Search: UNCLOS

...the legality of the Chinese “nine-dash line”. I think this filing has much more political than legal significance. As a legal matter, I don’t think there is any procedure in the UNCLOS dispute settlement system for third-party interventions, so I think this is really just like sending a letter to the arbitral tribunal. It has no legal significance, and the tribunal has no obligation to consider it. But of course, it has the right to do so if it believes it is relevant to the dispute before it. On the...

...to be an effective counter to China here for at least two reasons (one legal, one policy-based): 1) China has opted out of any “compulsory” system of international dispute resolution that would rule on its territorial claims in the South China Sea (or anywhere, for that matter). This “opt-out” is perfectly legal and may very well prevent the Philippines from even making their full case to the UNCLOS arbitration tribunal. There are no other legal institutions that have jurisdiction. So the only way “lawfare” can work here is if China...

...and Ohio State Law. There is a nice 2008 profile of him in the UW alum magazine here. The following is a personal note from Professor Song: We both are students of the New Haven School for the legal studies, where I met Professor Myres S. McDougal when attending the annual policy science meeting held at Yale Law School. His book entitled THE NEW INTERNATIONAL LAW OF FISHERIES: UNCLOS 1982 AND BEYOND (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994) is one of the most authoritative textbooks for students who are interested in studying...

...to moderate Taiwan’s expansive South China Sea claims. In fact, her statement was usefully trumpeted by the Chinese government and media as a sign of cross-strait Chinese solidarity. I have never understood the Taiwanese government’s obsession with maintaining its expansive claims in the South China Sea. It is a waste of government resources to protect a fishing industry that doesn’t really deserve so much protection. I am particularly surprised that the current Taiwan president is acting so aggressively to protect Taiping Island’s status as an “island” under UNCLOS entitled to...

...the START treaty currently being renegotiated or the older SALT treaties or many SOFAs that exist today. And then there are competing acronyms; the earlier reference to UNCLOS has little appeal to its opponents, who prefer to refer to that treaty as LOST. So what are my FILAs? Actually, I tend to appreciate acronyms that suggest a drafting committee had a sense of humor about their project. I’m pretty sure, for example, that in devising a POPRC, the treaty-makers were not merely creating a very interesting example of international delegation,...

...Life at Sea (SOLAS) and the SAR Convention. French and British authorities, therefore, have a duty to cooperate to prevent loss of life at sea and ensure completion of a search and rescue mission. While seeking accountability for failure to rescue or to cooperate under the Law of Sea is possible in theory, the regime remains fundamentally a State-centred one – with individuals generally deprived of locus standi before the dispute resolution measures under UNCLOS including the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea (ITLOS). Accountability gaps in such...

...September 26-27, 2012 on the topic of “The Law and Practice of the International Criminal Court: Achievements, Impact and Challenges”. The conference will take place at the Peace Palace, The Hague, The Netherlands. More information and registration can be found here. The British Institute of International and Comparative Law (BIICL) and the Law Society of Northern Ireland will commemorate the 30th anniversary of the opening for signature of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (“UNCLOS”) with a conference in Belfast, Ireland on November 22-23, 2012. More...

...but my sense is that the district court opinion is intended to aid the Fourth Circuit in reaching what I think is the correct result in Said — that the treaty language is controlling. Since Somalia is a party to UNCLOS (as are 160 other nations), it hardly seems unfair to consider the pirates to have fair notice of its provisions, whereas it seems more of a stretch to consider them on notice of an 1820 decision of a foreign supreme court. Judge Davis’s opinion in Hasan is available here....

...the same time it is forbidden under UNCLOS from hampering transit passage in any way and is by law required to give publicity to any danger to navigation. In its Wimbledon Case the PCIJ ruled that there was a general rule embodied in Art. 380 of the Treaty of Versailles granting full access to vessels of commerce and war to the Kiel Canal. As Germany is the only country that has control over this waterway it holds a dominant position. The same goes for the 1901 Hay-Pauncefote treaty on the...

...folks at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in Hamburg — including Chinese and Russian judges! —, who (again, in theory) might “use a legal dispute to score points against American ‘unilateralism’ and ‘arrogance’ for a global audience keen to humble the United States” and find American anti-terrorism operations on the high seas inconsistent with UNCLOS. Sounds pretty unlikely to me, in the same way that the ICC was never going to haul US servicemembers into the dock, at least not anytime soon. Remember, ITLOS is a...

This week on Opinio Juris, Kristen Boon followed up on her discussion last week about changes towards more transparency and fairness in the UN’s Al Qaida sanctions regime. Craig Allen contributed a guest post on the ITLOS’ interim order for the release by Ghana of Argentina’s ARA Libertad. UNCLOS was also central to Duncan Hollis’ post on China’s submission to the Continental Shelf Commission in relation to the dispute regarding the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands. Peggy McGuinness congratulated Diane Amann, Leila Sadat and Patricia Sellers on their appointments as special advisor to...

...legal problems which may arise in the carrying out of the programmes to explore outer space”. However, by their first meeting, only two states had launched a grand total of just 20 satellites. They had no template to reference – the Antarctic Treaty was only halfway negotiated and not yet drafted, while the four treaties from UNCLOS I left key questions unanswered. The few scholars who’d considered law in space by then had taken one giant leap into becoming punchlines – a joke retold this summer on The Good Fight....