scholarly journals Legalitas Iran dalam Melakukan Penahanan Kapal Asing Di Selat Hormuz

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 1379
Author(s):  
Fariz Mauldiansyah
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Persian Gulf ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Strait Of Hormuz ◽  
Traffic Violations ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The Law ◽  
Pass Through ◽  
The Persian Gulf

AbstractThe Persian Gulf, which stores about one fifth of the world's oil, would be the destination of every petroleum producing country. But to reach the Persian Gulf by sea, every ship must pass through the Strait of Hormuz first. The Strait of Hormuz, which was located between two countries, Iran and Oman, has become a dispute terrain for several times in the last 10 years, one of which is the dispute of ship detention between Iran and Britain. The detention of ships carried out by Iran is a big question for the international community, is the detention legal or not? This article uses a type of normative juridical writing and uses statute approach and conceptual approach.The results showed that the detention was considered legitimate because the United Kingdom had committed maritime traffic violations and abused the rights of transit passage and right of innocent passage that was granted by international law. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS 1982) basically regulates and authorizes coastal states to exercise their jurisdiction in the territorial seas of their respective countries.Keywords: Ship Detention; Strait of Hormuz;Territorial Sea.AbstrakTeluk Persia yang menyimpan sekitar seperlima minyak bumi dunia, tentu menjadi destinasi setiap negara produsen minyak bumi. Namun untuk mencapai Teluk Persia melalui laut, setiap kapal harus melewati Selat Hormuz terlebih dahulu. Selat Hormuz yang terhimpit oleh dua negara, yaitu Iran dan Oman, telah beberapa kali menjadi medan sengketa dalam 10 tahun terakhir, salah satunya adalah sengketa penahanan kapal antara Iran dan Inggris. Penahanan kapal yang dilakukan oleh Iran tersebut menjadi pertanyaan besar bagi masyarakat internasional, apakah penahanan tersebut legal atau atau tidak? Artikel ini menggunakan tipe penulisan yuridis normatif dan menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan konseptual.Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa penahanan tersebut dianggap sah karena Inggris telah melakukan pelanggaran lalu lintas maritim dan menyalahgunakan hak lintas transit maupun hak lintas damai yang diberikan oleh hukum internasional. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS 1982) pada dasarnya mengatur dan memberikan wewenang kepada negara pantai untuk menjalankan yurisdiksi nya di laut teritorial negara masing-masing.Kata Kunci: Penahanan Kapal; Selat Hormuz; Laut Teritorial.

The Mox Plant Case–Provisional Measures in the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea

2003 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 611-619 ◽  
Author(s):  
MALCOLM J. C. FORSTER
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Irish Sea ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Radioactive Substances ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Irish Sea

On 3 December 2001, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) issued an Order in response to Ireland's request for the prescription of provisional measures in accordance with Article 290 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). In its request, Ireland alleged violation by the United Kingdom of numerous provisions of UNCLOS. The scope of provisional measures requested by Ireland included, among others, the immediate suspension by the United Kingdom of the authorization of the Sellafield Mox Plant and a guarantee of no movement of radioactive substances or materials or wastes that are in any way related to the plant into or out of the waters of the Irish Sea. This article reviews the background to the dispute between Ireland and the United Kingdom over the operation of the Sellafield Mox Plant. It focuses on the various jurisdictional challenges raised before ITLOS and critically assesses the conclusions reached by the Tribunal in its Order.

British Accession to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea

1997 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 761-786 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. H. Anderson
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law

On 21 July 1997 the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary announced the United Kingdom's decision to accede to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (“the Convention”), a decision which was acted upon four days later in New York. The United Kingdom thus became the 119th State to establish its consent to be bound by the Convention and the 82nd party to the Agreement of July 1994 on the Implementation of its Part XI (“the Implementation Agreement”).

The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf and its Disturbing Propensity to Legislate

2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 355-383 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Serdy
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Continental Shelves ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law

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.

How to Amend UNCLOS and Why It Has Never Been Done

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 72-83
Author(s):  
Chris Whomersley
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Organisations ◽  
International Labour Organisation ◽  
International Maritime Organisation ◽  
Consensus Procedure ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law ◽  
Labour Organisation

Abstract The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) contains detailed provisions concerning its amendment, but these have never been used and this article explores why this is so. States have instead maintained the Convention as a “living instrument” by adopting updated rules in other organisations, especially the International Maritime Organisation and the International Labour Organisation. States have also used the consensus procedure at Meetings of the States Parties to modify procedural provisions in UNCLOS, and have adopted two Implementation Agreements relating to UNCLOS. In addition, port State jurisdiction has developed considerably since the adoption of UNCLOS, and of course other international organisations have been active in related fields.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document