New Zealand Freedom of Navigation on the High Seas: Sellers v Maritime Safety Inspector

1999 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 435-439
Author(s):  
J.S. Davidson
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Maritime Safety ◽  
Freedom Of Navigation ◽  
High Seas

The Respect of Other States’ Rights (Freedom of Navigation and Other Rights and Freedoms Set Out in the LOSC) as a Limitation to the Military Uses of the EEZ by Third States

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 117-127
Author(s):  
Geneviève Bastid Burdeau
Keyword(s):  
Coastal State ◽  
The Military ◽  
Freedom Of Navigation ◽  
High Seas

Abstract Due regard appears as the key notion to articulate rights recognized by the LOSC to coastal states in their EEZ and the rights of third states. Little attention is paid by the LOSC to the relations between third states conducting activities in the EEZ of a coastal state apart from the laying of cables. Third states enjoy all freedoms of the high seas compatible with the rights expressly granted to the coastal state. Although no specific provision regulates the relations between third states in the use of these rights, it is argued that the obligation of due regard prevailing in the high seas under Article 87(2) should also apply between third states in the EEZ of a coastal state. However, for military activities not listed in Article 87(1), the answer is uncertain due to the opposite views of states concerning such activities by third states in their EEZ.

The Principle of Exclusive Flag State Jurisdiction

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 330-347
Author(s):  
Chris Whomersley
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
State Control ◽  
Maritime Safety ◽  
Exclusive Jurisdiction ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
Multiple Challenges ◽  
International Instruments ◽  
Flag State ◽  
Port State Control ◽  
High Seas

Abstract The principle that a ship is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the flag State on the high seas is firmly established. But given the prevalence of open registries and the multiple challenges in the maritime sphere, such as maritime safety, the popularity of cruise holidays, the promotion of human rights for those working at sea, and the need to combat iuu fishing, is it any longer tenable to slavishly follow the principle? International instruments and judicial decisions have emphasised the responsibilities of flag States. But States have also increasingly turned to other mechanisms, especially port State control, to deal with the various problems.

Terrorism on the High Seas: The Achille Lauro, Piracy and the IMO Convention on Maritime Safety

1988 ◽  
Vol 82 (2) ◽  
pp. 269-310 ◽  
Author(s):  
Malvina Halberstam
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Blow Up ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cruise Ship ◽  
Maritime Safety ◽  
Rescue Mission ◽  
Palestine Liberation Organization ◽  
Port Said ◽  
High Seas

On October 7, 1985, the Achille Lauro, an Italian-flag cruise ship, was seized while sailing from Alexandria to Port Said. The hijackers, members of the Palestine Liberation Front (PLF), a faction of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), had boarded the ship in Genoa, posing as tourists. They held the ship’s crew and passengers hostage, and threatened to kill the passengers unless Israel released 50 Palestinian prisoners. They also threatened to blow up the ship if a rescue mission was attempted. When their demands had not been met by the following afternoon, the hijackers shot Leon Klinghoffer, a Jew of U.S. nationality who was partly paralyzed and in a wheelchair, and threw his body and wheelchair overboard. The United States characterized the seizure as piracy, a position that has been supported by some commentators and opposed by others.

scholarly journals New Zealand’s Port and Harbour Marine Safety Code: a case study in co-regulation

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith Manch
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Regulatory System ◽  
Government Agencies ◽  
Maritime Industry ◽  
Maritime Safety ◽  
Safety Code ◽  
National Forum ◽  
Marine Safety

The inaugural annual national forum on the 2016 New Zealand Port and Harbour Marine Safety Code took place in July 2017 in Wellington. The 2016 code replaced a code originally put in place in 2004. Participants in the forum included the 2016 code partners: port companies, regional councils/unitary authorities, Maritime New Zealand, as well as maritime industry representatives, and other government agencies with an interest in maritime safety. The forum represented an important waypoint in the journey from the development, implementation and review of the 2004 code, to the development and implementation of the 2016 code as a key part of the regulatory system that seeks to manage port and harbour risks.

The Interpretation and Application of the Freedom of Navigation and Flag State Jurisdiction in the M/V “Norstar” and the M/T “San Padre Pio” Cases

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 108-118
Author(s):  
Vasco Becker-Weinberg
Keyword(s):  
Flag State ◽  
Freedom Of Navigation ◽  
High Seas

Abstract The M/V “Norstar” and the M/T “San Padre Pio” cases raise important questions regarding the interpretation and application of the freedom of navigation and the principle of exclusive flag State jurisdiction, namely if the latter prohibits the exercise of prescriptive jurisdiction on the high seas by non-flag States. One of the exceptional aspects of the M/V “Norstar” case is the Joint Dissenting Opinion (JDO) by seven judges underlining a distinctive view regarding the interpretation of the freedom of navigation and the principle of exclusive flag State jurisdiction. Subsequent to the M/V “Norstar” case, the M/T “San Padre Pio” case was submitted and bares relevance for the clarification on some of the key matters addressed in the Judgment and the JDO in the M/V “Norstar” case. This article highlights the different views of the Judgment and the JDO and examines the relation with the M/T “San Padre Pio” case.

The Collision Avoidance Regulations as a Regulator of International Navigation Rights: Underlying Principles and their Adequacy for the Twenty-first Century

1996 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 377-393 ◽  
Author(s):  
Glen Plant
Keyword(s):  
Collision Avoidance ◽  
First Century ◽  
The Other ◽  
Twenty First Century ◽  
The Right ◽  
Freedom Of Navigation ◽  
High Seas

The high seas freedom of navigation, and the lesser rights of transit, archipelagic sea lane and innocent passage applicable in straits used for international navigation, archipelagic sea lanes and the territorial sea respectively, have been said to embrace two notions: ‘one is the right to make progress over the surface of the sea, the other is the duty to make progress only in an orderly way, as to speed, steering, lights and so on – the manner of operation of the right’.

Armed Neutralities to 1780

1935 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 423-447
Author(s):  
Carl J. Kulsrud
Keyword(s):  
Freedom Of Navigation ◽  
High Seas

It is frequently asserted even today that the armed neutrality formed by the Northern Powers in 1780 constituted the first organized effort by neutral states to secure freedom of navigation on the high seas. Likewise, it is said that this league was promoted by Catherine II of Russia for the express purpose of protecting neutral rights.

scholarly journals The MV “Norstar” Case (Panama v. Italy)

2020 ◽  
Vol 114 (1) ◽  
pp. 116-123
Author(s):  
Cameron Miles
Keyword(s):  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
The Law ◽  
State Rights ◽  
Flag State ◽  
The Way ◽  
Freedom Of Navigation ◽  
High Seas

In the MV “Norstar” Case (Norstar Case), the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) produced two reasoned decisions. In the first, the Tribunal established jurisdiction over the relevant dispute and the admissibility of Panama's claims. In the second, it found that Italy had violated Panama's right to freedom of navigation on the high seas. In the latter decision, the Tribunal relied on an expansive understanding of flag state jurisdiction—prompting a vociferous joint dissent by seven of its twenty-three judges. The majority's understanding of the jurisdictional exclusivity of the flag state as extending to prescriptive as well as enforcement jurisdiction is a significant expansion of flag state rights—and will have a corresponding impact on the way that shipping is regulated internationally.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document