please mail to us (info(@)iilss.net) or send your request in contact page for buying this book with 50% discount
IMLI Studies in International Maritime Law
Series Editor: Professor David Joseph Attard
Director of the IMO International Maritime Law Institute
The IMO International Maritime Law Institute (IMLI) was established under the
auspices of the International Maritime Organization, a specialised agency of
the United Nations.
The Institute is an international centre for the training of specialists in
international maritime law. It contributes to the development and dissemination
of knowledge and expertise in the international regime of merchant shipping
and related areas of maritime law and the general law of the sea, with special
reference to the international regulations and procedures for safety and effi ciency
of shipping and the prevention of marine pollution. For further information on
the Institute please visit its website at: www.imli.org.
The series is dedicated to publishing original, scholarly contributions which
analyse key issues in international maritime law. The works published in the series
will be of interest to an audience of students and scholars in maritime law,
maritime lawyers and barristers, and professionals in the shipping industry.
Available Titles:
Limitation of Liability in International Maritime Conventions
The Relationship between Global Limitation Conventions and Particular
Liability Regimes
Norman A. Martínez Gutiérrez
Serving the Rule of International Maritime Law
Essays in Honour of Professor David Joseph Attard
Edited by A. Martínez Gutiérrez
Extension of Coastal State Jurisdiction in Enclosed
or Semi-enclosed Seas
A Mediterranean and Adriatic Perspective
Mitja Grbec
please mail to us (info(@)iilss.net) or send your request in contact page for buying this book with 50% discount
Foreword xiii
Preface xv
Acknowledgements xvii
Table of cases xix
Table of treaties xxi
Table of selected legal instruments xxix
Table of statutes and other national legislation xxxv
List of fi gures xxxix
List of abbreviations xli
Introduction 1
I Current jurisdictional landscape of the Mediterranean and Adriatic Seas 1
II Part IX of UNCLOS 2
III Aims of the work 3
IV Methodology and contents 3
1 The Mediterranean and Adriatic as enclosed
or semi-enclosed seas 6
1.1 The Mediterranean Sea 6
1.2 The Adriatic Sea 9
1.3 The Mediterranean and/or Adriatic: Enclosed or semi-enclosed seas? 13
1.4 Concluding remarks 15
2 Development of the concept of enclosed or
semi-enclosed seas at UNCLOS III and its refl ection
in the contemporary law of the sea 17
2.1 UNCLOS III 17
2.1.1 The pre-UNCLOS III period 18
2.1.2 Position of states at UNCLOS III 19
please mail to us (info(@)iilss.net) or send your request in contact page for buying this book with 50% discount
viii Extension of Coastal State Jurisdiction in Enclosed or Semi-enclosed Seas
2.1.3 Main reasons for the inclusion of specifi c rules
on enclosed or semi-enclosed seas in UNCLOS 20
2.2 A legal defi nition of an enclosed or semi-enclosed sea 22
2.2.1 Evolution of Article 122 at UNCLOS III 22
2.2.1.1 ISNT and RSNT 24
2.2.2 Article 122 of UNCLOS 25
2.2.2.1 The two State requirements 25
2.2.2.2 Connection to another sea or the ocean by a narrow
outlet 26
2.2.2.3 Consisting entirely or primarily of the territorial seas and
EEZs of two or more coastal States 28
2.2.2.4 Should there be a proclaimed EEZ? 29
2.3 Rights and duties of states bordering an enclosed or semi-enclosed sea 30
2.3.1 The Iranian proposal 31
2.3.2 ISNT 33
2.3.3 RSNT 34
2.3.4 Article 123 of UNCLOS 35
2.3.4.1 An obligation or just an exhortation to co-operate? 36
2.3.4.1.1 Relevance of the chairman’s statement 37
2.3.4.2 Areas of co-operation 38
2.3.4.3 The introductory statement of Article 123 and its
infl uence on the application of the general rules of
UNCLOS 39
2.3.4.4 Interrelation between the introductory and the second
element of Article 123 42
2.3.4.5 Institutional or non-institutional co-operation? 44
2.3.4.6 Does Article 123 affect other users of enclosed or
semi-enclosed seas? 45
2.4 Infl uence of Part IX of UNCLOS on the extension of coastal
State jurisdiction in enclosed or semi-enclosed seas 46
2.4.1 Extension of the breadth of the territorial sea in
enclosed or semi-enclosed seas 47
2.4.1.1 Proposals by states at UNCLOS III and within the
SBC 47
2.4.1.2 Extension of the territorial sea up to the maximum extent
permitted by international law: A right or a duty? 48
2.4.1.3 Practice of states bordering enclosed or semi-enclosed
seas 50
2.4.2 Proclamation of EEZs and similar zones in enclosed or
semi-enclosed seas 51
2.4.2.1 Positions of States at UNCLOS III 51
2.4.2.1.1 A right to proclaim an EEZ 52
2.4.2.1.2 Delimitation of EEZs 52
2.4.2.1.3 Conservation of living resources and
preservation of historic fi shing rights 53
2.4.2.1.4 Navigation 54
2.4.2.2 Proclamation of EEZs 55
2.4.2.3 Fixing external limits of EEZs 56
2.4.2.4 Delimitation of EEZs 58
2.4.2.5 Conclusion of provisional arrangements of a practical
nature pending delimitation (Article 74(3)) 61
2.4.2.5.1 2002 Tunisia/Algeria Agreement: Application
of Article 74(3) and 83(3) of UNCLOS in the
light of Part IX of UNCLOS? 64
2.5 Concluding remarks 67
3 Extension of coastal State jurisdiction in the
Mediterranean: An Adriatic and EU perspective 68
3.1 The continental shelf and the Mediterranean 68
3.1.1 Delimitation of the Mediterranean continental shelf 71
3.2 The Mediterranean status quo (jurisdictional landscape) 74
3.3 Extension of coastal state jurisdiction in the Mediterranean and
Adriatic: sui generis zones or quasi EEZs? 76
3.3.1 Fisheries protection zone (Spain) 76
3.3.2 Zone of ecological protection (France) 80
3.3.3 The Mediterranean (Pelagos) sanctuary: The fi rst
Mediterranean sui generis zone? 83
3.3.4 Ecological and fi sheries protection zone (Croatia) 87
3.3.5 Zone(s) of ecological protection (Italy): An in plus
stat minus or a real sui generis zone? 94
3.3.6 Zone of ecological protection (Slovenia) 101
3.4 Recently proclaimed EEZs in the Mediterranean: de facto or
just virtual EEZs? 105
3.4.1 Cyprus 105
3.4.2 Syria 112
3.4.3 Libya: In transition from a sui generis zone to a full EEZ? 114
3.4.3.1 The limits of the Libyan FPZ 116
3.4.3.2 The Libyan EEZ (2009) 118
3.4.4 Tunisia 119
3.4.5 Malta 121
3.4.6 French and Lebanese EEZs: The end of a ‘sui generis zones
era’ in the Mediterranean? 122
3.5 Recent positions of the EU regarding the extension of coastal
state jurisdiction in the Mediterranean 124
x Extension of Coastal State Jurisdiction in Enclosed or Semi-enclosed Seas
3.5.1 Extension of coastal state jurisdiction and delimitation
of maritime zones by EU Member States 125
3.5.2 Recent initiatives and positions of the EU (European
Commission) on the extension of coastal state
jurisdiction in the Mediterranean 126
3.5.2.1 Venice Declaration (2003) 127
3.5.2.2 Towards an integrated maritime policy for better
governance of the Mediterranean? 130
3.6 Concluding remarks 133
4 Delimitation of maritime boundaries in the (Eastern)
Adriatic Sea: Border bays, uti possidetis and an
enclosed or semi-enclosed sea 134
4.1 Uti possidetis 134
4.2 Uti possidetis and the dissolution of the former SFRY 135
4.3 Uti Possidetis and maritime delimitations 139
4.3.1 Pre-2007 jurisprudence on uti possidetis 140
4.3.2 The applicability of the doctrine of ‘effective control’
(effectivités) to cases of maritime delimitation 141
4.3.3 Application of the principle of uti possidetis (and/
or doctrine of effectivités) in cases where it confl icts with
generally recognized rules and principles of
international law (law of the sea) 144
4.4 Border bays in international law 148
4.4.1 State practice regarding bays bordered by more than one
state (border bays) 148
4.4.1.1 The Sea of Azov and the Strait of Kerch 150
4.4.1.2 Delimitation of historic waters (India-Sri Lanka
and the Mozambique-Tanzania Agreement) 151
4.5 Croatia/Bosnia and Herzegovina: Is a solution in line with Part IX
of UNCLOS possible? 153
4.5.1 The legality of the enclosure of the maritime zone(s)
of Bosnia Herzegovina within the Croatian system
of straight baselines 155
4.5.2 Treaty on the state border between the Republic of
Croatia and the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina 158
4.5.3 Access of Bosnia and Herzegovina to the Adriatic’s
high seas/EEZs 160
4.6 Delimitation of the maritime (and land) boundary between
Croatia and Montenegro 162
4.6.1 The 2002 Protocol: Provisional arrangements of a practical
nature applicable to internal waters and territorial sea? 163
4.7 Slovenia-Croatia maritime delimitation dispute: Looking for solutions
in the spirit of Part IX of UNCLOS? 166
4.7.1 Geographical characteristics and general historical
background 167
4.7.2 Delimitation of the (maritime) boundary between
the Republic of Croatia and the Republic of
Slovenia 168
4.7.2.1 Border Bay of Piran 169
4.7.2.2 Territorial contact of Slovenia with the high seas: A
refl ection of the Slovenian claim to its own continental
shelf and EEZ? 172
4.7.3 Drnovšek-Racˇan Treaty (2001) 174
4.7.4 Joint fi shing zone (SOPS): Preservation of historic
fi shing rights in the Northern Adriatic? 177
4.8 2009 Arbitral Agreement between Slovenia and Croatia:
Refl ecting the spirit of Part IX of UNCLOS? 181
4.8.1 EU element 183
4.8.2 Bay of Piran 185
4.8.3 Applicable law and the principle of uti possidetis 186
4.8.4 Territorial contact of Slovenia with the high seas
and zones of sovereign rights and jurisdictions 186
4.9 Concluding remarks 189
5 Present and future co-operation of Adriatic States:
Has Part IX of UNCLOS been implemented
in the Adriatic? 190
5.1 Existing forms of co-operation at Mediterranean level: an Adriatic
Sea perspective 190
5.1.1 Protection and preservation of the marine environment 190
5.1.2 The Barcelona System 192
5.1.2.1 Enforcement of the Barcelona system on the high seas:
How much added value would bring the extension of
coastal State jurisdiction? 193
5.1.2.2 EEZs or ZEPs? 196
5.1.2.3 Compliance with the Barcelona Convention 198
5.1.3 Implementation of the Barcelona System by Adriatic
States 200
5.1.3.1 The Biodiversity Protocol 200
5.1.3.2 The Prevention and Emergency Protocol 204
5.1.3.3 The Land-Based Protocol 206
5.1.3.4 The Offshore Protocol 208
5.1.3.5 The ICZM Protocol 213
xii Extension of Coastal State Jurisdiction in Enclosed or Semi-enclosed Seas
5.2 Management and conservation of living resources 217
5.3 Co-operation in the fi eld of marine scientifi c research 220
5.4 Other co-operative arrangements between Adriatic States 222
5.4.1 Agreements concluded within the AII framework 225
5.4.1.1 Safety of navigation 226
5.5 Adriatic PSSA: Added value to the protection of the Adriatic
marine environment? 229
5.5.1 Work undertaken in relation to the proclamation
of an Adriatic PSSA 230
5.6 The role of the EU in the protection and preservation of the Adriatic
marine environment 232
5.7 Other areas of co-operation 235
5.8 Concluding remarks 237
6 Current state and possible way forward 239
6.1 Extension of coastal State jurisdiction in the Adriatic: ‘Mini EEZs’
or real sui generis zones? 240
6.1.1 In plus stat minus? 240
6.1.2 Real sui generis zones or mini EEZs? 243
6.1.3 The rights of third States and the relation of sui generis
zones with the high seas 244
6.2 Delimitation of zones of sovereign rights and jurisdiction 246
6.3 A possible way forward in the Adriatic Sea 247
Select bibliography 251
Index 261
please mail to us (info(@)iilss.net) or send your request in contact page for buying this book with 50% discount