Showing papers on "Internal waters published in 2009"

International Security and International Law in the Northwest Passage

Abstract: Concern over the loss of sea ice has renewed discussions over the legal status of the Arctic and subarctic transcontinental maritime route connecting the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, referred to as the “Northwest Passage.” Over the past thirty years, Canada has maintained that the waters of the Passage are some combination of internal waters or territorial seas. Applying the rules of international law, as reflected in the 1982 United Nations Law of the Sea Convention, suggests that the Passage is a strait used for international navigation.Expressing concerns over maritime safety and security, recognition of northern sovereignty, and protection of the fragile Arctic environment, Ottawa has sought to exercise greater authority over the Passage. This Article suggests that Canada can best achieve widespread global support for managing its maritime Arctic by acknowledging that the Passage constitutes an international strait and working through the International Maritime Organization to develop a comprehensive package of internationally accepted regulations.

Salt Water Neighbors: International Ocean Law Relations Between the United States and Canada

Abstract: Preface List of Treaties List of International Cases Chapter One - INTRODUCTION Part A 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Context of the Canada-U.S. Ocean Relationship Perception/Interests Pragmatism (Agreeing-to-Disagree) Avoiding Resolution The Other Neighbours Broader Bilateral Relationship History 3.0 LOS Convention, International Law and National Offshore Zones International Law: Treaties, Custom and Adjudication Offshore Zones Part B 4.0 A Few Words on Other Treaties and Ocean Governance Ocean Fora Deep Seabed Mining Ship Safety and Vessel-Source Pollution Land-Based Sources of Marine Pollution Fisheries Whaling Biodiversity Port Security and Terrorism at Sea ANNEX Chapter Two - 1970: THE LANDMARK YEAR 1.0 Introduction 2.0 1970: The Year of Transition of International Ocean Law 3.0 Canadian Actions in 1970 Continental Shelf Territorial Sea and Fishing Zones Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act Functionalism and Unilateralism 4.0The Canada-U.S. Ocean Relationship Emerging from 1970 Differing Ocean Interests and Approaches Agreeing-to-Disagree 5.0Continuing Echo of 1970 Chapter Three - UNCLOS III AND THE LOS CONVENTION 1.0 Introduction 2.0 At UNCLOS III Offshore Resources Navigation and Vessel-Source Pollution Issues Common Heritage of Mankind and Deep Seabed Mining 3.0 The LOS Convention Adoption of the Convention and the 1980s Party Status 4.0 Conclusion Chapter Four - CANADA - UNITED STATES MARITIME BOUNDARIES 1.0 Introduction Part A 2.0 Agreed Canada - U.S. Maritime Boundaries Juan de Fuca Strait Passamaquoddy Bay Portland Canal - The 1903 Alaska Boundary Arbitration 3.0 The 1984 Gulf of Maine Case Getting to Court Proposed Boundary Lines Judgment of the Court Aftermath Part B An Overview of Maritime Boundary Delimitation Law State Practice The Law - The Two-Step Process 5.0 Unresolved Maritime Boundaries British Columbia/Alaska Maritime Boundaries British Columbia/Washington Maritime Boundary Seaward of the Gulf of Maine Beaufort Sea Machias Seal Island and North Rock Part C 6.0 Conclusion ANNEX: Questions and Detail Respecting the Application of the Two-Step Process I. Provisional Equidistance II. Special/Relevant Circumstances Chapter Five - STATUS OF WATERS AND NAVIGATION RIGHTS 1.0 Introduction Part A 2.0 International Law Respecting Navigational Rights in National Waters Historic Internal Waters International Straits Part B 3.0 Northwest Passage Ice and Climate Change International Legal Positions Cooperation Respecting the Northwest Passage Future of the Dispute 4.0 Head Harbour Passage Proposed Tanker Traffic International Legal Positions Cooperation and the Future of the Dispute 5.0 Dixon Entrance, Hecate Strait and Queen Charlotte Sound 6.0 Georgia Strait, Johnstone Strait, Queen Charlotte Strait and the Inside Passage 7.0 Juan de Fuca Strait 8.0 Conclusion Chapter Six - FISHERIES 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Pacific Salmon Introduction The 1985 Canada - U.S. Pacific Salmon Treaty The 2002 Yukon River Agreement North Pacific Anadromous Stocks Convention 3.0 Other Fisheries Pacific Halibut Albacore Tuna Hake/Whiting 4.0 Conclusion Chapter Seven - REVIEWING THE PAST, LOOKING TO THE FUTURE Bibliography of Government Documents and Other Sources (Selected) Bibliography of Academic Literature Index

International Security and International Law in the Northwest Passage

Abstract: Concern over the loss of sea ice has renewed discussions over the legal status of the Arctic and subarctic transcontinental maritime route connecting the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, referred to as the “Northwest Passage.” Over the past thirty years, Canada has maintained that the waters of the Passage are some combination of internal waters or territorial seas. Applying the rules of international law, as reflected in the 1982 United Nations Law of the Sea Convention, suggests that the Passage is a strait used for international navigation. Expressing concerns over maritime safety and security, recognition of northern sovereignty, and protection of the fragile Arctic environment, Ottawa has sought to exercise greater authority over the Passage. This Article suggests that Canada can best achieve widespread global support for managing its maritime Arctic by acknowledging that the Passage constitutes an international strait and working through the International Maritime Organization to develop a comprehensive package of internationally accepted regulations. * Commander Kraska is a professor of international law in the Center for Naval Warfare Studies at the U.S. Naval War College and a guest investigator at the Marine Policy Center, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. A former Oceans Policy Adviser for the Director of Strategic Plans & Policy, Joint Chiefs of Staff, he was the principal drafter of the national security provisions of the U.S. Arctic Region Policy signed by the president in January, 2009. The views presented are those of the author and do not reflect the policy or position of the Department of Defense. 1110 VANDERBILT JOURNAL OF TRANSNATIONAL LAW [Vol. 42:1109

The Philippine Treaty Limits and Territorial Water Claim in International Law

Abstract: The fundamental position of the Philippines regarding the extent of its territorial and maritime boundaries is based on two contentious premises: first, that the limits of its national territory are the boundaries laid down in the 1898 Treaty of Paris which ceded the Philippines from Spain to the UnitedStates; and second, that all the waters embraced within these imaginary lines are its territorial waters. The position of the Philippine Government is contested in the international community and runs against rules in the Law of the SeaConvention, which the Philippines signed and ratified. This situation poses two fundamental unresolved issues of conflict: first, is the issue on the breadth of its territorial sea, and second, its treatment of supposed archipelagic watersas internal waters. The twin issues of the legal status of the Philippine Treaty Limits and its extensive historic claims to territorial waters have been subject of much academic debate and serious criticisms. The delimitation of Philippine territorial and maritime boundaries in conformity with international law necessitates the reform of the existing national legal, policy and administrative framework to resolve fundamental issues ofconflict between domestic legislation and international law. This paper, proceeding from both a national and an international legal perspective, aims to clarify the legal status of the Philippine Treaty Limits and territorial watersclaim in international law.

Disputes over Islands and Maritime Boundaries in East Asia

Abstract: A surprisingly large number of maritime boundaries remain unresolved around the globe, and East Asia has some particularly difficult disputes. In East Asia, disputes over sovereignty continue at present between Japan and Russia over the Northern Territories; between Korea and Japan over Dokdo (Takeshima); between Japan, China, and Taiwan over Daioyudao/Senkakus; between China and Vietnam over the Paracel Islands; and between China, Taiwan, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, and Brunei over the Spratly Islands. This chapter provides an overview of these disputes, with some recommendations regarding how some of them might be addressed. The Soviet Union, and now Russia, has occasionally suggested that the Sea of Okhotsk consists of internal waters and has drawn aggressive baselines along certain coastal areas within the Sea. The East Sea/Sea of Japan is a resource rich semi-enclosed sea that presents a difficult boundary delimitation challenge. Keywords: East Asia; East Sea; Japan; maritime boundaries; Northern Territories; Okhotsk; Russia; Sea of Japan

The Maritime Border Areas of Ireland, North and South: An Assessment of Present Jurisdictional Ambiguities and International Precedents Relating to Delimitation of 'Border Bays'

Abstract: Since the time of Partition of the island of Ireland in the 1920s, there have, for good political reasons (such as particularly the pre-Belfast Agreement Irish claim to all the territorial waters around Northern Ireland), been no agreed international maritime boundaries between either jurisdiction North or South: either in the two border bays lying to the north-west and north-east of the land boundary (Lough Foyle and Carlingford Lough, respectively) or in regard to the lateral boundaries extending further seawards from these loughs. Nor have any official closing lines been agreed to indicate that the two border bays contain internal waters. The past lack of maritime boundaries has been mitigated in the more recent past by the unique cross-border jurisdiction relating to fisheries in Lough Foyle from 1952, as now extended under the Belfast Agreement to Carlingford Lough, through the enhanced joint regime administered through the Loughs Agency (part of a North-South body). However, for other jurisdictional purposes, such as criminal law enforcement, security, and planning aspects for marine uses such as windfarming, the lack of territorial sea/internal waters boundaries has led to Anglo-Irish problems and jurisdictional vacuums. This article looks at the past and present of such jurisdictional problems—including those relating to the new Loughs Agency—in the light of border bay precedents elsewhere in the world, and suggests maritime boundary solutions which might be mutually adopted

On the Evolution of the Law of International Sea Piracy: How Property Trumped Human Rights, the Environment and the Sovereign Rights of States in the Areas of the Creation and Enforcement of Jurisdiction

Abstract: The aforementioned article, which set forth Admiral Mullen's comment, went on to say that as of that day, there had been 95 acts of piracy committed in the Gulf of Aden and the surrounding waters,39 captured vessels, and 330 sailors from 25 nations who still remain hostage. Definitions 'Piracy' as defined in both the 1958 Geneva Convention on the High Seas and UNCLOS were the same crime committed on high seas, as follows: Article 101 Definition of piracy; Piracy consists of any of the following acts: any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed: on the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on board such ship or aircraft; against a ship, aircraft, persons or property in a place outside the jurisdiction of any State; any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate-ship or aircraft; any act of inciting or of intentionally facilitating an act described in subparagraph (a) or (b). Of course, from the shipping industry's point of view, these attacks are criminal; seventeen of the incidents were against tankers, seven on supply ships and the remaining on bulk carriers, general cargo ships and container ships. The Security Council Resolutions that have been mentioned couched the intrusion into territorial, internal waters and land, by expressing concern for human rights so that food shipments would not be blockaded and hijacked by Somali pirates. There is no question that the United States, Denmark, and most of the other nations involved believed that it was necessary to obtain a Security Council Resolution(s) in order to pursue pirates into the territorial, internal waters and on the territory of Somalia.

On the Evolution of the Law of International Sea Piracy: How Property Trumped Human Rights, the Environment and the Sovereign Rights of States in the Areas of the Creation and Enforcement of Jurisdiction

Abstract: The aforementioned article, which set forth Admiral Mullen's comment, went on to say that as of that day, there had been 95 acts of piracy committed in the Gulf of Aden and the surrounding waters,39 captured vessels, and 330 sailors from 25 nations who still remain hostage. Definitions 'Piracy' as defined in both the 1958 Geneva Convention on the High Seas and UNCLOS were the same crime committed on high seas, as follows: Article 101 Definition of piracy; Piracy consists of any of the following acts: any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed: on the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on board such ship or aircraft; against a ship, aircraft, persons or property in a place outside the jurisdiction of any State; any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate-ship or aircraft; any act of inciting or of intentionally facilitating an act described in subparagraph (a) or (b). Of course, from the shipping industry's point of view, these attacks are criminal; seventeen of the incidents were against tankers, seven on supply ships and the remaining on bulk carriers, general cargo ships and container ships. The Security Council Resolutions that have been mentioned couched the intrusion into territorial, internal waters and land, by expressing concern for human rights so that food shipments would not be blockaded and hijacked by Somali pirates. There is no question that the United States, Denmark, and most of the other nations involved believed that it was necessary to obtain a Security Council Resolution(s) in order to pursue pirates into the territorial, internal waters and on the territory of Somalia.

The philippine treaty limits and territorial waters claim in international law

Abstract: The fundamental position of the Philippines regarding the extent of its territorial and maritime boundaries is based on two contentious premises: first, that the limits of its national territory are the boundaries laid down in the 1898 Treaty of Paris which ceded the Philippines from Spain to the United States; and second, that all the waters embraced within these imaginary lines are its territorial waters. The position of the Philippine Government is contested in the international community and runs against rules in the Law of the Sea Convention, which the Philippines signed and ratified. This situation poses two fundamental unresolved issues of conflict: first, is the issue on the breadth of its territorial sea, and second, its treatment of supposed archipelagic waters as internal waters. The twin issues of the legal status of the Philippine Treaty Limits and its extensive historic claims to territorial waters have been subject of much academic debate and serious criticisms. The delimitation of Philippine territorial and maritime boundaries in conformity with international law necessitates the reform of the existing national legal, policy and administrative framework to resolve fundamental issues of conflict between domestic legislation and international law. This paper, proceeding from both a national and an international legal perspective, aims to clarify the legal status of the Philippine Treaty Limits and territorial waters claim in international law.