Search: UNCLOS

This fortnight on Opinio Juris, Julian shared his impressions of the Asian Society of International Law Biennial Meeting in New Delhi, and summarized his unofficial notes on Judge Xue Hanqin’s personal comments regarding China’s non-participation in the UNCLOS arbitration started by the Philippines. Peter, meanwhile, was at the 2013 Emma Lazarus Lecture and found much to agree with in Jagdish Baghwati’s proposals for state, as opposed to federal, powers in immigration reform. Peter later alerted us to Somalia’s ratification of the Children’s Rights Convention. This of course leaves the US...

...the need for action is greater than it has ever been in order to protect and expand America’s sovereignty and national and economic security. And from that ad (quoting John Negroponte): With ratification, America would secure international recognition of the greatest expansion of resource sovereignty in its history, gaining exclusive access to resources in a region larger than the area of the Louisiana Purchase and Alaska combined. So UNCLOS is pro-sovereignty because it literally (littorally) and legally recognizes US jurisidiction over huge swathes of the ocean. You have to admire...

...that international humanitarian law applies, smugglers’ boats would be entitled to protection as civilian objects. The smugglers’ activities should not qualify as ‘piracy’ under the UNCLOS Article 101. That would in any case only make them liable to seizure by force by any State on the high seas (Article 105). To argue that the provision allows to destroy their ships when docked in a harbour seems too much of a stretch. 3. Conclusion: Another Problem that Cannot be Solved by Force While there are legal avenues open for using force...

...China to react, albeit through the soft pressure of an Annex VII UNCLOS arbitral proceeding. It is impressive how China can keep three of its neighbors scrambling to respond while it slowly builds up its territorial claims. In the long run, China v. India/Japan/Philippines/Vietnam/etc. seems like bad odds, but so far it is working. Will international arbitration play any role in resolving these disputes? I doubt it, but we will soon get some empirical evidence if the Philippines is able to win a judgment that affects or shifts China’s behavior....

...see Clinton emphasizing the need for the United States to fix the Human Rights Council and join CTBT and CEDAW, or Edwards wanting the U.S. to renegotiate NAFTA and join the ICC, while Kucinich talks about signing Kyoto and Obama indicates his intention to reinvigorate the Geneva Conventions and have the U.S. join UNCLOS. I really hope that these four won’t be the only candidates to contribute to ASIL’s project (for example, I can’t imagine the site without Senator Biden’s survey response). And, of course, given that ASIL identifies itself...

...pilot draws that mission!) Although provocative and dangerous, it seem clear to me that China’s ADIZ does not violate international law. Indeed, China’s Foreign Ministry was perfectly correct today in its claim that its ADIZ is consistent with “the U.N. Charter and related state practice.” Countries (led by the U.S.) have long drawn ADIZs beyond their national sovereign airspace as a measure to protect their national airspace. This practice, although not exactly blessed by any treaty, does not appear to violate either the Chicago Convention or UNCLOS. (See Peter Dutton’s...

...of a garment factory in Bangladesh, which Roger hoped would provide an incentive to sign up to agreements, such as the Bangladesh Fire and Building Safety Agreement, that include a binding arbitration clause to ensure better protection of human rights. In news from international courts, Julian updated us on the appointment of the final arbitrators for the UNCLOS arbitration lodged by the Philippines against China, and assessed China’s “talking points” on the case. He also urged the Supreme Court to follow the ICJ’s lead and release video recordings of oral...

...applicable in MLE operations, especially in disputed maritime areas. Finally, this paper will present the view that the application of LONW is not purely a legal matter, the context plays a more significant role in determining the applicable law. MLE vs. Use of Force at Sea: A Borderline Jurisprudence Coastal States, to implement their maritime legislations, sometimes employ armed force during MLE operations. Although this is a quite common phenomenon, as the ITLOS also pointed out in the M/V Saiga (No. 2) case, “the UNCLOS does not contain express provisions...

With Julian’s many interesting posts on UNCLOS, I thought I would flag for our readers Andrew Guzman’s interesting essay published on SSRN entitled the “Consent Problem in International Law.” Here’s the abstract: The legal obligations of a state are overwhelmingly based on its consent to be bound. This commitment to consent preserves the power of states, but also creates a serious problem for the international system. Because any state can object to any proposed rule of international law, only changes that benefit every single affected state can be adopted–creating a...

...Economic Zone is groundless. Unclos allows coastal states to claim a 200-nautical mile EEZ, but coastal states have no rights to infringe on the inherent territory and sovereignty of other countries,” it said. China’s position is that this is a question of sovereignty, and not the Law of the Sea. There is no basis for the ITLOS to assert jurisdiction over this dispute, without China’s consent. This seems right to me. Except that no one is sure exactly what the basis of China’s sovereignty claim is, but assuming it has...

Both Eugene and Maggie disagree with my claim that politically-motivated acts of violence on the high seas were not traditionally considered piracy under international law, but were instead simply criminal acts that the offended state could prosecute as it saw fit. Here is Eugene (my emphasis; combining two comments): The rule is clear as both a matter of customary international law and the Law of the Sea Convention. On the latter score, the “private” ends requirement of the UNCLOS Art. 101 (which defines piracy) has to be read in conjunction...

...of the right to die to terminally ill minors as an argument to attack on Roper v Simmons, and later replied to Eugene’s response. For those hungry for more reading: Kevin recommended a post by Sergey Vasiliev on the relationship between Perisic and Sainovic while Julian recommended Stephan Talmon’s book chapter on the question of UNCLOS jurisdiction in Philippines arbitration against China, and Duncan announced the winners of the 2013 ASIL Certificates of Merit. Finally, Jessica wrapped up the news and I listed events and announcements. Have a nice weekend!...