| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
004445
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Durham, International Boundaries Research Unit, 1993.
|
| Description |
17p.;figures
|
| Series |
Territory Briefing;5
|
| Standard Number |
1897643039
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 035232 | R 320.12/MIL 035232 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
061003
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
059892
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
087182
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article examines the process by which certain coastal states in East and Southeast Asia may confirm their sovereign rights over areas of continental shelf more than 200 nautical miles from their baselines - areas commonly termed the "outer" or "extended" continental shelf. The article provides an overview and explanation of this legally and technically complex process. It also highlights some of the numerous issues and uncertainties in respect of both the interpretation of the relevant provisions of the international law of the sea and practical aspects of the implementation of the process itself. Many states around the world, including in East and Southeast Asia, are striving to meet a deadline for submissions related to the outer continental shelf of May 2009. Existing and potential submissions are outlined. The potential opportunities and challenges associated with outer continental shelf are then discussed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
010098
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Feb 1996.
|
| Description |
75-79
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
073059
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
059088
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
069243
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
065491
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
062028
|
|
|
| 11 |
ID:
149531
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
On 12 July 2016, the Arbitral Tribunal in the case between the Philippines and China delivered its award.1 The Tribunal’s ruling represents a sweeping victory for the Philippines and fundamentally alters the international legal land, or more appropriately, seascape of the South China Sea. This article has three aims: first, to outline the character of the Tribunal and the status of its award; second to summarize the Tribunal’s main findings; and third, to explore some of the potential implications of the award, both within and beyond the South China Sea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 12 |
ID:
188392
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This dedicatory section in this issue of the Journal of the Indian Ocean Region includes three papers as part of an effort to honor Commodore Professor Sam Bateman who passed away in October 2020. Before joining the academic community full-time, Sam served in the Royal Australian Navy (RAN) for four decades, commanding several ships. Sam was a scholar and a sailor, something that was illustrated by his taking on the role of the first Director General of the RAN’s Maritime Studies Program which later became the Sea Power Centre Australia. Further, in his final posting with the Navy, Sam became the founding Director of the Centre of Maritime Policy (CMP) at the University of Wollongong, the organization that became the Australian National Centre for Ocean Resources and Security (ANCORS) in 2005. Further, from 2004 to 2018, he served Senior Fellow and Advisor to the S. Rajaratnam School of Maritime Security Programme (2004–2018).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 13 |
ID:
067316
|
|
|
| 14 |
ID:
052858
|
|
|
| 15 |
ID:
124568
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea's March 2012 Judgment in the Bay of Bengal Case is a landmark decision in multiple ways. It represents the first maritime boundary to be delimitated by the Tribunal. It is the first adjudication of a maritime boundary in Asia, and it is also the first judicial delimitation of a maritime boundary for parts of the extended continental shelf located seaward of the 200-nautical-mile limit from baselines. While the Tribunal's ruling largely resolves the maritime dispute between Bangladesh and Myanmar, it also raises a number of questions and concerns that are highlighted in this article, including the Tribunal's approach to delimitation both within and beyond the 200-nautical-mile limit, the treatment of islands, the interplay between law of the sea institutions and the creation of a so-called grey area where continental shelf jurisdiction falls to one state and water column jurisdiction to the other.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|