EXPLOITATION OF THE CONTINENTAL SHELF IN DISPUTED AREAS AN EXAMPLE OF THE ARCTIC OCEAN
This paper aims to examine the legal regime related to define the outer limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 NM. Firstly, special focus will be on the development of the legal concept of the continental shelf. Relevant provisions of the LOS Convention and Article76 inparticular will be scrutinized. Subsequently there is an assumption on which the principles of the Arctic outer continental margin delimitation will be conducted in relation of hypothetic application during the practice of an international adjudicative body. The delimitation within 200 NM and beyond200 NM will be compared. The fourth chapter will be concentrated on the role of the Commission as an important participant of delimitation process. Also there will be a general overview of the state practice concerning the establishment of the outer continental margin in theArctic, the reaction of other Arctic States and recommendations of the Commission.
It will be concluded that 'there are some difficulties in implementing the Article 76 (locating the foot of the slope and dealing with ridge issues), however it is possible to delimit the continental margin of the world based on the Article 76.' Difficulties in implementing and some discrepancies in provisions of the Article 76 do not constitute grounds for considering of a new legal approach. Discrepancies are mainly con tained in the Rules of Procedure and in the Scientific and Technical Guidelines of the Commission. They can be disposed practically without considering the legal concept. In case of unresolved land or maritime dispute the cooperation among coastal states is the best way to avoid conflicts while delimiting the outer continental margin.
About the AuthorM. S. Peters
Mary Sabina Peters (Odisha, India) - Faculty Member of the Xavier University of Bhubaneswar in the Xavier School of Sustainability
(Plot No: 12 (A), Nijigada, Kurki, Harirajpur-752050, Dist.-Puri, pipili, 752050, Odisha, India)
1. Brown E.D., Sea-Bed Energy and Minerals: The International Legal Regime, 1 The Continental shelf (martinus nijhoff, 2001).
2. Churchill Robin and Ulfstein Geir, Marine management in disputed areas. The case of the Barents Sea (1992).
3. Churchill R.R. and Lowe A.V., The Law of the Sea (manchester university Press, 3rd edition 1999).
4. Colson D.A., The Delimitation of the Outer Continental Shelf Between Neighboring States, 97 AJIL (2003).
5. Johnston D.M., Saunders P.M. Ocean Boundary making: Regional Issues and Developments (Croom Helm 1988).
6. Miles E.L. Global Ocean Politics (The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff 1998).
7. Kunoy B. A New Arctic Conquest: The Arctic Outer Continental Margin, 76 Nordic J. of Int'l L. (2007). DOI: 10.1163/090273507X257058.
8. Nordquist M.H., Moore J.N. and Heidar T.H. Legal and Scientific Aspects of Continental Shelf Limits (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 2004).
9. Pharand Donad, The Law of the Sea of the Arctic (special reference to Canada) (University of Ottawa Press 1973).
10. Rothwell Donald R. The polar regions and the development of international law (Cambridge 1996).
11. McDorman T.L., The Role of the Commission on the Limits of Continental Shelf: A Technical Body in a Political World, 17(3) Int'l J. of Marine and Coastal L. (2002). DOI: 10.1163/157180802X00099.
12. Prescott V., National Rights to Hydrocarbon Resources of the Continental Margin Beyond200 Nautical Miles in G.H. Blake, M.A. Pratt and C.H. Schofield (eds.) Boundaries and Energy: Problems and Prospects (Kluwer Law International, The Hague 1998).
13. Smith R.W. and Taft G., Legal Aspects of the Continental Shelf, in PJ. Cook and C.M. Carleton (eds.), Continental Shelf Limits: The Scientific and Legal Interface (New York, Oxford University Press 2000).
14. Symmons C., Ireland and the Law of the Sea (Dublin, Round Hall Sweet & Maxwell 2000).
For citation: Peters M. EXPLOITATION OF THE CONTINENTAL SHELF IN DISPUTED AREAS AN EXAMPLE OF THE ARCTIC OCEAN. BRICS Law Journal. 2016;3(1):42-65. https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2016-3-1-42-65
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.