The Geneva Conference on the Law of the Sea and the Right of Innocent Passage Through the Gulf of Aqaba

1984 ◽  
pp. 1117-1147
Author(s):  
Leo Gross
Keyword(s):  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Gulf Of Aqaba ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Geneva Conference

The Geneva Conference on the Law of the Sea and the Right of Innocent Passage through the Gulf of Aqaba

1959 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 564-594 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leo Gross
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Gulf Of Aqaba ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Geneva Conference ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

Since the United Nations Emergency Force moved in and occupied the heights overlooking the Straits of Tiran, the Gulf of Aqaba has been quiet. Ships, including Israel flag ships, move freely in and out. The right of passage claimed by Israel and other states was discussed in the Security Council in 1954, in the International Law Commission in 1956, in the General Assembly in 1956-57, and again at the Geneva Conference on the Law of the Sea February 24-April 27, 1958, and will be analyzed here. It should be stated at the outset that Israel's boundaries, including the strip at the northern end of the Gulf of Aqaba, are not an issue here. Nor is the Arab claim that a state of war continues to exist pertinent in determining the legal status of the Gulf and the Straits, although it obviously has some bearing on the availability to Israel of the right of “innocent” passage.

A Survey of the Definition of International Straits and the Issue of “Status Mixtus”

1968 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-66
Author(s):  
Mibi B. Moser
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Geneva Convention ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Gulf Of Aqaba ◽  
International Power ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right ◽  
Geneva Conference ◽  
International Rule

The issue of free navigation through international waterways is not academic nor need any hypothetical questions be posed. The concept of free navigation and international interest continues to confront the concept of sovereignty and national interest. To solve some of the acute problems thus engendered, it has become necessary to establish a body of rules within the scope of international law.This paper is devoted to one category of international waterways, the so-called international straits. “Still waters run deep” and it seems as if narrow strips of water are often the most troublesome.The most recent controversy concerning free navigation through straits arose in 1967 between Israel and the U.A.R. over the Tiran Straits. In the absence of an international power able to enforce the so-called international rule of free navigation or to convince the parties that the rule did not apply, the conflict was resolved by force of arms.No agreement exists between the littoral States as to the legal status of the Gulf of Aqaba and the Straits. The most cited document in this connection is the Geneva Convention on Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone of 1958. Examination of the preparatory and subsequent material of the 1958 Geneva Conference on the law of the sea, leads to the conclusion that the problem of straits in international law is not so much a question of substantive rule as a problem of defining international straits. The rule as such of free navigation is well established and was articulated long ago by Grotius. The right of innocent passage and the freedom of the high seas is today basically derived from the rule as defined by Grotius.

scholarly journals The Navigational Rights of Nuclear Ships

2002 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 251-265
Author(s):  
Marco Roscini
Keyword(s):  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Radioactive Materials ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

Even though Article 23 of the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea explicitly acknowledges the right of innocent passage through the territorial sea to nuclear vessels, many coastal states have recently forbidden or submitted to authorization the passage of ships carrying radioactive materials: this reveals a trend towards a more restrictive concept of “innocent passage.” As to straits used for international navigation and archipelagic sea lanes, the ius communicationis is still prominent and every measure that might prejudice the navigational rights of nuclear ships would not be consistent with the Montego Bay Convention.

scholarly journals The role of fishery supervisors and community participation to ensure the sustainable fisheries in Indonesia’s Exclusive Economic Zone

2021 ◽  
Vol 890 (1) ◽  
pp. 012068
Author(s):  
Maskun ◽  
H Assidiq ◽  
S N Bachril ◽  
N Al-Mukarramah
Keyword(s):  
Community Participation ◽  
Fishery Management ◽  
Exclusive Economic Zone ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Fish Resources ◽  
Effective Manner ◽  
Economic Zone ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

Abstract Indonesia has ratified the United Convention Law of the Sea of 1982 with the Law No. 17 of 1985 concerning the Ratification of United Nations Convention on The Law of the Sea 1982. It means that Indonesia has the right to use, conserve, and manage fish resources in the Indonesia’s Exclusive Economic Zone (IEEZ). To guarantee the optimal and sustainable management of Indonesian fish resources, the role of fishery supervisors and community participation in an efficient and effective manner is needed. Law enforcement in the field of fisheries is very important and strategic to support fishery development in accordance with the principle of fishery management, so that the sustainable development of fisheries can be done continuously. Therefore, the existence of legal certainty is absolutely necessary to support fishery management in Indonesia.

scholarly journals TINJAUAN YURIDIS PENENGGELAMAN KAPAL ASING MENURUT UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 45 TAHUN 2009 TENTANG PERIKANAN

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Elisabeth Septin Puspoayu ◽  
Bunga Nurani ◽  
Esti Wulan Trityas ◽  
Maulida Indah Sari ◽  
Mayang Chandra Gita Siti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Marine Resources ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
Illegal Fishing ◽  
Fishing Vessels ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact

Amendment to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982 with Law No. 17 the Year 1985 makes Indonesia have the right to utilize, conservation, and manage fish resources in Indonesia's exclusive economic zone and the high seas. Such rights are exercised under applicable international terms or standards. Therefore, legislation was made related to the sinking of illegal fishing vessels in Indonesian territorial waters through Law No. 45 of 2009 on Fisheries. Indonesia's high wealth of marine resources does not run following all layers' expectations after illegal fishing. However, the juridical consequences of applying the law have several impacts, namely the impact of sinking foreign vessels on relations with foreign countries and negative-positive effects in the marine environment due to the sinking of foreign vessels illegal fishing actors.

scholarly journals Australia's Response to Illegal Foreign Fishing: A Case of winning the Battle but losing the Law?

2008 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-124
Author(s):  
Rachel Baird
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
Illegal Fishing ◽  
The Past ◽  
Fishing Vessels ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The Law ◽  
The One ◽  
The Right

AbstractThe right of prompt release has been interpreted by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea as a safeguard, balancing the right of the coastal State to detain and deal with arrested fishing vessels and crew on the one hand, with the interests of the flag State to secure the release of detained vessels on the other. As the incidence of illegal fishing within national fishing zones has increased in the past decade, many coastal States, such as Australia, have implemented increasingly harsh penalties aimed at deterring the fishers. One such measure involves the operation of an automatic forfeiture regime whereby the detained vessel, gear and catch are forfeited to the Commonwealth. This regime operates in the absence of any judgement on the merits. This paper examines the details of the Australian legislation in addition to recent case law and concludes that the operation of the automatic forfeiture regime has the potential to upset the balance established in Article 73 of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

scholarly journals Analisis Masalah Pengaturan Ruang Udara Di Atas Alur Laut Kepulauan Indonesia (ALKI)

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Dirwan
Keyword(s):  
Grounded Theory ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Military Aircraft ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982 (UNCLOS) was formed at 10 December 1982. Archipelagic State (Article 46) means a state constituted wholly by one or more archipelagos and may include other islands. Article 53, paragraph (2) UNCLOS 1982, stated: “all ships and aircraft enjoy the right of archipelagic sea lines passage in such sea lines and air routes”. However, this article could cause overlapping in applications, because ICAO already states all air areas in flight routes (ATS). In another article, the right of archipelagic sea lines passage, especially for military aircraft regarding the necessity to get permission from Archipelagic State, has been perceived differently by every states. This research with the grounded theory methode, involves expert respondents to see and synchronize few aspects or articles. Findings from this research are to complete the sentence of “all ships and aircraft enjoy the right of archipelagic sea lines passage .... “, with the understanding that all aircraft can provide overflight on archipelagic sea lines air area, which determined as an ATS route according to ICAO rules. Every military aircraft which uses the ATS route should have permission from Archipelagic State Goverment.

scholarly journals Snow Crab in the Barents Sea: Managing a Non-native Species in Disputed Waters

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (0) ◽  
pp. 108
Author(s):  
Tore Henriksen
Keyword(s):  
Native Species ◽  
Barents Sea ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Snow Crab ◽  
Coastal State ◽  
Fishing Vessels ◽  
The Barents Sea ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
A New Species

The introduction of a new species to the Barents Sea raises questions as to the rights and duties of states under the law of the sea to exploit, manage and conserve the species. This paper discusses three of them. The first question is whether the snow crab qualifies as a sedentary species. The entitlements and competence of states in respect of living marine resources depend on the location and the characteristics of the species. If it qualifies as a sedentary species under the law of the sea, it is subject to the sovereign rights of the coastal States. Otherwise, it is subject to the sovereign right of the coastal States as well as the freedom of fishing, dependent on its distribution. The second question is what, if any, obligations Norway as a coastal State has in respect of conservation and management of the snow crab and how Norway is complying with these obligations. This includes a discussion of whether the snow crab qualifies as an introduced, alien species and the possible implications for the obligations of the coastal State. The area of distribution of the snow crab includes waters within 200 nautical miles off Svalbard, raising a third question as to the implications of the 1920 Treaty concerning Spitsbergen (Svalbard Treaty) and in particular whether fishing vessels of Contracting parties have the right to participate in the harvest on an equal footing with Norwegian vessels. The Norwegian Snow Crab Regulations effectively reserves the harvest of snow crab for Norwegian fishing vessels. The paper discusses the implications of a recent decision by the Norwegian Supreme Court on dismissal of an appeal by a Latvian vessel and its captain convicted for illegal harvest of snow crab within 200 nautical miles off Svalbard.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document