Outer Continental Shelf Delimitation in the Western Caribbean Sea: (Nicaragua v. Colombia II): what lessons to learn from the East China Sea dispute on the viability of maritime delimitation between different bases of continental shlef entitlement? (original) (raw)
Related papers
Territorial and Maritime Dispute (Nicaragua v. Colombia), 2001
Latin America and the International Court of Justice (Routledge), 2017
Delimitation of the extended continental shelf, ICJ, Latin America, Delineation of the extended continental shelf, preliminary information, customary international law, tension Article 76 and 77 UNCLOS
Equitable Considerations in the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf
International Law Studies, 2023
The delimitation of the continental shelf is often regarded as one of the most controversial inter-State delimitation disputes due to the significant advantages it can offer to coastal States. Since the conception of the continental shelf regime, i.e., the 1945 Truman Proclamation, equitable considerations have been central to the delimitation of this zone, which has been consistently reflected in the jurisprudence and in UNCLOS. As an umbrella instrument with a framework character, UNCLOS usually suffices to stipulate the fundamental norms and principles. This was also the case for the delimitation of the continental shelf. Article 83, whilst not prescribing a specific delimitation method, sets out the ultimate objective as the achievement of an equitable solution. Hence, this requires a proactive role for international courts and tribunals in developing appropriate approaches and methods. The relevant case law recognizes that the equitable principles doctrine stands as a fundamental norm of international law. However, the exact application of equitable considerations is yet to be further refined. In light of the foregoing, this article aims to explore the role of equitable considerations in the delimitation of the continental shelf process.
Ocean and Shoreline Management, 1991
The prolongation of land boundaries into the sea becomes very complicated where the boundary is defined by the mouths of large rivers with considerable change in coastal development. The cases of the boundaries Honduras-Nicaragua (Rio Coco) and Nicaragua-Costa Rica (Rio San Juan) are used to point out difficulties in applying definitions and concepts of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea to this specific situation. The third case refers to the Nicaraguan Rise, where many cays, banks, reefs and islands represent serious problems of definition in the context of maritime delimitation. The persisting lack of detailed studies at the local scale, including historical change and coastal dynamics, is overruled by nationalistic territorial policies which intensify boundary disputes and conflict potential. This requires a combination of topographical, geomorphological and historical studies with conflict research which includes the political performance of the actors and its relation to 'national' interests, public opinion and consciousness of the maritime dimension of territory.
Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta, Novi Sad, 2014
It was a dispute over some islands and cays in Caribbean whose importance was that they were determining division of continental shelf. The islands are much closer to the coast of Nicaragua than the cost of Columbia, but this fact did not have decisive importance in attribution of sovereignty over the islands. The border on the sea, inherited from Spanish colonial time, was not easy to be determined. The both sides referred to certain legal acts of colonial authorities which might serve as colonial titles, but these acts were not precise enough. On the other hand, Columbia and Nicaragua settled some territorial issue by the 1928 Treaty and the 1930 Protocol thereto. Nicaragua challenged validity of the Treaty, but without success. The International Court of Justice found that Columbia has performed certain acts of sovereign power over the disputed clays in post-colonial time and resolved the dispute in favor of Columbia applying post-colonial ffectivités.
United Nations – Nippon Foundation of Japan Fellowship Program on ocean affairs and Law of the Sea , 2012
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea that entered into force in 1994, established a legal regime for the continental shelf in its Part VI (art. 76 - 85) and its Annex II (together with Annex II of the Final Act) according to which coastal State may extend its rights to the continental shelf throughout the natural prolongation of the land territory to the outer edge of the continental margin, or to a distance of 200 nautical miles from the baselines. Article 76 of the Convention provides that States may extend the outer limits of their continental shelf beyond the 200 nautical miles if certain physical circumstances exist, namely that the outer limits of the continental margin extends beyond that distance. In that case the coastal State has to follow the procedure regulated in Article 76 and Annex II to the Convention by making a submission to a technical institution created to the Convention: the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) This research wants to present a general perspective of the legal regime of the continental shelf and the process to establishment of its outer limits.
SSRN Journal , 2023
The law of the sea is a very vast domain. However, the sea law mainly governs through a convention i.e. Unit Nations Convention on the Law of Sea (UNCLOS). All the matters are discussed in terms of territorial limits, maritime jurisdiction of coastal states, Natural Islands, Artificial Islands, and continental shelf which will be discussed below. Further, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) is the United Nations specialized agency with responsible for the safety and security of shipping and the prevention of marine and atmospheric pollution by ships. IMO's work supports the UN sustainable development goals. 1
PEACE & SECURITY-PAIX ET SÉCURITÉ INTERNATIONALES (EuroMediterranean Journal of International Law and International Relations), 2019
Costa Rica and Nicaragua, that rarely reach direct agreements, had not delimited the maritime areas in the Caribbean Sea and the Pacific Ocean, nor the land boundary in the northern part of Isla Portillos. Thus, Costa Rica first initiated an action in the International Court of Justice in 2014 regarding the maritime issue, and later, in 2017, requested the definition of the land boundary of that area in Isla Portillos and that it be noted that Nicaragua had set up a new military camp on its beach.This text – in view of the parties’ proposals - will analyze the recent judgment of the Court in the joined procedures, studying the proceedings followed, the relevant geography and history, the theses of the Parties and the reasoning of the Court. L’ARRÊT DE LA COUR INTERNATIONALE DE JUSTICE DANS LES AFFAIRES DE DÉLIMITATION MARITIME ET TERRESTRE (COSTA RICA C. NICARAGUA), À LA LUMIÈRE DE LEURS PROPOSITIONS RESPECTIVES (2 FÉVRIER 2018) Le Costa Rica et le Nicaragua, qui difficilement arrivent à des accords directs, n’ont pas délimité les espaces maritimes de la mer des Caraïbes et de l’océan Pacifique, ni la frontière terrestre dans la partie nord d’Isla Portillos. Ainsi, le Costa Rica a d’abord engagé une procédure en matière maritime devant la Cour internationale de justice en 2014, puis en 2017, a demandé la définition de la frontière terrestre de cette zone d’Isla Portillos et qu’il soit établi que le Nicaragua avait établi un nouveau Camp militaire sur sa plage.Ce document - à la lumière des approches des parties - analysera le récent arrêt de la Cour qui a résolu les deux procédures ensemble, étudiera la procédure suivie, la géographie et l’histoire perti-nentes, les thèses des parties et le raisonnement de la Cour. LA RECIENTE DELIMITACIÓN TERRESTRE Y MARÍTIMA DE LA CORTE DE LA HAYA (2 DE FEBRERO DE 2018) EN LOS ASUNTOS DE COSTA RICA CONTRA NICA-RAGUA A LA LUZ DE SUS PLANTEAMIENTOS Costa Rica y Nicaragua, que difícilmente llegan a arreglos directos, no habían delimitado los espacios marítimos en el mar Caribe y en el océano Pacífico, como tampoco el límite de tierra en la parte norte de Isla Portillos. Así, Costa Rica inició primero un procedimiento ante la Corte Internacional de Justicia en 2014 por el asunto marítimo, y más tarde, en 2017, solicitó la definición del límite terrestre de esa área de Isla Portillos y que se constate que Nicaragua había establecido un nuevo campamento militar en su playa. Este escrito –a la luz de los planteamientos de las Partes– analizará la reciente sentencia de la Corte que resolvió unidos los dos procedimientos, estudiando el trámite seguido, la geografía e historia relevantes, las tesis de las Partes y el razonamiento de la Corte.
The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, 2010
It is not the role of an international adjudicative body in the exercise of its contentious jurisdiction, to advise parties as to what their rights would be under a hypothetical state of facts. Having in mind the importance international law attaches to the judicial principle res iudicata, the question examined in this article is whether an international adjudicative body should accept the application to delimit the outer continental shelf, to which there are overlapping claims, prior to the completion of the work of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. Notwithstanding the unilateral character of the delineation of the outer limits of the continental shelf and its conceptual detachment from delimitation, these two operations are intertwined. Thus, it could affect the holistic application of the Law of the Sea Convention, should international adjudicative bodies accept to delimit the outer continental shelf in the absence of any recommendations by the Commission.
Dispute settlement and the establishment of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles
2013
Convention). The 1958 Continental Shelf Convention is one of four conventions adopted in Geneva in 1958 which are the predecessors to UNCLOS. 8 The international seabed area is usually referred to as the Area. Article 1(1) of UNCLOS defines the Area as 'the seabed and ocean floor and subsoil thereof, beyond the limits of national jurisdiction'. The definition is a negative one 'for in order to know the exact extent of the Area, one needs to know up to where exactly coastal states have extended their national jurisdiction at sea'. Erik Franckx, 'The International Seabed Authority and the Common Heritage of Mankind: The need for States to Establish the Outer Limits of their Continental Shelf' (2010) 25 IJMCL 543, 552. Article 140 of UNCLOS provides that '[a]ctivities in the Area shall ... be carried out for the benefit of mankind as a whole'. 9 These two terms should not be confused with the term demarcation which is important in land boundary delimitations. The demarcation of a land boundary 'amounts to laying it down, as mutually defined, by means of boundary pillars, monuments and buoys, and permanent erections of other kinds, along the topographical conformations of the territories to be separated by it'. A. Cukwurah, The Settlement of Boundary Disputes in International Law (Manchester University Press 1967) 28. Demarcation is of limited practical value in outer continental shelf delimitations since the importance of visually showing the boundary line on the seabed itself is very limited. 10 Article 9 of Annex II to UNCLOS. 11 Article 83 of UNCLOS.