scholarly journals The Future of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea

1994 ◽  
Vol 88 (3) ◽  
pp. 488-499 ◽  
Author(s):  
John R. Stevenson ◽  
Bernard H. Oxman
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
The Future ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law

scholarly journals The Paradoxical Success of UNCLOS Part XV: A Half-hearted Reply to Rosemary Rayfuse

2005 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 713 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Serdy
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
The Future ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law

In his reply to Rosemary Rayfuse's article, "The Future of Compulsory Dispute Settlement under the Law of the Sea Convention", Andrew Serdy addresses some of the criticisms that have been levelled at the Part XV dispute resolution provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). He concludes that despite being little used, the Part XV provisions remain pivotal to UNCLOS and its related treaties, and if anything are becoming more so

scholarly journals When is a Ship a Ship? Use by State Armed Forces of Un-crewed Maritime Vehicles and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon McKenzie
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Military Operations ◽  
Sovereign Immunity ◽  
Strategic Value ◽  
The Future ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law

[Law and the Future of War Research Paper No 3] Armed forces around the world are rapidly developing un-crewed maritime vehicles (UMVs) for use in military operations. Key to the strategic value of UMVs is that they will have no people on board, and instead be remotely controlled or, in the future, will be able to carry out some or all of their mission autonomously. But will they fit into the existing categories of the law of the sea set out in the in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)? This paper considers whether two of the basic classifications of this body of law – being categorised as a ‘ship’ or ‘vessel’ and being a ‘warship’ – require people to be on board the vehicle and thus exclude UMVs. These categories are critical for the distribution of rights and obligations in the UNCLOS. Failing to qualify as a ship would significantly limit the strategic value of UMVs, restricting their navigational rights and possibly preventing states claiming sovereign immunity. Along with the important practical implications of these definitional challenges, they also serve as an example of when an evolutionary interpretation of international treaty law should be preferred. The paper shows that the better interpretation of ship in UNCLOS is capacious enough to include both remotely controlled and autonomous UMVs. However, the more restrictive definitional requirements of warship in UNCLOS will be more difficult for UMVs to meet.

The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf and its Disturbing Propensity to Legislate

2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 355-383 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Serdy
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Continental Shelves ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law

AbstractCreated by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea to apply the rules in Article 76 on the outer limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles from States’ territorial sea baselines, the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf has on several occasions introduced new requirements for States not supported by Article 76, or impermissibly qualifying the rights Article 76 accords them. This article focuses on several such instances, one to the coastal State’s advantage (though temporally rather than spatially), another neutral (though requiring unnecessary work of States), but the remainder all tending to reduce the area of continental shelves. The net effect has been to deprive States of areas of legal continental shelf to which a reasonable interpretation of Article 76 entitles them, and in one case even of their right to have their submissions examined on their merits, even though, paradoxically, the well-meaning intention behind at least some of the Commission’s pronouncements was to avoid other controversies.

How to Amend UNCLOS and Why It Has Never Been Done

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 72-83
Author(s):  
Chris Whomersley
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Organisations ◽  
International Labour Organisation ◽  
International Maritime Organisation ◽  
Consensus Procedure ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law ◽  
Labour Organisation

Abstract The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) contains detailed provisions concerning its amendment, but these have never been used and this article explores why this is so. States have instead maintained the Convention as a “living instrument” by adopting updated rules in other organisations, especially the International Maritime Organisation and the International Labour Organisation. States have also used the consensus procedure at Meetings of the States Parties to modify procedural provisions in UNCLOS, and have adopted two Implementation Agreements relating to UNCLOS. In addition, port State jurisdiction has developed considerably since the adoption of UNCLOS, and of course other international organisations have been active in related fields.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document