scholarly journals Adjacency and due regard: The role of coastal States in the BBNJ treaty

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Mossop ◽  
Clive Schofield
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Fundamental Question ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
The Third ◽  
Legal Principle ◽  
National Jurisdiction ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Relationship

In the negotiations for the new treaty on biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ), a fundamental question will be the relationship between the regime for areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ) and areas under coastal State jurisdiction. Adjacency has been raised as a concept that might assist in bridging these areas. It has been suggested that adjacency is a legal principle that could give coastal States additional rights or responsibility in relation to biodiversity in ABNJ proximate to their own national maritime jurisdictions. However, there has never been an accepted principle in the law of the sea that coastal States have priority over other States in ABNJ. We propose that due regard is a more appropriate lens to address this issue and one that would be consistent with existing principles under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). References to adjacent coastal States can be found in the draft text considered by the Intergovernmental Conference. The article analyses challenges arise in defining adjacent States as well as applying due regard to elements of the package. It considers the use of adjacency in the draft texts issued for the third and fourth sessions of the Intergovernmental Conference, as well as proposals made by delegates.

scholarly journals Adjacency and due regard: The role of coastal States in the BBNJ treaty

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Mossop ◽  
Clive Schofield
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Fundamental Question ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
The Third ◽  
Legal Principle ◽  
National Jurisdiction ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Relationship

In the negotiations for the new treaty on biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ), a fundamental question will be the relationship between the regime for areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ) and areas under coastal State jurisdiction. Adjacency has been raised as a concept that might assist in bridging these areas. It has been suggested that adjacency is a legal principle that could give coastal States additional rights or responsibility in relation to biodiversity in ABNJ proximate to their own national maritime jurisdictions. However, there has never been an accepted principle in the law of the sea that coastal States have priority over other States in ABNJ. We propose that due regard is a more appropriate lens to address this issue and one that would be consistent with existing principles under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). References to adjacent coastal States can be found in the draft text considered by the Intergovernmental Conference. The article analyses challenges arise in defining adjacent States as well as applying due regard to elements of the package. It considers the use of adjacency in the draft texts issued for the third and fourth sessions of the Intergovernmental Conference, as well as proposals made by delegates.

scholarly journals PERAN KONVENSI HUKUM LAUT INTERNASIONAL PBB 1982 DAN INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION (IMO) BAGI KESELAMATAN DAN KEAMANAN ANAK BUAH KAPAL (ABK) SELAMA BERLAYAR DALAM PELAYARAN INTERNASIONAL

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 160-178
Author(s):  
Piseth Chann
Keyword(s):  
Human Resources ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Management ◽  
International Maritime Organization ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Relationship

ABSTRAKEksploitasi terhadap tenaga kerja di laut lepas, khususnya ABK, masih sering terjadi. Meskipun tidak diatur secara spesifik, keselamatan dan keamanan ABK dapat dikaitkan dengan KHL PBB 1982, Pasal 94. Tujuan dari kajian ini adalah untuk menjelaskan keterkaitan Pasal 94 KHL dengan perlindungan terhadap ABK, peran IMO terhadap keselamatan dan keamanan ABK, dan kerja sama antara IMO dan ILO dalam menangani masalah eksploitasi sumber daya manusia dalam pelayaran internasional. Dari kajian ini dapat dijelaskan bahwa dalam KHL PBB 1982, Pasal 94 Ayat 2 (b) dan 3 (b) terdapat kewajiban yang dibebankan kepada Negara Bendera untuk ikut bertanggung jawab jika ABK mendapatkan suatu masalah. Sementara itu, sebagai agen khusus PBB, IMO telah mengadopsi satu Kode Manajemen Internasional dengan tujuan untuk memastikan keselamatan manusia dan menghindari kerusakan lingkungan laut. IMO, ILO dan Ad Hoc juga membentuk kerja sama tripartit untuk mengatur hal-hal yang berkaitan dengan ketenagakerjaan di laut. Kata Kunci: anak buah kapal; IMO; ILO; keselamatan dan keamanan ABSTRACTExploitation of workers on the high seas, especially the ship's crew, is still common. Although not specifically regulated, the safety and security of the ship's crew can be linked to the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), Article 94. The purpose of this study is to explain the relationship between Article 94 UNCLOS and the protection of ship's crew, the role of International Maritime Organization (IMO) in the safety and security of ship's crew, and cooperation between IMO and ILO in dealing with the problem of exploitation of human resources in international shipping. From this study, it can be explained that in the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Article 94 Paragraphs 2 (b) and 3 (b) there was an obligation imposed on the Flag State to take responsibility if the ship's crew had a problem. Meanwhile, as a UN special agent, IMO has adopted an International Management Code to ensure human safety and avoid damage to the marine environment. IMO, ILO and Ad Hoc also formed tripartite cooperation to regulate matters related to employment at sea.Keywords: ILO; IMO; security and safety; ship's crew

Article 76 of the LOSC on the Definition of the Continental Shelf: Questions concerning its Interpretation from a Legal Perspective

2006 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 269-285 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Oude Elferink
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
The Third ◽  
Complex Process ◽  
Legal Perspective ◽  
National Jurisdiction ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The Law ◽  
Definition Of

AbstractThe establishment of the outer limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles under Article 76 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC) is a complex process, which requires a coastal state to dedicate significant resources. To understand the reasons for the inclusion of this complex provision in the LOSC, this article first looks at the origins of Article 76. Subsequently, a number of provisions of Article 76 are considered to illustrate the questions which exist in connection with its application and interpretation. It is concluded that Article 76 fulfills the mandate that had been given to the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea in respect of the definition of the limits of national jurisdiction, notwithstanding the complexity of the issue and the interests involved. Before the Third Conference started there was no certainty about the extent of the continental shelf. Article 76 provides a procedure to arrive at precisely defined outer limits. Once Article 76 will have been implemented by all the present states parties to the Convention, most of the outer limits of the continental shelf vis-à-vis the Area will be defined in precise terms.

United States Interests in the Law of the Sea Convention

1994 ◽  
Vol 88 (1) ◽  
pp. 167-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Multilateral Negotiations ◽  
The Third ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law

In 1982 the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea adopted a treaty, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, that succeeded in resolving the most fundamental questions of the law of the sea in accordance with three basic principles: 1.The rules of the law of the sea must fairly balance the respective interests of all states, notably the competing coastal and maritime interests, in a manner that is generally acceptable.2.Multilateral negotiations on the basis of consensus replace unilateral claims of right as the principal means for determining that balance.3.Compulsory dispute settlement mechanisms should be adopted to interpret, apply, and enforce the balance.

scholarly journals Dispute settlement under the United Nations Convention On the Law of the Sea and Its Role in Oceans Governance

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Anshuman Chakraborty
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Traditional Role ◽  
Actual Role ◽  
The Future ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanisms

<p>This thesis is about the dispute settlement provisions of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC or Convention), and the potential and actual role that they play in oceans governance. The study focuses not only on the traditional role of dispute settlement mechanisms in peacefully settling disputes, but also on their potential for contribution to good oceans governance in many ways. The jurisprudence generated so far under the dispute settlement provisions of the LOSC can be called neither a complete success nor a total failure. Part XV of the Convention, dealing with dispute settlement procedures, has made a promising start with the inaugural jurisprudence under the prompt release and provisional measures proceedings. However, besides the general beneficial influence of the jurisprudence on oceans governance, a few detrimental developments have also been identified from the perspective of oceans governance. The present thesis demonstrates that a lot of hope had been pinned on the dispute settlement provisions at the time when the LOSC was drafted. However, most of these hopes have not yet found expression, and if the limited use of dispute settlement procedures continues, it is unlikely that Part XV will fulfil those hopes in the future. Nevertheless, this thesis argues along more optimistic lines, and expresses a realistic hope that the actual role of dispute settlement in oceans governance will improve in the future. The thesis concludes that the success or failure of the dispute settlement mechanisms mostly depends upon their actual use made by states. Further, the dispute settlement mechanisms once invoked must be able to settle disputes objectively on the basis of law, equity and justice and uphold the principles and provisions of the LOSC. It is hoped that states will have recourse to Part XV more often for the purpose of settling their disputes peacefully, and that the dispute settlement provisions will in turn fulfil their mandate. Only then will the world witness the dispute settlement mechanisms playing a real and beneficial role in oceans governance, concurrently with other oceans governance institutions and arrangements.</p>

16 The United Nations: A Practitioner’s Perspective

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corell Hans
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Sustainable Use ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Marine Biodiversity ◽  
Human Environment ◽  
Fish Stocks ◽  
National Jurisdiction ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law

This chapter discusses the contributions of the United Nations to the development of the law of the sea during the period following the adoption of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC) in 1982. It covers preparing for the entry into force of the LOSC; informal consultations relating to the implementation of Part XI of the LOSC; establishing the Convention institutions after the entry into force of the LOSC; the Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea (DOALOS); United Nations conferences on the human environment; the role of the General Assembly; the Meeting of States Parties to the LOSC; sustainable fisheries and straddling fish stocks and highly migratory fish stocks; the Oceans and Coastal Areas Network (UN-Oceans); the United Nations open-ended informal consultative process on oceans and the law of the sea; the so-called Regular Process; the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction; and piracy on the agenda of the Security Council.

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