United Nations Convention On The Law Of The Sea Research Articles

The Role of UNCLOS 1982 in Maintaining and Protecting the International Marine Environment

The disposal of nuclear waste in the Sea of Japan is a complex and controversial issue where it involves aspects of international law and the international environment. Japan, as one of the largest nuclear waste-producing countries, has faced pressure to manage that waste in a way that complies with international legal principles and environmental norms. International law, such as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), provides a framework for the management of marine resources, including waste disposal issues. However, the lack of clarity in international regulations regarding nuclear waste creates challenges in determining the limits of state responsibility and obligations. From an international environmental perspective, nuclear waste disposal can have long-term detrimental impacts on marine ecosystems and human health. Sustainability and sustainability of marine ecology must be a primary consideration in decisions regarding nuclear waste disposal. Meanwhile, various international conventions and agreements such as the Espoo Convention and the Aarhus Convention emphasize the importance of public participation in environmental decision-making. Therefore, the involvement of civil society in the decision process regarding the disposal of nuclear waste in the Sea of Japan is essential to ensure representation of public interests and concerns. This research aims to find out and analyze Japan's actions in dumping nuclear waste into the Pacific Ocean. The problem formulation in this research is: what is the role of UNCLOS 1982 in maintaining and protecting the international marine environment? This research was written using the normative juridical research type, which includes examining legal conflicts, legal vacancies, or vague norms.

The legal framework of the European Union in the field of combating environmental crimes

The article focuses on the activities of the European Union regarding the development of an effective legal framework for combating environmental crimes considering modern realities. It is noted that the existing norms on combating environmental crime in the EU are based on the provisions of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU which sets the competence of the EU to define criminal offenses and sanctions in the spheres of EU policy to which harmonization measures apply (Article 83(2)). Attention is paid to the provisions of the following directives: Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of the environment through criminal law and replacing Directive 2008/99/EC, which supplemented the list of illegal acts with new categories of crimes, established a deterrent level of sanctions, which ensures a more consistent application of conditions for enterprises in the EU; Directive 2004/35/CE of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 on environmental liability with regard to the prevention and remedying of environmental damage, which sets rules based on the «polluter pays» principle and related directives 2000/60/EC, 2008/56/EC, 2009/147/EC and 92/43/EEC. It is noted that the EU constantly works on improving the provisions of the acts adopted by it in the specified area, as evidenced by the directives, on the basis of which changes and amendments were made to the above-mentioned directives, regarding safety issues, waste management, simplification of reporting obligations in the field of environmental legislation (Directives 2006/21/EC, 2009/31/EC, 2013/30/EC, Regulation (EC) 2019/101).
 Attention is focused on acts related to the protection of certain objects, including: 1) acts aimed at combating pollution from ships: Directive 2005/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on ship-source pollution and on the introduction of penalties, including criminal penalties, for pollution offence (as amended), Council Framework Decision 2005/667/JHA of 12 July 2005 to strengthen the criminal-law framework for the enforcement of the law against ship-source pollution; 2) acts on combating trade in wild animals: Regulation (EC) No 338/97 (as amended), Commission regulation (EC) No 865/2006 (as amended), Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 792/2012 97 (as amended), Revision of the EU action plan against wildlife trafficking of 2022.
 It is noted that EU legislation is based on international universal acts adopted within the UN in the relevant field (International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) of 1973, United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) of 1982, Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) of 1975), which simplifies law enforcement and the introduction of measures to combat environmental crime.
 The importance of strategic acts adopted by the EU, including the Agenda and Action Plan on Drugs 2021–2025 and the Biodiversity strategy for 2030 is emphasized. Relevant conclusions have been drawn.

The role of environmental impact assessments in the establishment and management of marine protected areas under the UNCLOS and the BBNJ Agreement

AbstractThis article analyses the role of environmental impact assessments (EIAs) in establishing and managing marine protected areas (MPAs) in areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ) under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the Agreement under the UNCLOS on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement). The analysis is conducted by discussing Articles 194 and 205–206 of the UNCLOS and Articles 27–28 and 30 of the BBNJ Agreement. It concludes that the interaction between EIA and MPAs in ABNJ is not only desirable but also critical for the success of MPAs. The BBNJ Agreement operationalises the role of EIAs in establishing and managing MPAs under the UNCLOS by (1) granting EIA an important role in assessing the susceptibility of an MPA to the impact of certain human activities and (2) factoring part of indicative criteria for identifying potential MPAs in the list of criteria to be considered for conducting EIA screening.

Assessing the Legal Framework for Marine Protected Areas in High Seas: Challenges and Prospects under the UN BBNJ Agreement

Oceans, integral to a healthy global ecosystem, are protected partly through marine protected areas (MPAs). Despite numerous MPAs within national jurisdictions, the Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (ABNJ) remain significantly neglected. Currently, most MPAs in ABNJ are governed by the OSPAR or CAMLR frameworks, which exhibit substantial deficiencies due to the fragmented state of international laws. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), for instance, offers limited provisions for ABNJ. To address these legislative gaps, negotiations for the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) were initiated, leading to the successful adoption of the BBNJ Agreement in March 2023. This paper critically examines the existing regional treaties overseeing high-seas MPAs and explores the innovative approaches introduced by the BBNJ Agreement for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity in ABNJ. The analysis concludes that the BBNJ Agreement provides a more comprehensive and sustainable management framework for high-seas MPAs, thus effectively overcoming the limitations inherent in regional treaties.

Reimagining the Law of the Sea: Evolution or Revolution?

This article explores the challenges for the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) in protecting the marine environment and biodiversity. The traditional approach to developing the law when facing new challenges is through evolution – the iterative amendment of existing instruments and guidelines. I discuss the recent Agreement for the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biodiversity in Areas beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement) as an example of the evolution approach. I challenge whether evolution in the law of the sea is sufficient to meet the significant challenges facing regulation of uses of the ocean, and ask whether revolution is needed, through new concepts and processes.

International Legal Framework for Joint Governance of Oceans and Fisheries: Challenges and Prospects in Governing Large Marine Ecosystems (LMEs) under Sustainable Development Goal 14

Sustainable Development Goal 14 (SDG 14) was launched in 2015 to provide an overarching governance framework for long-term sustainable ocean development. This research paper analyzes the extent to which global and regional organizations are coherent with SDG 14 under the existing frameworks of international law. This research paper further assessed Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) under the framework of the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and International Environmental Law (IEL) in the context of joint governance of ocean and fisheries as Large Marine Ecosystems (LMEs). According to its objectives, the research indicated that coherence across governing instruments should be increased for the governance of LMEs, leading to the development of a mechanism representing consistency with SDG 14. As a result, a mechanism that demonstrates the coherence of SDG 14 with Agenda—2030 is made, which indicates that, in order to govern fisheries and oceans as LMEs jointly, coherence among governing instruments must be increased. The conclusion followed SDG 14’s recommended actions, which are sly in line with UNCLOS and IEL, although the current initiatives of the regional organizations should be updated.

Emergency Marine Protected Areas Under the BBNJ Agreement: A Feasible Solution for Emergencies in ABNJ?

An emergency marine protected area (EMPA) refers to a type of area-based management tool (ABMT) designated on an interim basis with immediate effect, pending the establishment of formal marine protected areas (MPAs). The marine environment is currently under an increasing threat of abrupt extreme events. However, formal MPAs are not an ideal tool to render an emergency response owing to their time-consuming procedures for adoption and hindrance from competing interests. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and other international agreements cannot provide a comprehensive solution to combat various unforeseeable extreme events. Facing this situation, the development of an EMPA is proposed. The BBNJ Agreement includes an article providing for emergency measures in areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ). It concludes that establishing EMPAs could be an effective solution to marine environmental emergencies. The new Agreement offers hope for implementing EMPAs in ABNJ. In addition, EMPAs are expected to play an important role in ecosystem recovery after climatic extreme events in a timely and flexible manner in the context of climate change.

Study on the interpretation and application of the concept of “effective control” by the ISA

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) include the term of “effective control” in its sponsorship provisions but do not clarify its meaning. To arrive at a consensus on its connotation, the International Seabed Authority (ISA) began discussions on the concept of “effective control” that have been ongoing since 2014 but have still not yielded any definite conclusion. The interpretation and application of this concept tend to be construed as a regulatory standard in current discussion documents and practices of the ISA, where this allow contractors from developed countries to easily use the method of “sponsoring states of convenience” to apply for and obtain contracts to reserved areas. This is inimical to the goals of effective marine environmental protection and the implementation of preferential treatment for developing countries. The international community should pay attention to this issue and correct the unreasonable tendencies of the ISA in this regard.

The Agreement Under the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation & Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction

On June 19, 2023, the Intergovernmental Conference on an international legally binding instrument under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ Intergovernmental Conference) adopted, by consensus, the Agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine BioLogical Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement or Agreement). The Agreement, which is grounded in and builds on the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), specifically addresses issues relating to the conservation and sustainable use of the marine biodiversity of the high seas. The adoption of the Agreement was the culmination of nearly two decades of work under the auspices of the UN General Assembly.

Area‐based management tools under the BBNJ Agreement: Ambition or illusion?

AbstractThis article intends to answer the question of whether and to what extent the arrangements for area‐based management tools (ABMTs) under the Agreement on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement) can contribute to the comprehensiveness, coherence and consistency of the international legal regime relating to ABMTs. To answer this question, the article analyses and evaluates the key aspects of the arrangements for ABMTs of the BBNJ Agreement, including consistency with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the interpretation of ‘not undermining’, decision making and the implementation mechanism. It concludes that the arrangements for ABMTs of the BBNJ Agreement are consistent with the UNCLOS and may contribute to the comprehensiveness, coherence and consistency of the international legal regime relating to ABMTs to a large extent. The article further notes that the arrangements for ABMTs of the BBNJ Agreement are ambitious, but lots of work needs to be done to ensure the ambition does not become an illusion.

New developments and trends in extended continental shelf delineation practices—An analysis of China's participation and response strategies

Rights and interests concerning the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles (extended continental shelf, ECS) are related to important aspects of a nation's marine utilization such as marine resource development, marine technological innovation, and the construction of marine ecological civilization. China is a country with a long coastline and has the right to delineate large areas of ECS according to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). However, the process of confirming China's ECS rights under international law is particularly complicated owing to the complex maritime delineation disputes between China and its neighboring countries. From the perspective of international law, this study uses the method of historical analysis and case analysis to retrospectively explore the evolution of the international legal frameworks governing ECS and analyze its current characteristics and trends in practice. On this basis, the paper evaluates the major challenges of China's national practice in ECS delineation and puts forward suggested countermeasures for safeguarding its legitimate rights and interests related to ECS.

Towards carbon neutrality in shipping: Impact of European Union's emissions trading system for shipping and China's response

Global climate change and the rising volume of world trade have made achieving carbon neutrality in shipping essential for meeting the temperature control targets outlined in the Paris Agreement. Consequently, the European Union (EU) has emerged as a strong advocate for carbon neutrality in shipping and is integrating the shipping industry into its Emissions Trading System (ETS) to enable decarbonisation. The EU's unilateral measure is expected to trigger a series of reactions from the global shipping industry. As a result, China, both a major shipping country and developing nation, could potentially attract significant international attention. This study examines the EU ETS for shipping from the perspective of international law. On one hand, the "Kyoto Protocol" does not exclude parties other than the International Maritime Organization (IMO) from taking unilateral measures to address the issue of carbon emissions from shipping. Furthermore, in accordance with the principle of national territorial sovereignty stipulated in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the EU has the right to reduce shipping emissions only within its national jurisdiction. Therefore, the EU has the legal authority to adopt an ETS for shipping, but the effectiveness of its extraterritorial jurisdiction lacks the support of international law. However, since the EU ETS for shipping applies to all ships without distinction, it may potentially violate the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR), which could have negative implications for the shipping industry in developing countries. This study focuses on China as the research subject and offers potential solutions for the country when addressing the EU ETS for shipping.

Assessment of Stakeholder Options to Participate in Disputes Over Seabed Mining

Exploitative mining in the deep seas is coming, and with it will arrive a new wave of international disputes. Numerous stakeholders will be interested in these disputes, such as those seeking to profit from exploitative mining activity; developing states seeking to benefit from equitable sharing of wealth and lessons learned; and environmentalists all over the world worried about environmental catastrophes that could result from such activity. Stakeholders include the mining contractor, the sponsoring state of the contractor, the International Seabed Authority (ISA) created by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) to control mining activity in the deep seas, states (both states parties to UNCLOS and those that are not) and affected communities, which includes Indigenous peoples and climate activists. However, the dispute settlement system of UNCLOS treats these different stakeholders unequally in terms of whether they may be parties to a dispute proceeding and, if so, what claims they may bring. Unsurprisingly, the system excludes non-states parties and non-state entities (apart from the International Seabed Authority and the contractor), such as Indigenous peoples and climate activists, from serving as parties (claimant or respondent) to a dispute. This essay explores the limited ways in which excluded stakeholders nonetheless may be able to participate in a dispute initiated under UNCLOS. Specifically, they may serve as witnesses, experts, or amicus curiae in proceedings before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), the Seabed Disputes Chamber, or a commercial arbitral tribunal. This essay also advocates for the ISA to establish administrative processes for ongoing monitoring and whistleblower complaints. Such processes would allow excluded stakeholders to submit relevant evidence and information that could—and should—be used in any formal dispute settlement processes initiated by those stakeholders who enjoy direct participatory rights.

The Legal Status Issue of Unmanned Maritime Vehicles (UMVs) Used for Military Purposes

In parallel with the advances in technology, the use of unmanned vehicles on the battlefield for military purposes is becoming increasingly widespread. Since the beginning of the new millennium, the undeniable contributions of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) in combat and combat support operations, especially in Afghanistan and Iraq, have made these vehicles indispensable for states, while on the other hand, it has affected the expansion and deepening of the range of missions of unmanned vehicles used in the maritime environment within a limited framework. However, the use of UMVs, which are gaining importance for states day by day and becoming a force multiplier, has also brought along some legal debates. The absence of a provision directly related to UMVs in international maritime law legislation has led to the emergence of grey areas regarding the legal status of these vehicles. Since the increasingly sophisticated UMVs in terms of size, tonnage and level of autonomy diversify in a wide spectrum, not all UMVs will be subject to the same legal status naturally. On the other hand, the problem of legal status becomes more complex as the states take steps towards establishing their national legislation. Based on the provisions of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), it is important to discuss UMVs to understand the potential legal status of these instruments, which are directly related to critical issues such as freedom of navigation, belligerent rights and judicial immunity.

ASEAN and the Major Powers in the South China Sea: the Role of Law, Diplomacy, and Deterrence in Moderating Sovereignty Claims

Abstract This article focuses on the rising strategic significance of the South China Sea for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the major powers. It traces the origins of the South China Sea (SCS) dispute, and the claimants that are directly involved (China, Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia, and Brunei). It then examines why balance of power considerations have influenced and continue to influence the role of regional states as well as the major external powers (China, United States, India, and Japan, together with other interested middle powers such as Australia and Canada). It argues that the SCS is an international maritime regime (global commons), and therefore subject to the principles and practice of International Law, specifically United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Any attempt at nationalisation of the SCS will be rejected under international law, as evidenced by the 2016 decision of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), with respect to the submission in 2013 by the Philippines on its dispute with China, for compulsory arbitration by the The Hague Court. It notes the lack of unity in ASEAN over how to deal with China’s assertive conduct in the SCS. It suggests that only a dynamic balance of power approach, which includes external power engagement with regional interests, will create the necessary space for diplomacy and dialogue by upholding the primacy of the rule of law, freedom of the open seas, and the legitimate rights and interests of all claimant states. It concludes that law, politics, diplomacy, and deterrence are interactive variables requiring strategic management to promote shared interests, stability and security in the South China Sea.

From Constantinople to Oslo to Gaza: Developments of Palestine’s maritime legislation under colonization

Due to its colonial heritage over more than a century, Palestine has been unable to regulate its maritime affairs. The 2015 accession of Palestine to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) offers an opportunity to craft comprehensive legislation that may give rise to the domestication of international law of the sea. Such harmonization is called for annually by the UN General Assembly. Some UNCLOS-based laws might accord Palestine the means of claiming particular maritime rights towards other State parties or even non-parties to UNCLOS, relevant international organizations, law of the sea tribunals, or even companies operating ships, submarines, oil rigs and aircrafts. While the reform process is separate from the State’s ability to enforce these stipulations, domestication of maritime laws would enhance State’s image on the global stage, increasing its credibility and contributing to its independence.

Sustainable and Just Deep-Sea Mining for the Energy Green Transition: A Conundrum Without Legal, Governance or Technological Solutions. The Case of the EU

In January 2023 the International Seabed Authority (ISA), an intergovernmental organization established under the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) granted already thirty contracts for exploration of Deep Seabed Mining, but exploitation has not started yet because ISA has not finalized its regulations, expected in 2025. This article intends to address to what extent is the current deep Seabed mining regime factoring risks and uncertainties in a just and sustainable manner in the current legal framework on environmental liability embedded in the green energy transition’s processes with the EU as case study and enquiry if there are baseline or best practice to learn from. It unravels which type of precautionary approach fits and is just. Deep Seabed Mining is also a social justice, ethical dilemma demanding equitable and share solutions to the benefit of current and future generations because activities of this kind can destroy ecosystems that can take decades to regenerate, if not causing irreversible damage. Law and technology, but also technology will be crucial as new methods guaranteeing an “environmental benign Deep Seabed Mining” will determine how liability law will be shaped. Deep Seabed Mining Environmental Liability, Precautionary approach; Sustainable Green Transition, Natural Extraction Law, Critical Minerals, Sustainable Development, Sustainable Ocean Law and Governance, Environmental Justice, Deep Seabed Law, Law and Technology

The Existence of International Agreements on National and Regional Legislation Related to Handling Marine Plastic Waste in Indonesia

Indonesia has ratified international environmental agreements such as the Marine Pollution Convention (MARPOL) 1973/1978, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) 1982, the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary. Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal (Basel) 1989, United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (UNCBD) 1992, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) 1992, Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) Convention, 2001 and several other international agreements. The international agreement has also laid down norms related to plastic waste in the ocean, although they are very limited. For Indonesia, after the ratification of the international agreement, follow-up steps are needed from legislative, administrative, and institutional aspects to funding through laws and regulations. On the other hand, the process of negotiating international agreements regarding plastic waste in the sea is still ongoing. Therefore, it will also be seen how Indonesia's role and the relationship between the draft zero draft international plastic waste agreement and existing international agreements. This article aims to find out and examine the existence of existing and future international agreements and how they affect the national and regional levels, especially those related to plastic waste in the sea. Therefore, various ratification processes, the formation of laws and regulations, institutions, administration, funding, and other actions related to the issue of plastic waste in the sea in Indonesia will be studied. In general, this article has shown that in Indonesia, there are already regulations to implement international agreements both ratified and synchronized with the draft Global Plastic Treaty that is being made. The conclusion shows that the Government of Indonesia has a strong commitment to the existence of international agreements related to plastic waste in the sea. The recommendation or suggestion is that existing or ongoing international agreements should be able to provide benefits for the welfare of the Indonesian people.

Political and Cultural Boundaries in the Conflict between Indonesia and China in the South China Sea

China's unilateral claim to an area in the South China Sea, which it calls the nine-dash line, the traditional fishing ground, has triggered boundary conflicts in border countries. In this context, Indonesia calls the area that intersects the North Natuna Sea based on the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). This difference in perception is alarming to the international relations between the two countries. This paper aims to analyze how international law views the position of political and cultural boundaries as the basis for claims to an area. This way, dispute resolution with a win-win solution perspective can be formulated in the South China Sea case. The analysis results show that political and cultural boundaries have justification and legitimacy based on international law. Political boundaries emphasize the State's commitment to translating agreements into international treaties bilaterally, regionally, or universally. In contrast, cultural boundaries still require an inventory of the evidence that China's claim is based on, whose legitimacy process must be based on a decision-making institution. However, any legal process will be challenging if the cultural approach is not completed. Apart from that, the essential thing in resolving the South China Sea conflict is the commitment of the State's compliance to international agreements made, decisions of dispute resolution institutions, and settlement steps through a cultural approach.

Revise of the Law Exclusive Economic Zone in Indonesia: An Urgent Necessity

Indonesia is an archipelago with massive oceans. In 1982, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) was signed in Jamaica. In 1983 the Indonesian government passed Law Number 5 of 1983 concerning Exclusive Economic Zone, and UNCLOS 1982 was set as one of the fundamental considerations in the Law. However, the issue is what is the legal basis of including the UNCLOS 1982 as one of the basic considerations and how these two laws are related. This research employed a normative method aiming to study one of the fundamental considerations of the making of Law Number 5 of 1983 concerning the Exclusive Economic Zone in Indonesia. The results of the discussion show that the inclusion of UNCLOS 1982 as a basis for consideration in making Law Number 5 of 1983 concerning Indonesia's EEZ is problematic from the legal position of the rules. Law Number 5 of 1983 concerning the EEZ of Indonesia needs to be revised by referring to Law Number 17 of 1985 concerning the Ratification of the Convention of The Law of the Sea. This revision is intended to improve the regulation concerning the implementation of sovereign rights and jurisdiction and related regulatory provisions regarding the EEZ of Indonesia in terms of the interest of security on the sea.