Marine Policy and the Coastal Community: The Impact of the Law of the Sea

1977 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 276-277
Author(s):  
Angelika Volle
2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Elisabeth Septin Puspoayu ◽  
Bunga Nurani ◽  
Esti Wulan Trityas ◽  
Maulida Indah Sari ◽  
Mayang Chandra Gita Siti ◽  
...  

Amendment to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982 with Law No. 17 the Year 1985 makes Indonesia have the right to utilize, conservation, and manage fish resources in Indonesia's exclusive economic zone and the high seas. Such rights are exercised under applicable international terms or standards. Therefore, legislation was made related to the sinking of illegal fishing vessels in Indonesian territorial waters through Law No. 45 of 2009 on Fisheries. Indonesia's high wealth of marine resources does not run following all layers' expectations after illegal fishing. However, the juridical consequences of applying the law have several impacts, namely the impact of sinking foreign vessels on relations with foreign countries and negative-positive effects in the marine environment due to the sinking of foreign vessels illegal fishing actors.


Afrika Focus ◽  
1991 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-14
Author(s):  
Eddy Somers

This contribution gives an idea of the necessity of cooperation in the field of the law of the sea, ocean management and marine policy towards East Africa. It is demonstrated through a substantial analysis of the development of the law of the sea that such a cooperation on an academic level can be a valuable means for further development in these fields for Third World States. A general description of a present cooperation project with Kenya is given as an example of this kind of approach.


AJIL Unbound ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 115 ◽  
pp. 399-403
Author(s):  
Theresa Squatrito

In “Judicialization of the Sea: Bargaining under the UNCLOS Regime,” Sara McLaughlin Mitchell and Andrew P. Owsiak examine the extent to which legalization and judicialization of the law of the sea has changed how states manage conflicts. They argue that legalization and judicialization have diminished maritime conflict because disputing parties are able to predict how a court would rule and, therefore, they will be more likely to bargain out-of-court to achieve more favorable outcomes. Their analysis suggests that how adjudicators perform as dispute resolution bodies is basically irrelevant. Drawing on the literature on the performance of international courts, this essay identifies numerous ways that the contribution of international courts to the resolution of disputes is contingent on key performance criteria, including legal clarification and compliance. When international courts perform at their best, judicialization enhances the impact of legalization. If performance is a contingent feature of international adjudication, then the generalizability of Mitchell and Owsiak's argument might be limited by the extent to which adjudicators achieve certain key performance criteria.


Grotiana ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 277-303
Author(s):  
Snjólaug Árnadóttir

Abstract The legal order of the oceans centres on coastal geography which is undergoing unprecedented changes. Claims to national jurisdiction are based on distance from the coast and are only enforceable as long as they are consistent with international law. Consequently, sea level rise and submergence of coastal features can affect the location and enforceability of unilateral maritime limits and bilateral boundaries. Some States wish to maintain previously established entitlements around submerged territory but the only way to prevent fluctuations of unilateral limits is through artificial conservation of coastlines. Therefore, a change, in either the location of maritime entitlements or rules governing such entitlements, is inevitable. It has been proposed that maritime limits should be frozen to ensure opposability as coastlines change. That would enable States to exercise sovereignty and sovereign rights over areas that have no anchor in coastal territory, arguably causing a departure from the land dominates the sea principle and a Grotian Moment in the law of the sea. However, this article concludes that it is unlikely that proposals to freeze maritime limits will change the law of the sea and that the proposals may in fact serve to deter another paradigm shift, one that involves a departure from the principle of stable boundaries.


1978 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 216
Author(s):  
Barbara Johnson ◽  
Frank Langdon

1978 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Johnson ◽  
Frank Langdon

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document