The Purpose of Equity

2021 ◽  
pp. 69-83
Author(s):  
Catharine Titi
Keyword(s):  
Distributive Justice ◽  
International Law ◽  
Intergenerational Equity ◽  
Corrective Justice ◽  
Allocation Of Resources ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Common Heritage ◽  
Common Heritage Of Mankind ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Way

‘The way is equity, the end is justice’, wrote the umpire in the Aroa Mines case. The chapter probes the ethical foundations of equity in international law and argues that the overarching purpose of equity is to do justice. In this light, it surveys equity as corrective, distributive, and supplementary justice. Under the heading of corrective justice, the chapter canvasses equity as individualised justice and as justice that tempers the rigour of the law. Distributive justice is conceptualised in relation to the allocation of resources and the sharing of benefits and burdens, the common heritage of mankind, intergenerational equity, and equitable representation in the composition of international bodies. The chapter further reviews equity as supplementary justice, when legal rules are absent. The analysis shows that the different roles of equity as justice overlap and stresses that justice provides the backbone and rationale for the broader need for equity.

The Common Heritage of Mankind

2019 ◽  
pp. 35-51
Author(s):  
Surabhi Ranganathan
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Mineral Resources ◽  
Common Heritage ◽  
Common Heritage Of Mankind ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
The Common ◽  
Economic Considerations ◽  
Over Time

In the decolonization era, one of the battles for international law was over the seabed and its mineral resources, with intensive debates about the ownership of these resources and the conditions under which they could be exploited. At its nexus was the principle of common heritage of mankind (CHM). This chapter relates the protracted legal tussle around the CHM principle. It traces how the terms of the battle changed over time and ‘annotates’ the battle by reference to a few key issues—the precise basis for developing states’ interest in seabed resources; the antinomies of the CHM principle; and the Cold War’s effect upon the negotiations. It highlights how economic considerations remained material to the negotiations; the ideological defeat for developing states; and the seabed’s role in the NIEO movement as a whole.

The Maps of International Law: Perceptions of Nature in the Classification of Territory

2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 621-639 ◽  
Author(s):  
KARIN MICKELSON
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Economic Power ◽  
Terra Nullius ◽  
Common Heritage ◽  
Common Heritage Of Mankind ◽  
Current Thinking ◽  
The Common ◽  
Instrumental View ◽  
Surface Changes

AbstractThis article explores the understanding of nature reflected in the international legal classification of territory, as reflected in the doctrines of terra nullius, res communis, and the common heritage of mankind. It provides an overview and analysis of each of these concepts, noting the frequently problematic role they have played in legitimating the exercise of political and economic power. It then analyses the continuities and discontinuities between these categories. It argues that, despite surface changes, a narrow instrumental view of nature and the environment continues to be deeply embedded in much of our current thinking about jurisdiction over territory, and can be seen as constituting one of the ongoing barriers to thinking about the environment in more innovative and sustainable ways.

scholarly journals China’s stance towards the applicability of the common heritage of mankind governance regime to the Arctic

2018 ◽  
pp. 13-21
Author(s):  
E. V. Kienko
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
Common Heritage ◽  
Governance Regime ◽  
Common Heritage Of Mankind ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law

Introduction.The article provides an analysis of China’s tough stance towards the applicability of the governance regime of the common heritage of mankind to the Arctic referring to the Part XI of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982, in the general context of contemporary inter­national law.  Materials and methods.General scien­tific and private scientific methods of cogni­tion constitutes the methodological basis for the study.  Results of the study.In the course of the study the author concludes that China’s current stance towards the governance regime of the International seabed area as the common heritage of mankind and towards the international maritime law as a whole should not have exclusively negative assessments as it was during the period of the confrontation between the Soviet Union and the People’s Republic of China in 1960-1980. Objectively the long-term interests of the People’s Republic of China and the Russian Fed­eration in the maintenance of international maritime law are aligned. However, a contemporary legal poli­cy of China differs from the policy stated at the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea. It became more focused on the promotion of China’s national interests in the Arctic, on the creation of the Area of the common heritage of mankind in the Arc­tic Ocean, even though none of the Arctic Coastal State advocate this stance. Conclusions.In this article the author balanc­es China’s arguments in favour of applicability of norms of the international law related to the com­mon heritage of mankind to the Arctic with the Arc­tic Coastal States’ arguments against it according to the doctrine in the sphere of the international law in which the legal concept of the common heritage of mankind is clarified. The author reveals reasons of China’s support of the concept of the common heri­tage of mankind initiated by the USA and China’s effort to broadly interpret it especially towards the Arctic in terms of the Arctic Coastal States’ stance towards this issue contained in the materials of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea (1973 – 1982).

Deep Sea Anarchy: Mining at the Frontiers of International Law

2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 445-476 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan-Stefan Fritz
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Deep Sea ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The Past ◽  
Common Heritage ◽  
Common Heritage Of Mankind ◽  
National Jurisdiction ◽  
The Common ◽  
First Time ◽  
Made In

For the first time, new sources of minerals are likely to be exploited in the deep seas in an area beyond national jurisdiction. Deep-sea mining encompasses the potential for cooperation and/or competition between the most technologically and economically advanced States and those aspiring to join this group. The community of States recognized this potential early on and signed new treaties, established new international institutions, and promised new levels of cooperation. Most importantly, they also set a standard according to which the exploration for and exploitation of these new resources are to be governed, namely in the context of the Common Heritage of Mankind. This article assesses what progress has been made in the past forty years on defining and implementing the Common Heritage of Mankind as a normative and legal framework for governing the exploration for and exploitation of marine minerals in the deep seas.

International Law and Corporate Actors in Deep Seabed Mining

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Dingwall
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Commercial Activity ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
Common Heritage ◽  
Common Heritage Of Mankind ◽  
The Common ◽  
Deep Seabed Mining ◽  
Seabed Mining

Corporate participation within deep seabed mining raises unique challenges for international law. Commercial investment by private corporate actors in deep seabed mining is increasing. The deep seabed beyond national jurisdiction (the Area) comprises almost three-quarters of the entire surface area of the oceans, and it is home to an array of prized commodities including valuable metals and rare earth elements. These resources constitute the common heritage of mankind. Acting under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the International Seabed Authority (ISA) is responsible for regulating the Area for the benefit of humanity and granting mining contracts. Although mining activities in the Area remain at the exploration stage, in recent years, there has been a marked growth in investment by private corporate actors, and an increasing impetus towards exploitation. This increasing corporate activity presents challenges, including in relation to matters of common management, benefit sharing, marine environmental protection and investment protection. In part, these challenges stem from the often-contentious role of non-state actors, such as corporations, within the international legal system. A product of its history, the UNCLOS deep seabed regime is an unlikely hybrid of capitalist and communist values, embracing the role of private actors while enshrining principles of resource distribution. As technological advances begin to outstrip legal developments, this study advances the discourse by addressing the extent of any tension between corporate commercial activity in the Area and the achievement of the common heritage of mankind.

scholarly journals The Common Heritage of Mankind and the Sub-Saharan African Native Land Tenure System: A “Clash of Cultures” in the Interpretation of Concepts in International Law?

2013 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-88
Author(s):  
Edwin Egede
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Land Tenure ◽  
Common Heritage ◽  
Common Heritage Of Mankind ◽  
Common Ownership ◽  
National Jurisdiction ◽  
Land Tenure System ◽  
The Common ◽  
Sub Saharan ◽  
Clash Of Cultures

AbstractThe deep seabed beyond national jurisdiction and the seabed's resources have been declared the common heritage of mankind. There are however divergent views on exactly what the common heritage of mankind is. Does it connote joint management or common ownership of this spatial area? This article argues that culture is one of the relevant factors to be considered in understanding the interpretation given to the common heritage of mankind by sub-Saharan African states and that the role of culture cannot be ignored in appreciating how states interpret concepts in international law.

The International Seabed Authority and the Common Heritage of Mankind: The Need for States to Establish the Outer Limits of their Continental Shelf

2010 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 543-567 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik Franckx
Keyword(s):  
Continental Shelf ◽  
International Law ◽  
Outer Space ◽  
Common Heritage ◽  
Common Heritage Of Mankind ◽  
National Jurisdiction ◽  
The Common ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
International Seabed Authority ◽  
The Antarctic

AbstractThe principle of the common heritage of mankind was introduced in international law to internationalize certain common spaces beyond national jurisdiction. It has found a certain application in outer space as well as in the Antarctic, but it is with respect to the oceans that it has so far found its fullest exposition. Since the principle is very much tied to the Area in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, i.e., the seabed and ocean floor and subsoil thereof beyond the limits of national jurisdiction, it can be said to have triggered that convention, but at the same time was also almost responsible for its demise. As a consequence, its content has changed over the years. The present article intends to have a closer look at how this principle at present relates to the obligation of broad-margin states to establish the outer limit of their continental shelf.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document