227 research outputs found
The High Seas and the International Seabed Area
This article is set out in three parts. The first section briefly describes the geographic scope of the sea. The second section analyzes the geographic scope of the high seas. The last section presents six agreed legal principles relevant to the seabed debate which – contrary to the tone of much of the debate - constitute a substantial and growing consensus on the elements of the legal regime of the seabed beyond coastal state jurisdiction. The article concludes by suggesting that more is agreed in this area than is often acknowledged, and that the broader debate would be aided by recognition of this
Recommended from our members
Comment: Developing the Environmental Law of Armed Conflict
My reaction to the excellent papers presented today is quite simple: I agree with much of what was said. Since Ivan Shearer has helpfully summarized Glen Plant's classifications of the various positions on the issue, I let me say that the views I expressed to the United States Senate in 1991 place me mainly in the first camp.2 But I am willing to find practical ways to accommodate the objectives of those in the second camp. And I am ready to be persuaded by partisans of the third camp on specific points. That, I suppose, makes me a partisan of what Lucius Caflisch called the "Goldblat Doctrine," namely "to build upon what exists already and ... show a certain realism in doing so.,,3 We should bear in mind that almost 20 years ago, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute study already warned that military disruption of the environment is exceedingly difficult to limit or control by legal instruments.4 In this regard, I am not sure that all of the speakers on the panel would attach as much significance as I do to three points: 1) Because armed conflict is always bad for the environment, any text attempting to deal with the full problem of environmental restraints on armed conflict in a simple and sweeping peremptory fashion is likely to force a choice between the obvious and the fanciful. 2) We must be cautious about perverse effects. The practical impact of a particular protective legal rule may be to increase the likelihood of undesirable damage, for example by encouraging the militarization of a site that would not otherwise have been a profitable object of attack. 3) We should not confuse thejus in bello with thejus ad bellum. Whatever the intent, I believe the fourth camp cannot easily satisfy these criteria. For example, let me quote from Sebia Hawkins' comments on behalf of the Greenpeace position before the American Society of International Law in 1991
The Law of the Sea Conference and Development: Food and Energy Resources
1. Professor of Law, University of Miami School of Law; Vice Chairman, United States Delegation to the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea. The following is the text of an address given to the International Development Conference, Washington, D.C., May 13, 1981. The views expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the Department of State or the U.S. Government. 2. The Conference commenced in 1973 pursuant to UNGA Res. 3067 (XXVIII). The author's articles tracing the work of the Conference may be found in Stevenson and Oxman, The Preparations for the Law of the Sea Conference, 68 Am. J. Int'l L. 1 (1974); The Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea: The 1974 Caracas Session, 69 Am. J. Int'l L. 1 (1975); The 1975 Geneva Session 69 Am. J. Int'l L. 763 (1975); and Oxman, The Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea: The 1976 New York Session, 71 Am. J. Int' l L. 247 (1977); The 1977 New York Sessions, 72 Am. J. Int'l L. 57 (1978); The Seventh Session (1978), 73 Am. J. Int'l L. 1 (1979); The Eighth Session (1979), 74 Am. J. Int'l L. 1 (1980); The Ninth Session (1980), 75 Am. J. Int'l L. 211 (1981). 3. Draft Convention on the Law of the Sea (Informal Text), U.N. Doc. A/ Conf.62/WP.10/Rev. 3/Add.l (1980). [hereinafter cited as Draft Convention] The text was subsequently reissued with primarily drafting changes as A-Conf.62/L.78 (1981)
- …