SUCCESS AND FAILURE OF UNCLOS III Introduction 1.
On 10 Dec 1982, the UN convention on the law of the sea was ope ned for signature at Montego Bay,
Jamaica. this marked the culmination of over 14 years of works i nvolving participation by more than 150 countries responding all region of the world, all legal and political systems, all degrees of socio-eco nomic development. They comprised coastal systems, geographically disad vantaged states, archipelagic states, island states and land locked states. These countries conven ed for the purpose of establishing a comprehensive regime dealing with all matters relati ng to the law of the sea, bearing i n mind the problem of ocean space are closely interrelated and needed to be considered as a whole. The T he fruits of their laboures are embodied in the law of the sea (UNCLOS). 2.
The article will highlight the de velopment of UNCLOS III with relevance to the success and failure of
ONCLOS II a nd UNCLOS III.
Aim 3.
The aim of the article is fto discuss the development of INCLOS III
History
of Development of UNCLOS III
4.
Important milestones of law of the sea convention can be summarized as follows: a.
1930 League of Nations Codification Conference at Hague prepared a draft on legal states
of territorial sea. b.
1945 Truman proclamation in USA in 1945 on the Continental Shelf and Fisheries
Conservatio ns marked the starting point of contemporary development of LOS. c.
1958 UNCLOS-I, participated by 87 countries and adopted 04 conventions.
d.
1960 UNCLOS II, attended by 88 states.
f.
1968 the Gen eral Assembly established an Adhoc Committee to study the peaceful uses of
the seabed and ocean floor. g.
1973 UNCLOS III convened in accordance with General Assembly regulation 3067.
h.
1982 - 10 Dec, UNCLOS III was opened for signature.
j.
1994 UNCL OS III came in to force on 16 Dec 1994. Separate agreement o n part 11 of the
conventions was open for signature. k.
1996 part 11 of UNCLOS III entered into force on 28 Jul 1996.
1
Success and Failure of UNCLOS I 5.
UNCLOS I was conveyed in FEB 1958
in Geneva an d participated by 87 coun tries. It produced 4
conventions and an optional protocol governing several aspect of the law of the sea. These are:
6.
a.
Territorial sea and contiguous zone.
b.
The continental Shelf
c.
The high sea.
d.
Fishing and conserving of the living resources of the High seas.
e.
Optional protocol on compulsory settlement of dispute.
It left many question unsettled i ncluding: a.
The maximum breadth of the territorial sea.
b.
The extent of coastal states fisherys ju risdictions.
Success and Failure of UNCLOS II 7.
UNCLOS II was attended by 88 states to deal with the unsolved territorial sea a nd fisheries issues. It
narrowly failed to adopt a 6 nm territorial sea plus a 6 nm exclusive or partially exclusi ve fishery zon e.
UNCLOS III 8.
It comprises 320 articles and 9 annexes including all aspect of ocean spaces from delimitations to
conventional control, scientific research, economic and commercial activities, technology and settlement of disputes relating to ocean matters.
Major Achievement of UNCLOS III 9.
The followings are some of major achievement of UNCLOS III. a.
It provides for equitable distribution and use of common wealth of the ocean.
b.
Sovereign rights of the coastal states up to 12 nm, described as territorial sea.
c.
Economic interests of the coastal states are protested up to 200 nm EEZ and 350nm
continental shelf. d.
Freedom of the high seas is conferred.
e.
Protections of the marine environment are ensured.
f.
Present system of marine scientific research ensured.
g.
So far (up to Jul 2011) 157 countries of the world sig ned the UNCLOS III and 162 have
ratified.
Conclusion 10.
The UNCLOS III is marked as one of the most accepted and supported, and successful treaty laws.
The development of such a comprehensive law took a long period. UNCLOS I & II were the first steps though they failed universal consensus. Finally, after the relentless effort by the expertise, UNCLOS III was convened and took its present shape. The law has ensured fair and equal access to a common resources and use of the sea. No doubt, for the foreseeable future, UNCLOS III will regulate the activities across the spaces of the ocean.
2
MARITIME BOUNDARY DISPUTE AND DELIMITATION OF MARITIME ZONE Introduction 1.
The oceans are common resources to the shared by all the people of the world. Free access to the
ocean allows nations to en joy adva ntages of the living resources of sea, efficient and low cost means of transportation and u ndersea mineral resources. The United Nations Co nvention of the Law of the Sea-1982 (UNCLOS III) coastal states sovereign rights over the sea area to explore a nd exploit resources. This has raised the nations effort to delimit a nd delineate their maritime zone for strategic and economic benefits. So claiming of sea areas before enforcement of UNCLOS III and these historically claimed zones raised a lot
of unsettled dispute between states. These disputes can be settles by the relevant provisions of UNCLOS III. 2.
Bangladesh being one of the most overpopulated countries and relatively poorly endives with
natural resources has special reason to be interested in drawing her maritime zone. But the sea area of Bay
of Bengal is not precisely delimited. Bangladesh and her neighbor India and Myanmar promulgated their own claims in regards to the delimitation of various maritime zones a nd boundaries. These claims overlap and encroach upon each others areas and thus have disputes. 3.
With this backdrop, this article will discuss the existing claims of Bangladesh along with the
contradiction with UNCLOS III and highlight the existing disputes with her neighbors. Then it will suggest procedures to settle those disputes via the provisions of UNCLOS III.
Aim 4.
The aim of this paper is to study the maritime boundary disputes of Bangladesh an d options for
delimitations her maritime zones.
Maritime Zone of Bangladesh Present Claims 5.
Bangladesh claims her maritime zones by enacting act no XXVI of 1974 The Territorial Waters a nd
Maritime Zone Act 1974, long before the enforcement of UNCLOS III. Her existing claims are as follows: a.
Baselines.
Ban gladesh law fixed 08 floating geographical points along 10 fathom
isobaths to draw a straight baseline consideri ng peculiar deltaic and deeply indented coastline. b.
Territorial Waters.
12nm from the baseline.
c.
Contiguous Zone.
06nm outward of territorial waters (18 nm from baseline)
d.
Economic Zone.
200nm from baseline.
Maritime Zones as Per UNCLOS III 6.
Under UNCLOS III, a nations sea areas are divided in 05 distant zones. a.
Internal Waters. Waters on the landward side of the baseline.
b.
Territorial Sea/Archipelagic Waters.
Extended up to 12 n m from the baselines. For
archipelagic states, their archipelagic waters are defined as territorial sea. c.
Contiguous Zone.
d.
Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).
e.
Continental Shelf .
Exten ded up to 24 nm from the baseline. Can be claimed up to 200nm from the baselines.
Extended up to 200nm or some cases 350nm from the baselines.
3
The Problems and Areas Of Dispute 7.
Bangladesh claims her Maritime zones a nd established the baselines long before the enforcement
and existence of UNCLOS III. The following problems and areas of disputes can be summarized which are existing after implication of UNCLOS III and counter claims by the neighboring countries India and Myanmar. a.
The baseline set out 10 fathom or 60 feet of water is not in conformity with the UNCLOS III.
b.
Ban gladesh claims her zone on equitable basis, considering her peculiar coastal areas a nd
highly unstable coastline. But India and Myanmar claims on equidistance basis. Thus their EEZ demarcation line cut the western and eastern EEZ portion of Bangladesh. c.
Both India and Myanmar do not accept our claim of baselines.
d.
Both India and Myanmar do not accept the method of delimitatio n of sea zones.
e.
The ownership of Talpotti isla nd is not yet resolved.
Existing Difficulties for Drawing Baselines and Boundary The existing difficulties and disputes can be summarized as follows: a.
The baseline claimed by Bangladesh has not yet been recognized by India and Myanmar.
b.
Coastal terminal point with India has not yet been agreed upon due to the issue of South
talpatti. c.
The choice of projection for reference chart is to be the same and yet to be agreed upon.
d.
The scale of reference chart is to be the same.
e.
No joint survey carried out.
f.
No common chart datum has been established.
g.
Overlapping claim on disputed island.
Recommendation 8.
In light of the above analysis, followi ng recommendations are made in order to delineate and delimit
the baseline and maritime zone of Bangladesh: a.
Territorial waters and maritime zone act 1974 may be amended as necessary by the exprties
in conformity of UNCLOS III. b.
Complete hydrographic survey of our area and submit chart by 2005.
c.
Established unified chart datum.
d.
We must take advantages of reefs like St Martines reef declaring as low tide elevation and
building permanen t structure on it as per Art 6 and 13 of UNCLOS III. e.
A joint committee may be formed among Bangladesh, India and Myanmar for joi nt survey
and subsequent settlement of the dispute. f.
We must raise our claims to ICJ for equitable share of the bay.
g.
Diplomatic i nitiati ve must be taken, above all, to solve the existing dispute.
h.
BN may be used on i nstrument to take the leadi ng role for survey and subsequent
approaches
4
5
