Revisiting the Critique Against Territorialism in the Law of the Sea: Brazilian State Practice in Light of the Concepts of Creeping Jurisdiction and Spoliative Jurisdiction

SummaryThe use of the concept of an exclusive Economie zone has increased since the adoption of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. However, the characterization of this zone varies greatly between States. This article presents an exhaustive survey of the concept of an exclusive Economie zone. The author discusses the types of jurisdiction exercised by States in their uses of an exclusive Economie zone. Disparity exists between the provisions of the Convention and State practice in some specific areas: for example, the provisions on the environment and on scientific research. Despite these exceptions, the author maintains that the basic tenets of the Convention are respected in State practice. State declarations as well as arbitral and judicial decisions show that the Convention and State practice are together evolving to reinforce the basic principles of the concept of an exclusive Economie zone.

Download Full-text

Irish State Practice on the Law of the Sea 2013

The Irish Yearbook of International Law : Volume 8, 2013 ◽

10.5040/9781782257837.ch-008 ◽

2015 ◽

Keyword(s):

Law Of The Sea ◽

State Practice ◽

The Law

Download Full-text

Historic Rights in African State Practice

The Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law ◽

10.1163/22134484-12340123 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 7 (2) ◽

pp. 166-188

Author(s):

Edwin Egede

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

African State ◽

Law Of The Sea ◽

Legal Obligation ◽

State Party ◽

Customary International Law ◽

State Practice ◽

Dash Line ◽

United Nations Convention ◽

The Law

Abstract Historic rights in the law of the sea has been given prominence since the publication by China of the so-called nine-dash line map. Certain States have challenged this claim as inconsistent with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) to which China is a State Party. On the other hand, it has been argued that although historic rights claims are not comprehensively regulated by the UNCLOS they are actually governed by the principles of general international law. Consequently, this would require establishing if there is a general and consistent practice of States followed by them from a sense of legal obligation which establish historic rights claims are consistent with Customary International Law. This article explores the State Practice of African States in order to determine whether these States acknowledge and recognize historic rights claims as consistent with contemporary law of the sea.

Download Full-text

The Regime of Straits and the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea

The American Journal of International Law ◽

10.2307/2200905 ◽

1980 ◽

Vol 74 (1) ◽

pp. 77-121 ◽

Cited By ~ 19

Author(s):

John Norton Moore

Keyword(s):

United Nations ◽

Law Of The Sea ◽

Foreseeable Future ◽

Coastal Fisheries ◽

The Third ◽

State Practice ◽

The Law ◽

Deep Seabed Mining ◽

Seabed Mining ◽

Preparatory Work

The negotiations at the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea have been the most important catalyst of this century for a new legal and political order for the oceans. The conference, together with its preparatory work within the “Seabeds Committee,” has indelibly stamped ocean perspectives. Even without a widely acceptable, comprehensive treaty the influence of these perspectives on state practice will be profound—indeed, it already has been, for example, in legitimizing 200-mile coastal fisheries jurisdiction. If the conference is able to clear the remaining hurdles, particularly that of deep seabed mining, the new treaty is likely to govern oceans law for the foreseeable future.

Download Full-text

BOOK REVIEWSBOOK REVIEWSKwiatkowskaBarbaraDrAssociate Director, Netherlands Institute for the Law of the Sea121990373419424JayewardeneH.W., The Regime of Islands in International Law, Publications on Ocean Development, General Editor: OdaShigeru, Vol. 15, M. Nijhoff Publ., Dordrecht 1990, 572 pp. + Indexes, Dfl. 315/$ 159/£ 105.Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 19901990T.M.C. Asser PresspdfS0165070X00006914a.pdfdispartBook Reviews1.This in fact can also be advantageous with respect to many problems other than islands, as illustrated by, e.g., the special recognition gained by Ambassador Jayewardene during UNCLOS III for Sri Lankan (and likewise Indian) sovereignty over an unique extent of its continental shelf on the basis of geological evidence which he collected at that time (p. 571). This recognition is enshrined in UNCLOS III Final Act's Annex II containing the Statement of Understanding Concerning a Specific Method to be Used in Establishing the Outer Edge of the Continental Margin and applying exclusively to the southern part of the Bay of Bengal, although in practice a similar situation could also be claimed by States other than Sri Lanka and India.2.By 3 May 1990, the LOS Convention had obtained 159 signatures and 43 (out of the 60 required for its entry into force) ratifications. See 15 Law of the Sea Bulletin (UN Office for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea) (05 1990) pp. 1–6. Note also the relevant studies issued by this UN Office on island-related questions, such as: Regime of Islands (United Nations, 1988); Baselines (United Nations, 1989); and Archipelagic States (United Nations, 1990).3.For an excellent brief exposition of this regime, see the article by one of the principal architects thereof, KusumaatmadjaM., “The Concept of the Indonesian Archipelago”, 10 Indonesian Q. (1982) no. 4, pp. 12–26. For an extensive analysis of State practice, see also KwiatkowskaB. and AgoesE.R., ‘Archipelagic Waters: An Assessment of National Legislation’, in WolfrumR., ed., Law of the Sea at the Crossroads: The Continuing Search for a Universally Accepted Regime, Proceedings of International Symposium Held in Kiel, on 10–14 July 1990 (forthcoming).4.Cf., BowettD.W., ‘The Economic Factor in Maritime Delimitation Cases

Netherlands International Law Review ◽

10.1017/s0165070x00006914 ◽

1990 ◽

Vol 37 (03) ◽

pp. 419

Author(s):

Barbara Kwiatkowska

Keyword(s):

United Nations ◽

Economic Factor ◽

Outer Edge ◽

Law Of The Sea ◽

Specific Method ◽

Sri Lankan ◽

Geological Evidence ◽

Indonesian Archipelago ◽

State Practice ◽

The Law

Download Full-text

Islands and the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf: A Framework for Analysis

The American Journal of International Law ◽

10.2307/2199580 ◽

1977 ◽

Vol 71 (4) ◽

pp. 642-673 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Donald E. Karl

Keyword(s):

Continental Shelf ◽

Analytical Model ◽

Relative Size ◽

Exclusive Economic Zone ◽

Law Of The Sea ◽

Relative Location ◽

The Third ◽

State Practice ◽

Economic Zone ◽

The Law

This article examines one of the recurring problems in the law of the sea—the treatment of islands in the delimitation of the continental shelf between opposite and adjacent states—in light of developments at the Third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea, in particular, the adoption of “equitable principles” as the standard for delimitation of the continental shelf and exclusive economic zone between adjacent and opposite states. On the assumption that the content of these equitable principles may be derived from contemporary state practice in maritime delimitations, this state practice is used as a basis for the construction of an analytical model of the continental shelf problem of islands. This model relies primarily on an island's relative location and secondarily on its relative size with respect to the delimiting states. It provides a framework for determining how an island should be treated in a given delimitation. Though the model is, out of necessity, based upon state practice in continental shelf delimitations, the premises underlying the model are not so limited and thus the general principles derived from this analysis will have an important bearing on the new problem of the delimitation of the exclusive economic zone.

Download Full-text

The Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea: the 1976 New York Sessions

The American Journal of International Law ◽

10.2307/2199528 ◽

1977 ◽

Vol 71 (2) ◽

pp. 247-269 ◽

Cited By ~ 22

Author(s):

Bernard H. Oxman

Keyword(s):

New York ◽

United Nations ◽

International Law ◽

Customary Law ◽

Law Of The Sea ◽

Customary International Law ◽

The Third ◽

Geneva Conventions ◽

State Practice ◽

The Law

The law of the sea has changed, for good or for ill. The Revised Single Negotiating Text (hereinafter RSNT) issued in the spring of 1976 may prove to be the single most important document regarding the law of the sea since the 1958 Geneva Conventions in terms of its influence on state practice, whether by way of an ultimate treaty or otherwise. Important differences will exist regarding the extent to which portions of the text are declaratory of emerging customary international law and regarding the extent to which the text must be changed to be acceptable as a universal treaty or as customary law. Indeed, difficult questions of implementation of its principles in bilateral and other arrangements are already arising. Positions taken at multilateral conferences may differ from the positions taken in other contexts. But the text will not be ignored.

Download Full-text