Underwater Cultural Heritage in Africa and Questions of Immunity, State Ownership and Succession: What Role for Equity?

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 264-294
Author(s):  
Michail Risvas

Abstract Underwater cultural heritage (UCH) is an emerging topic of the law of the sea and international law. Nonetheless, little attention has been paid to UCH situated off the coasts of Africa, despite its archaeological, historical and cultural value. At the same time, there is a growing trend of restitution of cultural heritage removed from African States by their former (Western) colonial powers. Against this background the article argues that the principle of equity regarding State ownership, succession in relation to, and immunity of, African UCH constitutes the mechanism which can lead to a more balanced distribution of UCH between Western and African States.

2014 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariano J. Aznar

Abstract The law of the sea, mainly codified in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (losc), does not properly address the protection of underwater cultural heritage. This is particularly evident for the contiguous zone, a maritime area where different public and private marine activities may be threatening that heritage. Articles 33 and 303(2) losc are counterproductive and may create a legal problem that the 2001 unesco Convention on the protection of underwater cultural heritage tries to solve and clarify. In addition to this Convention, State practice shows how coastal States have been expanding their rights over their contiguous zone by adding legislative powers to the limited enforcement powers allegedly endorsed in the losc. This article tries to demonstrate that general and consistent State practice over the last decades, both conventional and unilateral, has produced a change in the legal rules governing the coastal States’ archaeological rights over their contiguous zone, expanding them with no clear objection among States, which now consider the protection of underwater cultural heritage—a generally absent interest during the negotiation of the losc—indispensable to safeguard for future generations the fragile elements composing that heritage.


2021 ◽  
Vol 90 (3) ◽  
pp. 343-372
Author(s):  
Alexander Lott

Abstract It is widely believed that international law does not enable to protect effectively the wreck of the ms Estonia against looting. The protection regime established under the 1995 ms Estonia Treaty is binding and violations against it can be effectively sanctioned in respect of only the nationals of its few States Parties, resulting in numerous jurisdictional gaps. This study argues that the law of the sea and administrative law provide the means for safeguarding the ms Estonia wreck against pilferers. Estonia has repeatedly designated tiny buffer zones around relatively modern shipwrecks outside its territorial sea. Finland can follow this practice in relation to the ms Estonia wreck that lies less than 19 nm from its baselines. In effect, Finland would be entitled to regulate and authorize activities directed at the shipwreck with the right to exercise its enforcement jurisdiction against persons that disturb the peace of the mass grave.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document