Scope Of The United Nations Convention Of Law Of The Sea

Original Language Title: Geltungsbereich des Seerechtsübereinkommens der Vereinten Nationen

Subscribe to a Global-Regulation Premium Membership Today!

Key Benefits:

Subscribe Now for only USD$20 per month, or Get a Day Pass for only USD$4.99.
34. public announcement of the Federal Chancellor concerning the scope of the United Nations after notification of the Secretary-General of the United Nations Convention of law of the sea following more States have their instruments of ratification or accession to the United Nations Convention of law of the Sea (BGBl. No. 885/1995) deposited:

 







States:









Date of deposit of the





Instrument of ratification or instrument of accession:









Albania





June 23, 2003







Algeria





June 11, 1996







Equatorial Guinea





July 21, 1997







Argentina





December 1, 1995







Armenia





December 9, 2002







Bangladesh





July 27, 2001







Belgium





November 13, 1998







Benin





October 16, 1997







Brunei Darussalam





November 5, 1996







Bulgaria





May 15, 1996







Burkina Faso





January 25, 2005







Chile





August 25, 1997







China





June 7, 1996







Denmark





November 16, 2004







Estonia





August 26, 2005







European Community





April 1, 1998







Finland





June 21, 1996







France





April 11, 1996







Gabon





11 March 1998







Georgia





21 March 1996







Greece





July 21, 1995







Guatemala





February 11, 1997







Haiti





31 July 1996







Ireland





June 21, 1996







Japan





20 June 1996







Jordan





November 27, 1995







Canada





November 7, 2003







Qatar





December 9, 2002







Kiribati





February 24, 2003







Republic of Korea





January 29, 1996







Lao PDR





June 5, 1998







Latvia





December 23, 2004







Lithuania





November 12, 2003







Luxembourg





October 5, 2000







Madagascar





August 22, 2001







Malaysia





October 14, 1996







Maldives





September 7, 2000







Mauritania





July 17, 1996







Monaco





March 20, 1996







Mongolia





August 13, 1996







Mozambique





March 13, 1997







Myanmar





May 21, 1996







Nauru





January 23, 1996







Nepal





November 2, 1998







New Zealand





July 19, 1996







Nicaragua





May 3, 2000







Netherlands (for the Kingdom in Europe)





June 28, 1996







Norway





June 24, 1996







Pakistan





February 26, 1997







Palau





September 30, 1996







Panama





July 1, 1996







Papua New Guinea





January 14, 1997







Poland





November 13, 1998







Portugal





November 3, 1997







Romania





December 17, 1996







Russian Federation





March 12, 1997







Solomon Islands





June 23, 1997







Samoa





14 August 1995







Saudi Arabia





April 24, 1996







Sweden





25 June 1996







Slovakia





May 8, 1996







Spain





January 15, 1997







South Africa





December 23, 1997







Suriname





July 9, 1998







Tonga





August 2, 1995







Czech Republic June 21, 1996







Tuvalu





December 9, 2002







Ukraine





July 26, 1999







Hungary





February 5, 2002







Vanuatu





August 10, 1999









United Kingdom (including Jersey, Guernsey, island one, Anguilla, Bermuda, British Antarctic Territory, British Indian Ocean Territory, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Falkland Islands, Gibraltar, Montserrat, Pitcairn, Henderson, Ducie - and Oeno Islands, Saint Helena and dependencies, South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands, Turks and Caicos Islands)







July 25, 1997





 

Serbia and Montenegro have declared to consider themselves bound with effect from 27 April 1992 continue to the Convention.

Messages of the Secretary-General of the United Nations have declared reservations below States on the occasion of the deposit of their instruments of ratification or accession or made statements:

Algeria:

The Democratic People's Republic of Algeria considers paragraph 1 is by the provisions of article 287 lit. (b) this Convention regarding the submission of the dispute at the International Court of Justice not as.

The Democratic People's Republic of Algeria declares that a previous agreement between all parties is required for the submission of a dispute at the International Court of Justice in each individual case.

The Algerian Government declared that in accordance with the provisions of part II, section 3 the passage of ships through the territorial waters of Algeria of a permit 15 days in advance subject to subsection A and C of the Convention, provided except in cases of force majeure such as in the Convention.

Equatorial Guinea:

The Government of the Republic of Equatorial Guinea hereby affix a reservation and paragraph 1 of the Convention, of the 1982 United Nations pursuant to article 298 explains that they the procedures provided for in part XV, section 2, of the Convention for the types of disputes in accordance with article 298 par. 1 lit. a with regard to other States recognizes ipso facto not as binding.

Argentina:



a. with regard to those provisions of the Convention, concerning the innocent passage through the territorial sea, the Argentine Government intends, continue to apply the regime currently in force for the passage of foreign warships through Argentine territorial waters because this regime with the provisions of the Convention is entirely compatible.

(b).
With regard to part III of the Convention, the Argentine Government declared that both States confirmed the validity of article V of the Treaty from 1881 in the signed with the Republic of Chile, on November 29, 1984 and entered into force on May 2, 1985 Treaty on peace and friendship, which has been registered in accordance with article 102 of the UN in the Secretariat of the United Nations Charter, , which was the road forever marginalized by Magellan, free shipping for the flags of all Nations. The mentioned Treaty of peace and amity includes rules for ships with flags of third States in the Beagle Channel and other streets and canals of the Tierra del Fuego archipelago.

c. that recognizes the provisions of the Convention relating to the conservation and management of the living resources of the high seas, Argentina's Government considered but in particular the provisions relating to straddling and highly migratory fish stocks as insufficient and is of the opinion that this would facilitate among other things cooperation to prevent the over-fishing through an effective and binding multilateral regime, and allow control of activities of fishing vessels on the high sea and of fishing methods and equipment , should be added.

With regard to the priority interests in the conservation of resources in the exclusive economic zone and the adjacent area of the high Lake is the Argentine Government of considers that in accordance with the provisions of the Convention there, where the same stock or the same stocks of related species as well as in the exclusive economic zone and in the adjacent area of the high seas , the Argentine Republic as a coastal State and the States which have to fish in the areas adjacent to the exclusive economic zone after such stocks, agree on the necessary measures for the conservation of these stocks or related species in the high seas.

Regardless of is the Argentine Government of considers that she is entitled to meet the obligation laid down in the Convention on the conservation of the living resources in its exclusive economic zone and the adjacent area, to take all measures, which appear to be necessary for this purpose in accordance with international law.

(d).

The ratification of the Convention by the Argentine Republic includes the adoption of the final act of the third United Nations Conference of law of the sea. In this regard, the Argentine Republic - explains how in its written declaration of December 8, 1982 (A/CONF.62/WS/35) - its reservation with the effect that the resolution III in annex I to the final act in any way affect the question of the "Falkland Islands (Malvinas)", by 2065 (XX) General Assembly resolutions adopted in the context of the decolonization process, 3160 (XXVIII), 31/49 , 37 / 9, 38 / 12, 39 / 6, 40 / 21, 41 / 40, 42 / 19, 43 / 25, 44/406, 45/424, 46/406, 47/408 and 48/408 is regulated.

The Argentine Republic confirmed their legitimate and absolute sovereignty over the Malvinas, making South Sandwich Islands and the corresponding maritime and island areas, an integral part of Argentine territory. The recovery of these territories and full exercise of sovereignty over this under consideration on the way of life of the inhabitants of these territories, and in accordance with the principles of international law are a permanent objective of the Argentine people and indispensable.

It is also the Argentine Republic of considers that the final Act describes only the procedure to avoid a series of separate votes on the Convention and the resolutions, which is applied at the Conference by their reference in paragraph 42 the Convention together with the resolutions I to IV as an integral whole. Clearly, the Convention finds itself in article 318 that only the facilities are an integral part of the Convention; Therefore any other certificate or any other document is not an integral part of the United Nations Convention of law of the sea, even those that have been adopted by the Conference.

e. the Argentine Republic respects the right of free navigation in the Convention enshrined, yet she believes that the passage of ships transporting highly radioactive substances, needs to be regulated accordingly.

The Argentine Government accepts the provisions of part XII of the Convention for the prevention of pollution of the marine environment, but is of the opinion that in the light of the incidents after the adoption of this international instrument, the measures to prevent, control and minimize the impact of marine pollution must be supplemented by harmful and potentially dangerous materials and highly radioactive materials and strengthened.

(f).
According to article 287 the Argentine Government explains that she accepts the following procedures for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention in the order of preference: (a) the International Tribunal; (b) in accordance with annex VIII built arbitration for issues relating to fisheries, protection and preservation of the marine environment, scientific marine research and marine in accordance with annex VIII article 1. The Argentine Government also explains that they are the procedures provided for in part XV, section 2 of article 298 para 1 lit. a, b and c disputes referred to is not accepted.

Bangladesh:



1. the Government of the people's Republic of Bangladesh is of the opinion that the provisions of the Convention authorize in other States any way to carry out military exercises or manoeuvres, particularly those that include the use of weapons or explosives, in the exclusive economic zone and on the continental shelf of a coastal State without the consent of the coastal State concerned.

2. the Government of Bangladesh is tied to any national laws or by statements made of States on the occasion of the signing or ratification of the Convention. Bangladesh reserves the right to present its position on such laws or declarations at the appropriate time. The ratification of the Convention by Bangladesh represents a recognition of maritime claims of other States also signed the Convention, or have ratified, in particular in any way, where such claims are incompatible with the relevant principles of international law and detrimental to the sovereign rights and the jurisdiction of Bangladesh through its sea areas.

3. the exercise of the right of innocent passage of warships through the territorial waters of other States should be seen as peaceful. Effective and rapid means of communication are readily available and make the notice exercising the right of innocent passage of reasonable and incompatible with the Convention. Some States already require such an announcement. Bangladesh reserves the right to legislate on this issue.

4. Bangladesh is of the opinion that such a requirement of notification with regard to ships with Kernenergieantrieb, as well as ships, nuclear or carry other substances of similar nature, is given. In addition, such vessels in the Bangladesh waters without the necessary permit are not allowed.

5. Bangladesh believes that the State immunity as provided in article 236, a State not by the moral or other obligation free, to assume his responsibility and liability for the compensation of damage by pollution of the marine environment by warships, naval auxiliary, or other ships or aircraft belonging to a State or used from this for other than commercial purposes, causes.

6. through the ratification of the Convention by Bangladesh are not recognized by a Contracting State of the Convention asked territorial claims or accepted nor any land or sea border is recognized as a result.

7. the Government of Bangladesh considered by other countries at the signing ceremony, statements given to acceptance, ratification or accession to the Convention, as well as whenever she formulated or may be named, not as and reserves the right at any time to explain their attitude to such declarations.

8. the Government of Bangladesh declared that archaeological and historical objects that are found in the sea areas, which it exercises sovereignty or jurisdiction, must be removed not without prejudice to article 303 of the Convention without their notice and consent.

9. the Government of Bangladesh will make the declarations provided for in articles 287 and 298 regarding dispute resolution at the appropriate time.

10. the Government of Bangladesh plans to examine existing national legislation and regulations with the aim of unifying with the provisions of the Convention.

Belgium:

The Kingdom of Belgium maintains that it transferred covered matters which are enumerated in the Declaration issued on the occasion of the formal confirmation of the Convention by the European Community from April 1, 1998, as a member of the European Community of these powers in certain of the Convention.

The Kingdom of Belgium declares that's either built the International Tribunal in regard to his preference for existing courts pursuant to article 287 of the Convention as a means for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention in accordance with annex VI (article 287 par. 1 lit. a) or the International Court of Justice (art. 287 para 1 lit. b), in the absence of other peaceful Streitbeilegungsmittel , which might prefer, elect.

Chile:



1. the Republic of Chile explained that the Treaty signed with the Argentine Republic, on November 29, 1984 on peace and friendship, which entered into force on May 2, 1985, sets the boundaries of the respective sovereignties of the sea, the seabed and subsoil of the Argentine Republic and the Republic of Chile in the sea of the southern zone to the conditions described in article 7 to 9.

2. with regard to part II of the Convention: a. in accordance with article 13 of the Treaty of peace and friendship of 1984, the Republic of Chile in exercise of their sovereign rights of the Argentine Republic granted the maritime concessions laid down in articles 1 to 9 through Chilean internal waters described in this agreement.

The Republic of Chile also explains that due to this Treaty ships, flying the flag of third countries, may drive article 1 to 8 set routes according to Chilean legislation without impediment by the inner waters along the in annex 2.

In the Treaty of peace and friendship of 1984, the two parties have on a in annex 2 article 11 to 16 fixed system of shipping and navigation agreed in the Beagle Channel. Shipping regulations referred to in this annex shall replace all previous agreements on this issue that may exist between the parties.

We repeat that the navigation systems referred to in this paragraph and facilitation in the Treaty of peace and friendship of 1984 for the sole purpose were created to facilitate maritime traffic between certain points of sea and areas along the set route, so that they not apply existing routes to others in areas for which no agreement was reached.

(b).

The Republic of Chile once again confirms the full validity of the highest Decree of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs No.. 416 from 1977, which has created the straight baselines that were confirmed in article 11 of the Treaty of peace and friendship, in line with the principles recognised by Chile of the entirety of article 7 of the Convention.

c. in cases where the State restricts the right of innocent passage for foreign ships, the Republic of Chile reserves the right to apply similar restrictive measures.

3. with regard to part III of the Convention must be taken note that in accordance with article 35 lit. c which do not touch this part the legal regime of the Straits of Magellan provisions, because the passage through this Strait through a "long existing and in force international accord, which relate in particular to these Straits" as the border Treaty of 1881, a regime that 1984 was confirmed by the Treaty of peace and friendship, is regulated.

Article 10 of this Agreement agreed Chile and Argentina over the border at the eastern end of the Strait of Magellan and agreed that these border changes the provisions of the Treaty of 1881 in any way, where - as Chile 1873 unilaterally declared, forever neutralized the Strait of Magellan and the free shipping for the flags of all Nations would secure according to the conditions laid down in article V. The Argentine Republic has committed itself, at any time and under any circumstances, the right of ships of all flags, quickly and without obstacles through the waters under its jurisdiction to the and to drive by the Strait of Magellan, to maintain.

We emphasize also that the Chilean maritime transport to and from the North through the Estrecho de Le Maire that enjoys article 10 of the Treaty of peace and amity 1984 established facilities in annex 2.

4. with regard to the interests of the conservation of resources in the exclusive economic zone and the adjacent area of the high Lake is the Republic of Chile of believes that in accordance with the provisions of the Convention there, where the same stock or the same stocks of related species as well as in the exclusive economic zone and in the adjacent area of the high seas , the Republic of Chile, as a coastal State and the States fishing for such stocks in the areas adjacent to the exclusive economic zone, need to agree on the necessary measures for the conservation of these stocks or related species in the high seas. In the absence of such an arrangement, Chile reserves the right to exercise its rights under article 116 and other provisions of this Convention and the other rights conferred upon it under international law.

5. with regard to part XI of the Convention and the Supplementary Convention is Chile of considers that the authority for the prevention of pollution must apply the general criterion for the exploration and exploitation, that the reduction under water is subject to standards, which are at least as stringent as comparable standards in the country.

6. with regard to part XV of the Convention, the Republic of Chile, said that: a. She accepted in accordance with article 287 of the Convention in the order of preference the following procedures for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention: i. built in accordance with annex VI, the International Tribunal;

II. in accordance with annex VIII built special arbitration for the there mentioned types of disputes concerning fisheries, protection and preservation of the marine environment, scientific marine research and navigation, including pollution from vessels and dumping.

(b).
Pursuant to articles 280 and 282 of the Convention the choice of means of dispute resolution touches that referred to in the previous paragraph in any way from the General, regional or bilateral agreements, the Republic of Chile, as the party is a member of, and obligations concerning the peaceful settlement of disputes.

c. Chile declares in accordance with article 298 of the Convention, that's none of the procedures provided for in part XV, section 2 for the article 298 par. 1 lit. a, b and c of the Convention mentioned disputes accepted.

China:



1. the people's Republic of China enjoys in accordance with the provisions of the law of the Sea Convention of United Nations sovereign rights and jurisdiction over an exclusive economic zone of 200 nautical miles and the continental shelf.

2. the people's Republic of China will make determining the borders of maritime jurisdiction on the basis of international law and in accordance with the principle of equity through consultations with States with opposite or adjacent coasts.

3. the people's Republic of China confirms once again its sovereignty over all its archipelagos and Islands as enumerated in article 2 of the law of the people Republic of China on the territorial sea and the connection zone published on February 25, 1992.

4. the people's Republic of China once again confirms that the provisions of the law of the Sea Convention of the United Nations concerning the innocent passage through the territorial sea affect the right of the coastal State, to request, to obtain prior approval of the coastal State or to contact them before the passage of its warships through the territorial sea of the coastal State a foreign State in accordance with its laws and regulations.

Denmark:

The Kingdom of Denmark makes the following statement: the Government of the Kingdom of Denmark is of the opinion that the exception from the transit passage in accordance with article 35 lit. c of the Convention to the special legal position in the Danish straits (great belt and little belt the Danish part of the Öresund sound) is applicable, which developed as a result of the Copenhagen Treaty of 1857. The current legal situation in the Danish straits will remain therefore unchanged.

The Government of the Kingdom of Denmark declares in accordance with article 287 of the Convention that selects the International Court of Justice for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention.

The Government of the Kingdom of Denmark declares in accordance with article 298 of the Convention, that it does not agree to arbitration in accordance with annex VII, for all kinds of disputes referred to in article 298.

The Government of the Kingdom of Denmark declared its opposition to any statement or opinion, which exclude the legal effect of the provisions of the Convention or change in accordance with article 310 of the Convention. Inaction on such statements or opinions should be interpreted as acceptance or rejection of such statements or opinions.

The Kingdom of Denmark recalls that it has conferred powers covered matters as a member of the European Community of that in certain of the Convention. In accordance with the provisions of annex IX of the Convention, the European Community issued a detailed explanation about the nature and scope of the powers conferred on the European Community on the occasion of the deposit of the instrument of formal confirmation. This transition of responsibility does not extend to the Faroe Islands and Greenland.

Estonia:



1. as a member of the European Community, the Republic of Estonia in particular of the Convention covered matters of the European Community has conferred powers in accordance with the Declaration, which gave the European Community on 1 April 1998 on the occasion of their accession to the United Nations Convention of law of the sea.

2. in accordance with article 287, paragraph 1 of the Convention chooses the Republic of Estonia pursuant to annex VI the interpretation or application of the Convention established the International Tribunal and the International Criminal Court as a means for the settlement of disputes concerning.

European Community:

The European Community submitted their recommendations to the Secretary-General of the United Nations and honour is to deposit the instrument of formal confirmation of the Convention on the law of the United Nations dated 10 December 1982 and of the Convention for the implementation of part XI of the Convention of the United Nations by December 10, 1982, which was adopted on 28 July 1994 by the General Assembly of the United Nations.

The community is honoured on this occasion to explain, with regard to the matters for which you are Member States, the parties to the Convention, have transferred jurisdiction that recognizes the rights and obligations arising from the Convention and the implementing agreement for States. The Declaration of competence according to article 5 paragraph 1 of annex IX of the Convention is attached.


The Community explained further under article 310 of the Convention, that it does object against any declaration or statement which exclude the legal applicability of the provisions of the Convention on the law of the United Nations and in particular those concerning the fisheries activities or changed. The community considers that the agreement the rights or jurisdiction of the coastal State in relation to the exploitation, maintenance and the management of fish stocks with the exception of sedentary species beyond the exclusive economic zone does not recognise.

The Community reserves the right to make statements in connection with the Convention and the implementing agreement, also in response to future declarations and statements, at a later date.

Declaration on the competence of the European Community which by the law of the Sea Convention of the United Nations dated 10 December 1982 and the agreement of 28 July 1994 to the implementation of part XI of the Convention of law of the sea regulated Affairs (declaration under article 5 paragraph 1 of annex IX of the Convention and article 4 paragraph 4 of the Convention).

According to article 5, paragraph 1 of annex IX of the United Nations Convention of law of the sea must contain a statement the instrument of formal confirmation of an international organization in which the matters governed by the Convention in particular are listed for the organization by its Member States, the contract States, jurisdiction has been transferred.

According to article 4 paragraph 4 of the Convention to the implementation of part XI of the law of the Sea Convention of the United Nations by December 10, 1982 is the formal confirmation by an international organization according to annex IX of the Convention.

The United Nations Convention of law of the sea and the Convention for the implementation of part apply to the territories in which the Treaty establishing the European Community is applied, and in accordance with the Treaty, in particular article 227 XI of the Convention of law of the sea in the areas of competence conferred on the European Community.

This statement does not apply to the territories of the Member States in which the Treaty is not applied, and it is without prejudice to the measures or positions that can meet the concerned Member States for these areas in their interests within the framework of the Convention and the Schengen Agreement or represented.

In this statement, the responsibilities are listed in accordance with the above provisions regulated matters conferred pursuant to these treaties by the Convention and the implementing agreement in the Member States of the community.

Scope and exercise of Community competences are subject to a permanent development course, and the community is under article 5, paragraph 4 of annex IX of the Convention supplement this statement therefore if necessary or change.

The community has exclusive competence on some issues while she shares responsibility for other matters with its Member States.



1. matters of exclusive competence of the community: the Community explained that its Member States have transferred her responsibility for the conservation and management of marine fisheries resources. As a result, it is authorized to adopt relevant legislation (which the Member States apply) in this area and to enter contractual obligations within the framework of their responsibility towards third countries or the competent international organizations. This responsibility extends to the national waters and on the high seas. However, the exercise of jurisdiction over the ships, the assignment of the flag, the registration of vessels and the imposition of criminal and administrative sanctions remains within the competence of the Member States in accordance with Community law. This envisages also administrative sanctions.

On the basis of their powers in the field of trade and customs policy, the community has competence for the provisions of parts X and XI of the Convention and of the Convention of 28 July 1994 concerning the international trade.

2. matters where the community shares competence with its Member States: with regard to the fisheries jurisdiction for a number of areas that are not directly related to the conservation and management of marine fisheries resources, is divided, for example, for research, technological development and development cooperation.

With regard to the provisions on maritime transport and maritime safety and the prevention of marine pollution, which are included in the parts II, III, V, VII and XII of the Convention, the community has only in so far as existing Community legislation touching exclusive jurisdiction, as the relevant provisions of the Convention or the rules adopted on the basis of the Convention. There are Community rules and remain untouched, especially when Community rules laying down only minimum standards, have the Member States competence, without prejudice to the competence of the community, to take action in this area. In other cases, the Member States remain responsible.

A list of relevant acts of the community is part of the system. The competence of the community arising from these acts is to assess to what extent it sets common rules because of the exact content of each measure and in particular then.

In areas covered by the parts XIII and XIV of the Convention Community competence relates mainly to the promotion of cooperation with third countries and international organisations in the field of research and technological development. Action by the community in this area complement actions of the Member States. This responsibility is exercised through the adoption of the programmes listed in the annex.

3. possible impact of other Community policies: in addition is on the policies and measures of the community in the field of control of unfair economic practices, to point out of public procurement, industrial policy and development cooperation. These policies can be for the Convention and the implementing agreement of importance, in particular as regards certain provisions of parts VI and XI of the Convention.

Complex acts of the community on the matters regulated IN the Convention and IN the implementing Convention - with regard to the safety of shipping and prevention of marine pollution:

Decision 92/142/EEC of 25 February 1992 on radionavigation systems for Europe (OJ L 59 of the 4.3.1992, p. 17)

 

Directive 79/115/EEC of 21 December 1978 on the advice of ships by overseas pilots in the North Sea and the English channel (OJ L 33 of the 8.2.1979, p. 32)

 

Directive 93/75/EEC of 13 September 1993 concerning minimum requirements for vessels which run seaports of the community or leaving and carrying dangerous or polluting goods (OJ L 247 of the 5.10.1993, p. 19)

 

Directive 93/103/EC of 23 November 1993 concerning the minimum requirements for safety and health at work on board fishing vessels (13th individual Directive within the meaning of article 16 1 of Directive 89/391/EEC) (OJ OJ L 307 of the 13.12.1993, p. 1)

 

Directive 94/57/EC of 22 November 1994 on common rules and standards for ship inspection and survey organisations and for the relevant activities of maritime administrations (classification societies Directive) (OJ L 319, 12.12.1994, p. 20)

 

Directive 94/58/EC of 22 November 1994 on the minimum requirements for the training of seafarers (OJ L 319, 12.12.1994, p. 28)

 

Council Directive 95/21/EC of 19 June 1996 on the enforcement of international standards for ship safety, who run on pollution prevention and the living and working conditions on board ships using Community ports and territorial waters of the Member States (port State control) (OJ OJ L 157 of the 7.7.1995, p. 1)

 

Directive 96/98/EC of the Council of 20 December 1996 on marine equipment (OJ L 46 of the 17.2.1997, p. 25)

 

Regulation (EEC) No 613/91 of 4 March 1991 on the transfer of ships within the Community (OJ L 68 of the 15.3.1991, p. 1) and Regulation (EEC) No 2158/93 of the Commission of 28 July 1993 concerning the application of amendments to the International Convention of 1974 on the protection of human life at sea and the International Convention of 1973 for the prevention of pollution from ships for the purposes of Regulation (EEC) No. 613/91 (OJ L 194 of the 3.8.1993, p. 5)

 

Regulation (EC) No 2978/94 of 21 November 1994 on the implementation of IMO resolution A.747(18) on the measurement of ballast spaces in oil tankers with segregated ballast (OJ L 319, 12.12.1994, p. 1)

 


Regulation (EC) No 3051/95 of 8 December 1995 on measures to safe ship operation of ro-ro passenger ships (OJ L 320 of 30.12.1995, p. 14)

 

-(Part XII of the Convention in the area of protection and preservation of the marine environment):

Decision 81/971/EEC of the Council of 3 December 1981 establishing a community information system for the monitoring and reduction of oil pollution of the Sea (OJ L 355 of the actions, p. 52)

 

Decision 86/85/EEC of 6 March 1986 establishing a community information system for the control and reduction of pollution by oil and other hazardous substances (OJ L 77 of the 22.3.1986, p. 33)

 

Directive 75/439/EC of 16 June 1975 on the disposal of waste (OJ L 194 of the 25.7.1975, p. 23)

 

Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste (OJ L 194 of the 25.7.1975, p. 39)

 

Directive 76/160/EEC of 8 December 1975 concerning the quality of bathing water (OJ OJ L 31 of the 5.2.1976, p. 1)

 

Directive 76/464/EEC of 4 May 1967 relating to pollution caused by certain dangerous substances into the aquatic environment of the Community (OJ L 129 of the 18.5.1976, p. 23)

 

Directive 78/176/EEC of 20 February 1978 on waste from the titanium dioxide industry (OJ L 54 of the 25.2.1978, p. 19)

 

Directive 79/923/EEC of 30 October 1979 on the quality required of shellfish waters (OJ L 281 of the 10.11.1979, p. 47)

 

Directive 80/779/EEC of 15 July 1980 on limit values and guide values of for sulphur dioxide and suspended particulates (OJ air quality L 229 of the countrywide, p. 30)

 

Directive 82/176/EEC of 22 March 1982 on limit values and quality objectives for mercury discharges by the chlor-alkali electrolysis industry (OJ L 81 of the chlor, p. 29)

 

Directive 82/501/EEC of 24 June 1982 on the risks of serious accidents in certain industrial activities (OJ L 230 of the 5.8.1982, p. 1)

 

Directive 82/883/EEC of 3 December 1982 on the details of the surveillance and monitoring of environments concerned by waste from the titanium dioxide industry (OJ OJ L 378 of the 31.12.1982, p. 1)

 

Directive 82/884/EEC of 3 December 1982 on a limit value for lead in the air (OJ L 378 of the 31.12.1982, p. 15)

 

Directive 83/513/EEC of 26 September 1983 on limit values and quality objectives for cadmium discharges (OJ OJ L 291 of the 24.10.1983, p. 1)

 

Directive 84/156/EEC of 8 March 1984 on limit values and quality objectives for mercury discharges with than of the industry chlor-alkali electrolysis industry (OJ L 74 of the 17.3.1984, p. 49)

 

Directive 84/360/EEC of 28 June 1984 on the combating of air pollution from industrial plants (OJ L 188 of the 16.7.1984, p. 20)

 

Directive 84/491/EEC of 9 October 1984 on limit values and quality objectives for discharges of hexachlorocyclohexane (OJ L 274 of the 17.10.1984, p.11)

 

Directive 85/203/EEC of 7 March 1985 on air quality standards for nitrogen dioxide (OJ L 87 of the 27.3.1985, p. 1)

 

Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the environmental assessment of certain public and private projects (OJ L 175 of the 5.7.1985, p.40)

 

Directive 86/280/EEC of 12 June 1986 on limit values and quality objectives for the discharge of certain dangerous substances within the meaning of the list I in the annex of to Directive 76/464/EEC (OJ OJ L 181 of the 4.7.1986, p. 16)

 

Directive 88/609/EEC of 24 November 1988 on the limitation of emissions of certain pollutants into the air (OJ from OJ L 336 of the 7.12.1988, p. 1)

 

Directive 89/369/EEC of 8 June 1989 on the prevention of air pollution from new incineration plants for municipal waste (OJ L 163 of the Outils, p. 32)

 

Directive 89/429/EEC of 21 June 1989 on the reduction of air pollution from existing incineration plants for municipal waste (OJ L 203 of the 15.7.1989, p. 50)

 

Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning the treatment of urban waste water (OJ L 135 of the 30.5.1991, p. 40)

 

Directive 91/676/EEC of 12 December 1991 on the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources (OJ L 375 of 31.12.1991, p. 1)

 

Directive 91/689/EEC of 12 December 1991 on hazardous waste (OJ L 377 of 31.12.1991, p. 20)

 

Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and Flora (OJ L 206 of the 22.7.1992, p. 7)

 

Directive 92/112/EEC of 15 December 1992 on procedures for harmonizing the programmes for the reduction and eventual elimination of pollution caused by waste from the titanium dioxide industry (OJ L 409, 31.12.1992, p. 11)

 

Directive 94/67/EC of the Council of 16 December 1994 on the incineration of hazardous waste (OJ L 365 of 31.12.1994, p. 34)

 

Regulation (EEC) No 259 / 93 / EEC of the Council of 1 February 1993 on the supervision and control of shipments of waste within, into and out of the European Community (OJ OJ L 30 of the 6.2.1993, p. 1)

 

-In the field of research on the marine environment and for scientific and technological cooperation:

Program "Marine Science and Technology"

 

Environment and climate

 

Cooperation with third countries and international organisations: scientific and technological cooperation with developing countries (INCO-DC)

 

-Convention, at which the community is a Contracting Party: Convention on the prevention of marine pollution from land-based, Paris, 4 June 1974 (Council decision 75/437/EEC of the Council of 3 March 1975, published in OJ L 194 of the 25.7.1975, p. 5)

 

Amendment protocol to the Convention on the prevention of marine pollution from land-based, Paris, 26 March 1986 (decision 87/57/EEC of the Council dated 28 December 1986, published in the OJ L 24 of the 27.1.1987, p. 47)

 

Protocol on the protection of the Mediterranean Sea against pollution from land-based, Athens, 17 May 1980 (Council decision 83/101/EEC of 28 February 1983, published in the OJ L 67 of the 12.3.1983, p. 1)

 

Convention for the protection of the Mediterranean Sea against pollution and the Protocol for the prevention of pollution of the Mediterranean Sea by dumping from ships and aircraft, Barcelona, 16 February 1976 (Council decision 77/585/EEC of 25 July 1977, published in the OJ OJ L 240 of the 19.9.1977, p. 1)

 

Protocol concerning cooperation in combating pollution of the Mediterranean Sea by oil and other harmful substances in cases of emergency, Barcelona, 16 February 1976 (Council decision 81/420/EEC of the Council of May 19, 1981, published in the OJ L 162 of the 19.6.1981, p. 4)

 

Convention on long-range transboundary air pollution, Geneva, 13 November 1979 (Council decision 81/462/EEC of 11 June 1981, published in OJ L 171 of the 27.6.1981, p. 11)

 

Log of 2nd-3rd April 1982 on the specially protected areas of Mediterranean Sea, Geneva, 3 April 1982 (Council decision 84/132/EEC of 1 March 1984, published in OJ L 68 of the 10.3.1984, p. 36)

 

Convention on cooperation in combating pollution of the North Sea by oil and other harmful substances, Bonn, 13 September 1983 (Council decision 84/358/EEC of 28 June 1984, published in OJ L 188 of the 16.7.1984, p. 7)

 

Convention on cooperation for the protection of the coasts and waters of the North-East Atlantic against pollution, Lisbon, 17 October 1990 (Council decision 93/550/EEC of 20 October 1993, published in the OJ L 267 of the 28.10.1993, p. 20)

 

Basel Convention on the control of transboundary movements of hazardous wastes and their disposal, Basel, 22 March 1989 (Council decision 93/98/EEC of the Council of 1 February 1993, published in the OJ L-39 by the 16.2.1993, p. 1)

Finland:

In accordance with article 287 of the Convention, Finland selects the International Criminal Court and the International Tribunal for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention, as well as to the implementation of part XI of the Convention.

Finland recalls that it has conferred powers covered matters as a member of the European Community of that in certain of the Convention. A detailed explanation about the nature and scope of the powers conferred on the European Community will be given due time in accordance with the provisions of investment from IX of the Convention.

France:



1. France recalls that it has conferred powers covered matters as a member of the European Community of that in certain of the Convention. A detailed explanation about the nature and scope of the powers conferred on the European Community will be given due time in accordance with the provisions of investment from IX of the Convention.

2. France rejects statements contrary to the provisions of the Convention and reservations. Also, France rejects unilateral measures as well as measures on the basis of an agreement between States that have contradictory effects, the provisions of the Convention.

3. with regard to the provisions of article 298, paragraph 1 accepted none of the procedures provided for in part XV, section 2 France with regard to the following disputes;

Disputes concerning the interpretation or application of articles 15, 74 and 83 relating to the delimitation of sea areas or historic bays or historical title;

-Disputes concerning military activities, including military acts of State ships and State aircraft, which serve other than for commercial purposes, and disputes concerning enforcement actions in the exercise of sovereign rights or jurisdiction, which are excluded under article 297 para. 2 or 3 from the jurisdiction of a court or a criminal court;

-Disputes involving the United Nations Security Council shall exercise the responsibilities entrusted to it by the Charter of the United Nations unless the Security Council decides not to drop the item from its agenda, or calls on the parties to settle the dispute by the means provided for in this Convention.

Greece:

Interpretative declaration concerning Straits:

This statement relates to the provisions of part III on straits used for international navigation, in particular the application of articles 36, 38, 41 and 42 of the law of the Sea Convention in practice.

In areas with numerous, widely spread Islands that make up a large number of alternative roads, which serve the same international shipping route, Greece of considers that the concerned coastal State is responsible to set the route or routes in the mentioned alternative roads, which ships and aircraft of third States for the transit regime in a way to use, is that on the one hand the requirements of the international shipping industry and of the flyover and on the other hand the minimum safety requirements of the vessel in transit or Aircraft and the coastal State are met.

Explanations:



1. with the ratification of the UN Convention of law of the sea, Greece secured all rights and assumes all obligations under the Convention. Greece in line with its national strategy will determine when and how it will exercise its rights. This does not mean that Greece renounces these rights in any way.

2. Greece would call in this context its interpretative declaration deposited on the occasion of the adoption of the Convention and on the date of signature on straits in memory (see "interpretative declaration concerning Straits").

3. in accordance with article 287 of the United Nations Convention of law of the sea, the Government of the Hellenic Republic hereby chooses the International Tribunal established in accordance with annex VI of the Convention for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention.

4. Greece has transferred as a Member State of the European Union of this in certain areas covered by the Convention Authority. After the deposit of the instrument of formal confirmation by the European Union, Greece will be an own explanation in the matters covered by the Convention, for which it has transferred powers to the European Union, be stated exactly.

Guatemala:

The Government of Guatemala stated that:



(a) the approval of the agreement by the Congress of the Republic of Guatemala under any circumstances the right Guatemala over the territory of Belize, including the Islands and islets or their historical rights over Bahia de Amatique must touch and b) accordingly the territorial sea and maritime areas not can be delineated to solving the existing dispute.

Ireland:

Ireland recalls that it has conferred powers covered matters as a member of the European Community of that in certain of the Convention. A detailed explanation about the nature and scope of the powers conferred on the European Community will be given due time in accordance with the provisions of investment from IX of the Convention.

Canada:

The Government of Canada chooses the following procedures hereby pursuant to article 287 of the Convention for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention, without specifying that a process takes precedence over the other:



a. the International Tribunal in accordance with annex VI of the Convention established and b. an arbitral tribunal that is built in accordance with annex VII of the Convention.

With regard to article 298, paragraph 1 of the Convention of law of the sea Canada accepts none of the procedures provided for in part XV, section 2 with respect to the following disputes:



-Disputes concerning the interpretation or application of articles 15, 74 and 83 relating to the delimitation of sea areas or historic bays or historical title;

-Disputes concerning military activities, including military acts of State ships and State aircraft, which serve other than for commercial purposes, and disputes concerning enforcement actions in the exercise of sovereign rights or jurisdiction, which are excluded under article 297 para. 2 or 3 from the jurisdiction of a court or a criminal court;

-Disputes involving the United Nations Security Council shall exercise the responsibilities entrusted to it by the Charter of the United Nations unless the Security Council decides not to drop the item from its agenda, or calls on the parties to settle the dispute by the means provided for in this Convention.

According to article 309 of the Convention only such reservations or exceptions to this Convention are permitted, that are expressly provided for in other articles of the Convention. A declaration made under article 310 of the Convention may have do not allow the exclusion or modification of the legal effect of the provisions of the Convention in their application to a State, international organization or any other entity to the content. The Government of Canada therefore explains that she by themselves by States, already or in the future given international organisations or other legal entities referred to in article 310 of the Convention declarations, which exclude the legal effect of the provisions of the Convention in their application to the State concerned, the international organisation or the other entity or change, not considered bound. The absence of a response of the Government of Canada with regard to such declarations should not be construed as tacit acceptance of such a declaration. The Government of Canada reserves the right at any time to take a position of such a declaration in the suitable appearing way.

Kiribati:

In exercise of the right conferred by article 310 of the Convention, the Republic of Kiribati on the occasion of their accession to the law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS) United Nations explains that it accepts the provisions of article 47 in part IV of this Convention, and would like to express its concern with respect to the formula used to define the baselines of the archipelago.

The part IV does not allow calculations for archipelago waters draw a base line to all of the islands of three island groups in the Republic of Kiribati consists. These island groups are spread over an area of more than three million square kilometers of the ocean, and the existing formula as set out in part IV of the Convention is split into three different exclusive water zones and international waters three island groups of Kiribati.

The Government of Kiribati would like to propose that the formula for determining archipelago baselines is revised, so that in the future of Kiribati addressed above concerns.

The accession of Kiribati to the United Nations Convention of law of the sea in any way affected his status as an archipelago State or its rights to explain his all or parts to the Lake of associated territory as archipelago waters within the meaning of this Convention.

Latvia:

Referred to in article 287 of the United Nations Convention of law of the sea, the Republic of Latvia declares that she chooses the following remedies to the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention:



1 in accordance with annex VI of the Convention established International Tribunal 2. the International Court of Justice Lithuania: the Republic of Lithuania elects pursuant to article 287 paragraph 1 of the Convention the following procedures for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention:



a. the established International Tribunal in accordance with annex VI, and b. the International Criminal Court.

Malaysia:



1. the Malaysian Government is bound not by national law or any explanations given by other States on the occasion of the signing or ratification of this Convention. Malaysia reserves the right to take a position, in particular on maritime claims of other States that have also signed the Convention or ratified, if such claims with the relevant principles of international law and the provisions of the Convention of law of the sea are incompatible and detrimental to the sovereign rights and the jurisdiction of Malaysia over its maritime areas of national law or declarations at the appropriate time.

2.

The Malaysian Government expects that the provisions of article 301, which forbid "any threat of violence or use of force, which is designed or incompatible or with the principles of international law enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations against the territorial integrity of a State", in particular also apply to the marine areas under the sovereignty or the jurisdiction of the coastal State.

3. the Malaysian Government assumes that the provisions of the Convention empower other States not to do so without the consent of the coastal State in whose exclusive economic zone military exercises or manoeuvres carry out, especially those involving weapons or explosives are used.

4. in view of the risk of the passage of ships with Kernenergieantrieb, as well as ships, nuclear or carry other substances of similar nature, entails and with regard to the provision of article 22 para 2 of the law of the Sea Convention relating to the right of the coastal State, to restrict the passage of such vessels on inland waterways established by that State within its territorial sea as well as on article 23 of the Convention , which provides that such ships must carry documents and observe the special safety precautions, which are prescribed in international agreements for such vessels, to ask the Malaysian Government that the aforementioned vessels before entering the territorial waters of Malaysia must obtain a prior special permit as long as have been completed up to the international instruments referred to in article 23, and Malaysia has become a Contracting Party. The flag State of such vessels is obligated to accept liability for any loss resulting from the passage of ships through the territorial waters of Malaysia's or damage under any circumstances.

5. the Malaysian Government would also again referred to by its declaration to article 233 of the Convention in its application on the Straits of Malacca and Singapore was connected to a letter submitted to the President by UNCLOS III of 28 April 1982 and in the document A/CONF.62/L 145, UNCLOS III off. REC, vol. XVI, p. 250-251 is included.

6. the ratification of the Convention by the Malaysian Government affect their rights and obligations in any way to other agreements and contracts on courts matters belongs to the Malaysian Government as a party.

7. the Malaysian Government articles 74 and 83 thought out so that the centerline is border in the absence of an agreement on the boundary of the exclusive economic zone, the continental shelf, or other sea areas for the purpose of reaching a solution corresponding to the equity, i.e. a line at any point equidistant from the nearest points of the baselines is away, from which the breadth of the territorial sea from Malaysia and the other State is measured.

Malaysia also believes that the boundary of the continental shelf and the exclusive economic zone on the same line should be in accordance with the provisions of the Convention, namely article 56 and 76, if the sea area covers less or not more than 200 nautical miles, is (identical).

8. the Malaysian Government declared that archaeological and historical objects, which are found in marine areas, from which it has sovereignty or jurisdiction, must be removed not without prejudice to article 303 of the Convention without their notice and consent.

Nicaragua:

The Government of Nicaragua declared in accordance with article 310 of the Convention of the United Nations, hereby:



1. that they formulated itself through that as well as always or explanations and comments raised by other States on the occasion of the signature, acceptance, ratification of the Convention or of accession to this unbounded considers and that she reserves the right at any time to express their attitude to these statements or opinions.

2. that the ratification of the Convention includes the recognition of any territorial claim made by a Contracting State of the Convention nor the automatic recognition of any land or sea border.

Nicaragua declares in accordance with article 287 paragraph 1 of the Convention, that it accepts only the appeal to the International Court of Justice as a means for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention.

Nicaragua declares that only the appeal to the International Court of Justice as a means of resolving the kinds of disputes in accordance with article 298 par. 1 lit. a, b, and c acknowledges.

Netherlands:

A. Declaration in accordance with article 287 of the Convention:

The Kingdom of the Netherlands declares in accordance with article 287 of the Convention, that it recognizes the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation and application of the Convention to Contracting States of the Convention, which also have done so.

B. Appeals:

The Kingdom of the Netherlands vetoes all statements that exclude the legal effects of the provisions of the United Nations Convention of law of the sea or change.

This is the case in particular with regard to the following matters:



I. innocent passage through the territorial sea of the Convention allows the innocent passage through the territorial sea, including foreign warships, vessels with Kernenergieantrieb, as well as ships, nuclear or other all vessels carry substances of similar nature without prior consent or notification and with precise attention for such vessels in international agreements special precautions provided for.

II. economic exclusion zone 1 passage through the exclusive economic zone nothing in this agreement restricts the freedom of navigation of vessels with Kernenergieantrieb or ships, nuclear or other carrying substances of similar nature in the exclusive economic zone, provided these shipping in accordance with the applicable rules of international law. In particular the Convention not authorised the coastal State to make subject to the shipping of such vessels in the exclusive economic zone of a prior consent or notification.

2. military exercises in the exclusive economic zone of the Convention not authorised the coastal State to prohibit military exercises in its exclusive economic zone. The rights of coastal States in the exclusive economic zone are enumerated in article 56 of the Convention, and a such power is not conferred on the coastal State. In the exclusive economic zone, all States enjoy freedom of navigation and of the flyover, subject to the relevant provisions of the Convention.

3. facilities in the exclusive economic zone of the coastal State has run the right to approve installations and structures in the exclusive economic zone for economic purposes, and use. The jurisdiction over the construction and operation of such installations and structures confined to paragraph 1 contained rules which in article 56 and is subject to article 56 para. 2 and art. 58 and 60 of the Convention obligations.

4. other rights of the coastal State enjoys no additional rights in the exclusive economic zone. The rights of the coastal State are enumerated in article 56 of the Convention and may not be extended.

III. passage through straits routes and waterways by straits are set in accordance with the rules of the Convention. Considerations relating to national security and public order should not affect navigation in straits used for international navigation. The application of other international regimes on Straits is subject to the relevant articles of the Convention.

IV. archipelago States the application of part IV of the Convention limited to States, which consist of one or several island groups entirely, and may include other islands. Article 46 conflicting claims on the status of the archipelago State are unacceptable. The status of the archipelago State and from this emerging State rights and obligations can be purchased only according to the conditions of part IV of the Convention.

BC Fisheries Agreement transfers the coastal State no jurisdiction with regard to the exploitation, conservation and management of living marine resources beyond the exclusive economic zone except sedentary species. The Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that the conservation and management of straddling and highly migratory fish stocks in accordance with must be articles 63 and 64 of the Convention on international cooperation in appropriate subregional and regional organizations.

VI. cultural heritage under water the jurisdiction of archaeological and historical objects found in the sea 149 and 303 of the Convention limited to articles. The Kingdom of the Netherlands but considers that it may be necessary to develop the international law regulations concerning underwater cultural heritage in international cooperation.

VII. baselines and delimitation


A claim that baselines or the delimitation of sea areas comply with the Convention, is only acceptable if such lines or areas under the Convention have been set.

VIII. national legislation in accordance with the general rule of international law, such as articles 27 and 46 of the Vienna Convention on the law of treaties laid down, States can invoke their internal law, to justify failure to comply with the Convention.

IX. territorial claims the ratification by the Kingdom of the Netherlands includes not the recognition or acceptance of any territorial claims on the part of individual Contracting States of the Convention.

Article 301 is Article 301 in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as it applies to the territory and the territorial sea of a coastal State, to be interpreted.

XI. General Declaration of the Kingdom of the Netherlands reserves the right to submit further explanations to the Convention and to the implementation of Convention in response to future declarations.

C. Declaration in accordance with annex IX of the Convention on the occasion of the deposit of the instrument of ratification calls the Kingdom of the Netherlands in memory, it has transferred to the European Community of these powers in certain areas covered by the Convention as a member. A detailed explanation about the nature and scope of the powers conferred on the European Community will be given due time in accordance with the provisions of investment from IX of the Convention.

Norway:

Declaration in accordance with article 310 of the Convention:

In accordance with article 309 of the Convention only such reservations or exceptions to this Convention are permitted, which are expressly provided for in other articles of the Convention. A declaration in accordance with article 310 can have for the explanatory State not the effect of an exception or a reservation. The Government of the Kingdom of Norway therefore declared that it considers itself by States or already or in the future given from international organizations statements under article 310 of the Convention not as. Passivity with regard to such declarations shall be construed as acceptance or rejection of such declarations. The Government reserves the right of Norway to take a position at any time to such declarations in the appropriate appearing way.

Declaration in accordance with article 287 of the Convention:

The Government of the Kingdom of Norway declares in accordance with article 287 of the Convention that selects the International Court of Justice for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation and application of the Convention.

Declaration pursuant to article 298 of the Convention:

The Government of the Kingdom of Norway declares in accordance with article 298 of the Convention, that it does not accept an arbitration that is built in accordance with annex VII for the kinds of disputes referred to in article 298.

Pakistan:



(i) the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan will make the declarations provided for in articles 287 and 298 regarding dispute settlement at the appropriate time.

(ii) the Convention of law of the Sea provides for transit through the territory of the transit State of whose sovereignty. It ensures therefore in accordance with article 125 the rights and facilitation of transit for landlocked countries are violating the sovereignty and the legitimate interests of the transit State in any way. The precise content of the freedom of transit must be agreed upon in each case between the State of transit and the landlocked State concerned. In the absence of such an agreement concerning the terms and conditions of exercising the right of transit through the territory of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the transit is governed exclusively by the national laws of Pakistan.

(iii) the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan is of the opinion that the provisions of the law of the Sea Convention in any way to carry out military exercises or manoeuvres, particularly those that include the use of weapons or explosives, authorize by other States in the exclusive economic zone and on the continental shelf of a coastal State without the consent of the coastal State concerned.

Panama:

The Republic of Panama explained that she enjoys exclusive sovereignty over the "historic Panamanian Bay" of the Gulf of Panama, a well marked geographic configuration, whose Küsten belong entirely to the Republic of Panama. It is a large Bay or an inlet in the South of the Panamanian isthmus, into the sea waters overlapping the seabed and the subsoil area between the northern latitudes of 70 28' 00 "and 70 31' 00" and longitude 70 59' 53 "and 78 11' 40", both West of Greenwich, include, based on the positions of Punta Mala and Punta Jaqué , both West and East of the entrance of the Gulf of Panama. This wide Bay goes pretty far in the Panamanian isthmus. The width of the input is about 200 km from Punta mala to Punta de Jaqué and extends to a distance of 165 km inland (measured from the imaginary line between Punta Mala and Punta Jaqué to the mouth of the Rio Chico East of Panama City).

Considering the current and potential resources is the historic Bay of the Gulf of Panama a vital for the Republic of Panama need, both in terms of security and defence (it does since immemorial times) as well as be used in economic terms, since their marine resources of ages by the inhabitants of the Panamanian isthmus.

He is of elongated shape, similar to a calf's head outline of coast and his coastal range, which measures 668 km, about is under Panama's maritime control. According to this definition, the historic Bay of the Gulf of Panama covers an area of about 30, 000 m ².

The Republic of Panama declares that she is acting in the exercise of their sovereign rights and in compliance with their duties in a manner compatible with the provisions of the Convention and reserves the right, if necessary, to give further explanations to the Convention.

Portugal:



1. Portugal once again confirmed his rights to national law with respect to the Mainland, the island group and the in these included Islands; for the purpose of delimitation of the territorial sea, the continental shelf and the exclusive economic zone

2. Portugal declared that it; take required forthcoming control measures in accordance with the provisions of article 33 of this Convention within a zone of 12 nautical miles in connection to its coastal sea

3. in accordance with the provisions of this Convention, Portugal enjoys sovereign rights and jurisdiction over an exclusive economic zone of 200 nautical miles from the baseline of the width of the territorial sea is measured

4. the sea border between Portugal and the States with opposite or adjacent coasts is the one that historically has been set on the basis of international law.

5. According to the understanding of Portugal, the resolution III of the third United Nations Conference of law of the sea is fully applicable to the not self-governing territory of East Timor, whose administrative power, Portugal will remain after the Charter of the United Nations and the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council. As a result the responsibility coming to Portugal as the administering power of the territory of East Timor must take into account according to the articles of Association and these resolutions and on the application of the Convention, in particular the delimitation of the maritime areas of the territory of East Timor, the rights of his people;

6 Portugal explained that without prejudice to the provisions of article 303 of the Convention and the application of other international legal instruments relating to the protection of the archaeological heritage under water all in the sea areas under its sovereignty or jurisdiction historical or archaeological objects found on may be removed only after prior information and consent of the competent Portuguese authorities.

7. the ratification of the Convention by Portugal means any sea or land border not the automatic recognition.

8 Portugal still considered by statements given by other States not as bound and reserve its opinion with regard to any declaration in due time;

9. taking into account the available scientific information, and to the protection of the environment and the sustainable growth of sea-based economic activities Portugal will carry preferably through international cooperation, taking into account the principle of caution control activities of the areas beyond its national jurisdiction;

10. with regard to article 287 of the Convention Portugal explains that it chooses in the absence not legal means for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation and application of the Convention is one of the following means for the settlement of disputes: a. the built in accordance with annex VI International Tribunal;

b. the International Criminal Court;

c. the arbitral tribunal established in accordance with annex VII;

d. the special arbitral tribunal established in accordance with annex VIII;

11.

In the absence of other more peaceful means of dispute settlement, Portugal will choose the appeal to a Special Tribunal in accordance with annex VIII of the Convention unless the application or interpretation of the provisions of this Convention concerning living marine resources and the marine environment, scientific research, shipping and marine pollution are affected fisheries, protection and preservation.

12 Portugal explained that's without prejudice to the provisions contained in part XV, section 2, of the Convention the procedures provided for in section 1 of this part with respect to one or more article 298 lit. a, b and c to this agreement does not recognize these kinds of disputes.

13 Portugal maintains that it has conferred powers covered matters as a member of the European Community of that in certain of the Convention. A detailed explanation about the nature and scope of the powers conferred on the European Community will be given due time in accordance with the provisions of investment from IX of the Convention.

Romania:



1 as a geographically disadvantaged region which is bordered by a sea with insufficient natural resources, Romania asserts the necessity of international cooperation for the extraction of the mineral resources of economic zones, due to cheap and equitable agreements, to develop, ensuring the access of countries of this species to the fishing grounds of the economic zones of other regions or sub-regions.

2. Romania asserts the right of coastal States to take measures to protect of its security interests, including the law, laws and regulations about the passage of foreign warships through its territorial sea to decide. This right is in full compliance with articles 19 and 25 of the Convention, as this clearly was expressing the Conference the statement of the Chairman of the third law of the Sea Conference of the United Nations in the General Assembly on April 26, 1982.

3. Romania notes that the uninhabited islands without economic life in any way can affect the delimitation of the maritime spaces that belong to the mainland coast of coastal States, in accordance with the equity - as it is apparent from articles 74 and 83 of the Convention of law of the sea.

Russian Federation:

The Russian Federation pursuant to article 298 of the United Nations Convention of law of the sea explains that they follow the procedure, the decisions to bind part XV, section 2, of the Convention, with regard to disputes concerning the interpretation or application of articles 15, 74 and 83 of the Convention concerning the delimitation of sea areas or historic bays or historical title, disputes over military actions , including military acts of State ships and State aircraft and disputes concerning enforcement actions in the exercise of sovereign rights or jurisdiction, as well as disputes where, the United Nations Security Council shall exercise the responsibilities conferred upon it by the Charter of the United Nations, does not recognize.

Taking into account of articles 309 and 310 of the Convention explains the Russian Federation that it does object to all already given or made in future statements on the occasion of the signing, ratification or accession to the conventions or declarations that are made for any other reason in connection with the Convention, are not in accordance with the provisions of article 310 of the Convention available. The Russian Federation believes that such explanations of how they formulated or may be named, with that Contracting State not to consider the legal effects of the provisions of the Convention in their application to the Contracting Party which has made such a declaration, exclude, or change, and therefore in the relations of the Russian Federation.

Saudi Arabia:



1. the Government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is bound neither by national laws nor by statements given by other States on the occasion of the signing or ratification of the Convention. The Kingdom reserves the right to set its position on such laws or statements at the time. In particular, the ratification of the Convention by the Kingdom in any way represents a recognition of maritime claims on the part of other States that signed the Convention or have ratified, where such claims are incompatible with the provisions of the United Nations Convention of law of the sea and disadvantageous to the sovereign rights and jurisdiction over the maritime areas of the Kingdom.

2. the Government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is bound to no international treaties or conventions which contain provisions incompatible with the United Nations Convention of law of the sea and are detrimental for the sovereign rights and the jurisdiction of the Kingdom over its maritime areas.

3. the Government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is of the opinion that the application of the provisions of the part is subject to IX of the agreement concerning the cooperation of countries of sealed or semi enclosed seas of the adoption of the Convention by all States concerned.

4. the Government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is of the opinion that the provisions of the Convention regarding the implementation of the legal system of transit passage through serving the international maritime Straits, which link to another part of the high seas or the exclusive economic zone, a part of the high seas or the exclusive economic zone are applied also on the boat trip between adjacent to such straits or neighboring islands , especially where for the entry in or exit from the Strait marked used shipping routes, such as the competent international organization, in the vicinity of such islands.

5. the Government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is of the opinion that the innocent passage shall not apply to their territorial sea, where there is a sea that is equally appropriate in navigatorischer and hydrographic terms due to the high seas or an exclusive economic zone.

6. in view of the risk, the passage of ships with Kernenergieantrieb, as well as ships, nuclear or other carry substances of similar nature, entails and in regard to the provision of article 22 paragraph 2 of the Convention relating to the right of the coastal State, such ships by be to limit territorial waters on the shipping lanes designated by him as well as of article 23 of the Convention , that such ships must carry documents and observe the special safety precautions, which are provided for in international agreements, to ask the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, that the abovementioned vessels before entering the territorial waters of the Kingdom must obtain a special permit as long as previously completed by the international conventions referred to in article 23 and the Kingdom has become a Contracting Party. The flag of such ships is responsible for any loss or damage that arises from the innocent passage of vessels through territorial waters of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, to take over under any circumstances.

7. the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia will make known the internal procedures for the its sovereignty and jurisdiction sea areas under the sovereign rights and jurisdiction to affirm and to guarantee the interests of the Kingdom in these areas.

Sweden:

The Government of the Kingdom of Sweden selects the interpretation and application of the Convention and of the Convention hereby pursuant to article 287 of the Convention the International Court of Justice for the settlement of disputes through to the implementation of part XI of the Convention.

The Kingdom of Sweden recalls that it has conferred powers covered matters as a member of the European Community of that in certain of the Convention. A detailed explanation about the nature and scope of the powers conferred on the European Community will be given due time in accordance with the provisions of investment from IX of the Convention.

Serbia and Montenegro:



1. starting from the right, which is recognized to the Contracting States on the basis of article 310 of the United Nations Convention of law of the sea, the Government expects Serbia and Montenegro, that a coastal State with its own laws and regulations can make conditional on the passage of foreign warships from the requirement of prior notification of the coastal State and on innocent passage (art. 17 to 32 of the Convention) limit the number of simultaneously passing ships on the basis of international customary law and in accordance with the law.

2. the Government Serbia and Montenegro also assumes that on the basis of article 38 paragraph 1 and of article 45 para 1 lit. a of the Convention by means of its own laws and regulations can determine on which the straits used for international navigation in the coastal sea of Serbia and Montenegro to apply, where appropriate, are the provisions regarding the innocent passage.

3.

In view of the fact that the provisions of the Convention through the connection zone (art. 33) contain no provisions on the delimitation of the connecting zone between States with opposite or adjacent coasts, the Government expects Serbia and Montenegro, that that paragraph 3 of the Convention on the territorial sea and the connection zone, signed in Geneva on 29 April 1958 laid down principles of international customary law in article 24 also apply to the demarcation of the connecting zone between the signatory States of the United Nations Convention of law of the sea.

Spain:



1. the Kingdom of Spain recalls that it has conferred powers covered matters as a member of the European Union of this in particular by the Convention. A detailed explanation about the nature and scope of the powers conferred on the European Community will be given due time in accordance with the provisions of investment from IX of the Convention.

2. the Spanish Government declared on the occasion of the ratification of the Convention, that this Act not recognized any rights or status on the sea Gibraltar, are not included in article 10 of the Treaty of Utrecht, of July 13, 1713, between the Spanish and the British Crown should be interpreted. The Spanish Government also considers that the resolution III of the third law of the Sea Conference of the United Nations not on the case of the colony of Gibraltar is applicable is subject to a decolonization process, in which only the relevant, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly resolutions apply.

3. Spain is of the view that a. the provisions of part are compatible III of the Convention with the right of the coastal State, to adopt their own regulations in straits used for international navigation on the condition and to apply that these provisions impede the right of innocent passage.

b. the words "normally" in article 39, paragraph 3 lit. a, "except by force majeure or by emergency" mean.

c. the provisions of article 221 not his responsibility under international law to intervene in the case of accidents mentioned in this article escape a bordering a strait serving international shipping State.

4. Spain declares: a. that are articles 69 and 70 of the Convention to be interpreted accordingly, that access to fishing in the economies of third States by the fleets of developed landlocked and geographically disadvantaged States is dependent on whether the coastal State concerned the fleets of States, which have typically fished in the exclusive economic zone, has earlier granted access.

b. with regard to article 297 and without prejudice to the provisions of this article, the article allow no interpretation 56, 61 and 62 of the Convention with regard to the settlement of disputes, according to which the rights of the coastal State, the allowed catch, to determine its fishing capacity and the use of surpluses, are considered unumschränkt.

5. Article 9 does not prevent the provisions of system III that Contracting States, their industrial potential makes this a direct participation as a contractual partner in the exploitation of the resources of the area, cannot take part in the community activities referred to in paragraph 2 of this article.

6 the International Criminal Court as a means Spain chooses, pursuant to article 287, § 1 of the Convention for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation and application of the Convention.

After notification of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the Kingdom of Spain issued statements under articles 287 and 298 on July 19, 2002:

The Government of Spain declared in accordance with article 287 paragraph 1 of the Convention, that she chooses the International Tribunal and the International Criminal Court as a means for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation and application of the Convention.

The Government of Spain explains para 1 lit in accordance with article 298. (a) of the Convention, that the procedures provided for in part XV, section 2 concerning the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of articles 15, 74 and 83 relating to the delimitation of sea areas or historic bays or historical title does not recognise them.

South Africa:

The Government of the Republic of South Africa at the appropriate time, will, make the declarations provided for in articles 287 and 298 regarding dispute resolution.

Czech Republic:

The Czech Government has considered the Declaration of the Federal Republic of Germany of 14 October 1994 concerning the interpretation of the provisions of part X of the Convention concerning the right of access of landlocked countries to and from the sea and freedom of transit, and explained that the Declaration should be interpreted from the Federal Republic of Germany with regard to the Czech Republic not in contradiction to the provisions of part X of the Convention.

Ukraine:



1. the Ukraine explained that she chooses the arbitral tribunal established in accordance with annex VII referred to in article 287 of the Convention of the United Nations from 1982 as the principal means for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation and application of the Convention. For the treatment of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention with regard to issues of fisheries, protection and preservation of the marine environment, marine scientific research and navigation, including pollution and dumping, Ukraine chooses the special arbitral tribunal established in accordance with annex VIII.

Ukraine recognises the competence of the International Tribunal for questions concerning the immediate release of a suspended ship or its crew, as provided in article 292 of the Convention.

2. Ukraine declared in accordance with article 298 of the Convention, that it - unless this is otherwise stipulated in a special international agreement between Ukraine and the State - does not recognise the compulsory procedures and binding decisions for treating disputes concerning the delimitation of sea areas or over historic bays or historical title and disputes over military actions.

3. taking into account articles 309 and 310 of the Convention explains the Ukraine vetoes all declarations, regardless of that when such declarations were submitted or that result can have, that the provisions of the Convention could not be interpreted in good faith, or contrary to the ordinary meaning of the words in their context or the goal and purpose of the Convention.

4. as a geographically disadvantaged country, with a sea that is poor in living resources, Ukraine once again stresses the need, international cooperation for the exploitation of the living resources of economic zones on the basis of fair and cheap agreements that ensure access to fish resources in the economic zones of other regions and subregions to develop.

Hungary:

The Government of the Republic of Hungary makes the following declaration to article 287 of the United Nations law of the Sea Convention, which was adopted on 10 December 1982 in Montego Bay:

In accordance with article 287 of the Convention referred to above, the Government of the Republic of Hungary selects the following means for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention in the following order:



1. the international maritime Court, 2. a specially the International Criminal Court, 3 built in accordance with annex VIII arbitration for all kinds of disputes referred to it.

United Kingdom:



a. General: the United Kingdom can accept not already given or made in the future declaration, articles 309 and 310 of the Convention not with standing in line,. Article 309 of the Convention prohibits reservations and exceptions (except those that are explicitly provided for in other articles of the Convention). According to article 310, declarations of a State to exclude the legal effect of the provisions of the Convention in their application to that State or change.

The United Kingdom considers that declarations which are not with articles 309 and 310 in accordance, include among others following explanations:-those which relate to baselines, were drawn in accordance with the Convention;

-those which include the need for some form of notification or permission before warships or other ships exercise the right of innocent passage or the freedom of navigation, or include a restriction on the navigation rights in a manner not permitted by the Convention, otherwise;

-those which are incompatible with the provisions of the Convention regarding straits, which serve international shipping, including the right of transit passage;

-those which are incompatible with the provisions of the Convention regarding archipelago States or archipelago waters, including the archipelago baselines and the passage through archipelago waterway,

-

such stand, including that the jurisdiction of the coastal State over all equipment with the provisions of the Convention relating to the exclusive economic zone or the continental shelf not in line and insisting on structures in the exclusive economic zone or on the continental shelf, and those that include the requirement of consent to exercises or maneuvers (including weapons exercises) in these areas;

-those that involve a subordination of the interpretation or application of the Convention in national laws and regulations, including constitutional provisions.

b. European Community: the United Kingdom recalls that it has transferred the European Community of this authority in certain matters regulated by the Convention as a member. A detailed explanation about the nature and scope of the powers conferred on the European Community will be given due time in accordance with the provisions of investment from IX of the Convention.

c. the Falkland Islands: With regard to paragraph d of the Declaration issued by the Government of the Argentine Republic on the occasion of the ratification of the Convention, the Government of the United Kingdom has no doubts about the sovereignty of the United Kingdom over the Falkland Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands. The Government of the United Kingdom has expanded as the managing authority of the two areas on the Falkland Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands the accession of the United Kingdom. The Government of the United Kingdom rejects therefore paragraph d of the Argentine Declaration as unfounded.

d. Gibraltar: With regard to point 2 of the Declaration issued on the occasion of the ratification of the Convention by the Spanish Government, the United Kingdom has no doubts about the sovereignty of the United Kingdom over Gibraltar, including its coastal waters. The Government of the United Kingdom has extended the accession of the United Kingdom to the Convention and the ratification of the Convention as the managing authority of Gibraltar Gibraltar. The Government of the United Kingdom rejects therefore point 2 of the Spanish declaration as ill-founded.

After notification of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the United Kingdom made following statement on 12 January 1998:

Pursuant to article 287, paragraph 1 of the Convention the International Court of Justice chooses the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention. The International Tribunal is a new facility that, the United Kingdom, hopes will give an important contribution to the peaceful settlement of disputes in the field of the law of the sea. In addition to those cases where the Convention itself provides for the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court, the United Kingdom is ready to consider the submission of the disputes among the Court after agreement from case to case.

After notification of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the United Kingdom issued following declaration pursuant to article 298 para 1 on April 7, 2003:

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland accepts none of the procedures provided for in part XV, section 2, of the Convention with regard to article 298 par. 1 lit. b and c mentioned types of disputes.

After further releases of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, following States have submitted further explanations:

Australia:

The Government of Australia explains para. 1 of the law of the Sea Convention of the United Nations by December 10, 1982 in accordance with article 287 that choosing the following procedures for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention, without specifying that a process takes precedence over the other:



a. the International Tribunal in accordance with annex VI of the Convention established and b. the International Criminal Court.

The Government of Australia explains para 1 lit in accordance with article 298. a the law of the Sea Convention of the United Nations by December 10, 1982, that they the procedures provided for in part XV, section 2 (including in the letter a and b of this declaration mentioned procedure) with regard to disputes concerning the interpretation or application of articles 15, 74 and 83 relating to the delimitation of sea areas or historic bays or historical title, not accepted.

These statements of the Australian Government are effective immediately.

Honduras:

Pursuant to article 287, paragraph 1 of the United Nations Convention of law of the sea the Republic of Honduras selects the International Criminal Court as a means for the settlement of disputes of any kind concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention.

Nevertheless reserves the possibility before any other means of peaceful dispute settlement, including the international maritime Court, upon agreement from case to case, to consider the Republic of Honduras.

Italy:

The Italian Government honoured to explain that she chooses Court the International Tribunal and the international for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention and of the Convention adopted on 28 July 1994 to the implementation of part XI, without thereby setting a preference for one of the two courts in accordance with article 287 of the United Nations Convention of law of the sea.

With this Declaration in accordance with article 287 of the United Nations Convention of law of the sea, the Italian Government confirmed their confidence in the existing international judicial bodies. Pursuant to article 287, para 4 Italy takes the view that it has agreed to "same procedure" as any other Contracting State has chosen the International Tribunal and the International Court of Justice.

Croatia:

The Government of Croatia declared in accordance with article 287 of the Convention, that she chooses the following procedures in the order of preference for the resolution of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention and of the Convention adopted on 28 July 1994 to the implementation of part XI:



a. the International Tribunal in accordance with annex VI of the Convention established and b. the International Criminal Court.

Mexico:

The Government of Mexico in accordance with article 287 of the United Nations Convention of law of the sea explains that she chooses one of the following means for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention without setting a preference:



1. the international maritime Court; established in accordance with annex VI

2. the International Court of Justice;

3. a special arbitration court built in accordance with annex VIII for one or more of the there mentioned types of disputes.

Mexico's Government declared in accordance with article 298 of the Convention, that it does not accept the procedures provided for in part XV, section 2 with respect to the following types of disputes:



1. disputes concerning the delimitation of sea areas or historic bays or historical title, in accordance with article 298 par. 1 lit. a;

2. disputes concerning military activities and the other in article 298 par. 1 lit. b mentioned acts.

Slovenia:

The Government of the Republic of Slovenia declares in accordance with article 287 of the Convention, that she built arbitration selects it in accordance with annex VII for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation and application of the Convention.

The Government of the Republic of Slovenia declares in accordance with article 298 of the Convention, that it built arbitration for the species referred to in article 298 of disputes does not accept that in accordance with annex VII.

Tunisia:

The Government of Tunisia declared pursuant to article 287 of the United Nations Convention of law of the sea, accept the following procedures for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention in the order of preference:



a. arbitration established the International Tribunal b. that, in accordance with annex VII.

Bowl

Related Laws