UPSC MainsLAW-PAPER-I201230 Marks
Q15.

UNCLOS-III & Customary International Law of the Sea

With special reference to the United Nations Convention on Law of Sea (UNCLOS-III), which came into force in 1994, and its two predecessor UN Conventions on the Law of the Sea, analyse how far these conventions have been able to effectively codify customary international law of sea.

How to Approach

This question requires a nuanced understanding of the UNCLOS regime and its evolution. The approach should be to first introduce the conventions, then analyze how effectively they codified customary international law concerning the sea. This involves discussing the historical context, the key provisions of each convention, and examining instances where customary law was either explicitly incorporated or implicitly recognized. A comparative analysis, highlighting successes and limitations, is crucial. Finally, a balanced conclusion assessing the overall effectiveness is needed. The answer must demonstrate knowledge of relevant articles, case laws, and debates surrounding UNCLOS.

Model Answer

0 min read

Introduction

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) represents a monumental achievement in international law, aiming to establish a legal framework for all marine activities. It’s a complex story, built on the foundations of earlier efforts. The first UNCLOS (Geneva, 1958) and the second UNCLOS (Geneva, 1960) addressed primarily navigation and fishing rights, respectively. However, they were limited in scope and failed to address emerging issues like continental shelf rights and deep seabed mining. The third UNCLOS (UNCLOS-III), finalized in 1982 and entering into force in 1994, sought to comprehensively regulate all aspects of ocean use. This answer will analyze the extent to which these three conventions have successfully codified the customary international law of the sea, acknowledging both achievements and shortcomings.

Historical Context and Evolution of UNCLOS

Prior to the UNCLOS regime, customary international law governed maritime activities. This law, derived from long-standing practices and state consent, was often vague and subject to conflicting interpretations. The first two UNCLOS attempts aimed to clarify and codify this existing customary law, but faced challenges in achieving universal acceptance and addressing new developments, particularly regarding resource exploitation.

First UNCLOS (1958): Navigation

The First UNCLOS focused primarily on defining navigation rights and freedoms. It codified existing customary law regarding innocent passage, but failed to adequately address issues like submarine cables and the expanding concept of territorial waters. Its limited scope and lack of universal ratification hindered its effectiveness.

Second UNCLOS (1960): Fishing and Continental Shelf

The Second UNCLOS dealt with fishing rights and the continental shelf. It extended the concept of the continental shelf, allowing states to exploit resources on the seabed beyond the 200-nautical-mile limit. While significant, it also lacked universal acceptance and didn't address deep seabed mining, a key emerging issue.

UNCLOS-III (1982/1994): A Comprehensive Framework

UNCLOS-III represents the culmination of decades of negotiations. It established a comprehensive legal order of the seas, defining various maritime zones and their associated rights and responsibilities. The key zones defined are:

  • Internal Waters: Waters within a state's territorial boundaries.
  • Territorial Sea: Extends up to 12 nautical miles from the baseline.
  • Contiguous Zone: Extends up to 24 nautical miles.
  • Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ): Extends up to 200 nautical miles.
  • Continental Shelf: The seabed and subsoil extending beyond the territorial sea.
  • High Seas: All parts of the sea not within the jurisdiction of any state.

Codification of Customary International Law: Successes

UNCLOS-III successfully codified several aspects of customary international law:

  • Right of Innocent Passage: The convention formalized the right of warships to innocent passage through the territorial sea, a long-standing principle.
  • Freedom of Navigation: UNCLOS-III reaffirmed the freedom of navigation on the high seas, a cornerstone of international maritime law. Article 87 explicitly states this right.
  • Maritime Delimitation: The convention provides a framework for resolving maritime boundary disputes based on customary principles of equitable proportionality.
  • Responsibilities for Marine Environmental Protection: UNCLOS-III codified the duty to protect the marine environment, a concept gaining traction in customary law.

Codification of Customary International Law: Limitations and Challenges

Despite its successes, UNCLOS-III has faced challenges in fully codifying customary international law:

  • Deep Seabed Mining: The regime for deep seabed mining, governed by the International Seabed Authority (ISA), has been criticized for its lack of transparency and potential environmental impact. While intended to be equitable, its implementation has sparked debates about the balance between resource exploitation and environmental protection.
  • Enforcement: UNCLOS-III lacks a robust enforcement mechanism. Disputes are typically resolved through arbitration or the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), but compliance is ultimately dependent on state consent.
  • Evolving Customary Law: Customary international law continues to evolve, particularly in areas like climate change and marine plastic pollution. UNCLOS-III needs to be interpreted and supplemented to address these new challenges.
  • Disputes and Overlapping Claims: Numerous maritime boundary disputes remain unresolved, highlighting the limitations of UNCLOS-III in achieving universal acceptance and effective dispute resolution. The South China Sea dispute is a prime example.

Case Study: The Arctic Ocean and UNCLOS

The melting of Arctic ice due to climate change has created new opportunities for resource exploitation and increased geopolitical competition. UNCLOS principles, particularly regarding the continental shelf and the rights of coastal states, are being invoked to assert claims over the Arctic region. However, the interpretation and application of these principles in the unique Arctic environment are complex and contentious. The Russian Arctic submission regarding its extended continental shelf is a notable example.

Convention Focus Key Provisions Limitations
First UNCLOS (1958) Navigation Defined navigation rights and freedoms Limited scope, lack of universal ratification
Second UNCLOS (1960) Fishing & Continental Shelf Extended continental shelf rights Lack of universal acceptance, didn't address deep seabed mining
UNCLOS-III (1982/1994) Comprehensive Law of the Sea Defined maritime zones, EEZ, continental shelf, deep seabed mining regime Enforcement challenges, evolving customary law, unresolved disputes

Conclusion

In conclusion, the UNCLOS regime, encompassing the three conventions, has significantly advanced the codification of customary international law of the sea. It has provided a comprehensive framework for governing maritime activities and resolving disputes. However, the conventions are not without limitations. Emerging challenges, such as climate change and deep seabed mining, require ongoing interpretation and adaptation. The ultimate effectiveness of UNCLOS-III hinges on the willingness of states to uphold its principles and resolve disputes peacefully, ensuring the sustainable and equitable use of the world’s oceans.

Answer Length

This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.

Additional Resources

Key Definitions

Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)
A zone extending 200 nautical miles from a state's coast, within which the state has special rights regarding exploration and use of marine resources.
Innocent Passage
The right of a foreign warship to pass through the territorial sea of another state without prejudice to that state's sovereignty, provided the passage is innocent (not prejudicial to the peace, order, or safety of the coastal state).

Key Statistics

As of 2023, 168 states have ratified UNCLOS, representing almost all coastal states worldwide. (Source: UN Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea)

Source: UN Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea

The International Seabed Authority has approved 30 contracts for exploration for mineral resources in the deep seabed. (Source: ISA website)

Source: International Seabed Authority

Examples

South China Sea Dispute

China’s expansive claims in the South China Sea, overlapping with the EEZ and continental shelf claims of neighboring countries like the Philippines, Vietnam, and Malaysia, demonstrate the ongoing challenges in applying UNCLOS principles and resolving maritime boundary disputes.

Arctic Continental Shelf Claims

Russia's submission to the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) regarding its extended continental shelf in the Arctic Ocean highlights the complexities of applying UNCLOS principles in a rapidly changing environment.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is UNCLOS-III not universally ratified?

The United States has not ratified UNCLOS-III, citing concerns about the provisions related to deep seabed mining and the jurisdiction of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. However, the US generally follows UNCLOS principles in its maritime policies.

What is the role of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS)?

ITLOS is a judicial body established under UNCLOS-III to adjudicate disputes arising under the Convention. It plays a crucial role in interpreting and applying UNCLOS principles.

Topics Covered

International RelationsLawLaw of the SeaInternational ConventionsMaritime Law