| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
134947
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The decision of the International Court of Justice in the Australia/Japan Whaling Case marks an advance in the law of the sea and the obligation on states to cooperate in common ocean resource regimes. The Court found substantially for Australia, prohibiting Japan's long-running program to capture large cetaceans in the Southern Ocean around Antarctica for scientific research. The Court's discussion of the criteria for states to design and implement scientific research whaling programs is assessed, as is the obligation for cooperation in such research and ocean research generally. The result for whaling and for the future work of the International Whaling Commission is considered.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
134949
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Market-based incentives are a new approach to direct fisheries toward greater sustainability. The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) is the leading certification scheme for wild capture fisheries. Four Russian fisheries were certified from 2010 to 2014. Despite a slow start, the Russian fishery assessments have gone more quickly, received less public criticism, and scored better over time. Consensus is emerging that the Russian system for fisheries management fulfills the MSC requirements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
134948
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The case Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v. Japan) decided by the International Court of Justice is a landmark that introduces new parameters for measuring the “reasonableness” of scientific research by permit under the International Convention on Whaling. However, aspects of these parameters and how they may be applied in future cases remain uncertain. Because the Court's interpretation of the language “for purposes of scientific research” avoids defining scientific research, the Court's decision provides only a limited degree of clarification for States that intend to operate scientific whaling programs under Article VIII of the Convention. The Court's reasonableness test is unlikely to prevent scientific whaling. States who no longer support the dual object and purpose of the Whaling Convention may want to consider negotiating a new international instrument that would be more protective of whales and their habitat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
134951
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Since the 1969 North Sea Continental Shelf cases, natural prolongation has been a semisacred expression that characterizes the continental shelf. This article examines whether this notion is still viable. A comparative study of its current use in the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea against its original use reveals misunderstandings in three key aspects: entitlement, delineation, and delimitation of the continental shelf. This article concludes that natural prolongation no longer constitutes a pivot in the legal understanding of the continental shelf.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
134950
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The current standoff over Huangyan Island (Scarborough Reef/Shoal) between China and the Philippines is one that above all concerns the sovereignty over the island. The Philippines made its position known in 1997 that it relies on effective occupation of the island as the basis for its claim. This article, a preliminary study, seeks to demonstrate that there are not two competing titles respecting Huangyan Island's ownership, but only one, i.e., China's. Even in terms of the doctrine of effective occupation, China has a superior claim to the title to the island.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|