Search: UNCLOS

...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...

...made to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) by the States parties to the UNCLOS. With regards to State practice, the Court relies on three key factors: a) vast majority of States that have not asserted their CLCS submissions an entitlement to a continental shelf that extends within 200 nautical miles from the baseline of another State; (b) only a small number of States that have claimed an extended continental shelf encroaching the maritime areas within 200 nautical miles of another State; and c) States objecting...

...obligation requires States to take preventive measures to protect life through the provision, operation and maintenance of effective SAR services required under UNCLOS (Article 98(2)) and SOLAS (Annex, Cap V, Reg 7) and SAR (Annex, Cap 2.1.1.) Conventions. It is noteworthy that obligations of due diligence necessitate not only the adoption of appropriate rules and measures under these treaties but also “…a certain level of vigilance in their enforcement…” (Pulp Mills case, para 197). The obligation of due diligence translates itself into a duty to take all necessary measures to...

...provide maritime situational awareness and protect vessels against multi-domain attacks at sea. It should remain defensive in nature. Forces deployed for the operation should act in compliance with applicable international law, including customary international law, including self-defence where conditions are met, to defend against an imminent or ongoing attack on their own, or third-party, vessels. The operation should act in full compliance with UNCLOS. emphasis added This decision indicates the growing practical importance of issues relating to the use of force against threats below the threshold of an armed attack. ...

...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...

...operations of maritime PMSCs (2022), operations of the floating armories continue to raise concerns. Recent incidents of sinking vessels used as FAs close to conflict areas, without international oversight of transfer/management of stockpiles on them, raise further concerns about their regulation. While the International Maritime Organization does not have specific regulatory framework guiding operations of FAs, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) addresses criminal jurisdiction on board of a foreign ship, which is quite limited in relation to territorial waters, and shifts responsibility mainly to regulate...

...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!...

...specifically: the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS); the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS); the International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue (SAR); and relevant maritime traffic treaties and International Maritime Organisation Resolutions. This legal framework imposes upon States a duty to require shipmasters to assist and rescue any individual in distress at sea. This duty to assist and rescue, recognised as a principle of customary international law (EC Guidance, p. 7), by corollary includes a duty for States to disembark rescued...

...issues, including public international law disputes, investor-state arbitrations, commercial contract disputes, law of the sea arbitrations under Annex VII of UNCLOS, and energy charter treaty disputes. It has even administered an arbitration between a State and an armed movement within its territory (namely the Abyei Arbitration between the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army in 2008 – 9). One institutional feature of note is that PCA offers a development assistance fund for states that require financial aid for use of PCA’s services. Member states donate to the...

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...

This week on Opinio Juris, Julian wondered if the ICJ’s judgment in the Whaling in the Antarctic would ring in the end of the Whale Wars. He also curiously awaits the release of the Philippines memorial filed with the PCA in the UNCLOS arbitration against China and assessed China’s reaction to the submission. Meanwhile, Kevin handed out advice on how to get yourself convicted of terrorism and Chris compared Russia’s rhetoric regarding Crimea to its rhetoric regarding intervention and recognition in Kosovo and South Ossetia. We also hosted a symposium...