Piracy and Privateers in the Golden Age: Lessons for Today

Customary international law has governed high seas piracy for many centuries and is now codified in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC). In this article, we discuss the reasons why enforcement against piracy today is less effective than three hundred years ago. We contend that crime, including the crime of piracy, can be modeled as a rational choice that is responsive to expected rewards and punishments. Based on this view, we argue that three hundred years ago, the free rider problem resulting from enforcement on the high seas was less prevalent than it is today because seaborne trade was more concentrated in the vessels of a few countries, making enforcement more like internal than international policing. The persistence of piracy today also stems from a continuing low probability of capture coupled with lenient punishments. In addition to enforcement differences, we contrast the sources of piracy in the two eras—in the earlier period, the end of privateering led many privateers to engage in piracy, whereas today, the main source of pirates in the Western Indian Ocean is the existence of a “failed state,” and off West Africa and South East Asia pirates are common criminals.     

Delimitation of the maritime boundary in the gulf of Maine area

The compulsory dispute settlement regime included in the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention is recognized as one of the most comprehensive in a modern international convention. Yet, in the recent application of this regime, the question has arisen as to whether the procedural prerequisites associated with the LOS Convention's compulsory dispute settlement mechanism are so arduous as to avoid binding and compulsory jurisdiction in most instances. This article addresses that question by examining, in particular, the reasoning of the Southern Bluefin Tuna arbitration tribunal, which found Article 281 of Section 1 of the LOS Convention to bar jurisdiction to the compulsory dispute settlement mechanism prescribed by the Convention, and offers suggestions as to how states might distinguish or overcome the barriers imposed by the Southern Bluefin Tuna tribunal in future cases.     

The U.N. convention on the law of the sea and military interests in the indian ocean

Abstract

The U.N. Law of the Sea Convention, ambiguous on military uses of the ocean space, weakens the legal basis for the maritime powers to pursue freely their military objectives in the oceans. Repudiation of the Convention by the United States will accelerate the creeping jurisdiction of the littoral states. The Convention enhances the security of the littoral states of the Indian Ocean, all of whom have only limited blue‐water capabilities and have sought to contain the military intrusions of the superpowers into the Indian Ocean.     

The Robin Hood Narrative: A Discussion of Empirical and Ethical Legitimizations of Somali Pirates

The pirates of Somalia pose a major challenge for the international community, both economically and morally. Somali pirates try to legitimize their actions by reference to a number of arguments that appeal to the international community. Allegedly, the illegal fishing and waste dumping in Somali waters were the triggers for piracy. Hence, the pirates want to protect their coasts. These various strands form the so-called legitimacy Robin Hood narrative. In this article, this narrative is critically examined. The analysis includes a discussion of justice theories and related claims based on the works of John Rawls and Thomas Pogge. This is followed by a discussion of the justification of violence using Nicholas Fotion's irregular just war theory.     

A Note on the European Union's Integrated Maritime Policy

This article analyses the characteristics of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf as an international decision-making institution in the process of establishing the seaward limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles from the baselines of the territorial sea under Article 76 of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. The Commission may be compared to scientific bodies established to give advice relating to the implementation of treaty provisions. However, in the exercise of its functions, the Commission also performs legal-administrative tasks, and its recommendations to individual coastal states entail significant legal effects; for instance, as a means of interpretation under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. The Commission's functions and competencies must be taken into account in classifying and understanding this unique international institution.     

American Security and Law of the Sea

With the election of President Barack Obama and renewed interest in the Law of the Sea Convention inside the United States, this article pulls from obscurity the key U.S. declarations, understandings, and conditions of ratification to the Treaty, considers their context and meaning for U.S. security interests, and helps to place them into the lexicon of oceans law and policy that informs the greater dialogue of international security and strategy.     

Conciliation and the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea

Conciliation is an age-old peaceful means of dispute settlement. The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea provides for both voluntary and compulsory conciliation. The importance of conciliation under UNCLOS is obvious, yet it has received little focused attention.     

Law of the Sea Issues Between the United States and East Asian States

The United States is the sole superpower in the contemporary world and its role in the development of the law of the sea cannot be ignored. Although having not yet acceded to the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, the United States has contributed to the development of the international law of the sea in numerous ways, including responding to the so-called excessive maritime claims in East Asia and creating new rules of maritime enforcement. This article assesses this recent U.S. practice.     

Deep seabed mining: A definition of the problem

Abstract

The prospects for deep seabed mining in this century appear remote. The U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea was closed for signature on December 10, 1982. As of that date, 155 nation‐states and four entities had signed, but not the United States and some others. Since that time, the United States has endeavored without much success to develop a “Reciprocating States Agreement”; that would legitimate seabed mining with or without the U.N. Convention. On the other hand, the Preparatory Commission has met six times and is making only modest progress without the participation of the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Federal Republic of Germany.     

The Impact of the Law of the Sea Convention on Conflict and Conflict Management in the South China Sea

This article examines the impact of the UN Law of the Sea Convention on conflict behavior and management in the South China Sea during four periods: during its negotiation (1973–1982); from its signing to the entry into force (1982–1994); from then until the China-ASEAN Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (1995–2002); and from the setting of a timeline for outer limits of continental shelf submissions to the events following the 2009 submissions (2003–2013). Ambiguous effects were found. On the one hand, the Convention has generated or exacerbated conflict by raising the stakes, failing to resolve key legal issues, and encouraging overlapping zone claims. On the other hand, it has provided obligations, language, and techniques for conflict management and resolution. The conflict-enhancing impact was found to have been more substantial than the peace-promoting effects. Nevertheless, the balance has shifted toward more emphasis on conflict management and also some utilization of the Convention's peacemaking potential. If this long-term trend continues and the Convention is more rigorously respected and applied, the Convention may in the end be found to have contributed to regional peace.     

Coastal States in the South China Sea and Submissions on the Outer Limits of the Continental Shelf

The purpose of this article is to examine the outer continental shelf submissions made by the coastal states of the South China Sea and their potential impact on legal and political developments in the South China Sea. In accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982 and the guidelines of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, coastal states are to establish the outer limits of their continental shelf where it extends beyond 200 nautical miles. Meeting this obligation is complicated in enclosed or semienclosed seas where there are maritime disputes such as in the South China Sea.     

The new law of the sea: Rethinking the implications for sovereign jurisdiction and freedom of action

This article examines the effects of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea on sovereign jurisdiction and freedom of action in key sea zones covered under this Convention for coastal, noncoastal, and landlocked states pursuant to the modifications contained in the 1994 Implementation Agreement. In order to determine whether or not the treaty increases, decreases, or has no effect on state sovereign‐jurisdiction and freedom of action in the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the exclusive economic zone, the continental shelf, the archipelagic regime, international straits, the high seas, and the deep seabed, the rights and duties of states set forth in this Convention are compared with those previously recognized in the 1958 Geneva Law of the Sea Conventions, state practice, and other sources of international law.     

Implementation of the LOS convention: Options,impediments, and the ASEAN states

Abstract

The six states of ASEAN are faced with the problem of interpreting and implementing the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention. One of the factors to be considered in implementation is the possible impediments to implementation that may exist. Nine different types of impediments are outlined with examples drawn from the ASEAN states. Despite the various impediments that may exist for the ASEAN states none of the impediments are serious enough to force a state to be unable to ratify the LOS Convention.     

国家管辖范围外海域遗传资源获取和惠益分享机制构建建议

随着人类对海洋资源开发利用强度的增加, 海洋生物多样性的养护面临着更大挑战。《联合国海洋法公约》及其执行协定已不能较好地应对这些挑战。为此, 联合国大会决定成立工作组, 拟订新的国际协定, 以解决国家管辖范围外海域生物多样性的养护与可持续利用问题。建立国家管辖范围外海洋遗传资源的获取和惠益分享机制是该议题的焦点问题之一, 但是目前各国对新的国际执行协定应当包含哪些要素还缺乏共同理解。本文通过分析《生物多样性公约》、《名古屋议定书》及《粮食和农业植物遗传资源国际条约》等与遗传资源获取和惠益分享相关的国际条约在遗传资源的定义、管辖范围、获取条件及惠益分享要求等方面的异同, 提出对海洋遗传资源获取和惠益分享机制的构建建议: (1)国家管辖范围外的海洋遗传资源不可自由获取; (2)海洋遗传资源的定义应当涵盖海洋生物代谢生成的海洋天然产物; (3)惠益分享责任适用于在新执行协定生效前获取, 但在其生效后进行开发利用的遗传资源; (4)获取活动都应得到主管当局批准, 并签订材料转让协议或共同商定条件; (5)应为非商业化的获取活动制定简化程序, 在人类健康、粮食安全等受到重大威胁而急需获取海洋遗传资源时, 也应适用简化程序, 但后续商业化活动须分享惠益; (6)针对海洋遗传资源的不同研发环节, 设置惠益分享类型, 并就后续利用进行披露和监测, 确保惠益得到分享。     

Governance of Ice-Covered Areas: Rule Construction in the Arctic Ocean

This article recounts the negotiations and emergence of Article 234 concerning ice-covered areas in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. As Arctic shipping increases, more vessels and flag states may be subject to the provisions of Article 234, which permit coastal states to both prescribe and enforce special measures to protect the marine environment in ice-covered areas. The history of the Article 234, disclosed partially through declassified U.S. government documents, provides context for implementation of the provision by Arctic coastal states and flag states.     

“Openness” and Article 76 of the Law of the Sea Convention: The Process Does Not Need to Be Adjusted

The establishment of the outer limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles under Article 76 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which requires states to submit information to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS), is a complex and costly process. States have an interest in being aware of the kind of information that the Commission is expecting to receive. States also have an interest in being able to assess whether the coastal state in establishing these outer limits has acted on the basis of the recommendations of the Commission, as is required by the Convention. Both these issues have led to calls for greater “openness” with respect to the consideration of submissions by the CLCS. This article takes a close look at the proposals that have been advanced to accomplish greater openness and concludes that there is no need to change the current process, which offers sufficient opportunities to deal with the above-mentioned concerns. It is further concluded that the proposed changes in any case do not stand any chance of being adopted.     

The New Paradox in Marine Scientific Research: Regulating the Potential Environmental Impacts of Conducting Ocean Science

Concerns about the negative effects of marine scientific research are in clear juxtaposition to the beneficial role that scientific knowledge plays in enhancing the understanding of the oceans and protecting the marine environment. This presents a regulatory paradox that is examined in this article in light of the legal framework in the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The article traces how these general principles in the Convention are elaborated in soft law instruments for the promotion of environmentally sustainable research practices. It also looks at an example of state practice in this area by examining regulatory measures instituted in the Canadian Endeavour Hydrothermal Vent Marine Protected Area.     

Can Lionel Messi’s brain slow down time passing?

It seems that seeing others in slow-motion by heroes does not belong only to movies. When Lionel Messi plays football, you can hardly see anything from him that other players cannot do. Then why he is not stoppable really? It seems the answer may be that opponents do not have enough time to do what they want; because in Messi’s neural system, time passes slower. In differential equations that model a single neuron, this speed can be generated by multiplying an equal term in all equations. Or maybe interactions between neurons and the structure of neural networks play this role.     

The Practice of Archipelagic States: A Study of Studies

The 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea contains provisions governing the maritime claims of states, including special provisions for archipelagic states. To date, 20 states have utilized these provisions by enacting archipelagic baselines, within which these states claim sovereign waters subject to the navigational rights of other states. This article systematically examines the degree to which the archipelagic claims of these states have complied with the requirements in the Law of the Sea Convention.