Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
The increasing exploitation of marine resources has heightened the importance of understanding maritime zones and their legal implications. The concept of a "fishery zone" historically emerged as a national claim over fishing rights, but has largely been superseded by the broader "Exclusive Economic Zone" (EEZ) established under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The recent increase in incidents involving fishing vessels and maritime disputes, particularly in the South China Sea, underscores the need for a nuanced understanding of these zones and the obligations they entail. This answer will delve into the definitions of these zones, highlight their differences, and critically examine the assertion of a coastal state's special interest in high seas resources.
Defining Maritime Zones: Fishery Zone vs. Exclusive Economic Zone
The historical context is key to understanding the evolution of maritime zones. Prior to UNCLOS, nations asserted varying degrees of control over adjacent waters, often based on fishing rights. The term "fishery zone" was commonly used to denote an area where a coastal state had preferential rights for fishing.
Fishery Zone
A fishery zone, although not formally defined under international law, traditionally represented a coastal state's claim over fishing rights within a specific distance from its shores. These zones were often unilaterally declared and their extent varied considerably. They were primarily concerned with regulating fishing activities and protecting domestic fishing industries.
Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)
The UNCLOS 1982 codified the concept of the EEZ. An EEZ extends from the baseline of a coastal state up to 200 nautical miles from its shores. It grants the coastal state sovereign rights for the purpose of exploring and exploiting, conserving and managing the natural resources, including living (fisheries, marine life) and non-living resources (minerals, oil, gas) within those waters. It also includes jurisdiction over marine scientific research and the protection of the marine environment. Crucially, other states have freedom of navigation and overflight within the EEZ.
| Feature | Fishery Zone | Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) |
|---|---|---|
| Legal Basis | Historically asserted, not formally defined under international law | UNCLOS 1982, Article 56 |
| Extent | Variable, often less than 200 nautical miles | Up to 200 nautical miles from the baseline |
| Rights of Coastal State | Primarily fishing rights | Sovereign rights for exploration, exploitation, conservation, and management of natural resources (living and non-living), marine scientific research, and environmental protection |
| Rights of Other States | Limited, often based on reciprocal agreements | Freedom of navigation and overflight |
Coastal State's Interest in High Seas Resources: A Critical Analysis
The statement that a coastal state has a "special interest" in the maintenance of the productivity of living resources in any area of the high seas adjacent to its territorial sea is a complex and contentious issue. While a coastal state undeniably has a vested interest in the health of adjacent marine ecosystems, translating this into a "special interest" with legal implications is problematic.
Arguments in Favor
- Ecological Interdependence: The high seas and coastal waters are ecologically interconnected. Migratory fish species, for example, often traverse both areas, and the health of the high seas directly impacts the productivity of coastal fisheries.
- Historical Fishing Patterns: Coastal states often have historical fishing patterns extending into the high seas. Restricting access could significantly impact their economies and livelihoods.
- Responsibility and Stewardship: Coastal states are often perceived as having a greater responsibility for the stewardship of marine resources due to their proximity and potential for direct impact.
Arguments Against
- High Seas are "Common Heritage of Mankind": UNCLOS emphasizes that the high seas are the common heritage of mankind (Article 136). This implies a shared responsibility for their conservation and management, not a special claim by coastal states.
- Risk of Unilateral Action: Allowing coastal states to assert "special interests" could lead to unilateral actions and disputes, undermining the principles of international law and cooperation.
- Difficulties in Defining "Adjacency": Defining the boundary between a coastal state's "adjacent" high seas area is inherently problematic and open to interpretation.
The concept of "straddling fish stocks" (fish stocks that migrate between EEZs and the high seas) and "highly migratory species" further complicates the issue. UNCLOS attempts to address this through cooperative management regimes, requiring states to coordinate their conservation and management efforts. However, enforcement remains a challenge.
The 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement aims to strengthen the implementation of UNCLOS provisions relating to straddling fish stocks and highly migratory species, promoting regional cooperation and sustainable fishing practices. However, its effectiveness is limited by the participation of all relevant states.
Case Study: The South China Sea Dispute
Case Study: The South China Sea Dispute
The South China Sea dispute exemplifies the tensions arising from overlapping maritime claims and the assertion of "special interests." China’s expansive claims, including the “nine-dash line,” overlap with the EEZs of several Southeast Asian nations (Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei). China's fishing activities in disputed waters, often supported by coast guard vessels, are a source of ongoing conflict. This demonstrates the difficulty of balancing coastal states’ interests with the principles of international law and the need for peaceful resolution mechanisms.
Conclusion
In conclusion, while coastal states undeniably have a significant interest in the health and productivity of adjacent marine ecosystems, the assertion of a "special interest" in the high seas requires careful consideration within the framework of UNCLOS and the principle of the high seas as the common heritage of mankind. The evolving dynamics of resource exploitation and the complexities of marine ecosystems necessitate international cooperation and adherence to established legal regimes. A balanced approach that prioritizes sustainable resource management, respects the rights of all states, and promotes peaceful resolution of disputes is crucial for ensuring the long-term health of our 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.