component of national security, and the effective maintenance of China's maritime security urgently needs a complete guarantee of the rule of law. Since the founding of the People's Republic of China in 1949, the construction of domestic law on maritime security has undergone three phases: slow development, formation and refinement. Although the rule of law in the seas has been constantly improved, it has provided essential safeguards for maintaining China's maritime sovereignty, security, and rights and interests. It has facilitated the development of maritime undertakings. However, it still faces problems such as the lack of an explicit constitutional basis, the law of the sea is not an independent departmental law, the absence of the fundamental law of the sea, the lack of operability of marine legislation, and the existence of some gaps in marine laws. Given the problems with the current domestic law on maritime security, it is necessary to make improvements in the following areas: adding marine provisions to the Constitution, formulating the fundamental law of the sea and other marine laws, improving local marine laws, and introducing implementing regulations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The book "International Courts versus Non-Compliance Mechanisms: Comparative Advantages in Strengthening Treaty Implementation" edited by Christina Voigt and Caroline Foster explores the role of international courts and non-compliance mechanisms in enforcing treaty obligations. The editors argue that non-compliance mechanisms (NCMs) offer a more facilitative and proactive approach to promoting compliance compared to traditional punitive measures. The book provides a comprehensive analysis of NCMs in various areas of international law, highlighting their potential to enhance treaty implementation and complement the existing treaty regime. The authors suggest that NCMs, with their soft procedures and participatory nature, can better address the challenges of treaty compliance, especially for states struggling to meet their obligations. [Extracted from the article]

Ever since the International Court of Justice (ICJ) considered the straight baselines established by Norway not to be contrary to international law, state practice has developed in favor of a liberal interpretation of the conventional provisions that tried to formulate a general rule starting from the specificities of this 1951 ICJ decision. In 2022 the ICJ was given the opportunity to revisit this issue. It is argued that the ICJ's restrictive application of the conventional rules, which it moreover stated to form part of customary international law, might well have Arctic connotations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the cultural influences of Northeast Asia, specifically China, Japan, and Korea, on the evolution of the law of the sea and regional ocean policies. Despite the global nature of maritime law, regional practices and cultural norms have played a significant role in shaping legal frameworks and policies. This article aims to help fill a critical gap in the literature by providing a systematic analysis of how these Northeast Asian countries' historical, cultural, and political contexts have influenced their approach to the law of the sea. Through a series of case studies, including examination of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant incident, the article demonstrates the unique contributions of Northeast Asian perspectives to the law of the sea. This analysis not only highlights the distinct legal traditions and practices in this region but also underscores the importance of regional influences in the broader context of international ocean law. A deeper understanding of these cultural influences is essential for effectively addressing contemporary ocean issues in Northeast Asia and beyond. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Under the 1920 Treaty concerning the archipelago of Spitsbergen (Svalbard Treaty), the contracting parties recognize the full and absolute sovereignty of Norway over the archipelago. The sovereignty is to be exercised subject to the stipulations of the Treaty, which include equal rights of the contracting parties to fish and hunt on the territory of Spitsbergen and its territorial waters. Consistent with the developments of the law of the sea, Norway has claimed sovereign rights over the continental shelf and established 200 nautical miles (NM) zones off its coast, including Svalbard. Norway established a 200 NM Fisheries Protection Zone off the coast of Svalbard. Several contracting parties claim that the equal rights under the Svalbard Treaty are applicable in the maritime zones claimed or established after 1920. This is disputed by Norway by referring to the wording of the Treaty, which stipulates that it is applicable within the 12-NM territorial waters. Owners and captains of vessels flagged in other contracting parties have protested and argued that the arrest and prosecution for illegal fishing in the 200-NM zone off Svalbard violated their equal rights of fishing. The Court had not addressed the question of the applicability of the Treaty provisions until 2023. In a civil case before the Supreme Court, a Latvian shipowning company argued that the snow crab regulations on the continental shelf in the Barents Sea were void as they violated the equal rights of contracting parties under the Svalbard Treaty to fish on the continental shelf. The Supreme Court concluded that the treaty provisions were not applicable beyond the 12-NM territorial sea of the archipelago. An attempt by the same company at international litigation through investment arbitration was also unsuccessful. As the dispute issue is settled within the Norwegian legal system, the dispute enters into a new phase. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ted McDorman's scholarship had a focus on Canada/United States law of the sea relations ranging from the Arctic, to fisheries, islands, maritime boundaries, and dispute settlement. Using McDorman's frame of analysis, this article assesses Australian/New Zealand law of the sea relations relating to the Southern Ocean, fisheries, islands, maritime boundaries, marine environmental protection, and dispute settlement. Building on McDorman's Canada/United States scholarship, Australian/New Zealand relations between close maritime neighbors with shared boundaries, culture, economies, and history are assessed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article analyzes the dispute resolution provisions of Part IX of the Agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction. The article also comments on a provision in Part VI (Institutional Arrangements) of the Agreement that allows the Conference of the Parties to request an advisory opinion from the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in some limited circumstances. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission Advisory Opinion, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea confirmed it possessed the jurisdiction to deliver an advisory opinion upon the request of as few as two states. This essay considers what this might mean, as the implications of this jurisdiction are significant, in terms of both the law of the sea generally, and the potential impact for the operation of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. These implications were magnified after the decision in Mauritius-Maldives Maritime Boundary Case (Preliminary Objections) which considered the status of an advisory opinion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Compliance with the International Maritime Organization (IMO) 2020 sulphur oxides (SOx) emissions regulation requires using low sulphur content fuel or an alternative compliance mechanism certified by national administrations. The latter includes installation of an exhaust gas cleaning system (EGCS) to remove SOx prior to emission, which entails the discharge at sea of highly acidic washwater containing harmful substances, resulting in a new form of marine pollution. This article discusses how the certification and use of EGCS are incompatible with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea provisions on the protection and preservation of the marine environment and explores regulatory strategies for IMO to remove the incompatibility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The concept of territoriality does not appear to fit very well with the limits on state power in admiralty. Territoriality refers to land while admiralty concerns itself with the sea. Limitations on state power on land require adaptation and modification to apply at sea. They must overcome the contrast, pervasive in admiralty, between the law applied on land and the law applied on navigable waters. The adaptation of territorial boundaries to the sea turns out to be a complicated process, which invariably involves multiple boundaries even along the same stretch of coastline. Maritime boundaries are largely unmarked on the fluid surface of the sea, generating multiple ambiguities and controversies. These currently have important implications in the waters ranging from the Arctic Ocean to the South China Sea. Territoriality, whether on land or at sea, has two different components. The first refers to and incorporates measurements on the surface of the Earth, such as the baselines on land that determine zones of maritime control at sea. The second uses location with respect to these measurements as a constraint upon open-ended standards, such as multiple-factor balancing tests, which would otherwise apply regardless of the location of the events relevant to a claim or defense. This Essay explores how these two components of territoriality play out when they go from land to sea. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Does the Philippines have a grand strategy? The question is biased in favor of a negative answer. Odds are stacked against detecting a grand strategy in non‐great‐power states. Operationalizing grand strategy as a consistent pattern of behavior reduces bias, but odds are also stacked against observing policy continuities in the Philippines. Increasing the level of analysis, emphasizing outcomes over intentions, and enlarging the time scale can help. Applying these analytical techniques, I argue that a Philippine grand strategy is evident in continuities in the country's foreign and security policies on the South China Sea from 1995 to 2022 under the successive administrations of Ramos, Estrada, Arroyo, Aquino III, and Duterte. The grand strategy has five component policies: (1) bilateral diplomacy with China, (2) multilateral diplomacy through the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), (3) grounding in the law of the sea, (4) maintaining the alliance with the US, and (5) modernizing the military. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Araucaria is the property of Araucaria-Revista Iberoamericana de Filosofia, Politica y Humanidades and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Catalana de Dret Ambiental is the property of Universitat Rovira I Virgili and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Through symptomatic reading, we analyze the visible and the invisible – the explicit and the implicit – in the works of Filipino international legal scholar Merlin Magallona (1934–2022). We argue that Magallona's international legal thought was rooted in Marxist theory and practice and honed through the mode of production debates in the Philippine communist movement during the 1960s. Specifically, he developed a critique of the neocolonial division of labour and produced a materialist reading of international legal doctrines through "Postcolonial Self-Determination" – a synthesis of the antinomy of positivism and self-determination. In practice, his Third World Marxism led him to support the NIEO and resist UNCLOS through constitutional litigation based on the imperialist Treaty of Paris of 1898. Magallona's critique and praxis suggest new forms of resistance to the new imperialisms and underscore the imperative of a practice turn in Marxist international legal theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The 2022 Nord Stream sabotage put a spotlight on the vulnerability of submarine infrastructure like cables and pipelines, emphasising the need for protection against intentional damage. This work reviews and identifies gaps in the international legal frameworks governing the security of critical undersea infrastructure in times of peace and war, proposing solutions to address these gaps. First, it discusses UNCLOS provisions relevant in times of peace, the insufficiency of existing legal design and state practice, and the potential application of the law of piracy. In wartime scenarios, like Russia's invasion of Ukraine, states must resort to international humanitarian law. Eventually, neutral states like Germany may be able to resort to state responsibility, to political sanctions or even to the use of force. This work concludes by remarking on the convergence of different international law disciplines to effectively tackle complex security challenges to submarine cables and pipelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Palestine currently holds contractual relations with 167 States under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. UNCLOS's dispute settlement mechanisms might vary depending on the process States have opted for. In order to pick a preferred mechanism, a State Party should deposit a declaration with the UN Secretary-General. As it did not file any such declaration, Palestine is deemed to have accepted arbitration by default. However, Palestine can still deposit a declaration to choose other procedures and therefore open the possibility to resort to the International Court of Justice, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, or a special arbitration. Yet, the neighboring States have different approaches. While Egypt has cast opposition to arbitration regarding boundary delimitation, Israel is not a Party to UNCLOS and does not recognize its settlement mechanisms. How can disputes be resolved? Would conciliation work? What are exit channels? This article answers such questions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]