27 May Symposium on the Law of the Sea and the Law of Responsibility
This week we are delighted to bring you a symposium exploring the intersection between the law of responsibility and the law of the sea. The motivation for this symposium is twofold:
First, although there is long interaction between the law of the sea and the law of responsibility, the law of the sea has become an area where the intersection is of increasing importance. The posts this week will highlight the ways in which the law of responsibility is being invoked in current controversies involving marine species and resources like whales, sharks and fisheries; and examine the role of the law of responsibility in recent cases involving search and rescue operations, flagged ships, and whaling. The posts will also show that in some instances, there are gaps in the general rules of responsibility that render them inadequate or inappropriate for certain types of disputes with regards to the law of the sea. A dimension of particular interest in this regard will be instances in which questions of shared responsibility arise; these posts will be cross-posted on the SHARES website at the University of Amsterdam, Faculty of Law.
Although we cover law of the sea issues from time to time here at OJ, its not a field we post on regularly. The second goal behind this symposium is therefore to engage in a sustained discussion on developments of note with experts in Europe, North America, and Australia.
Our bloggers and commentators this week include: Natalie Klein, Yoshinobu Takei, Irini Papanicolopulu, Seline Trevisanut, Anastasia Telesetsky, Tim Stephens and Ilias Plakokefalos.
I hope you enjoy the topic, and we look forward to lively exchanges and comments.
Interesting prospects — but will commentators focus not merely on “state” responsibility, but also on the responsiiblity under international law of other actors, such as a nation, people, tribe, belligerent, insurgent, corpopration, etc. (perhaps especially on corporations who deplete the common heritage of humankind and “rogue” states that are complicit).
A good question. Some will address the responsibility of IOs and non-state actors — the other actors, to the extent they are implicated in the law of the sea context (thus in our topics this week, tribe, belligerent, insurgents are out of context) are flagged to illustrate the gaps in the law of responsibility.