The Nigerian Territorial Waters Legislation and the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention

2004 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 151-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edwin Egede
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
West Coast ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Gulf Of Guinea ◽  
The West ◽  
Coastal State ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Law

AbstractNigeria is a coastal state located strategically on the West Coast of Africa in the Gulf of Guinea. After gaining independence in 1960 it enacted legislation in 1967 on its territorial waters, which has been amended twice, in 1971 and 1998. After participating in the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III) it became a party to the 1982 Convention on 14 August 1986. This article examines the laws governing the Nigerian territorial waters vis-à-vis the LOSC provisions on the territorial sea with a view to pinpointing how far these laws are in compliance with the relevant provisions of the LOSC.

Ridge Issues

2000 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Taft ◽  
Hideo Kagami
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Continental Margin ◽  
Outer Edge ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Oceanic Ridge ◽  
Coastal State ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Law ◽  
Definition Of

The Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea sought to establish a definition of the continental shelf that would accommodate the interests of a number, albeit a minority, of coastal States. This included consideration of various submarine elevations, including ridges, and their relationship to the regime of the continental shelf. For a variety of reasons, submarine and oceanic ridges have proved to be contentious. Indeed, this chapter proved to be the most difficult of all the chapters in this book to obtain a text to which all the authors, scientists, and lawyers could agree. Therefore, rather than produce an anodyne chapter which might have summarized only those areas of agreement, we considered it best to also cover areas where agreement was lacking. This provides the reader with both sides of the argument and the opportunity to reach their own view on the basis of the evidence presented. Some of the contentious areas are . . . i. Whether or not article 76 should be interpreted in such a manner as to preclude a country situated on a ridge from having a continental shelf beyond 200 M. ii. Whether bathymetry (reflecting geomorphology) should be given more or less weight than, or the same weight as geology in any consideration of a continental shelf beyond 200 M, including extension along an oceanic ridge, iii. Whether the fact that article 76 refers to the continental shelf being a natural prolongation of the land territory "to the outer edge of the continental margin" means that it can (or cannot) be applied to an island sitting on top of an oceanic ridge, iv. Whether or not article 76 can be interpreted in such a way as to allow a coastal State to "jump" its claim from the margin onto an adjacent ridge. v. Whether or not article 76 limits the use of ridges so that coastal States do not unreasonably extend their continental shelf regime. . . . Ultimately, for the answers to these questions, the reader will need to look to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (the Commission), together with the outcome of diplomacy.

The Genesis of the ‘Due Regard’ Obligations in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-24
Author(s):  
Shotaro Hamamoto
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Coastal State ◽  
The Third ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law ◽  
Submarine Cables

Abstract The obligation of the coastal state to have due regard to the rights and duties of other states (Law of the Sea Convention (LOSC) Art 56(2)) did not suddenly appear with the LOSC. It was gradually formed corresponding to the increasing recognition of the rights of the coastal state in adjacent maritime zones. The practice prior to the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea and the travaux préparatoires of the LOSC indicate that this obligation requires something more than the negative obligation not to interfere with the exercise by the coastal State of its rights and competences, and that the ‘rights and duties’ to which due regard is to be paid are not limited to those explicitly listed in the LOSC, such as the freedoms of navigation, overflight and of laying of submarine cables and pipelines.

Innocent Passage of Warships

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 210-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anh Duc Ton
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
North Korea ◽  
East Asian ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Coastal State ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (losc) is well known as the “Constitution for the Oceans”; however, the passage of foreign warships through the territorial sea of a coastal State is not clearly addressed. All East Asian littoral States (except North Korea and Cambodia) are parties to the losc but their practices regarding the innocent passage of warships are different. This article provides an analysis of the innocent passage regime of the losc, the practice of East Asian littoral States regarding the innocent passage of warships as well as factors that have influenced the trends in their practices.

The Regime of Straits and the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea

1980 ◽  
Vol 74 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Norton Moore
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Foreseeable Future ◽  
Coastal Fisheries ◽  
The Third ◽  
State Practice ◽  
The Law ◽  
Deep Seabed Mining ◽  
Seabed Mining ◽  
Preparatory Work

The negotiations at the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea have been the most important catalyst of this century for a new legal and political order for the oceans. The conference, together with its preparatory work within the “Seabeds Committee,” has indelibly stamped ocean perspectives. Even without a widely acceptable, comprehensive treaty the influence of these perspectives on state practice will be profound—indeed, it already has been, for example, in legitimizing 200-mile coastal fisheries jurisdiction. If the conference is able to clear the remaining hurdles, particularly that of deep seabed mining, the new treaty is likely to govern oceans law for the foreseeable future.

United States Interests in the Law of the Sea Convention

1994 ◽  
Vol 88 (1) ◽  
pp. 167-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Multilateral Negotiations ◽  
The Third ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law

In 1982 the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea adopted a treaty, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, that succeeded in resolving the most fundamental questions of the law of the sea in accordance with three basic principles: 1.The rules of the law of the sea must fairly balance the respective interests of all states, notably the competing coastal and maritime interests, in a manner that is generally acceptable.2.Multilateral negotiations on the basis of consensus replace unilateral claims of right as the principal means for determining that balance.3.Compulsory dispute settlement mechanisms should be adopted to interpret, apply, and enforce the balance.

The law of the sea and the deep seabed

1978 ◽  
Vol 290 (1366) ◽  
pp. 21-31
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Mineral Resources ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Agreement ◽  
Exploration And Exploitation ◽  
The Third ◽  
Sea Bed ◽  
The Law ◽  
Work Done

It is the object of the third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea to obtain broad international agreement on the limits to the territorial sea, on that area beyond these limits within which the coastal state may exercise rights over living and non-living resources and on the nature and manner of exercise of those rights. The Conference is also required to establish an international regime to deal with the exploration and exploitation of the deep seabed beyond the limits of coastal states’ rights. The work done by the Conference in five sessions since 1973 will have its effect on international law and practice but, partly owing to differences between the view-points of less industrialized and the more industrialized states (not confined to marine matters), the global solution essential for the orderly regulation of movement of shipping, scientific research and development of fisheries and sea-bed mineral resources may yet elude the Conference, to the detriment of the participating states and of the international community as a whole.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document