| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
191902
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article analyzes the consequences of the recently declassified Soviet decree No. 331-112 of 27 April 1965 that established, inter alia, the status of the Soviet Arctic straits along the Northern Sea Route with respect to warships’ right of innocent passage. This article argues that the decree, read in conjunction with Article 5.2 of the 1958 Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone and Article 8.2 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, establishes a right of innocent passage through the majority of the Russian Arctic straits, which warships can enjoy. Furthermore, this article asserts that the decree calls into question the existence of a customary regime regulating navigation through the Arctic straits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
169289
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
While the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC) expressly allocates jurisdiction in regard to several activities that are conducted in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ), it does not do so for bunkering and ship-to-ship (STS) oil transfers. This article sheds light on different types of bunkering operations, as well as on the often-overlooked practice of STS oil transfers. It suggests that in the case of bunkering, the allocation of jurisdiction as between coastal and flag states depends on the activity of the vessel being bunkered. In the case of STS oil transfers, it concludes that jurisdictional competence needs to be determined in line with Article 59 of the LOSC. The article also examines relevant state practice and contends that the LOSC’s ambiguity is no license to unfettered coastal state regulation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
072475
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2006.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The Ishigaki Strait is an international strait by the terms of the United Nations Law of the Sea Convention, but for national security reasons it is not recognized as such by the Japanese government, which advocates a narrower definition of what constitutes an international strait in which the right of transit passage applies. China, as a traditional land power with tradinationally weak maritime forces, has historically agreed with Japan's limitations on access through such straits. As China's maritime strength grows, it has increasingly greater interest in access to ocean spaces. However, because of tension and poor coordination between its military and foreign policy bureaucracies, China missed an opportunity during the diplomatic crisis in November 2004 to align its position on maritime law with its strategic interests.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
188218
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Part XV of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) establishes a system for compulsory and binding dispute resolution. Article 288(2) of UNCLOS allows the dispute resolution system of Part XV to be used by the parties to another international agreement in accordance with the terms of that other agreement, as long as that agreement is related to the purposes of UNCLOS. This article examines the treaty practice under Article 288(2) to assess how those other agreements (which are mostly regional fisheries management organization agreements) provide for access to Part XV. The article examines these agreements within the following analytical framework: (1) Are these agreements related to the purposes of UNCLOS? (2) What jurisdiction, ratione materiae, do the agreements confer on the court or tribunal? (3) How do the agreements provide for submission? (4) How do the agreements deal with applicable law issues? (5) How do the agreements deal with the availability of provisional measures?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
159409
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article examines the conclusion in the decision of the Arbitral Tribunal in the South China Sea Case that straight baselines may not be used to enclose off-shore archipelagos unless they meet the criteria set out in Articles 46 and 47 of the Law of the Sea Convention.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|