Global Encyclopedia of Territorial Rights

Living Edition
| Editors: Michael Kocsis

The Law of the Sea Convention: Lasting Paradigm of Territory

Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68846-6_27-1
  • 115 Downloads

Definition

Arguably the most important achievements of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC), which entered into force in 1994, are its comprehensiveness and flexibility (Churchill 2015, 45). Establishing itself as “constitution for the oceans” (Koh 1982, xxxiii), it divides the ocean in defined maritime zones, in which coastal sovereignty is decreasing the further one is from the coast. Coastal states can claim a territorial sea up to 12 nautical miles from its low-water baseline (LOSC, Art. 3) and a contiguous zone up to 24 nautical miles from that same line (LOSC, Art. 33). In addition, coastal states can claim up to 200 nautical miles of exclusive economic zone (LOSC, Art. 57). A special regime applies to archipelagic states (LOSC, Part IV) and straits (LOSC, Part III). Furthermore, a coastal state has internal waters landward from its baseline (LOSC, Art. 8) and rights over its continental shelf (LOSC, Part VI). Beyond these zones, it is known as the...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Amerasinghe HS (1972) The third World and the seabed. In: Mann Borgese E (ed) Pacem in maribus. Dodd, Mead & Company, New York, pp 237–248Google Scholar
  2. Anand RP (1983) Origin and development of the law of the sea. History of international law revisited. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernhardt R (1989) Custom and treaty in the law of the sea. Recueil des Cours 205(1987):247–340Google Scholar
  4. Bosselmann K (2015) Earth governance. Trusteeship for the global commons. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham/NorthamptonGoogle Scholar
  5. Churchill RR (2015) The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. In: Rothwell DR et al (eds) Oxford handbook of the law of the sea. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 24–45Google Scholar
  6. Durner W (2000) Common goods. Statusprinzipien von Umweltgütern im Völkerrecht. Nomos, Baden-BadenGoogle Scholar
  7. Fitzmaurice G (1957) The general principles of international law considered from the standpoint of the rule of law. Rec Cours 92:5–222Google Scholar
  8. Grotius H (1608/1916) Mare liberum sive de iure quod Batavis competit ad indicana commercia. Dissertatio (trans: van Deman Magoffin R), Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Guilfoyle D (2017) Article 111 right of hot pursuit. In: Proelss A (ed) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: a commentary. C. H. Beck, München, pp 772–779Google Scholar
  10. Hannesson R (2006) The privatization of the oceans. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA/LondonGoogle Scholar
  11. International Court of Justice (1951) Fisheries case (United Kingdom v. Norway) judgment of December 18th, 1951. I.C.J. reports (1951), pp 116–144Google Scholar
  12. International Court of Justice (1969) North Sea Continental Shelf cases (Federal Republic of Germany/Denmark; Federal Republic of Germany/Netherlands) judgment of 20 February 1969. I.C.J. reports (1969), pp 3–56Google Scholar
  13. Jaeckel A (2017) The International Seabed Authority and the precautionary principle: balancing deep seabed mineral mining and marine environmental protection. Brill Nijhoff, Leiden/BostonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kiss A (1985) The common heritage of mankind: utopia or reality? Int J 40:423–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Koh TTB (1982) A constitution for the oceans. United Nations Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea. Retrieved from: http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/koh_english.pdf
  16. Lathrop CG (2015) Baselines. In: Rothwell DR et al (eds) Oxford handbook of the law of the sea. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 69–90Google Scholar
  17. Oxman BH (2006) The territorial temptation: a siren song at sea. Am J Int Law 100:830–851Google Scholar
  18. Pardo A, Christol CQ (1983) The common interest: tension between the whole and the parts. In: Macdonald RSJ, Johnston DM (eds) The structure and process of international law: essays in legal philosophy doctrine and theory. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, The Hague, pp 643–660Google Scholar
  19. Potter PB (1924) The freedom of the seas in history, law, and politics. Longmans, Green and Co., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Proelss A (2017a) Article 55. Special legal regime of the exclusive economic zone. In: Proelss A (ed) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: a commentary. C. H. Beck, München, pp 408–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Proelss A (2017b) Article 60. Artificial islands, installations and structures in the exclusive economic zone. In: Proelss A (ed) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: a commentary. C. H. Beck, München, pp 464–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rozwadowski HM (2018) Vast expanses: a history of the oceans. Reaktion Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Treves T (2019) The expansion of international law: general course on public international law (2015). Rec Cours 398(2018):9–398Google Scholar
  24. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (1982) Int Leg Mater 21:1261–1354Google Scholar
  25. van Bijnkershoek C (1744/1923) De dominio maris dissertatio. In: Opera minora, 2nd edn (trans: van Deman Magoffin R). Oxford University Press, New York, pp 352–424Google Scholar
  26. van Doorn E (2016) Environmental aspects of the mining code: preserving humankind’s common heritage while opening Pardo’s box? Mar Policy 70:192–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. van Doorn E, Gahlen SF (2018) Legal aspects of marine spatial planning. In: Yates KL, Bradshaw CJA (eds) Offshore energy and marine spatial planning. Routledge, London/New York, pp 74–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Law, Walther Schücking Institute for International LawKiel UniversityKielGermany

Section editors and affiliations

  • Kevin W. Gray
    • 1
  1. 1.University of TorontoTorontoCanada