International maritime law. International maritime law: concept, principles, institutions Concept sources special principles of international maritime law
1. The concept of international maritime law
Since ancient times, the spaces of the seas and oceans have served humanity as a field for various activities (navigation, extraction of living and non-living marine resources, scientific research, etc.). In the process of this activity, states and international organizations enter into relations with each other, which are regulated by legal norms that are interconnected and constitute as a whole the area of international legal regulation called international maritime law.Due to the unique nature of maritime activities, the vast majority of norms of international maritime law are not found in other areas of international legal regulation. These are freedom of navigation on the high seas, the right of innocent passage of seagoing vessels through territorial waters foreign states, the right to unhindered transit passage of ships and flight of aircraft through straits used for international navigation, etc. Some of the norms of international maritime law are considered as its principles in view of their of great importance to regulate maritime activities. Let us point out, in particular, the principle of freedom of navigation for all ships of all states on the high seas. This principle has a certain impact on the content of the legal regime of territorial waters, exclusive economic zones, international straits and some other maritime spaces. It is also advisable to note the fundamental provision established by the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea that all maritime areas and zones outside territorial waters are reserved by the convention for peaceful uses.
International maritime law is an organic part of the general international law: it is guided by the latter’s regulations on subjects, sources, principles, the law of international treaties, responsibility, etc., and is also interconnected and interacts with its other branches (international air law, space law, etc.). Of course, subjects of international law, when carrying out their activities in the World Ocean, affecting the rights and obligations of other subjects of international law, must act not only in accordance with the norms and principles of international maritime law, but also with the norms and principles of international law in general, including the Charter of the Organization United Nations, in the interests of maintaining international peace and security, development international cooperation and mutual understanding.
International maritime law is one of the most ancient parts of international law, dating back to the ancient world. But its codification was first carried out only in 1958 in Geneva by the First UN Conference on the Law of the Sea, which approved four conventions: on the territorial sea and the contiguous zone; about the open sea; about the continental shelf; on fishing and protection of living marine resources. These conventions are still in force for the states participating in them. The provisions of these conventions, to the extent that they declare generally recognized norms of international law, in particular international customs, must be respected by other states. But it must be borne in mind that soon after the adoption of the Geneva Conventions on the Law of the Sea of 1958, new factors historical development, in particular, the emergence in the early 60s of a large number of independent developing states that demanded the creation of a new law of the sea that meets the interests of these states, as well as the emergence as a result of the scientific and technological revolution of new opportunities for the development of the World Ocean and its resources, led to profound changes in international maritime law. These changes were reflected in the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea; which was signed by 157 states, as well as the EEC and, on behalf of Namibia, the UN Council for Namibia. This convention has reached the 60 ratifications required for it to enter into force, and from November 16, 1994 will become mandatory for its parties. Many other states comply with it in practice. In addition to the above conventions, international maritime law includes a significant number of other international agreements and international customs.
2. Classification of maritime spaces
From an international legal point of view, the spaces of seas and oceans on our planet are divided into: 1) spaces under the sovereignty of various states and constituting the territory of each of them; 2) spaces that are not covered by the sovereignty of any of them.The belonging of a part of the World Ocean to one of the specified types of sea spaces determines, therefore, the legal status, or legal status, of this part of the sea. The legal status of any maritime space has a great impact on the procedure for establishing and maintaining the legal regime regulating activities in this space. In this case, naturally, other circumstances are also taken into account, in particular the importance of the corresponding maritime space for communications and various types cooperation between states.
The territory of a country that has a sea coast includes parts of the sea located along its shores and called internal sea waters and territorial sea (or territorial waters - both terms are equivalent). The territory of states consisting entirely of one or more archipelagos includes archipelagic waters located between the islands within the archipelago.
Inland sea waters, territorial sea and archipelagic waters are only a small part of the World Ocean. Vast spaces of seas and oceans beyond their borders are not part of the territory and are not subject to the sovereignty of any state, that is, they have a different legal status. However, the classification of maritime spaces solely on the basis of their legal status is not exhaustive. As practice shows, two, and sometimes more, maritime spaces that have the same legal status, nevertheless have different legal regimes that regulate the corresponding activities in each of them. The legal regime of internal sea waters differs in some important respects from the legal regime of the territorial sea, and the legal regime of archipelagic waters does not coincide with the legal regime of either inland waters, nor the territorial sea, although all these three parts of sea waters are considered respectively the waters of a coastal state, that is, they have a uniform legal status. An even more variegated picture can be observed within the maritime spaces that do not fall under the sovereignty of any state and are located outside the territorial waters. They consist of areas that differ from each other by a specific legal regime (contiguous zone, exclusive economic zone, continental shelf, etc.).
These circumstances are taken into account when classifying maritime spaces.
A separate type of maritime space consists of straits used for international navigation. Within their boundaries there are waters that have not only different legal regimes, but also different legal status. Therefore, these straits themselves are divided into a number of categories.
The situation with some of the most important sea canals is peculiar. They, being artificial structures of a coastal state and its internal waters, due to their great importance for international navigation, are subject to a specific international legal regime.
Thus, the legal classification of maritime spaces should be carried out taking into account the legal status and features of the legal regime of a particular maritime space. This approach is consistent with historical tradition and is also based on the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention.
3. Inland sea waters
The concept of internal sea waters. The territory of each state with a sea coast includes internal sea waters. International agreements and national laws of various states include among them the waters located between the coast of the state and the straight baselines adopted to measure the width of the territorial sea.The following are also considered internal sea waters of a coastal state: 1) port waters limited by a line passing through the points of hydraulic engineering and other port structures that are most distant towards the sea; 2) a sea completely surrounded by land of the same state, as well as a sea whose entire coastline and both shores of the natural entrance to it belong to the same state (for example, the White Sea); 3) sea bays, lips, estuaries and bays, the shores of which belong to the same state and the width of the entrance to which does not exceed 24 nautical miles.
In the case when the width of the entrance to the bay (bay, lip, estuary) is more than 24 nautical miles, to measure the internal sea waters inside the bay (bay, lip, estuary), a straight baseline of 24 nautical miles is drawn from coast to coast in such a way: so that this line encloses as much water as possible.
The above rules for counting internal waters in bays (bays, lips and estuaries) do not apply to “historical bays”, which, regardless of the width of the entrance to them, are considered internal waters of the coastal state due to historical tradition. Such “historical bays” include, in in particular, in the Far East, Peter the Great Bay to the line connecting the mouth of the Tyumen-Ula River with Cape Povorotny (the width of the entrance is 102 nautical miles). The status of Peter the Great Bay as a “historical bay” was determined by Russia in 1901 in the rules of marine fishing in the territorial waters of the Amur Governorate General, as well as in the Russian and USSR agreements with Japan on fisheries issues of 1907, 1928 and 1944.
Canada considers Hudson Bay its historical waters (the width of the entrance is about 50 nautical miles). Norway - Varangerfjord (entrance width 30 nautical miles), Tunisia - Gulf of Gabes (entrance width about 50 nautical miles).
In our doctrine, the opinion was expressed that the Siberian seas such as the Kara, Laptev, East Siberian and Chukotka can be classified as historical maritime spaces, since these ice bays have been developed for navigation and are maintained in a navigable condition for a long time historical period efforts of Russian sailors and are of incomparable importance for the economy, defense and protection of the natural environment of the Russian coast. Shipping along the Northern Sea Route, which runs through the above-mentioned Siberian seas and was developed through the great efforts of our country and our seafarers, is regulated as shipping along the national sea route on a non-discriminatory basis. By Decree of the Council of Ministers of the USSR dated July 1, 1990, the Northern Sea Route is open to ships of all flags, subject to certain rules, in particular regarding mandatory icebreaking pilotage of ships due to the difficult navigation situation and in order to ensure the safety of navigation in some Arctic regions located within routes of the Northern Sea Route.
The legal regime of internal sea waters is established by the coastal state at its discretion. In particular, navigation and fishing in inland waters, as well as scientific and exploration activities, are governed exclusively by the laws and regulations of the coastal State. In these waters, foreigners are generally prohibited from engaging in any fishing or research activities without special permission. As a rule, any foreign vessels may enter the internal waters of another state with the latter's permission. The exception is cases of forced entry of ships due to a natural disaster, as well as the waters of open ports.
Legal regime of seaports. The water areas of seaports are part of internal sea waters. Therefore, the coastal state has the right to determine the procedure for access of ships of other countries to its ports, as well as the procedure for their stay there. It has the right, as a sovereign, to decide whether or not to open certain of its ports for the entry of foreign ships. This international custom was confirmed by the Convention on the Regime of Sea Ports, concluded in Geneva in 1923. About 40 coastal states are its participants.
However, in the interests of developing international relations, coastal states open many of their commercial ports to the free entry of foreign ships without discrimination.
According to the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, the entry into seaports of foreign nuclear ships requires the provision of advance information to the relevant coastal state that such entry will not threaten nuclear safety. For foreign warships to enter seaports, an invitation from the coastal state or prior permission must be obtained, and some countries require notification of the coastal state.
All ships while in foreign ports are required to comply with laws and regulations, as well as orders of the authorities of the coastal state, including on issues of border, customs, sanitary regimes, collection of port dues, etc. Typically, states enter into agreements between themselves on trade and navigation, which determine the procedure for entry and the legal regime of stay in the ports of merchant ships of the contracting states. When servicing foreign ships and providing them with services in ports, one of two principles is applied: national treatment (providing the treatment enjoyed by domestic ships) or most favored nation (providing conditions no worse than those enjoyed by ships of any most favored third state) .
The resolution of criminal cases relating to seafarers and other persons on board foreign ships while they are in ports, and civil cases relating to the said ships themselves, their crews and passengers, falls within the competence of the judicial institutions of the coastal state. Typically, the authorities of a coastal state will refrain from exercising criminal jurisdiction over seafarers of foreign merchant ships in cases where this is not caused by the interests of the coastal state, that is, when the offenses committed on board a foreign merchant ship are not of a grave nature and do not affect the interests of citizens of the coastal state , do not violate public peace or public order in it or its safety, do not affect the interests of persons not belonging to the crew of this ship.
According to international custom and practice of states, in internal waters on foreign ships internal regulations(in particular, the relationship between the captain and the crew of the ship) is governed by the laws and regulations of the country whose flag the ship flies.
In 1965, the Convention on Facilitation of International Shipping was concluded, which contains recommended standards and practices to simplify and reduce the formalities and documents relating to the entry, stay and departure of ships into foreign ports.
Warships lawfully present in a foreign port enjoy immunity from the jurisdiction of the coastal state. But they are obliged to comply with the laws and regulations of the coastal state, as well as the relevant norms of international law (prohibition of the threat or use of force, non-interference, etc.).
State maritime non-military vessels, including commercial ones, based on historically established long-standing custom, also enjoyed immunity from foreign jurisdiction at sea. However, the 1958 Geneva Conventions on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone, as well as on the High Seas, as well as the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, in contrast to this custom, recognize immunity only for state ships operating in non-commercial purposes.
The legislation of a number of states, in particular the United States, also includes significant restrictions on the immunity of foreign state-owned commercial vessels. At the same time, a number of bilateral agreements concluded by the USSR on issues of merchant shipping (with Ghana, Angola and some other countries) had provisions recognizing the immunity of all state ships.
4. Territorial sea
The concept of territorial sea. The maritime belt located along the coast, as well as outside the internal sea waters (for an archipelago state - beyond the archipelagic waters), is called the territorial sea, or territorial waters. The sovereignty of the coastal state extends to this sea belt of a certain width. The outer limit of the territorial sea is maritime state border coastal state. The basis for recognizing the right of a coastal state to include the territorial sea as part of its state territory was the obvious interests of this state in relation to both protecting its coastal possessions from attacks from the sea, and ensuring the existence and well-being of its population through the exploitation of the marine resources of adjacent areas.The sovereignty of a coastal state extends to the surface and subsoil of the territorial sea, as well as to the airspace above it. Provisions on the extension of the sovereignty of a coastal state over the territorial sea are contained in Art. 1 and 2 of the 1958 Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone and Art. 2 of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Naturally, in the territorial sea the laws and regulations established by the coastal state apply.
In the territorial sea, the sovereignty of the coastal state is exercised, however, subject to the right of foreign sea vessels to enjoy innocent passage through the territorial sea of other countries.
Recognition of the right of innocent passage of foreign ships through the territorial sea distinguishes the latter from internal sea waters.
Width of the territorial sea. The normal baseline for measuring the width of the territorial sea is the low tide line along the coast. In places where coastline deeply indented and winding, or where there is a chain of islands along the coast and in close proximity to it, the method of straight baselines connecting the corresponding points can be used to draw the baseline.
When drawing the initial lines, no noticeable deviations from the general direction of the coast are allowed. In addition, the straight baseline system cannot be applied by a State in such a way as to cut off the territorial sea of another State from the high seas or exclusive economic zone.
Throughout the 19th century and into the mid-20th century, international custom developed that the outer limit line of the territorial sea could be within a range of 3 to 12 nautical miles from the baseline lines for measuring the territorial sea. The International Law Commission noted in 1956 that "international law does not permit the extension of the territorial sea beyond 12 miles." However, due to disagreements between states, the First UN Conference on the Law of the Sea was unable to fix this provision in the Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone it adopted. Only the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea for the first time declared by treaty as a universal norm of international law that “every State has the right to fix the breadth of its territorial sea to a limit not exceeding 12 nautical miles,” measured from the baselines established by it . Currently, over 110 states have established the width of the territorial sea up to 12 nautical miles. However, about 20 states have a width that exceeds the limit established by international law. And more than 10 of them (Brazil, Costa Rica, Panama, Peru, El Salvador, Somalia and some others), by unilateral legislative acts adopted before the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, expanded their territorial waters to 200 nautical miles. Apparently, the solution to the problem that has arisen in this way can be facilitated by the entry into force of the Convention on the Law of the Sea or its actual implementation by the overwhelming majority of states.
The delimitation of the territorial sea between opposite or adjacent states, in appropriate cases, is carried out according to agreements between them, taking into account the specifics of each case. In the absence of such an agreement, coastal states cannot extend their territorial sea beyond the median line.
Innocent passage of foreign ships through the territorial sea. The 1958 Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone and the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea provide for the right of innocent passage through the territorial sea for foreign ships. Passage through the territorial sea means the navigation of ships for the purpose of: a) crossing this sea without entering internal waters, as well as without stopping at a roadstead or port facility outside internal waters; b) go into or out of internal waters or stand in a roadstead or port facility outside internal waters. The passage of a foreign vessel through the territorial sea is considered peaceful unless it interferes with the peace, good order or security of the coastal State.
The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea states, in particular, that passage is not innocent if the passing vessel allows the threat or use of force against sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of a coastal State or in any other manner, in violation of the principles of international law embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, carries out maneuvers or exercises with weapons of any kind, any act intended to affect the defense or security of a coastal State, as well as any other act not directly related to the passage (lifting and landing of aircraft, unloading and loading of goods, currencies, persons, sea pollution, fishing, etc.).
A coastal state has the right to take the necessary measures in its territorial sea to prevent passage that is not peaceful. It may also, without discrimination between foreign vessels, temporarily suspend in certain areas of its territorial sea the right of innocent passage of foreign vessels if such suspension is essential for the protection of its security, including the conduct of weapons exercises. Such suspension comes into force only after due notification of it (diplomatically or through “Notices to Mariners”, or otherwise). According to the Convention, when exercising the right of innocent passage through the territorial sea, foreign ships are required to comply with the laws and regulations adopted by the coastal state in accordance with the provisions of the Convention and other rules of international law. These rules may relate to: safety of navigation and regulation of vessel traffic; conservation of resources and prevention of violation of fishing regulations of the coastal state; protection environment; marine scientific research and hydrographic surveys; customs, sanitary, fiscal and immigration regimes.
Coastal State regulations should not, however, apply to the design, construction, manning or equipment of foreign ships unless they give effect to generally accepted international norms and standards. Consequently, the coastal state does not have discretion to determine specifications ships passing through its territorial sea, or the procedure for manning their crews and, on this basis, regulate the right of innocent passage.
But foreign vessels must comply with all laws and regulations when passing, as well as generally accepted international rules regarding the prevention of collision at sea.
The coastal State, if necessary and taking into account the safety of navigation, may require foreign vessels exercising the right of innocent passage through its territorial sea to use sea lanes and traffic separation schemes that it may establish or prescribe (subject to the recommendations of competent international organizations). The requirement to strictly follow such sea lanes may be imposed on tankers or vessels with nuclear engines or ships carrying toxic or dangerous substances and materials.
Foreign vessels cannot be subject to any charges merely for their passage through the territorial sea.
Criminal and civil jurisdiction over merchant ships and government vessels operated for non-commercial purposes. The criminal jurisdiction of a coastal State shall not be exercised on board a foreign ship passing through the territorial sea to arrest any person or to investigate any offense committed on board the ship during its passage, except in the following cases:
- a) if the consequences of the crime extend to the coastal state;
- b) if the crime committed violates the peace in the country or good order in the territorial sea;
- c) if the captain of the ship, diplomatic agent or consular officer of the flag state turns to local authorities with a request for assistance;
- d) if such measures are necessary to suppress illegal trade in narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances.
A coastal State must not stop or divert a foreign vessel passing through its territorial sea for the purpose of exercising civil jurisdiction over a person on board. It may foreclose or seize such a vessel in any civil action only on account of obligations or liability incurred or incurred by the vessel during or for its passage through the waters of the coastal State. A coastal State may exercise civil jurisdiction over a foreign ship anchored in the territorial sea or passing through the territorial sea after leaving internal waters.
State vessels used for non-commercial purposes enjoy immunity from the criminal and civil jurisdiction of the coastal state. The Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea provide for the right of innocent passage of foreign warships through the territorial sea. However, the first gave its participants the right to make reservations, including regarding the innocent passage of warships, while the second does not allow such reservations, but contains clear regulations for innocent passage, as discussed above.
Warships in the territorial sea, as in other areas of the World Ocean, enjoy immunity from the actions of the authorities of the coastal state. But if a foreign warship fails to comply with the laws and regulations of the coastal State relating to passage through the territorial sea, and ignores any request made to it to comply with them, the coastal State may require it to immediately leave the territorial sea. This convention requirement, of course, must be immediately fulfilled, and any issues arising in connection with this must be resolved diplomatically. Such questions arose, in particular, in 1986 and 1988 in connection with the entry of US Navy warships into what was then Soviet territorial waters in the Black Sea. As a result, the parties agreed in 1989 on a “uniform interpretation of the rules of international law” governing innocent passage.
In accordance with this document, they, along with other provisions, agreed to consider that in areas of the territorial sea where sea lanes or traffic separation schemes are not prescribed, vessels nevertheless enjoy the right of innocent passage. In a simultaneous exchange of letters, the United States stated that, without prejudice to its overall position on the issue of innocent passage, it “has no intention of implementing the peaceful passage of American warships through the territorial sea of the Soviet Union in the Black Sea.”
5. Maritime spaces beyond the territorial sea
The concept of the open sea in historical development. The spaces of seas and oceans that are outside the territorial sea and, therefore, are not part of the territory of any state, have traditionally been called the high seas. And although individual parts of these spaces (contiguous zone, continental shelf, exclusive economic zone, etc.) have different legal regimes, they all have the same legal status: they are not subject to the sovereignty of any state. The exclusion of the high seas from the sovereignty of a state or group of states was integral part a unified historical process, accompanied by the simultaneous recognition of each state's right to freely use the high seas.This process turned out to be long and complex, and it arose as a result of the needs of states to exercise freedom of maritime relations for the exchange of manufactured goods and access to overseas sources of raw materials.
Ideas about the free use of the sea and the inadmissibility of extending the power of individual states to the seas and oceans were expressed quite widely back in the 16th-17th centuries. This point of view received the most profound justification at that time in the book of the outstanding Dutch lawyer Hugo Greece “The Free Sea” (1609). But the principle of freedom of the high seas received general recognition only at the beginning of the 19th century. Its widespread adoption was long hampered by Great Britain, which claimed, often not without success, the role of “mistress of the seas.”
For several centuries, freedom of the high seas was understood primarily as freedom of navigation and sea fishing. But over time, the content of the concept of freedom of the high seas was clarified and changed, although the high sea itself remained not subject to the control of any state. In connection with the achievements of science and technology and the emergence of new types of activities of states in the World Ocean, the traditional freedoms of the high seas in the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries significantly expanded and replenished. They began to include freedom to lay underwater telegraph and telephone cables along the seabed, as well as pipelines, and freedom to fly in airspace over the open sea.
The concepts that emerged by the middle of the 20th century, as well as the provisions that make up the legal regime of the high seas, were declared in the 1958 Convention on the High Seas. It stated: “The words ‘high sea’ mean all parts of the sea which are not included either in the territorial sea or in the internal waters of any state” (Article 1). It further stated that “no state has the right to lay claim to subjection of any part of the high seas to its sovereignty" and "the high seas are open to all nations", that is, they are in the free use of all states. Expanding the content of the last provision, the Convention determined that freedom of the high seas includes, in particular: 1) freedom of navigation ; 2) freedom of fishing, 3) freedom to lay submarine cables and pipelines, and 4) freedom of overflight over the high seas (Article 2). Freedom of the high seas also included freedom of marine scientific research. However, new historical developments led to the adoption in 1982 of a comprehensive UN Convention on the Law of the Sea The new Convention introduced a number of major changes to the legal regime of the high seas.It gave coastal states the right to establish, outside the territorial sea, in the adjacent area of the high seas, an exclusive economic zone up to 200 nautical miles wide, which recognizes the sovereign rights of the coastal states for exploration and development of natural resources of the zone. Freedom of fishing and freedom of scientific research in the exclusive economic zone were abolished and replaced by new provisions. The coastal state has been recognized as having jurisdiction over conservation marine environment and the creation of artificial islands and installations.
The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, in addition, redefined the concept of the continental shelf, introduced the concept of “the area of the seabed beyond the continental shelf,” and also established the procedure for the exploration and development of natural resources within these spaces.
Legal regime of maritime spaces outside the territorial sea. While granting coastal states a number of very significant rights to resources, protection of the marine environment and regulation of scientific research within the exclusive economic zone, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea did not change the legal status of maritime spaces outside the territorial sea, confirming that no state has the right to claim to subordinate these spaces to its sovereignty. She retained in them, in addition, for all states the right to enjoy the freedoms of navigation and flight, laying submarine cables and pipelines and other legalized in international order rights and types of use of the high seas (Articles 58, 78, 89, 92, 135, etc.).
In maritime spaces beyond the outer limit of territorial waters, ships, as before, are subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the state whose flag they fly. No foreign military, border or police ship or any other foreign vessel has the right to prevent ships of other states from using the legally freedoms of the high seas or apply coercive measures to them. Strictly limited exceptions are allowed from this principle, applied in specific cases clearly defined by international law.
These exceptions, accepted by all states, are intended to ensure compliance in these parts of the World Ocean with the rules of international law and the safety of navigation in the general interest. Thus, outside the territorial waters, a warship or military aircraft of any state, as well as other ships and aircraft authorized for this purpose by their state, can seize a pirate ship or a pirate aircraft, arrest the persons on them for subsequent prosecution order of those guilty of committing acts of piracy on the high seas - violence, detention or robbery carried out by the crew for personal purposes.
In addition to the above cases, the inspection or detention of a foreign ship here may take place on the basis of a specific agreement between states. As an example, let us cite the current International Convention for the Security of Submarine Cables of 1984, which provides military and patrol vessels of states participating in the Convention to stop non-military vessels flying the flag of states party to the Convention on suspicion of damage to a submarine cable, as well as to draw up reports of violations of the Convention. Such protocols are transmitted to the state under whose flag the offending vessel flies in order to bring it to justice. The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea also provides for the obligation of states to cooperate in curbing the transport of slaves on sea-going vessels, the illegal trade in narcotics and psychotropic substances carried out by vessels on the high seas in violation of international conventions, as well as unauthorized broadcasting from the high seas in violation of international obligations.
However, if the detention or inspection of a ship or aircraft on suspicion of illegal activities turns out to be unfounded, then the detained ship must be compensated for any loss or damage. This provision also applies to the right of prosecution.
International law has traditionally recognized the right of a coastal state to pursue or arrest on the high seas a foreign vessel that has violated its laws and regulations while that vessel is in the internal waters, territorial sea or contiguous zone of that state. This right is extended by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea to violations of the laws and regulations of a coastal state relating to the continental shelf and exclusive economic zone. The pursuit must be "hot pursuit", that is, it can begin at the moment when the offending vessel is respectively in the internal waters, territorial sea, contiguous zone, waters covering the continental shelf, or in the exclusive economic zone of the coastal state, and must be carried out continuously. In this case, the “hot pursuit” stops as soon as the pursued vessel enters the territorial sea of its country or a third state. Continued persecution in someone else's territorial sea would be incompatible with the sovereignty of the State to which that sea belongs.
Warships, as well as ships owned (or operated by) the state and consisting of public service, enjoy beyond the outer limit of the territorial sea complete immunity from the coercive actions and jurisdiction of any foreign state.
Use of maritime spaces for peaceful purposes and ensuring the safety of navigation. The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea has established that sea waters beyond the territorial sea and the international seabed area are reserved for peaceful purposes. This means, at the very least, that in these maritime areas states should not allow any aggressive, hostile or provocative actions against each other. A number of other international agreements, which are partially or entirely aimed at solving this problem, also contribute to ensuring peaceful activities and peaceful relations on the seas and oceans. These include, in particular, the Atmospheric Test Ban Treaty, in outer space and under water of 1963, the Treaty on the Prohibition of the Placement on the Bottom of the Seas and Oceans and in the Subsoil of Nuclear Weapons and Other Weapons of Mass Destruction of 1971, the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Impact on the Natural Environment of 1977, as well as the Treaty on the Establishment Nuclear Free Zone in the South Pacific 1985 (Treaty of Rarotonga).
Here, bilateral agreements concluded by the Soviet Union with the USA, Great Britain, Germany, Italy, France, Canada and Greece on the prevention of incidents at sea outside territorial waters are in force. These agreements require warships of parties to the agreements to remain sufficiently far apart from each other in all cases to avoid the risk of collision, they oblige warships and aircraft not to undertake simulated attacks or simulated use of weapons, not to conduct maneuvers in areas of heavy shipping, and not allow certain other actions that could lead to incidents at sea and in the airspace above it. Actions prohibited by the agreements should not be applied to non-military ships and aircraft.
In addition to the military side, maritime safety also includes other aspects related to the protection of human life at sea, the prevention of ship collisions, rescue, the design and equipment of ships, crewing, the use of signals and communications. In particular, maritime states have repeatedly concluded agreements on the protection of human life at sea, taking into account the development and changing conditions of navigation. The latest version of the Safety of Life at Sea Convention was approved at a conference convened by the Intergovernmental Maritime Organization (since 1982 International Maritime Organization) in London in 1974. The Convention and its 1978 Protocol establish mandatory provisions relating to the design of ships, fire safety, life-saving equipment sufficient to provide for all passengers and members of the ship's crew in the event of an accident or danger, crew composition, navigation rules for nuclear ships, etc. In the Convention The 1974 Protocol and the 1978 Protocol were subsequently amended to take into account technical advances in this area.
The International Regulations for Preventing Collisions that are currently in force were adopted in 1972. They define the procedure for the use of signals (flags, sound or light), the use of radars, the divergence and speed of ships when they approach, etc. Issues of maritime rescue are regulated by the Maritime Search and Rescue Convention of 1979 and the Salvage Convention of 1989.
General provisions relating to the responsibilities of a State with regard to the safety of navigation of ships flying its flag, assistance and liability in the event of collision are contained in the 1958 High Seas Convention and the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Since the mid-80s of the current century, cases of criminal acts aimed against the safety of maritime navigation, which are qualified as terrorism at sea, have become more frequent (seizure of a ship by force or threat of force, murder or hostage-taking on hijacked ships, destruction of equipment on ships or their destruction). Such acts are committed in internal waters, in the territorial sea and beyond. These circumstances prompted international community conclude in 1988 the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation and the Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against Fixed Platforms on the Continental Shelf. These agreements provide for measures to combat terrorism at sea, entrusting their participants with the implementation of these measures.
Marine environment protection. Fundamentally important provisions, articulating the responsibilities of states to protect and preserve the marine environment, are contained in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. They relate to the prevention and reduction of pollution of the marine environment from land-based sources, from activities on the seabed, pollution from sea-going vessels, and by the disposal of toxic, noxious and noxious substances or pollution from or through the atmosphere.
States have concluded special conventions to combat marine oil pollution. These are, in particular, the Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Oil of 1954, the Convention on Civil Liability for Damage from Marine Oil Pollution of 1969, the International Convention on Intervention on the High Seas in Case of Marine Pollution Casualties of 1969, which in 1973 was supplemented by the Protocol on Intervention on the High Seas in Cases of Pollution by Substances Other than Oil.
In 1973, instead of the above-mentioned 1954 Convention, taking into account the intensity of shipping and the emergence of new sources of pollution, a new Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Oil and Others was concluded liquid substances. It introduced “special areas” in which the dumping of oil and its waste is completely prohibited (the Baltic Sea with a strait zone, the Black and Mediterranean seas and some others). In 1982, the new convention came into force.
In 1972, the Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution from Ships (meaning the dumping of waste and materials containing mercury, radioactive substances, poisonous gases and similar hazardous substances) was concluded. The Convention equates the deliberate sinking of ships, aircraft, platforms and other structures to dumping.
The prevention of pollution of the marine environment by radioactive waste is also supported by the Treaty Banning Nuclear Tests in Three Environments and the Treaty Prohibiting the Placement of Nuclear Weapons and Other Weapons of Mass Destruction on the Bottom of the Seas and Oceans.
6. Adjacent zone
Since the mid-19th century, some countries whose territorial sea width was 3-4-6 nautical miles began to establish an additional maritime zone outside their territorial sea to exercise control over it in order to ensure that foreign vessels comply with immigration, customs, fiscal and sanitary rules. Such zones adjacent to the maritime territory of a coastal state are called contiguous zones.The sovereignty of the coastal state does not extend to these zones, and they retain the status of the high seas. Since such zones were created for specific and clearly named purposes, and did not extend beyond 12 nautical miles, their establishment did not raise objections. The right of the coastal state to establish a contiguous zone in this form and within a limit of up to 12 nautical miles was enshrined in the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone of 1958 (Article 24).
The 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea also recognizes the right of a coastal state to a contiguous zone over which it may exercise the controls necessary to: a) prevent violations of customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws and regulations within its territory or territorial sea; b) punishment for violation of the above laws and regulations committed within its territory or territorial sea (clause 1 of Article 33).
However, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, unlike the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone, specifies that the contiguous zone cannot extend beyond 24 nautical miles measured from the baselines for measuring the breadth of the territorial sea. This means that the contiguous zone can also be established by those states whose territorial sea width reaches 12 nautical miles.
7. Continental shelf
From a geological point of view, the continental shelf is understood as the underwater continuation of the mainland (continent) towards the sea before its abrupt break or transition into the continental slope.From an international legal point of view, the continental shelf means the seabed, including its subsoil, extending from the outer border of the territorial sea of the coastal state to the limits established by international law.
The issue of the continental shelf in international legal terms arose when it became clear that in the depths of the shelf there were deposits of mineral raw materials that became available for extraction.
At the First UN Conference on the Law of the Sea in 1958, a special Convention on the Continental Shelf was adopted, which recognized the sovereign rights of a coastal state over the continental shelf for the purpose of exploration and development of its natural resources, including mineral and other non-living resources of the surface and subsoil of the seabed, living organisms of “sessile species” (pearls, sponges, corals, etc.) attached to the seabed or moving along or under it during the appropriate period of their development. The latter species also included crabs and other crustaceans.
The Convention provided for the right of a coastal state, when exploring and developing the natural resources of the continental shelf, to erect the necessary structures and installations, as well as create 500-meter safety zones around them. These structures, installations and safety zones should not be established if they would interfere with the use of recognized sea routes of significant importance to international navigation.
The Convention states that the continental shelf means the surface and subsoil of the seabed of underwater areas beyond the territorial sea to a depth of 200 m or beyond this limit to such a place to which the depth of the covering waters allows the development of the natural resources of these areas. Such a definition of the continental shelf could give a coastal state the basis to extend its sovereign rights over an indefinitely wide sea area as its technical capabilities for extracting shelf resources increase. This was a significant drawback of this definition.
At the III Conference on the Law of the Sea, digital limits were adopted to establish the outer limit of the continental shelf. The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea has defined the continental shelf of a coastal state as “the seabed and subsoil of submarine areas extending beyond the territorial sea throughout the natural extension of its land territory to the outer limit of the submarine margin of the continent or a distance of 200 nautical miles from the baselines from which the width of the territorial sea is measured when the outer boundary of the underwater edge of the continent does not extend to such a distance” (clause 1 of Article 76).
In cases where the submerged continental margin of a coastal State's shelf extends more than 200 nautical miles, the coastal State may include the outer limit of its shelf beyond 200 nautical miles having regard to the location and actual extent of the shelf, but in all circumstances the outer limit of the continental shelf must be no further than 350 nautical miles from the baselines from which the width of the territorial sea is measured, or no further than 100 nautical miles from the 2500-meter isobath, which is a line connecting the depths of 2500 m (clause 5 of Article 76). In accordance with the Convention, a Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf is created. The boundaries established by the coastal state on the basis of the recommendations of the said Commission are final and binding on all.
The rights of a coastal state to the continental shelf do not affect the legal status of the covering waters and the airspace above them. Consequently, the exercise of these rights should not lead to the infringement of freedom of navigation and freedom of overflight over the continental shelf. In addition, all states have the right to lay submarine cables and pipelines on the continental shelf. In this case, the determination of the route for their construction is carried out with the consent of the coastal state.
Scientific research on the continental shelf within 200 nautical miles may be carried out with the consent of the coastal state. However, it may not, at its discretion, refuse consent to other countries to conduct marine research on the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles, except in areas in which it is or will be conducting detailed exploration operations. natural resources.
As a rule, coastal states regulate the exploration and development of natural resources and scientific activities on adjacent shelves through their national laws and regulations.
8. Exclusive economic zone
The question of creating an exclusive economic zone outside the territorial sea in the area immediately adjacent to it arose at the turn of the 60-70s of our century. The initiative to set it up came from developing countries, who believed that in the current conditions of the enormous technical and economic superiority of developed countries, the principle of freedom of fishing and extraction of mineral resources on the high seas does not meet the interests of the countries of the “third world” and is beneficial only to maritime powers that have the necessary economic and technical capabilities, as well as a large and modern fishing fleet. In their opinion, maintaining freedom of fishing and other trades would be incompatible with the idea of creating a new, fair and equitable economic order in international relations.After a period of objections and hesitation that lasted about three years, the major maritime powers adopted the concept of an exclusive economic zone in 1974, subject to the resolution of the issues of the law of the sea considered by the III UN Conference on the Law of the Sea on a mutually acceptable basis. Such mutually acceptable solutions, as a result of many years of effort, were found by the Conference and included in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.
In accordance with the Convention, an economic zone is an area outside and adjacent to the territorial sea, up to 200 nautical miles wide from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured. This area has a specific legal regime. The Convention granted the coastal state in the exclusive economic zone sovereign rights for the purpose of exploration and development of natural resources, both living and non-living, as well as rights in relation to other activities for the purpose of economic exploration and development of the said zone, such as the production of energy through the use of water, currents and wind.
The Convention provides for the right of other states, under certain conditions, to participate in the harvest of living resources in the exclusive economic zone. However, this right can only be exercised by agreement with the coastal state.
The coastal state is also recognized as having jurisdiction over the creation and use of artificial islands, installations and structures, marine scientific research and conservation of the marine environment. Marine scientific research, the creation of artificial islands, installations and structures for economic purposes may be carried out in the exclusive economic zone by other countries with the consent of the coastal state.
At the same time, other states, both maritime and landlocked, enjoy in the exclusive economic zone freedoms of navigation, overflight, laying of cables and pipelines and other legalized uses of the sea related to these freedoms. These freedoms are exercised in the zone as on the high seas. The zone is also subject to other rules and regulations governing the rule of law on the high seas (exclusive jurisdiction of the flag state over its ship, permissible exemptions from it, the right of prosecution, provisions on the safety of navigation, etc.). No state has the right to claim the subordination of an economic zone to its sovereignty. This important provision applies without prejudice to compliance with other provisions of the legal regime of the exclusive economic zone.
In this regard, attention should be paid to the fact that the Convention requires that the coastal State and other States, when exercising their rights and obligations in the zone, take due account of each other's rights and obligations and act in accordance with the provisions of the Convention.
Even at the height of the work of the III UN Conference on the Law of the Sea, a significant number of states, ahead of the course of events and trying to direct them in the right direction, adopted laws establishing fishing or economic zones along their coasts up to 200 nautical miles wide. At the end of 1976, almost six years before the end of the Conference, the USA, Great Britain, France, Norway, Canada, Australia and a number of other countries, including developing ones, adopted such laws.
Under these conditions, areas of seas and oceans open to free fishing, including off Soviet coasts, could become zones of devastating fishing. Such an obvious and undesirable development of events forced the legislative bodies of the USSR to adopt in 1976 the Decree “On temporary measures for the conservation of living resources and regulation of fisheries in marine areas adjacent to the coast of the USSR.” These measures were brought into conformity with the new convention by the Decree “On the Economic Zone of the USSR” in 1984.
Currently, over 80 states have exclusive economic or fishing zones up to 200 nautical miles wide. True, the laws of some of these states do not yet fully comply with the provisions of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. But this situation will change as the regime provided for by the Convention is further strengthened.
The Convention's provisions on the exclusive economic zone are a compromise. They are sometimes subject to ambiguous interpretation. Thus, some foreign authors, in particular from developing countries, express the point of view that the exclusive economic zone, due to its inherent specific legal regime, which includes significant rights of the coastal state, is neither a territorial sea nor the high seas. While rightly noting the specificity of the legal regime of the exclusive economic zone, which includes important functional or target rights of the coastal state and significant elements of the legal regime of the high seas, the authors of this point of view do not give a clear answer to the question of the spatial status of the exclusive economic zone and do not take into account the provisions of Art. 58 and 89, indicating the applicability of important freedoms and the legal status of the high seas to the exclusive economic zone.
9. Parts of the high seas outside the exclusive economic zone
For parts of the sea located outside the exclusive economic zone offshore, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea extends the legal regime that has traditionally applied to the high seas. In these maritime spaces, all states, on the basis of equality, enjoy, taking into account other provisions of the Convention, such freedoms of the high seas as freedom of navigation, laying of submarine cables and pipelines, fishing, and scientific research.With regard to freedom of scientific research and the laying of cables and pipelines, there are small exceptions that apply only to areas of the continental shelf of coastal States beyond 200 nautical miles. These exceptions provide that the determination of routes for the laying of submarine cables and pipelines on the continental shelf of a coastal State, as well as the conduct of scientific research in those areas of the shelf where the coastal State is or will be conducting operations for the development or detailed exploration of natural resources, may take place with consent of the coastal state.
Outside the exclusive economic zone and beyond the outer limit of the continental shelf in cases where its width is more than 200 nautical miles, the Convention introduces a new freedom - to build artificial islands and other installations permitted by international law (Article 87, paragraph 1 d). The words “allowed by international law” mean, in particular, the prohibition of constructing artificial islands and installations for placing nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction on them, since such actions are incompatible with the Treaty Prohibiting the Placement of Nuclear Weapons on the Bottom of the Seas and Oceans and in Their Subsoils and other types of weapons of mass destruction dated February 11, 1971.
The Convention also contains some other innovations that complement the legal order traditionally existing on the high seas. Thus, it prohibits the broadcasting of radio or television programs from a ship or installation intended for public reception in violation of international regulations. Persons and vessels engaged in unauthorized broadcasting may be arrested and prosecuted in court: the flag state of the vessel; state of registration of the installation; the state of which the accused person is a citizen; any state where transmissions may be received. This prohibition also includes an exclusive economic zone.
The Convention paid significant attention to the issues of conservation of living resources in the waters of the high seas, which preserved the principle of freedom of fishing, exercised here taking into account the treaty obligations of states, as well as the rights, obligations and interests of coastal states provided for by the Convention. In accordance with the Convention, all states must take such measures in relation to their citizens as are necessary to preserve the resources of the high seas. States should also cooperate with each other directly or through subregional or regional fisheries organizations for the same purposes.
Even during the work of the III UN Conference on the Law of the Sea, organizations of this kind began to emerge, the charters of which took into account the new legal situation in the field of fisheries. Thus, since 1979, the Fisheries Organization has been operating in the North-West Atlantic, and in 1980 a similar organization was created for the North-East Atlantic. Continues to operate since 1969, but taking into account the introduction of economic zones, the International Fisheries Commission of the South-East Atlantic.
The areas of activity of these organizations cover both exclusive economic zones and the waters of the high seas beyond them. But the recommendations they make on regulating fishing and preserving fish resources in exclusive economic zones can only be implemented with the consent of the relevant coastal states.
States have also taken measures to regulate the fishing of certain valuable fish species. The 1982 Convention contains, in particular, special rules on the fishing and conservation of salmon (anadromous) species. Salmon fishing is permitted only in exclusive economic zones, and beyond their external borders - only in exceptional cases and upon reaching an agreement with the state of origin of salmon fish, that is, with the state in whose rivers these fish spawn. As is known, many species of salmon spawn in the Far Eastern rivers of Russia. Taking into account the principle of reciprocity, Russia allows, on the basis of annual agreements recorded in protocols, Japanese fishermen to fish for salmon spawning in Russian rivers in the northwestern part of the Pacific Ocean, but within the boundaries of certain areas of the sea and subject to established quotas.
10. International Seabed Area
As a result of scientific and technological progress, not only the natural resources of the continental shelf, but also deep-sea deposits of minerals located on the seabed and in its subsoil beyond the continental shelf have become accessible for exploitation. The real prospect of their extraction has given rise to the problem of legal regulation of the exploitation of natural resources in the area of the World Ocean, which is called the international seabed area, beyond the limits of national jurisdiction or, more precisely, beyond the continental shelf.The 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea declared the international seabed area and its resources to be the “common heritage of mankind.” Naturally, the legal regime of this area and the exploitation of its resources in accordance with this provision can only be determined by all states jointly. The Convention states that the financial and economic benefits derived from activities in the international area should be distributed on the basis of the principle of equity, with special regard to the interests and needs of developing States and peoples who have not yet achieved full independence or other status of self-government. Such a distribution of income generated from activities in the international area would not require direct or mandatory participation in those activities by developing States that are not prepared for them.
Activities in the area are carried out as stated in Art. 140 of the Convention, for the benefit of all mankind.
In defining the legal status of an international area, the Convention states that “no State may claim or exercise sovereignty or sovereign rights over any part of the area or its resources and no State, natural or legal person may appropriate any whatever their part may be” (v. 137).
All rights to the resources of the area belong to all humanity, on whose behalf it will act International body along the seabed. Activities in the international area are organized, carried out and controlled by this Authority (Article 153).
The extraction of resources in the area will be carried out by the International Authority itself, through its enterprise, and also “in association with the International Authority” by States Parties to the Convention, or by State-owned enterprises, or by natural or legal persons having the nationality of States Parties or under the effective control of those States, if the latter vouched for the indicated persons.
Such a system for developing the resources of the region, in which, along with the enterprise of the International Body, participating states and other subjects of the internal law of these states can participate, is called parallel.
The policy regarding activities in the area should be pursued by the International Authority in such a way as to promote greater participation in resource development by all States, regardless of their socio-economic systems or geographical location, and to prevent monopolization of activities on the seabed.
The general conduct of states and their activities in the international seabed area, along with the provisions of the Convention, are governed by the principles of the UN Charter and other rules of international law in the interests of maintaining peace and security, promoting international cooperation and mutual understanding (Article 138). The area is open for use exclusively for peaceful purposes (Article 141).
According to the Convention, the main bodies of the International Seabed Authority are the Assembly, consisting of members of the Authority, the Council, which includes 36 members of the Authority elected by the Assembly, and the Secretariat.
The Council has the power to establish and implement specific policies on any issue or problem in the activities of the International Authority. Half of its members are elected in accordance with the principles of equitable geographical representation, the other half on other grounds: from developing countries with special interests; from importing countries; from countries extracting similar resources on land, etc.
The provisions of the International Seabed Area Convention were developed with the active participation of the United States and other Western countries. However, the United States, Great Britain and Germany did not sign it, and in August 1984, these countries, together with five other Western states, entered into separate agreements that are intended to ensure their development of mineral resources outside the convention in promising areas of the deep-sea part of the World Ocean. Nevertheless, the Preparatory Commission, consisting of representatives of states that have signed the Convention, is working on the practical creation of the International Seabed Authority and its functioning in accordance with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.
11. Enclosed or semi-enclosed sea
A closed sea is understood as a sea that washes the coasts of several states and, due to its geographical location, cannot be used for transit passage through it to another sea. Access from the high seas to the closed sea is carried out through narrow sea lanes leading only to the shores of states located around the closed sea.The concept of a closed sea was formulated and reflected in treaty practice in late XVIII and during the first half of the 19th century. According to this concept, the principle of freedom of the high seas was not fully applied to the closed sea: access to the closed sea was limited naval ships non-coastal states.
Since this idea meets the interests of the security of coastal countries and the preservation of peace in such seas, it was at one time recognized in the doctrine of international law and retains its significance today.
Closed seas, in particular, include the Black and Baltic seas. These seas are sometimes called semi-closed and regional. The legal regime of these seas cannot be separated from the legal regime of the Black Sea and Baltic straits.
Throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, coastal states repeatedly entered into treaty agreements to close the Black and Baltic Seas to warships of non-coastal countries. However, in subsequent periods, mainly due to the opposition of countries that do not have their own possessions here, legal regimes corresponding to the significance and position of these sea areas were not established for the Black and Baltic Seas.
In the second half of the 20th century, the concept of a closed sea was further developed and began to provide provisions for special legal protection of the marine environment and regional legal regulation of fishing in closed or semi-closed seas.
The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea has expanded the concept of closed or semi-enclosed seas, which in the Russian text of the Convention are called “closed or semi-enclosed seas” (Article 122). The Convention, without defining the content of the legal regime of these seas, establishes the priority rights of coastal states to manage living resources, protect and preserve the marine environment and coordinate scientific research in enclosed and semi-enclosed seas (Article 123).
12. Rights of states that do not have a sea coast
Landlocked or, as they are often called, states without a sea coast have the right of access to the sea, including the right to have ships fly their flag.This pre-existing right was enshrined in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, which provides for the procedure for resolving the issue of access of an inland state to the sea through the territory of those countries that are located between the sea and this inland state.
In practice, this issue is resolved in such a way that the interested landlocked state negotiates with the corresponding country located on the seashore to provide it with the opportunity to use one or another seaport of the coastal country. For example, on the basis of such an agreement, sea vessels flying the Czech flag use the Polish port of Szczecin. Agreements of this kind simultaneously resolve the issue of transit communication between the interested non-coastal state and the seaport that is provided to this state.
Landlocked states have the right, in accordance with the Convention on the Law of the Sea, to participate on an equitable basis in the exploitation of that part of the living resources of economic zones that, for one reason or another, cannot be used by the coastal state. This right is exercised in the economic zones of coastal states of the same region or subregion by agreement with that coastal state. Under certain conditions and by agreement with the coastal state, a developing landlocked state can gain access not only to the unused part, but also to all the living resources of the zone.
The Convention grants landlocked States the right to access the “common heritage of mankind” and to benefit from the exploitation of the resources of the international seabed area within the limits provided for by the Convention.
13. International straits
Straits are natural sea passages that connect parts of the same sea or separate seas and oceans. They are usually necessary routes, sometimes even the only ones, for maritime and air communications between states, which indicates their great importance in international relations.When establishing the legal regime of sea straits, states usually take into account two interrelated factors: geographical position of a particular strait and its significance for international shipping.
Straits that are passages leading into the internal waters of a state (for example, Kerch or Irbensky), or straits that are not used for international navigation and, due to historical tradition, constitute internal sea routes (for example, Laptev or Long Island) are not considered international . Their legal regime is determined by the laws and regulations of the coastal state.
All straits used for international navigation and connecting with each other: 1) parts of the high seas (or economic zones) are considered international; 2) parts of the high seas (economic zone) with the territorial sea of another or several other states.
Specific straits may have their own characteristics. Nevertheless, it is believed that, for example, the English Channel, Pas de Calais, Gibraltar, Singapore, Malacca, Bab el-Mandeb, Hormuz and other straits are world sea lanes open to free or unhindered navigation and air navigation of all countries This regime has been in effect in these straits for a long historical period due to international customs or international agreements.
A reasonable combination of the interests of the countries using the straits and the countries coastal to them is reflected in the provisions of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Its Part III, entitled “Straits used for international navigation”, stipulates that it does not apply to a strait used for international navigation if the strait passes through a route equally convenient in terms of navigational and hydrographic conditions on the high seas or in exclusive economic zone. The use of such a route is carried out on the basis of the principle of freedom of navigation and flights. As for straits used for international navigation between one area of the high seas (or exclusive economic zone) and another area of the high seas (or exclusive economic zone) and overlapped by the territorial sea of the coastal or coastal states, then in them “all ships and aircraft use right of transit passage, which must not be interfered with.” Transit passage in this case “represents the exercise of freedom of navigation and overflight solely for the purpose of continuous rapid transit through the strait.”
The Convention also contains provisions that take into account the specific interests of states bordering the straits in the areas of security, fisheries, pollution control, and compliance with customs, fiscal, immigration and sanitary laws and regulations. Ships and aircraft, when exercising the right of transit passage, shall refrain from any activity in violation of the principles of international law embodied in the UN Charter, as well as from any activity other than that which is characteristic of the normal order of continuous and rapid transit.
According to the Convention, the transit passage regime does not apply to straits used for international navigation between part of the high seas (exclusive economic zone) and the territorial sea of another state (for example, the Strait of Tirana), as well as to straits formed by an island of a state bordering the strait and its the continental part, if seaward of the island there is a path equally convenient from the point of view of navigational and hydrographic conditions in the open sea or exclusive economic zone (for example, the Strait of Messina). In such straits, the regime of innocent passage applies. In this case, however, there should be no suspension of passage through them, unlike the territorial sea, where a temporary suspension is allowed.
The Convention does not affect the legal regime of straits, passage through which is regulated in whole or in part by existing international conventions in force that specifically relate to such straits. Conventions of this kind, as a rule, were concluded in the past in relation to straits leading to enclosed or semi-enclosed seas, in particular in relation to the Black Sea straits (Bosporus - Sea of Marmara - Dardanelles) and the Baltic straits (Great and Small Belts, Sound).
The Black Sea straits are open to commercial shipping of all countries, which was proclaimed in the 19th century in a number of treaties between Turkey and Russia, and then confirmed in a multilateral convention concluded in 1936 in Montreux. This Convention on the Black Sea Straits, currently in force, provides for restrictions on the passage in peacetime of warships of non-Black Sea powers. They can guide light surface ships and auxiliary vessels through the straits. The total tonnage of warships of all non-Black Sea states in transit through the straits should not exceed 15 thousand tons, and their total number should not exceed nine. The total tonnage of warships of all non-Black Sea states located in the Black Sea should not exceed 30 thousand tons. This tonnage can be increased to 45 thousand tons in the event of an increase in the naval forces of the Black Sea countries. Warships of non-Black Sea countries pass through the straits with 15 days' notice and can stay in the Black Sea for no more than 21 days.
The Black Sea powers can conduct through the straits not only light warships, but also their battleships, if they travel alone, escorted by no more than two destroyers, as well as their submarines on the surface; notification of such passages is given 8 days in advance.
If Turkey participates in a war or is under the threat of immediate military danger, it is given the right, at its discretion, to allow or prohibit the passage of any warships through the straits.
The regime of the Baltic Straits is currently governed by both treaty provisions and customary international law, as well as national laws: Denmark - in relation to the Little and Great Belts and the Danish part of the Sound and Sweden - in relation to the Swedish part of the Sound.
In the past, on the initiative of Russia, the Conventions on Armed Neutrality of 1780 and 1800 were concluded with the participation of the then Baltic states. According to these agreements, the Baltic Sea was to remain a “closed sea” forever, but in peacetime, freedom of commercial navigation in it was provided to all countries. The Baltic states retained the right to take the necessary measures to ensure that military actions or violence did not take place either at sea or on its shores. The Baltic Straits remained equally closed to warships of non-Baltic countries.
The special legal regime of the Baltic Straits was recognized in doctrine in the 19th century. Commitment to it was declared by the Soviet representative at the Rome Conference on the Limitation of Naval Arms in 1924. However, England, France and other Western countries opposed this idea. She was rejected. The most important act currently in force and regulating the regime of the Baltic Straits is the Copenhagen Treaty on the abolition of Sund duties on passage through the straits of 1857. Under this agreement, Denmark, in connection with the payment of 100 million French francs by the parties to the agreement, waived the collection of any fees from ships or their cargo when passing through the straits and the right to delay them under the pretext of non-payment of fees. Since these dues had not previously been levied on warships, and the only existing restriction on freedom of commercial navigation had thus been abolished, the treaty established a principle declaring that “no vessel can henceforth, under any pretext whatsoever, when passing through the Sound or the Belts be subject to detention or any kind of stop.”
The flight of military aircraft over the Danish part of the Baltic Straits requires prior permission in accordance with the decree “On the admission of foreign military vessels and military aircraft into Danish territory in peacetime” of December 27, 1976.
Overflight of foreign military aircraft over Swedish territorial waters in the Sound is permitted without formalities in accordance with § 2 of the Ordinance on the Rules for the Access of Foreign Government Ships and State Aircraft to Swedish Territory of 17 June 1982.
14. International sea channels
International sea canals are artificially created sea routes. They were usually built to reduce the length of sea roads and reduce the risks and dangers of navigation. In particular, with the commissioning of the Suez Canal, the distance between the ports of Europe and Asia was reduced by more than half. Existing sea canals were built on the territories of certain states under their sovereignty.However, for some maritime channels, due to their great importance for international navigation or for historical reasons, international legal regimes have been established. Such regimes were established for the Suez, Panama and Kiel canals.
The Suez Canal was built on Egyptian territory by a joint-stock company created by the Frenchman F. Lesseps. To build the canal, the Egyptian Khedive granted this society a concession for a period of 99 years from the opening of the canal. The canal was opened in 1869 and became the property of the Anglo-French Suez Canal Company. At a conference in Constantinople in 1888, the Suez Canal Convention was concluded, which was signed by Great Britain, France, Russia, Austria-Hungary, Germany, Spain, Italy, Holland and Turkey, which simultaneously represented Egypt. The Convention was subsequently joined by Greece, Denmark, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, China and Japan. In accordance with Art. 1 of the Convention, the Suez Canal must always remain free and open, in time of peace and war, to all merchant and military vessels without distinction of flag. Warships of belligerent powers also have the right of free passage through the canal during war. In the canal, in its exit ports and in the waters adjacent to these ports for a distance of 3 miles, any actions that could create difficulties for free navigation are prohibited. Blocking the channel is considered unacceptable. The diplomatic representatives of the powers in Egypt who have signed the Convention “have the duty of supervising its implementation” (Article 8).
On July 26, 1956, by decree of the President of Egypt, the Suez Canal Joint Stock Company was nationalized. The UN Security Council, in a resolution dated October 13, 1956, confirmed Egypt's sovereignty over the canal and its right to operate the canal "on the basis of the passage of ships of all flags."
Following the nationalization of the canal, the Egyptian government confirmed that the provisions of the 1888 International Suez Canal Convention would be respected and observed by it. In the Declaration of April 25, 1957, the Egyptian Government, reaffirming its commitment to “ensuring free and uninterrupted navigation to all countries” through the Suez Canal, solemnly declared its determination to “comply with the terms and spirit of the Constantinople Convention of 1888.” As a result of the Israeli armed attack on Arab countries in 1967, shipping through the Suez Canal was paralyzed for a number of years. The canal is currently open to international shipping. To manage the operation of the Suez Canal, the Egyptian government created the Suez Canal Authority. He also approved special rules for navigation through the Suez Canal.
The Panama Canal, located on a narrow isthmus between North and South America, has been the subject of decades-long American-British rivalry. Even before the construction of the canal, in 1850, an agreement was signed between the United States and Great Britain, according to which both parties pledged not to subject the canal, if it was built, to their exclusive influence and control.
However, in 1901, the United States managed to get Great Britain to cancel the 1850 treaty and recognize the United States' rights to construct the canal, manage it, operate it, and ensure safety. The new agreement also stipulated that the canal should be open on an equal basis to merchant and military vessels of all flags, following the example of the Suez Canal.
Under an agreement concluded in 1903 with the Republic of Panama, which was formed on part of Colombia, the United States received the right to construct and operate the canal. They acquired rights "as if they were the sovereign of the territory" within a 10-mile land zone along the banks of the canal and occupied it "in perpetuity." The United States declared the permanent neutrality of the canal with the obligation to keep it open to ships of all flags in accordance with the Anglo-American agreement of 1901, which essentially provided for the application of the provisions of the 1888 Suez Canal Convention to the canal.
The opening of the canal took place in August 1914, but it was opened for international shipping only in 1920. From then until 1979, the Panama Canal remained under US dominance.
As a result of a wide and long-term movement of the Panamanian people for the return of the canal to Panama, the United States was forced to meet the demand for the abolition of the 1903 agreement.
In 1977, two new treaties concluded between Panama and the United States were signed and entered into force on October 1, 1979: the Panama Canal Treaty and the Treaty on the Neutrality and Operation of the Panama Canal.
The Panama Canal Treaty terminated all previous canal agreements between the United States and Panama. Panama's sovereignty has been restored over the Panama Canal. The "Canal Zone" created by the 1903 agreement is abolished and US troops are withdrawn from it. However, until December 31, 1999, the United States retains the functions of managing the channel and its operation and maintenance (Article 3). Only after this period will Panama “take full responsibility for the management, operation and maintenance of the Panama Canal.” On December 31, 1999, the Panama Canal Treaty will terminate. For the duration of the treaty, the United States retains the “right” to station its armed forces in the canal zone (Article 4).
The Treaty on Neutrality and the Operation of the Panama Canal declared this sea route to be a “permanently neutral international waterway” open to the navigation of all countries (Articles 1 and 2). The treaty states that the Panama Canal will be “open to the peaceful transit of ships of all states under conditions of full equality and non-discrimination.” There is a fee for entry and entry service. The treaty includes a provision that the United States is the “guarantor” of the neutrality of the Panama Canal.
The Kiel Canal, connecting the Baltic Sea with the North Sea, was built by Germany and opened to navigation in 1896. Before the First World War, Germany classified the Kiel Canal as its internal waters and applied the appropriate regime to it. The Treaty of Versailles established the international legal regime for the canal. According to Art. 380 Treaty of Versailles, The Kiel Canal was declared permanently free and open with full equality for military and merchant ships of all states at peace with Germany.
After the end of the Second World War, the legal regime of the Kiel Canal was not regulated by any treaties or agreements between the interested states.
Currently, the Kiel Canal regime is unilaterally regulated by the German government, which has issued the Rules for Navigation in the Kiel Canal, which provide for freedom of merchant shipping for all countries.
15. Waters of archipelagic states (archipelagic waters)
As a result of the collapse of colonialism, big number countries that consist entirely of one or even more archipelagos. In this regard, the question arose about the legal status of the waters located within the archipelago state or between its island possessions. At the III UN Conference on the Law of the Sea, archipelagic states made proposals to extend the sovereignty of the corresponding archipelagic state to archipelagic waters. But these proposals did not always take into account the interests of international navigation through the straits located within archipelagic waters.In the Convention on the Law of the Sea, the issue of archipelagic waters received the following solution. Archipelagic waters consist of the waters located between the islands that are part of the archipelago State, which are delimited from other parts of the sea around the archipelago State by straight baselines connecting the most prominent points in the sea of the most remote islands and drying reefs of the archipelago. The length of such lines should not exceed 100 nautical miles, and only 3% of them total number can have a maximum length of 125 nautical miles. When conducting them, no noticeable deviation from the shore is allowed. The territorial waters of the archipelago state are measured from these lines towards the sea.
The ratio between the area of water and the area of land within these lines should be from 1:1 to 9:1. Consequently, not every state consisting of islands can have archipelagic waters. For example, Great Britain and Japan do not have them.
The sovereignty of the archipelagic state extends to archipelagic waters, as well as to their bottom and subsoil, as well as to their resources (Article 49).
Ships of all states enjoy the right of innocent passage through archipelagic waters, as established in relation to the territorial sea.
However, a different legal regime is established for sea routes usually used for international navigation located within archipelagic waters. In this case, the right of archipelagic passage is exercised. Archipelagic passage is the exercise of the right of normal navigation and overflight solely for the purpose of continuous, rapid and unimpeded transit from one part of the high seas or economic zone to another part of the high seas or economic zone. For archipelagic passage and overflight, an archipelagic state may establish sea and air corridors 50 nautical miles wide. These corridors traverse its archipelagic waters and include all normal routes of passage used by international shipping and overflight, and on such routes they include all normal shipping fairways.
If an archipelagic State does not establish sea or air corridors, the right of archipelagic passage may be exercised along routes normally used for international navigation.
For archipelagic passage, mutatis mutandis (subject to necessary distinctions), the provisions relating to transit passage through straits used for international navigation and defining the responsibilities of vessels carrying out passage, as well as the responsibilities of states bordering the straits, including the obligation not to impede transit passage and not to allow any suspension of transit passage.
The Convention on the Law of the Sea does not grant the right to establish archipelagic waters between islands of archipelagos that are separated from the main part of any state.
16. International organizations in the field of ocean development
The expansion and intensification of the activities of states in the use of seas and oceans has led to the emergence and significant growth in last years international organizations designed to promote the development of cooperation between states in various areas development of the World Ocean.We have already spoken above about international organizations for the exploitation of living marine resources and their conservation. The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea provided for the creation of the International Seabed Authority, which has greater powers over the extraction of seabed resources beyond the continental shelf.
For several years now, a preparatory commission has been working on the practical implementation of the provisions of the Convention relating to the creation and functioning of the International Seabed Authority.
A major contribution to the development of international maritime law and cooperation between states in the use of the World Ocean is made by the International Maritime Organization (IMO), created in 1958 (until 1982 - International Maritime Consultative Organization - IMCO).
The main objectives of IMO are to promote cooperation between Governments and activities relating to technical issues in international merchant shipping, and to help eliminate discriminatory measures and unnecessary restrictions affecting international merchant shipping. The organization is engaged, in particular, in the development of draft conventions on issues such as the protection of human life at sea, the prevention of sea pollution from ships, the safety of fishing vessels, and many others.
The development of legal norms related to maritime issues is also carried out by the International Maritime Committee, established in 1897 in Belgium and aimed at unifying the law of the sea through the conclusion of international treaties and agreements, as well as through establishing uniformity in the legislation of different countries.
Of great importance for the development of international cooperation in the study of oceans and seas are the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission, which exists under UNESCO, and International Council on marine exploration.
In 1976, the International Maritime Satellite Communications Organization (INMARSAT) was established. Its goal is to communicate 24/7 and quickly between sea vessels via artificial satellites Lands with shipowners and administrative authorities of the respective states parties to the convention that established INMARSAT, as well as with each other.
Russia is a member of all the above international organizations.
The concept of “international maritime law”. Subjects of international maritime law. Object (of legal regulation) in international maritime law. Main sources of international maritime law. Regimes of legal regulation of modern international maritime law: legal regime of the high seas; internal sea waters; territorial sea; so-called adjacent zone; continental shelf; exclusive economic zone; archipelago waters; international seabed area. The main problems of modern international maritime law.
International maritime law (public international maritime law) is a branch of modern international law, a set of principles and norms of which establishes the legal regimes of maritime spaces and regulates relations between states on the use of spaces and resources of the so-called World Ocean.
Historically, international maritime law, as well as the law of external relations, is one of the oldest branches of international law. Such a long history of maritime law is due to the fact that various international relations in this area of human activity have been actively carried out, starting from the very moment of the emergence of navigation. With the development of navigation, contemporary maritime law developed and is developing.
Currently, most of the rules of international maritime law are consolidated in the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
This Convention regulates all main types of maritime activities of modern states, namely:
- 1) international shipping and fishing;
- 2) exploration and development of various areas of the seabed of the World Ocean;
- 3) conducting marine scientific research;
- 4) protection and preservation of the marine environment;
- 5) protection of living resources of the World Ocean, as well as other types of marine fishing and human activity in the marine space.
All other international treaties (including various bilateral and regional agreements) containing regulations relating to this area of international law basically complement or detail the norms of this Convention.
The subjects of international maritime law are the main subjects of modern international law - states.
The object (of legal regulation) in international maritime law is the entire complex various relationships between subjects of maritime law, committed and carried out in the waters of the World Ocean.
Currently, the main source of international maritime law is the above-mentioned United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982. Also, international relations in the field of international maritime law are regulated by the following Conventions and international treaties:
- 1) the Geneva Conventions of 1958;
- 2) International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974;
- 3) International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973;
- 4) Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Materials, 1972;
- 5) International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978;
- 6) Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972;
- 7) The Antarctic Treaty of 1959 and many other international legal documents.
It should be especially noted that for a long time the only source of international maritime law was the international maritime customs actively used by the subjects of maritime law.
In modern international maritime law, it is necessary to highlight certain legal regulation regimes, namely the following legal regimes:
- 1) open sea;
- 2) internal sea waters;
- 3) territorial sea;
- 4) the so-called adjacent zone;
- 5) continental shelf;
- 6) exclusive economic zone;
- 7) archipelago waters (or so-called archipelagic waters);
- 8) international seabed area.
Each of the legal regimes of modern international maritime law has its own specifics and its own legal institutions; is regulated by certain international legal norms in order to achieve a specific result, namely: streamlining the activities of international legal entities in this area of international law and achieving a compromise in their often conflicting political and economic interests.
The legal regime of the high seas regulates interstate relations in all parts of the sea, which, in accordance with the norms and principles of international law, are in the free and equal use of all states. In turn, according to the standards of modern maritime law, those parts of the World Ocean that are located outside the internal and territorial waters, as well as outside the economic zone and archipelagic waters are in the free and equal use of all states.
According to the fundamental provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the waters of the high seas cannot under any circumstances be subject to the sovereignty of any State. This is due to the dominant role in modern international maritime law of the principle of freedom of the high seas, which includes such fundamental political and legal requirements as:
- 1) freedom of navigation (for both merchant and warships);
- 2) freedom of fishing;
- 3) freedom of flight over the open sea;
- 4) freedom of international legal entities to erect artificial islands and other similar structures;
- 5) freedom to conduct scientific research, etc.
The legal regime of internal sea waters is determined by the national legislation of various states, taking into account the current norms of international law. Each state exercises administrative, civil and criminal jurisdiction in its own internal waters in its entirety over all vessels located in these waters, regardless of their nationality.
Also, each state itself establishes all currently valid conditions for navigation in its own internal waters. The entry of any foreign ships into the internal waters of a certain state is carried out, as a rule, with the permission of that state (usually states publish a list of ports open to entry by foreign ships).
Warships of other states may enter internal waters either with permission or at the invitation of the coastal state. Foreign ships located in the internal waters of another state are required to comply with navigation rules; laws and customs of the coastal state.
The territorial sea in modern international maritime law is a strip of sea 12 nautical miles wide, directly adjacent to land territory or the outer limit of internal waters. The territorial sea is also a strip of sea that is always exclusively under the sovereignty of the coastal state.
The legal regime of the territorial sea in modern international maritime law is based on the following basic provisions of this international legal branch:
- 1) the coastal state extends its sovereignty to the space of its own territorial sea;
- 2) ships of all other states that have entered the territorial sea of any other state are recognized as having the right of peaceful passage through the space of that foreign territorial sea.
While exercising sovereignty over its own territorial sea, a coastal state can make laws and regulations regarding navigation in its territorial sea. The goals of such legal acts are: ensuring the safety of navigation; protection of various types and varieties of navigation aids; protection of all living resources of the sea; prevention of sea water pollution, etc.
A state, in accordance with the provisions of modern international maritime law, can also declare certain areas of its own territorial sea closed to foreign vessels, for example, when the naval forces of this state conduct any of their own or joint military exercises in the territorial sea.
The contiguous zone in modern international maritime law is a maritime territory that includes water spaces adjacent to the territorial waters of a certain state, together with the latter having a width of no more than 24 nautical miles.
Within the contiguous zone, the coastal state exercises legal and administrative control necessary to prevent various customs, fiscal and sanitary violations, as well as to punish international legal entities that have violated the above-mentioned legal standards, laws and regulations established by a certain state within its contiguous zone ( Article 33 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea).
In modern international maritime law, the following types of contiguous zones apply:
- 1) customs adjacent zones;
- 2) fiscal adjacent zones;
- 3) immigration adjacent zones;
- 4) sanitary adjacent areas;
- 5) the so-called zones of criminal and civil jurisdiction.
Customs adjacent zones are established to combat
smuggling, as well as with the illegal trade in weapons, drug trafficking, etc.
Fiscal contiguous zones are established to prevent violations of various financial rules, which should ensure economic security coastal state.
Immigration contiguous zones are designed to enforce laws regarding the entry and exit of foreigners.
Sanitary adjacent zones are created to prevent the spread of various infectious diseases and/or epidemics across maritime boundaries.
The so-called zones of criminal and civil jurisdiction are created to detain violators who have committed offenses and/or crimes established by the criminal and civil legislation of the coastal state.
The adjacent zones are not part of the state territory and the sovereignty of the coastal state does not fully extend to them. This is how the adjacent zones differ from the territorial sea.
However, the coastal state enjoys limited jurisdiction within its own contiguous zone, extending to the performance of certain special tasks.
Moreover, if the adjacent zone was established by the state solely for the purpose of customs supervision, then the coastal state does not have the right to exercise sanitary or any other (except customs) control in this zone.
The contiguous zone refers to areas of the high seas, since it is located outside the territorial waters. The coastal state exercises only targeted control in it, which distinguishes the adjacent zone from other areas of the high seas.
The continental shelf of a coastal state is the seabed and subsoil of underwater areas extending beyond the territorial waters of the coastal state to a distance of 200 miles (Article 76 of the Convention).
According to the provisions of international maritime law, coastal states have sovereign rights in the exploration and development of natural resources of the continental shelf. These rights are exclusive: if a coastal state does not develop the continental shelf, then another state cannot do this without its consent (Article 77 of the Convention).
In addition, the coastal state has the exclusive right to authorize and regulate, for example, drilling operations on the continental shelf (Article 81 of the Convention).
However, all states have the right to lay submarine cables and pipelines on the continental shelf, if this does not contradict the provisions of this Convention (Article 79).
Consequently, the sovereign rights of a coastal state to the continental shelf are somewhat narrower than the state’s sovereignty to territorial waters and their subsoil, which are already directly part of the state territory.
The right to conduct marine scientific research on its own continental shelf, as well as on legal regulation similar activities also belong to the coastal states. It should be especially noted that the above rights of the coastal state do not affect the legal status of the airspace above these waters of the continental shelf and, therefore, do not in any way affect the legal regime of air navigation.
An exclusive economic zone in modern international maritime law is an area of maritime space located outside the territorial waters of a certain state and, together with them, amounting to no more than 200 nautical miles.
It should be noted that economic zones are a relatively new category of maritime spaces that have a special legal regime in modern international maritime law.
Unlike the territorial sea, which is under the sovereignty of a coastal state and the territorial sea that is part of its state territory, exclusive economic zones are not under the sovereignty of the coastal state. According to the peculiarities of this political and legal regime, the jurisdiction and the entire range of rights of the coastal state, as well as the rights and freedoms of other states in the space of economic zones, are regulated by certain provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
Thus, a coastal state, without having absolute sovereignty in the exclusive economic zone, nevertheless enjoys certain sovereign rights designed to provide this state with the opportunity to explore, develop and preserve the natural resources of the economic zone, as well as contribute to the most effective management of these resources (Article 56 of the Convention).
At the same time, all other states cannot use the resources of the exclusive economic zone without the consent of the coastal state. These states enjoy freedom of navigation and flight in the economic zone, laying submarine cables and pipelines, but only if they take into account in their activities the rights of the coastal state guaranteed by the provisions of this Convention.
This international legal requirement is valid even in the case when the coastal state itself does not use (or uses little) the resources of the exclusive economic zone in its practical activities.
Freedom of navigation in the exclusive economic zone also applies to warships, since freedom of military navigation is component freedom of navigation. According to the international legal standards of modern maritime law, all states exercising their own right to freedom of military navigation must respect the legal regime of exclusive economic zones established by the coastal state and guaranteed by the provisions of the Convention in question.
The delimitation of the limits of the economic zone is carried out by subjects of modern international law on the basis of relevant agreements.
The newest legal regime of international maritime law is the regime of so-called archipelagic waters directly established by the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
Archipelagic waters in modern international maritime law are the waters separating and surrounding groups of islands; constituting a single geographical and political whole and falling under the sovereignty of any one island state.
The institution of archipelagic waters was introduced by modern international maritime law specifically in the interests of archipelagic states (Indonesia can be mentioned as the most obvious example of such a state).
The sovereignty of archipelagic states extends to the waters washing their territory; the airspace above them; their bottom and subsoil, as well as the entire complex of living and non-living natural resources available there.
Certain restrictions on the sovereignty of archipelagic states, however, exist in the modern international legal space on the issue of the right of ships and aircraft of other states to innocent passage and overflight over these territories. Archipelagic states must establish special sea corridors for this purpose in archipelagic waters, as well as air corridors above the surface of archipelago waters.
The international seabed area in modern international maritime law is the seabed located beyond the boundaries of the continental shelf of states. These territories in the modern international legal space are subject to the legal regime common heritage humanity.
This area is open for free exploitation by all states. The only existing limitation is the peaceful purposes of the activities undertaken.
The governing body that oversees the actions of states in the international seabed area is the so-called International Seabed Authority. In its activities, this body is called upon to ensure fair distribution of financial and other economic benefits received by states from activities in the international seabed area.
In addition, the International Seabed Authority controls the direct development of the subsoil of the area, as well as the processes of transportation, processing and marketing of minerals mined in the international seabed area.
Freely and without the obligation of direct participation in this activity of the said International Body, modern states can carry out any scientific research of a peaceful nature on the territory of the international seabed area. The placement of weapons of mass destruction on the bottom of the international seabed area is prohibited by modern international maritime law.
It is also worth noting that an important role in the space of modern international maritime law belongs to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea - a specialized judicial body for the settlement of various disputes relating to the interpretation and application of the rules and regulations of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
The seat of the Tribunal is Hamburg. This international judicial body began its work in 1996.
Finally, it is necessary to point out the unconditional importance in the space of international maritime law of such a political and legal category as the crew of a particular sea vessel. The issues of legal regulation of crew activities are spelled out in sufficient detail in existing standards of maritime law.
For example, evasion of assistance to the crew of ships in distress by the captain and crew of a certain (other) sea vessel is recognized by modern maritime law as a crime, and this assistance itself is mandatory and free of charge.
Moreover, each ship in modern maritime law has the nationality of the state under whose flag it flies.
A colossal problem of modern international maritime law, which is very often encountered in practice and often takes downright grotesque forms, is the practice of violation of the rights of crew members and non-compliance with contractual obligations towards them on the part of owners and/or companies of tenants of various vessels.
Unfortunately, the rights of crew members transporting a wide variety of cargo to various parts of the globe are not sufficiently regulated by modern legal standards in the field of international maritime law.
At least, compensation payments provided for by various legal standards for various violations of agreements concluded between them and other rights of seafarers committed by shipowners in relation to seafarers are not always paid; almost always - after a long period of time; too often - not in full, and often - not paid at all.
In addition, shipowners and/or lessees often abandon the crews of ships they own (hire) in situations that directly threaten the life, health and safety of seafarers.
Unfortunately, among the most unfavorable from the point of view of respecting the rights of seafarers, along with companies from third world countries, are shipowners (tenants) from countries of the former Soviet republics.
Also, such “irresponsible” companies often practice various directly illegal transportations (smuggling, drug transportation, etc.), which, naturally, involve the same sailors, who often bear legal responsibility in cases of detection by representatives of law enforcement agencies of various states of such cargo.
At the same time, in general, the problem of combating the illegal trade in weapons, drugs and other illegal goods transported by sea on an international scale can hardly be solved solely by the norms and practice of international maritime law.
This problem requires a comprehensive political and legal approach, a responsible position of states - the leading “players” in the modern world political space; effective and coordinated work of special services and intelligence structures of various states, as well as the presence of a single political line and the same attitude towards such illegal practices among these most influential world “players”. What's really on this moment seems somewhat problematic.
In addition, there are also frequent cases of unfounded and/or doubtful in terms of the validity of the offenses committed by the law enforcement a number of countries (most often third world countries also play this role) to foreign seafarers, who are brought forward regarding their violation of certain customs and/or administrative rules. Stories of this nature, unfortunately, often happen to Russian sailors.
At the same time, if a violation of the rights of seafarers committed by a company with which they themselves entered into a contract is a question (largely) from the sphere of private international law (although not exclusively, since the ownership of the vessel to a particular state also matters here, especially since the seafarers work on directly state non-military courts), then the above actions of law enforcement agencies, for example, in “third world” countries, are an international legal issue.
Also extremely relevant in Lately a problem that could only be solved in the space of international maritime law is the problem of piracy. From the point of view of international law, piracy is an extremely dangerous crime of an international nature.
This type of criminal activity has existed throughout human history. At the same time, with the development of technical capabilities and weapons, as well as the capabilities of the modern economic system (the rapid transfer of money through banking institutions makes it much more feasible for organized criminal groups involved in piracy to obtain ransom for the ships, persons and property they have captured), piracy is developing accordingly (but and the ability of modern states to effectively combat it increases).
At the moment, piracy is most developed in the Indian Ocean (primarily off the coast of Somalia, as well as the coast of Mauritius and to a lesser extent India), although it also occurs in a number of other parts of the globe. Political and economic problems of the states of the region, as well as the spread of radical religious and political ideologies, constantly generate a large number of new participants in piracy activities.
Modern international maritime law and, in general, international law allow states to seize pirate ships on the high seas and arrest the persons on them, ordering trials of acts committed by pirates in the national courts of the state that captured the pirates.
However, the corresponding actions of states in the internal sea waters of another state are prohibited, which in itself does not allow to finally “solve” the issue of piracy, since states that are weak and/or closely “tied” to piracy (as a constant source of profit) are not able to ( or simply do not want) to solve this problem.
Besides, evidence base when considering the issue of the participation of a specific person in piracy activities for modern European courts, most often, it is insufficient, and the court sentences passed by the latter are not able to frighten pirates and contribute to their refusal to continue engaging in this criminal activity.
In addition, solving the problem of piracy, for example, in modern Somalia, is generally impossible without large-scale preventive complex military-political, political-economic and political-legal actions, which can only be undertaken by truly powerful (politically, economically and militarily) states.
Moreover, if such a decision is nevertheless made, global political, legal and economic support for its practical implementation corresponding to the seriousness of the problem is necessary, as well as the determination of the states themselves who have begun to implement this policy to spend colossal financial and administrative resources on these actions. Which is really unlikely.
At the moment, it seems appropriate to “include” into modern standards of international maritime law and international humanitarian law provisions on the admissibility of engaging heavily armed private security to protect merchant ships, tankers and other non-military vessels, with unconditional permission for the guards of these vessels to sink pirate ships at attacks by the latter on non-military vessels guarded by security personnel.
If there is an international political and legal authorization for the protection of non-military ships, not to take pirates captive in the event of an attack by the latter on protected non-military ships, as a measure, could partially solve the problem of piracy by reducing the number of specific acts of piracy.
Currently, influential modern states are addressing the issue of piracy by patrolling the most dangerous spaces of the World Ocean with warships.
In particular, ships of the Russian Navy are currently patrolling the coasts of Somalia and the Gulf of Aden.
International maritime law(MMP) - is a set of principles and norms governing
international legal regime of the maritime spaces of the World Ocean and regulating the relationships of subjects of international law in various categories of maritime spaces.
Sources: The IMP codification process can be combined into three stages:
since the 1920s before the creation of the UN. The first stage is related to the activities of the League of Nations. In 1930, the Hague Conference was convened to consider the project International Convention on Territorial Waters, played a generally positive role in the development of MSE norms.
from the beginning of the UN to 1958 The second stage of codification of the norms of international maritime law is associated with the activities of the UN.
The report submitted by the International Law Commission to the General Assembly in 1950 reviewed various issues relating to the regime of the high seas. At its eighth session, the ILC approved the final report on the law of the sea.
The UN Conference on the Law of the Sea was held in Geneva from 24 February to 27 April 1958. The Conference approved four conventions and an Optional Protocol:
Convention on the High Seas. The Convention entered into force on September 30, 1962. The USSR ratified it on January 20, 1960.
Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone. The convention entered into force on September 10 1964 The USSR ratified it on October 20, 1960.
Convention on the Continental Shelf. The Convention entered into force on June 10, 1964. The USSR ratified it on October 20, 1960.
Convention on Fisheries and the Conservation of Living Resources of the High Seas. The Convention entered into force
However, the Geneva Conventions of 1958 turned out to be unsatisfactory, since they did not regulate new aspects of the activities of states in the World Ocean (for example, on the seabed beyond the continental shelf). They did not determine the width of the territorial sea, the outer limit of the continental shelf, and did not regulate the processes of marine scientific research and technology transfer. There was no special mechanism for resolving disputes on maritime issues.
from the mid-60s until 1982
At the third UN conference, it was developed and signed in 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Came into force in 1994. Russia ratified it in 1997. This international agreement has become the main source of international maritime law. The 1982 UN Convention clarifies, develops and codifies the law of the sea.
The Convention regulates in detail the problems of commercial and military navigation, establishes a territorial sea 12 miles wide, confirms the traditional rights of navigation on the high seas and innocent passage, including the right of transit passage, through the straits; it addresses issues of maritime corridors and traffic separation schemes, as well as the rights of criminal and civil jurisdiction of flag States, coastal States and ports over ships in their waters.
The Convention for the first time establishes the rights of coastal states in newly created exclusive economic zones with a width of 200 nautical miles in relation to living and non-living resources and also covers other economic activities; it concerns the rights of access to and from the sea of landlocked States and their freedom of transit; creates a revised regime of jurisdiction over the continental shelf; establishes a regime for archipelagic waters.
The Convention defines the status and regime of the seabed beyond the continental shelf and creates a new international organization - International Seabed Authority (ISAU) with his operational
division - the Enterprise for the purpose of managing and implementing the exploration and development of mineral resources of the ocean floor as part of a “parallel system”, also covering private enterprises. The Convention includes a provision that is rarely found in multilateral treaties: it provides not only for the settlement of disputes related to the Convention, but also for compulsory judgment at the request of one of the parties to the dispute if conciliation and other means do not lead to an agreement. As one of the means to do this, it establishes a special International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. It also provides for the establishment of arbitrations to consider disputes on fishing, shipping, pollution prevention, scientific research, etc.
Freedom of the high seas. It is enshrined in Art. 87 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. It means that the high seas are open to all states, whether they have access to the sea or not.
Use of the high seas for peaceful purposes. It is enshrined in general form in Art. 88 Convention UN Law of the Sea. This provision is enshrined in relation to: the seabed (Article 141), exclusive economic zone (Article 58), etc.
Rational use of marine resources. According to Art. 117 and art. 119 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, all states must cooperate with other states in taking measures that will be necessary to conserve the resources of the high seas and lists the data
this branch of international maritime law operates a number of special principles:
Prevention of marine pollution. This principle was enshrined in such conventions as: “On civil liability for damage from oil pollution” 1969, etc.
Freedom of marine scientific research. In accordance with Art. 238 of the United Nations Maritime Convention By law, all states and international maritime organizations have the right to conduct scientific research in compliance with the rules and requirements specified in the same Convention.
In addition, special principles include: complete immunity of warships from foreign jurisdiction, exclusive jurisdiction of the flag state on the ship, assistance
cabbage soup and rescue at sea, the responsibility of states for acts in the oceans, etc.
Among various international organizations, the International Maritime Organization(IMO), within which five committees have been created and operate: on maritime safety, on technical cooperation, etc. IMO has signed more than 40 cooperation agreements with other intergovernmental organizations.
Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf created on the basis of Art. 76 and Annex II to the 1982 Convention. The purpose of the Commission is to make recommendations to coastal states regarding the outer limits of the continental shelf. State boundaries established on the basis of these recommendations are final and must be recognized by all states.
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission(IOC), in accordance with the 1982 Convention, is the “competent international organization” in the UN system in the field of marine scientific research and dissemination.
International maritime law is a set of legal customs and international treaties that establish the legal regime of maritime spaces and regulate relations between states on issues of exploration and use of the World Ocean. The leading role in the system of international maritime law is played by its basic principles. The most important ones are: principles of international maritime law as the principle of freedom of the high seas, the principle of sovereignty and the principle of the common heritage of mankind.
Traditionally, the law of the sea has been dominated by the principle of freedom of the high seas and the principle of sovereignty. The French lawyer R. Dupuis, briefly outlining the essence of maritime law, illustrated it as follows:
At sea, two main opposing winds have always clashed: the wind of the open sea towards the land - the wind of freedom and the wind of the land towards the open sea - the wind of sovereignty. The law of the sea was constantly caught between these conflicting forces.
The principle of freedom of the high seas.
First principle of international maritime law- the principle of freedom of the high seas presupposes the possibility of unhindered use of the territory of the World Ocean for various purposes, such as shipping, aircraft overflight, laying of submarine cables and pipelines, construction of artificial islands, fishing and scientific research. The starting point for the formation of the principle of freedom of the high seas can be considered the policy of Queen Elizabeth I of England. This principle, first of all, should be considered as the most important condition for the development of international maritime trade and commerce. In this regard, it is interesting to note that Hugo Grotius, in his famous work Mare Liberum, published in 1609, championed the freedom of the high seas, defending the right of the Dutch East India Company to trade in the Far East against the exclusive monopoly of Portugal, secured by a bull of Pope Alexander IV. During negotiations to end the Dutch struggle for independence, Spain, supporting the position of Portugal, stubbornly opposed the establishment of trade relations between Holland and India. This situation did not suit the Dutch East India Company at all and, at its request, Hugo Grotius prepared for publication Mare Liberum. Indeed, the main purpose of the work was to protect and expand freedom of trade based on the freedom of the high seas. This episode is intended to demonstrate that the principle of freedom of the high seas is essentially a reflection of the economic and political interests of maritime powers.
Although the argument of Hugo Grotius was repeatedly criticized by various authors, including William Wellwood, John Selden, Justo Seraphim de Freitas, Juan de Solórzano Pierera and John Borough, the affirmation of the principle of freedom of the high seas was facilitated by the practice of states. In particular, England, which dominated the sea at that time, encouraged freedom of navigation to develop international commerce and trade. In essence, freedom of the high seas is a consequence of freedom of trade as the most important condition for the expansion of capitalism and the dominance of European civilization over the rest of the world.
The principle of sovereignty.
In contrast to the principle of freedom of the high seas, second principle of international maritime law- the principle of sovereignty is intended to guarantee the protection of the interests of coastal states. This principle essentially means the extension of national jurisdiction to maritime spaces and promotes the territorialization of the World Ocean. It is generally accepted that the concept of the modern state was formulated. It should not be surprising that the modern concept of the territorial sea was developed by the same author. In his book published in 1758, Vattel stated:
When a nation comes into possession of certain parts of the sea, they become imperial property, just like a domain, according to the same principle that we apply to land. These parts of the sea are under the jurisdiction of the state, are part of its territories: the sovereign controls them; makes laws and can punish those who violate them; in a word, has the same rights as on land, and, in general, all the rights that the laws of the state allow.
On the other hand, Vattel denied that the high seas could be appropriated by one or more states. Vattel thus made a clear distinction between a sea under territorial sovereignty and the high seas. At the same time, Vattel recognized through the territorial sea and. The territorial sea cannot be separated from the open sea, preventing the passage of ships. Vattel's concept represents the prototype of maritime law in its modern sense.
Subsequently, the maritime belt adjacent to the land territory is becoming increasingly important for coastal states from the point of view of ensuring national security, implementing customs and sanitary control, conducting fishing and implementing economic policies based on the doctrine of mercantilism. The practice of states maintaining maritime belt claims in the nineteenth century led to the formation of the doctrine of the territorial sea. At the international level, the dualism of the oceans, expressed in the difference in the legal regimes of the territorial sea and the high seas, receives clear confirmation in the Bering Sea fur seal case between Great Britain and the United States of 1893. The main topic of this arbitration was whether the United States has any right to protect against poachers fur seals, congregating on the Pribilof Islands in the Bering Sea, which are outside the generally accepted three-mile contiguous zone. In this case, the arbitration panel, by a majority of five to two, rejected the US right to protect the ocean fur seal population beyond the territorial sea. The arbitration panel's ruling makes it clear that a coastal state cannot exercise jurisdiction on the high seas beyond the three-mile contiguous zone. From this it clearly follows that the jurisdiction of a coastal state extends to a strip of maritime space extending from the coast to a width not exceeding three miles.
Thus, we can say that based on the principle of freedom of the high seas and the principle of sovereignty, the waters of the World Ocean are divided into two categories. The first category includes the maritime space adjacent to the coast and is subject to the national jurisdiction of the coastal state. The second category refers to maritime space beyond national jurisdiction and is subject to the principle of freedom of the high seas. Until the mid-twentieth century, the zone was limited by a narrow sea belt, and a huge area of oceans remained free. At that time, the principle of freedom of the high seas dominated the world's oceans. However, since the Second World War, coastal states have increasingly expanded their jurisdiction towards the high seas to establish greater control over marine resources. It can be said that the principle of sovereignty becomes the catalyst for the development of the law of the sea after the Second World War. In any case, there is little doubt that the coordination of the economic and political interests of maritime and coastal states has until recently been one of the central issues of international maritime law.
The principle of the common heritage of humanity.
Third principle of international maritime law- principle. This principle is enshrined in Part XI. The principle of the common heritage of mankind arises as the antithesis of both the principle of sovereignty and the principle of freedom of the high seas. It differs from traditional principles in two respects.
First, while the principles of sovereignty and freedom of the high seas are intended to protect the interests of individual states, the principle of the common heritage of mankind is intended to promote the interests of humanity as a whole. It can be argued that the term “humanity” defines a civilization of people that is not limited by either space or time. Not limited by space, because “humanity” includes absolutely all people living on the planet. Not limited by time, because “humanity” includes both present and future generations of people. We can say that the general interest of humanity means the interest of all people of present and future generations.
Second, the principle of the common heritage of humanity focuses on “humanity” as a new actor in international maritime law. “Humanity” is not just an abstract concept. In accordance with the Convention on the Law of the Sea, “humanity” has an operational governing body, the so-called. An international seabed authority acting on behalf of humanity as a whole. IN in this regard One can rightfully say that humanity is becoming a new actor in international maritime law. In this sense, the principle of the common heritage of mankind opens up international law of the sea new perspective, taking it beyond the framework of the system of interstate relations.
International maritime law
International maritime law(public international maritime law) - a set of principles and legal norms establishing the regime of maritime spaces and regulating relations between states on the use of the World Ocean. Currently, most of the norms of international maritime law are consolidated in the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. All other international treaties (including bilateral and regional agreements) containing regulations relating to this industry mainly complement or detail the provisions of the Convention.
Subjects
Subjects of international maritime law are subjects of international law, i.e. states and international intergovernmental organizations.
Sources
For a long time, the only source of international maritime law was customs.
Currently, the main source of international maritime law is the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. International relationships in the field of international maritime law are also regulated by the following conventions:
- Geneva Conventions 1958;
- International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974;
- International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL 73/78);
- Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Materials, 1972;
- International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978;
- Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972;
- 1959 Antarctic Treaty
and many others.
In addition to multilateral treaties, states also conclude local bilateral and multilateral treaties on various issues maritime activities:
- Convention on Fisheries and the Conservation of Living Resources in the Baltic Sea and Belts, 1973;
- Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area, 1974;
- North-East Atlantic Fisheries Convention, 1980;
- Convention for the Protection of the Black Sea against Pollution, 1992;
- Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, 1980;
- Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Caspian Sea, 2003.
Principles of international maritime law
The principle of freedom of the high seas
This principle is one of the oldest in international maritime law. It was described by G. Grotius in his work “Mare liberum”. Today, according to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, it reads: “No state can claim to subordinate the high seas or part of it to its sovereignty; it is open to all states - both those with access to the sea and those without it” Art. 89. Freedom of the high seas includes:
- freedom of navigation;
- freedom of flight;
- freedom of laying pipelines and cables;
- freedom to erect artificial islands and other installations;
- freedom of fishing;
- freedom of scientific research;
In addition, it is established that the high seas must be used for peaceful purposes.
The principle of exclusive jurisdiction of a state over ships of its flag on the high seas (Article 92 of the Convention on the Law of the Sea)
This principle states that a merchant ship on the high seas is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of its flag state and no one has the right to interfere with its lawful activities, except in cases where:
- the ship is engaged in piracy;
- the ship is engaged in the slave trade;
- the ship is engaged in unauthorized broadcasting, i.e. transmitting, in violation of international rules, radio and television programs intended for reception by the population (with the exception of distress signals). In this case, the ship can be arrested and the equipment confiscated:
- ship's flag state;
- State of registration of the broadcasting installation;
- the state of which the broadcaster is a citizen;
- any state where transmissions may be received;
- any state whose authorized communications are interfered with by such broadcasting.
- the ship has no nationality (sails without a flag);
- the ship sails without a flag or under the flag of a foreign country, but in reality has the same nationality as the detaining warship.
The principle of peaceful use of the world's oceans
The principle of sovereignty of states over internal sea waters and the territorial sea
Principle of marine environment protection
In other words, the principle of preventing marine pollution. It was first enshrined in the International Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Oil of 1954 in the form of establishing prohibited zones for the discharge of oil from ships.
Principle of immunity of warships
The principle states that military and other government vessels used for non-commercial purposes have immunity. This is limited to cases where such vessels violate the rules of peaceful passage through the territorial waters of a foreign state. The authorities of that state may demand immediate departure from their territorial waters. And for any damage caused by a military vessel as a result of violation of the rules of innocent passage, the flag state bears international responsibility.
1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea
The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea provides for the normative regulation of the following international legal institutions:
- territorial sea and contiguous zone;
Rights of landlocked states
The 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea establishes certain rights for landlocked states, i.e. states that do not have a sea coast:
This is interesting
Notes
Links
- F. S. Boytsov, G. G. Ivanov, A. L. Makovsky. "Law of the Sea" (1985)
- International maritime law. Tutorial. Ed. S. A. Gureeva. M, “Legal Literature”, 2003
- Database of documents on the law of the sea Rise::Law of the Sea
| International law | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| General provisions | |||||
| Legal personality | |||||
| Territory |
|
||||
| Population |
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.
See what “International Law of the Sea” is in other dictionaries:INTERNATIONAL LAW OF THE MARINE- see Maritime Law. Samoilov K.I. Marine dictionary. M. L.: State Naval Publishing House of the NKVMF of the USSR, 1941 International maritime law is a system of norms and principles about ... Maritime Dictionary International maritime law- (English international maritime law) a sub-branch of international law, a system of principles and norms that define the legal regime of maritime spaces and regulate relations between states arising in connection with the use of the World Ocean, including ... Encyclopedia of Law INTERNATIONAL LAW OF THE MARINE Legal dictionary INTERNATIONAL LAW OF THE MARINE- a set of principles and norms of international law governing relations between states, as well as. international organizations arising in connection with their activities in the use of seas and oceans and their resources, and, in some cases,... ... Legal encyclopedia international maritime law- a set of legal principles and norms governing the relationships between states and international organizations arising in connection with their activities in the use of seas, oceans and their resources, and in some cases the airspace above... ... Large legal dictionary INTERNATIONAL LAW OF THE MARINE- a set of principles and norms of international law governing relations between states, etc. international organizations arising in connection with their activities in the use of seas and oceans and their resources, and in some cases... ... encyclopedic Dictionary economics and law | ||||
What else to read
THE LAST NOTES
- Andrey Shcheglov: Reformation in Sweden
- Vegan pumpkin stuffed with rice and baked whole in the oven
- Teleportation and time travel
- Notification of changes in the terms of the employment contract and transition to an effective contract Notification of the employee about the introduction of an effective contract
- Liquid buckwheat porridge - benefits in every spoon