United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
The term United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS, also called simply the Law of the Sea or LOS) refers to several United Nations events and one treaty. The events the term refers to are the (First) United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea, the Second United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea, and the Third United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea. The treaty resulting from the Third United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea also bears the name United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea and is the most recent major development in international law governing the oceans. The treaty provided new universal legal controls for the management of marine natural resources and the control of pollution. Its Secretariat resides within the United Nations Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea.
The Third United Nations Conference on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III)
The issue of varying claims of territorial waters was raised in the UN in 1967 by Arvid Pardo, of Malta, and in 1973 the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea was convened in New York to write a new treaty covering the oceans. The conference lasted until 1982 and over 160 nations participated. The conference was conducted under a process of consensus rather than majority vote in an attempt to reduce the possibility of groups of nation-states dominating the negotiations. The convention came into force on November 14, 1994, one year after the sixtieth state, Guyana, signed it.
The convention introduced a number of provisions. The most significant issues covered were setting limits, navigation, archipelagic status and transit regimes, exclusive economic zones (EEZ), continental shelf jurisdiction, deep seabed mining, the exploitation regime, protection of the marine environment, scientific research, and settlement of disputes.
The convention set the limit of various areas, measured from a carefully defined baseline, as follows:
Internal waters
Covers all water and waterways on the landward side of the baseline. The coastal nation is free to set laws, regulate any use, and use any resource. Foreign vessels have no right of passage within internal waters.
Territorial waters
Out to 12 nautical miles from the baseline, the coastal state is free to set laws, regulate any use, and use any resource. Vessels were given the right of "innocent passage" through any territorial waters, with strategic straits allowing the passage of military craft as "transit passage", in that naval vessels are allowed to maintain postures that would be illegal in territorial waters.
Contiguous zone
Beyond the 12 nautical mile limit there was a further 12 nautical miles or 24 nautical miles from the territorial sea baselines limit, the "contiguous zone", in which area a state could continue to enforce laws regarding activities such as smuggling or illegal immigration.
Exclusive economic zones (EEZ)
Extends 200 nautical miles from the baseline. Within this area, the coastal nation has sole exploitation rights over all natural resources. The EEZ were introduced to halt the increasingly heated clashes over fishing rights, although oil was also becoming important. The success of an offshore oil platform in the Gulf of Mexico in 1947 was soon repeated elsewhere in the world, by 1970 it was technically feasible to operate in waters 4000 metres deep.
Archipelagic waters
The convention set the definition of Archipelagic States in Part IV, which also define how the state can draw its territorial borders. A baseline is drawn between the outermost points of the outermost islands, subject to these points being sufficiently close to one another. All waters inside this baseline is described as Archipelagic Waters and are included as part of the state's territory and territorial waters. This baseline is also used to chart its territorial waters 12 nautical miles from the baseline and EEZ 200 nautical miles from the baseline.
Aside from its provisions defining ocean boundaries, the convention establishes general obligations for safeguarding the marine environment and protecting freedom of scientific research on the high seas, and also creates an innovative legal regime for controlling mineral resource exploitation in deep seabed areas beyond national jurisdiction, through an International Seabed Authority.
Landlocked states are given a right of access to and from the sea, without taxation of traffic through transit states.
Part XI
Part XI of the Convention provides for a regime relating to minerals on the seabed outside any states territorial waters or EEZ. It establishes an International Seabed Authority (ISA) to authorise seabed exploration and mining and collect and distribute the seabed mining royalty.
The United States strongly objected to the provisions of Part XI of the treaty, on several grounds. The US felt that the provisions of the treaty were not free market friendly and were designed to favour the economic systems of the Communist states. The US felt that the provisions could potentially result in the ISA receiving large revenues from seabed mining, and that there was insufficient controls over what these revenues could be used for. The US was particularly concerned that these revenues could be given to causes which the US opposed, such as the PLO. It was also concerned that the ISA would become a bloated and expensive bureaucracy even if seabed mining never proved to be economically feasible.
Due to Part XI, the US refused to sign the UNCLOS, although they expressed their agreement with the remaining provisions of the treaty. They also expressed the view that even as not a party, it considered many of the remaining provisions as binding upon the United States as a statement of customary international law which it had accepted.
It became clear that the US would not accept the treaty as it stood. It was felt that the treaty would not be successful with such strong opposition from the US. In addition, the fall of the Communism in the late 1980s had removed much of the support for some of the more contentious Part XI provisions (such as the use of Soviet-style economic planning for seabed mining, and the use of the proceeds to fund "national liberation" movements such as the PLO). As a result, the United Nations resolved to negotiate an amendment to the treaty to meet the United States' concerns. As a result, the Agreement relating to Part XI was negotiated and agreed upon by the parties to the treaty and the United States. This modified Part XI to remove or soften most of the provisions the US was opposed to. In particular, it limited the size of the ISA bureaucracy and gave the US an effective veto over the dispersal of ISA funds.
Due to the Agreement, the United States government now feels that the UNCLOS (including the modified Part XI provisions) are now acceptable, and no longer opposes ratification. However, despite this, ratification by the USA still has not occurred.
Signature and ratification
Opened for signature - December 10, 1982.
Entered into force - November 16, 1994.
Parties - (150) Albania, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, The Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burma, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, People's Republic of China, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Cook Islands, Costa Rica, C?te d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Estonia, European Union, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, The Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kiribati, South Korea, Kuwait, Laos, Latvia, Lebanon, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Federated States of Micronesia, Monaco, Mongolia, Mozambique, Namibia, Nauru, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Russia, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, S?o Tom? and Pr?ncipe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Tanzania, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Vietnam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Countries that have signed, but not yet ratified - (27) Afghanistan, Bhutan, Burundi, Cambodia, Central African Republic, Chad, Colombia, Republic of the Congo, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Iran, North Korea, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Malawi, Morocco, Niger, Niue, Rwanda, Swaziland, Switzerland, Thailand, United Arab Emirates, United States of America.
Countries that have not signed - (18) Andorra, Azerbaijan, Ecuador, Eritrea, Israel, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Peru, San Marino, Syria, Tadjikistan, Timor-Leste, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Vatican City, Venezuela.
Text of the treaty
