The legal régime of straits in the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-165
Author(s):  
Ying Wang

Abstract Historic rights have been acknowledged by international legislation including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, although many issues concerning the concept still remain uncertain. This article will mainly discuss the legal connotation and juridical functions of the concept of ‘historic rights’ for maritime entitlements and maritime boundary delimitation, and attempt to clarify some legal ambiguity and explain the function of the legal regime through analysis of legal documents and identification of typical difficulties in the application of the concept of ‘historic rights’.


2012 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 867-874 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irini Papanicolopulu

Abstract The article, adopting an innovative approach to the law of the sea, discusses the place and role reserved to persons in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC) and the legal regime of which it is a part. The LOSC and other law of the sea agreements are examined, focussing on provisions that mention persons, their rights and their duties. Shortcomings identified include: the difficulty to configure persons as the beneficiaries of rights and the recipient of duties and the ensuing uncertain subjectivity of persons under the law of the sea; the presence of numerous gaps and inconsistencies in the existing legal regulation; the unavailability of mechanisms to address violations of duties by states. The conclusions draw attention to the potential of the LOSC and other treaties to further develop the international legal regime applicable to persons at sea and to provide an adequate place for persons in the law of the sea.


2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 189-203
Author(s):  
Humphrey S Sipalla

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC or the Convention) is quite simply, the greatest treaty-making achievement of the United Nations (UN) era. This appraisal of the recent developments of 2015-16 in this legal regime that governs the oceans – waters, floor and subsoil thereof – which cover ‘over 70 percent of the surface of our planet’, focuses on its oft-ignored spect, that is, its institutional framework.


2012 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 743-751 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ted L. McDorman

Abstract The international legal regime of the continental shelf was largely adopted in the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of Sea without change from that in the 1958 Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf. What was added in the 1982 Convention was that all States have a legal shelf out to 200 nautical miles (nm) and that beyond 200 nm there is a formula and process for States to establish their outer limit of the shelf. Amongst the several developments that have taken place in the last 30 years respecting the continental shelf regime noted in this article, the most surprising is the number of States that have indicated that they have an area of shelf beyond 200 nm, which far exceeds the number of States seen in 1982 as having such a possibility.


Author(s):  
Rothwell Donald R

This chapter begins by discussing the historical development of the regime of straits and considering some of the critical issues associated with Part III of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC). It then turns to a range of operational issues that exist for some straits, followed by a review of future issues facing the legal regime.


2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 355-383 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Serdy

AbstractCreated by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea to apply the rules in Article 76 on the outer limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles from States’ territorial sea baselines, the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf has on several occasions introduced new requirements for States not supported by Article 76, or impermissibly qualifying the rights Article 76 accords them. This article focuses on several such instances, one to the coastal State’s advantage (though temporally rather than spatially), another neutral (though requiring unnecessary work of States), but the remainder all tending to reduce the area of continental shelves. The net effect has been to deprive States of areas of legal continental shelf to which a reasonable interpretation of Article 76 entitles them, and in one case even of their right to have their submissions examined on their merits, even though, paradoxically, the well-meaning intention behind at least some of the Commission’s pronouncements was to avoid other controversies.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document