Search: UNCLOS

This article from the Global Times, a hawkish state-controlled newspaper in China, probably reflects a little bit of the official Chinese view on the Philippines UNCLOS claim. It also contains this troubling bit of analysis, from a Chinese scholar: The international court would not take the case without agreements from all parties involved, Dong Manyuan, a researcher at the China Institute of International Studies, told the Global Times. Uh, yes, that’s true in a general sense. But China has already agreed to allow an Article 287 arbitral tribunal to take...

...baseline for climate governance, reading climate duties across treaties, customary international law, and human rights. The Court further confirmed that climate protection arises from several treaties, among others,  the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Kyoto Protocol, the Paris Agreement, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and related instruments such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Agreement on the Law of the Sea...

...any oil exploration activities while the matter is before the ITLOS special chamber. Under UNCLOS Article 290, a court or tribunal with jurisdiction is empowered to issue provisional measures “which it considers appropriate under the circumstances to preserve the respective rights of the parties to the dispute or to prevent serious harm to the marine environment, pending the final decision.” I haven’t been privy to the papers filed in this case, but it does seem like Cote D’Ivoire should have a pretty reasonable provisional measures claim. Indeed, the UK oil...

The UNCLOS arbitral tribunal formed to hear a dispute brought by the Philippines against China has set December 15 as a deadline for China to submit a legal brief or memorial. As most of our readers know, China has steadfastly refused to even participate in the arbitral process. It has not selected any arbitrators and it did not attend the first hearing last spring. I (like most observers) expected China to ignore the December 15 deadline as well. Although it looks like China will not file a formal legal memorial,...

Today, the U.S. Department of State released the 2012 edition of its Digest of U.S. practice in international law (for a brief history of these Digests see the accompanying press release here). Under the editorship of CarrieLyn D. Guymon, the Digest addresses a number of key international legal developments from 2012, including the U.S. response to the crisis in Syria and the (failed) attempt to get Senate Advice and Consent to the Disabilities Convention and UNCLOS among other treaty action. In addition, there was plenty of activity on the litigation...

...international fisheries law, built upon the foundations provided by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). UNCLOS sought to deal with the tragedy of the commons primarily by arrogating to coastal states large swathes of ocean space within the EEZ. That left the problem of shared, straddling, migratory, and high seas fisheries. None of these have received the same regulatory attention until relatively recently, and since the UN Fish Stocks Agreement was adopted in 1995 there has been many initiatives to strengthen the hand of responsible states...

...I would like to make Peter’s appeal mine, and insist again on this problem. “Professor Romano points to a timely debate about the age-old problem of how to manage the ocean commons. There are indeed preliminary discussions underway about working up a new UNCLOS “Implementing Agreement” for biodiversity (and living resources) in areas beyond national jurisdictions. Also underway are serious negotiations to establish in the short-term new treaty-based regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs) for the Southern Pacific and Southern Indian Oceans that are likely to have broad-based authority to conserve...

...Annex VII of the UNCLOS. ITLOS can appoint members in case of a deadlock, but I don’t know if that happened here. In fact, ITLOS is a largely dormant institution (15 cases so far, in its entire 13 year history). The U.S., for instance, has opted out of the ITLOS for almost all disputes (assuming it eventually ratifies UNCLOS) in favor of the Annex VII arbitral process. This proceeding wasn’t even held at ITLOS’s chambers in Hamburg. Instead, it was administered by the Permanent Court of Arbitration situated (where else?)...

...the relevant regime is international human rights law, complemented by the law of the sea, in which intentional lethal force is exceptional and tightly constrained, and distress at sea pulls strongly toward rescue and criminal process, including the duty to render assistance reflected in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea  (UNCLOS).  If, by contrast, an International Humanitarian Law (IHL) framework is established, the analysis shifts to the conduct of hostilities rules.  Law Applicable A State can describe an operation as a “war” and still lack an...

...perfunctory commitments such as “capacity-building”, “technical support” and “information sharing”, the UN Law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS) and the MA being major exceptions. The concept of CHM that forms the basis of benefit-sharing in these two instruments, however, has fallen out of favour. This is evident from the reluctance of major space-faring nations to ratify the MA, and more recently, from the departure of negotiations for an implementing agreement concerning the conservation of Biodiversity in areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) from a fully CHM-based model to a narrower “benefit...

...to the WCPFC Record of Fishing Vessels, all three fishing vessels were flagged to China, owned by Chinese companies, and commanded by Chinese nationals. Because the abuse occurred on the high seas, where no state exercises sovereignty, China as flag state holds exclusive enforcement jurisdiction over those vessels under Article 92(1) of UNCLOS. It also means that China holds the primary jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute the alleged forced labour on board, and bears the primary duty to protect the human rights of everyone aboard those vessels. However, no visible...

...of villages, rape and pillage.” The U.S. State Department filed a statement of interest opposing the litigation. By a 2-1 majority, the Ninth Circuit ruled, among other things, that (1) all of the plaintiffs’ claims, with the exception of the UNCLOS claim, assert jus cogens violations that are actionable under Sosa; (2) the UNCLOS claim, while not jus cogens, can provide the basis of an actionable ATCA claim given the widespread ratification of that treaty; (3) corporations can be vicariously liable for violations of jus cogens norms; (4) the State...