| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
158328
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The authority vested in the President of the ITLOS by article 3 of Annex VII to the LOS Convention to appoint arbitrators for the Annex VII arbitral tribunal is important for the effective operation of the dispute settlement system established by the LOS Convention as well as for the ITLOS itself. There are some apparent irregularities in the practice of the President so far, and the transparency of the appointment process needs to be enhanced.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
142286
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article discusses the issue of treaty regimes in parallel to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in respect of peaceful settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention. The duality in relevancy of such disputes to two treaties at the same time would have begged the question about which treaty should be applied to settle them, but UNCLOS has a clear, conflict-of-law style rules in place to address the question. Article 281(1) is one such rule, and, with its exclusionary effect, stands out as a super provision of the Convention.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
156866
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
142119
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
It is the first time the full tribunal of the ITLOS has entertained a request for advisory opinion. The Tribunal expounded the legal basis of its advisory function under the LOS Convention as well as the prerequisites for the exercise of the jurisdiction in a particular case. The Tribunal held that the flag State has the responsibility to ensure that its vessels do not conduct IUU fishing activities within the EEZ of the coastal State. However, there are some weaknesses in the reasoning of the ITLOS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
137763
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The U-shaped line in the South China Sea has been recently challenged in the international community and this challenge reached its climax when the Philippines presented China with a Notification and Statement of Claim under Article 287 and Annex VII of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOS Convention) on 22 January 2013. In its Statement of Claim, the Philippines requests the Annex VII Arbitral Tribunal to adjudge and declare that China's maritime claims based on the U-shaped line are contrary to the LOS Convention and invalid. Against this background, this article will analyze the issues concerning the related submissions of the Philippines.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
112756
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The three categories of the seafloor highs provided for in Article 76 of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea should be interpreted from the legal perspective and in light of the principle of the natural prolongation. "Oceanic ridges of the deep ocean floor," which are not part of the natural prolongation of the land territory of the coastal state, are the submarine features that have no geomorphological continuity with the landmass of the coastal state. "Submarine elevations," which are not only part of the natural prolongation of the land territory of the coastal state but also the natural component of the continental margin, are those submarine features that have geomorphological as well as geological continuity with the landmass of the coastal state. "Submarine ridges," which are part of the natural prolongation of the land territory of the coastal state but not the natural component of the continental margin, are those submarine features that have geomorphological continuity with the landmass of the coastal state. There are some clear trends as well as obvious variances in the practice of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf in this regard.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
160920
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The Timor Sea Conciliation is the first experience with the compulsory conciliation under Annex V of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The Conciliation Commission addressed the objections to its competence as a preliminary matter and rendered a separate decision. This article examines the approach of the Conciliation Commission in dealing with its competence issues and the understandings of the Conciliation Commission as regards the relevant provisions of the 1982 Convention.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|