The Contribution of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea to the Protection of the Marine Environment

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 354-369
Author(s):  
Tomas Heidar
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Marine Environment ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Precautionary Approach ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessments ◽  
The Law

Abstract In its 25 years’ history, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea has dealt with a number of environmental cases. This has primarily occurred in the context of proceedings relating to the prescription of provisional measures and in advisory proceedings. This article explains how the Tribunal has reaffirmed and developed the basic environmental principles in Part XII of the Law of the Sea Convention, including the obligation to protect and preserve the marine environment, the precautionary approach, the duty to conduct environmental impact assessments, and the duty to cooperate, as well as the duty of due diligence, thereby contributing to the protection of the marine environment. Part XII of the Convention is a product of the 1970s and its provisions therefore reflect the state of international environmental law at that time. However, the Tribunal has interpreted and applied the aforementioned principles consistently with the contemporary state of international environmental law.

scholarly journals The Limitations on Military Activities by Third States in the EEZ Resulting from Environmental Law

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 144-165
Author(s):  
Pascale Ricard
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Marine Environment ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Marine Resources ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Environmental Preservation ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessments ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract In the EEZ, the supposed freedom of states to conduct military activities encounters the rights and duties of coastal states regarding conservation of marine resources and environmental preservation. This article focuses on the relationship between these two specific but not always compatible interests and asks: how should they be combined? Could international environmental law rules be interpreted as a limitation to the conduct of military activities in the EEZ? What are the concrete obligations of states to fulfil their environmental duties, and how far are they compatible with the conduct of other activities? The ‘due diligence’ obligation to protect the marine environment is interpreted as going further than the ‘due regard’ standard enshrined in Articles 56 and 58 of the LOSC. Accordingly, this article assumes that it is a positive obligation, implying specific consequences, such as the conduct of environmental impact assessments when the activity risks causing damage.

The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: A Forum for the Development of Principles of International Environmental Law?

2004 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 515-536 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gwenaele Rashbrooke
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Land Reclamation ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Uk

AbstractThis article examines the role of the ITLOS established by the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention. It considers the extent to which principles of international environmental law are reflected in the 1982 Convention. It then reviews the relevant jurisprudence of the tribunal including the Southern Blue-fin Tuna case between Japan and Australia and New Zealand, the MOX case between Ireland and the UK, and the Land Reclamation case between Malaysia and Singapore to determine the extent that the ITLOS case-law has indeed contributed to the development of certain key principles of international environmental law, including Stockholm Principle 21/Rio Principle 2, the principle of preventative action, cooperation and precaution.

scholarly journals THE APPLICATION OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN INTERNATIONAL LAW: AN ANALYSIS OF THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE LAW OF THE SEA

2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (29) ◽  
pp. 229-259
Author(s):  
Tiago Vinicius Zanella ◽  
Ricardo Pereira Cabral
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Marine Environment ◽  
Precautionary Principle ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Scientific Uncertainty ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
Irreversible Damage ◽  
Precautionary Approach ◽  
The Precautionary Principle ◽  
The Law

The precautionary principle, invoking the notions of risk, scientific uncertainty and irreversible damage, takes the solution of the environmental issues of the global risk society to the legal domain. Its application in international law has evolved significantly, especially with respect to the protection of the marine environment. This principle, which was much ignored in its practical application, is gradually being used in international environmental protection. The purpose of this paper is to analyze how the jurisprudence of the ITLOS has contributed to the development and application of the precautionary principle for the protection of the marine environment and how the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea contributed to the development of this principle in international law. Thus, although we are still not able to safely say that the precautionary approach is included in international law as an unchallenged principle, it has been given great steps over the last few years in this direction. Particularly with the contributions of the international jurisprudence of the ITLOS, the precautionary approach is evolving and becoming an autonomous principle, with less uncertainty and subjectivity that caused so much apprehension for the States and doubt in the doctrine.

The Marine Environment Protection Committee: The Conjunction of the Law of the Sea and International Environmental Law

2001 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 155-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise de La Fayette
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Marine Environment ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Environment Protection ◽  
Agenda 21 ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Multilateral Environmental Agreements ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law

AbstractThis article outlines the work of the Marine Environment Protection Committee of the International Maritime Organization in implementing measures to protect the marine environment and to conserve natural resources called for in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and international environmental law, in particular as set forth in Agenda 21 and the Rio Declaration, both products of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. In so doing, the paper examines IMO's collaboration with other intergovernmental organisations and UN bodies, such as the FAO, UNEP, the Commission on Sustainable Development and the United Nations, as well as with the secretariats of multilateral environmental agreements, such as the Basel Convention and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Although the work of IMO is frequently overlooked because it is an older organisation, the treaties, codes and guidelines developed by the MEPC have made an essential and valuable contribution to the progressive development of international environmental law, as well as to the law of the sea.

scholarly journals Prompt Release of Detained Foreign Vessels and Crews in Matters of Marine Environment Protection

2005 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 240-255 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heiki Lindpere
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Marine Environment ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Financial Security ◽  
Environment Protection ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
State Party ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law ◽  
Flag State

Article 292 of the United Nations 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea (Convention) reads:1. Where the authorities of a state party have detained a vessel flying the flag of another state party and it is alleged that the detaining state has not complied with the provisions of this Convention for the prompt release of the vessel or its crew upon posting of a reasonable bond or other financial security, the question of release from detention may be submitted to any court or tribunal agreed upon by the parties or, failing such agreement within 10 days from the time of detention, to a court or tribunal accepted by the detaining state under article 287 or to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, unless the parties otherwise agree.2. The application for release may be made only by or on behalf of the flag state of the vessel.3. The court or tribunal shall deal without delay with the application for release and shall deal only with the question of release, without prejudice to the merits of any case before the appropriate domestic forum against the vessel, its owner or its crew. The authorities of the detaining state remain competent to release the vessel or its crew at any time.4. Upon the posting of the bond or other financial security determined by the court or tribunal, the authorities of the detaining state shall comply promptly with the decision of the court or tribunal concerning the release of the vessel or its crew.

6 Applications for Provisional Measures

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kittichaisaree Kriangsak
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Marine Environment ◽  
The Other ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Arbitral Tribunal ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
The Third ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The Law ◽  
The One

This chapter assesses applications for provisional measures of protection under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). At the Third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea, the need for courts or tribunals having jurisdiction under UNCLOS to have the power to prescribe provisional measures was beyond dispute although there was considerable debate concerning the details of the regime associated with such measures. The finally adopted Article 290 of UNCLOS, under the heading ‘Provisional measures’, represents the best possible compromise. Provisional measures are divided into provisional measures prescribed by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) under Article 290(1) pending ITLOS’ judgment on the merits of the dispute, on the one hand, and provisional measures prescribed by ITLOS under Article 290(5) pending the constitution of an arbitral tribunal to which a dispute is being submitted, on the other hand. The request for the prescription of provisional measures shall be in writing and specify the measures requested, the reasons therefor, and the possible consequences, if the request is not granted, for the preservation of the respective rights of the parties or for the prevention of serious harm to the marine environment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document