Authored By: Piyush Kumar
Lloyd School of Law
Abstract
International Maritime Law is the cornerstone for regulating the sea and ocean. This article encompasses treaties, conventions, and evolution of laws from Ancient period to Modern world, and all the important cases related to disputes between nations. However, contemporary issues such as illegal fishing, maritime piracy, and territorial disputes pose significant challenges to its enforcement. This article explores the evolving landscape of maritime law, addressing pressing concerns such as the effectiveness of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the role of international tribunals, and emerging technological disruptions like autonomous vessels. By analysing these socio-legal aspects, this study understate the need for adaptive legal frameworks to ensure a fair and sustainable maritime order in the 21st century. The socio-legal dimensions of maritime law highlight the need for equitable governance, balancing the interests of coastal states, fair distribution of zones, and unbiasedness in governing without any, hegemony of developed and powerful nations.
Keywords: Cornerstone, UNCLOS, 21st century, Hegemony
Introduction
This world is totally dependent on the trade, communication, and networking. In this diverse and globalised world, International trade through seas and oceans play a very important role in the development of a nation. And as it says, “Laws Is Derived From social Facts1”, maritime law is very important for the regulating of the International Maritime Trade. By analysis the historical context and present scenario, the study aims to strike the International Maritime Laws by the International Legislation through the treaties and conventions. From The Rhodian Sea Laws (900 BC) to UNCLOS III (1982), maritime law has continuously reform to tackle the issues related to maritime. This article delves into the law of ocean to explore the depth of International Maritime Law of this globalised world.
This paper, in discharging its burden, is divided into six distinctive sections, aside from its section one which is the introduction. Section two defines the aims and objectives of this paper. The third section of the paper involves the historical interpretation of the law. In the fourth section of this article deals with Legal cases and conflicts. The fifth parts define socio legal and contemporary issues. At the last section i.e., sixth part of the paper draws the conclusion and necessary recommendations.
Aims and Objectives
The main purpose of this paper is to explore the law beyond the land (plain on which we are living). It will demonstrate how the law is important to administer the maritime areas! The International Maritime Law deals with the critical issues that are important to manage the seas and five oceans. Maritime laws aims to balance the rights of nations concerning marine and maritime zone. It govern issues such as shipping, navigation, trade, collisions and jurisdictions of the nations in the sea and oceans. The objectives of this paper are to look into the historical development, explore legal frameworks, assess socio legal issues and identify contemporary issues and propose adaptive recommendations. Using multiple perspectives and proposals this paper aims to contribute to a comprehensive understanding of the dynamic landscape of International Maritime Law and its role in global stability and fair and equitable resource distribution without favouritism.
LEGAL FRAMEWORK OF INTERNATIONAL MARITIME LAW Historical Interpretation
The International Maritime Law has evolved over centuries to regulate the all the activities happen in the seas and oceans like shipping, trade, navigation, collisions and the jurisdiction of nations over the maritime areas (i.e., seaside and Oceanside). Here is an overview of the evolution of International Maritime Laws from Ancient Period to Modern World –
- Ancient Period Maritime Laws:
Ancient period civilisation such as the Egyptians, Phoenicians, Greeks and Romans developed the early maritime rules based on customary practices.
In India, there are some evidences shows that maritime law is also discussed during King Harshavardhana period.2
The Rhodian Sea Law (900 BC) was one of the earliest recorded maritime codes, formulated by the Seafaring Island of Rhodes.
- Medieval Period Maritime Laws:
The Laws of Oleron (12th century, France)
The Consolato del Mare (14th century, Mediterranean region)
The Hanseatic League Laws (15th century, Northern Europe)
- Modern Period (20th– 21st Century) International Maritime Laws:
In the modern period, almost all the nations gained Independence from colonial rule and they have their own self-interest. Three conferences were held and finally, in the third conference, UNCLOS law was adopted by nations through their mutual interest and mutual agreement.
1st UN conference on law of the sea (1958): It was held in Geneva, Switzerland. UNCLOS I resulted in four treaties but although it was considered a success, it left open the important issue of breadth of territorial waters.
2nd UN conference on law of the sea (1960): It was also held in Geneva, Switzerland. UNCLOS II was the six-week conference did not result in any new agreements. Generally speaking, developing nations and third world countries participated only as clients, allies, or dependents of the United States (US) and the Soviet Union (USSR).
3rd UN conference on law of the sea (1973-1982): It was convened in New York, USA. It came into force in 1994. It was successful because of the more than 160 nations participated and by consensus this UNLOS III finally came into force. It had universality of participations, long duration, and enormous task. The convention also led to the establishment of an International Seabed Authority, The Common Heritage of Mankind principle, and also the International Tribunal for Law of the Sea (ITLOS) in Hamburg, Germany for the dispute resolution.
Landlocked states are also granted a right of access to the sea, without taxation of traffic through transit states.
This conference led to the division of the marine areas into four zones:
- Territorial zone: 12 nautical miles from the baseline
- Contiguous Zone: Beyond the 12 nautical miles and up to 24 nautical miles from the baseline
Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ): Extended 200 nautical miles from the baseline. Coastal state has exclusive power to explore, exploit, conserve and manage of the natural resources (living or non-living).
High Seas or Continental Shelf: It is extended beyond 200 nautical miles. The high seas are open to all states. Freedom of the high seas is exercised under the conditions laid down by this convention Article 87 of the UNCLOS III.
High Profile Conflicts and Legal Cases between the Nations
South China Sea Conflict: This is one of the most complicated and controversial marine disputes in the world, involving multiple countries or parties (including China, Vietnam, Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia and Taiwan) with overlapping claims to maritime areas. This region is rich in natural resources, strategically important for global trade, and holds significant geopolitical value. The South-China Sea Conflict remains unresolved due to the China’s assertive Policies, hegemony, military expansion, and strategic interests make a peaceful resolution challenging. The major points of conflict includes Nine-Dash Line Dispute (China claims roughly 90% of Total area defined by this map), Island claim disputes (including the Paracel Islands between China, Taiwan, and Vietnam; the Spratly islands between China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Brunei, and the Philippines; the Scarborough Shoal between Philippines, China, and Taiwan), and Malaysia and Brunei claim portion of the sea within their Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).
In 2002, Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and China signed “Declaration on the Code of Conduct of Parties in South China Sea” in an attempt to manage and resolve disputes and it is still ongoing.
Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) Ruling 2016 [Philippines vs China, 2016]: The PCA ruled in 2016 that China’s claims over 90% is illegal. However, China rejected the the PCA Ruling, asserting that it has Historical Rights to the South China Sea and prefers Bilateral Negotitations with other parties involved.
MOX Plant Case (Ireland vs United Kingdom, 2001): This case refers to a legal conflict between the Ireland (Plaintiff) and the United Kingdom (UK). It revolve around the issue raised by Ireland regarding the construction and operation of a Sellafield nuclear plant, in England, known as the MOX plant. Ireland claimed that the UK has violated its obligations under the UNCLOS3 by constructing and operating the plant without properly assessing its potential damage to the surroundings of maritime zone of Irish Sea. MOX plant produces mixed oxide fuel from plutonium and uranium oxides which can pollute the marine.
The Arbitral Tribunal ruled that the UK must improve the environmental safety measures of the marine. It also ruled that Ireland and the UK shall cooperate for this purpose and exchange further information with regard to possible consequences for the Irish Sea, monitor risks or the effects of the operation of the MOX plant, devise, as appropriate, measures to prevent pollution of the marine environment which might result from the operation of the MOX plant.
This Case has strengthened the rules and regulations regarding the environment of marine pollution and nuclear waste disposal under marine.
The Arctic Sunrise Case (Kingdom of Netherlands vs Russian Federation, 2013): The dispute relates to authorities of the Russian Federation boarding and detaining the ‘Arctic Sunrise’, an ice-strengthened vessel operated by Greenpeace International, in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of the Russian Federation and detaining the vessel’s crew without the prior consent of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. The Kingdom of the Netherlands requested the Russian Federation to adopt and implement provisional measures and immediately release the ‘Arctic Sunrise’ and its crew. The Russian Federation did not respond anything and did not follow any provisions. Finally, the Kingdom of the Netherlands filed a case in the ITLOS4to immediately intervene in this case and to release the crew members and vessel and also ensure that no other action is taken which might aggravate or extend the dispute.
In the ruling, the ITLOS ruled that Russian Federation has violated the maritime law (UNCLOS III) and has to release the vessel and crew members. However, Russian Federation refused to comply the ruling of the ITLOS and also refused to participate in any further legal proceedings of the ITLOS.
Socio-Legal and Contemporary Issues
- Debt-trap policy in maritime
In this modern world, the powerful nations are providing huge debt to the developing nations and create the situation like neither fish nor fowl. After creating this situation, powerful and developed nations are taking its ports on the name of recovery of loans. Powerful nations are targeting the countries which are surrounded or share its boundary with other powerful nation and lender nation’s enemy country for establishing its hegemony on the world. E.g. – China through its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) created debt-trap on the Sri Lanka and due to the unable to repay its massive debt to China, China has taken its Hambantota Port on lease for 99 years. Due to this port project, China can easily assess or spy on its main enemy nation i.e. India.
- Rising IUU fishing
It stands for the Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated fishing. This type of fishing is done for the extra profit maximization without paying extra taxes. IUU Fishing is done through Mother Vessel process and Flag Hopping etc. It has complex corporate structure and it is organized crime. The estimated profits through IUU fishing is $36.4 billion per year5 and 1 in 5 fishing done is IUU fishing. For example – The fishing Vessel, Thunder, got sunk in 2015 because it was held in the IUU Fishing by the NGO Sea Shepherd. After investigation, it was reveal that the vessel was registered under Panama Shell Company and was organising IUU fishing by Flag Hopping.
- There is also rising in the illegal immigration through sea route (Donkey Route), human trafficking, drug trafficking, and even modern slavery.
- NGO Piracy at Sea
In the case of Institute of Cetacean Research vs Sea Shepherd conservation society (NGO) 2013, a US court ruled that Sea Shepherd’s aggressive tactics against Japanese whaling ships in the Antarctic Ocean constituted acts of Piracy under international law, essentially ordering them to cease their disruptive actions against the whaling operations, with the Institute of Cetacean Research claiming Sea Shepherd’s actions endangered navigation and violated maritime safety conventions; this case highlighted the legal complexities surrounding environmental activism in the open seas.
Recommendation
The current socio-legal and contemporary issues required a more comprehensive and enforceable rules and regulations. The International Legislature should adopt a binding and justiciable nature of the law. It should give power to the flag nation to punish any illegal activities done in the coastal areas. The country which is doing illegal and making wrong decisions should follow the judgement of the ITLOS and Arbitral Tribunal or Court to make this law into successful law.
Conclusion
International Maritime Laws play a crucial role in this globalised world. It establish synergy between the nations and also protect their interest in marine zone. It also define the interest of landlocked nation not only coastal zone nations. International Maritime Law must remain dynamic and responsive to evolving global challenges and global maritime issues. It defines the fair and equitable distribution of zones without favouritism. UNCLOS III has prepared with the consensus of all the nations. Our studies indicate that through strengthened international collaboration and the enhancement of legal frameworks, the global community can ensure a just, secure, and sustainable maritime environment.
Reference(S):
1 Emile Durkheim
2 Records by the Chinese traveller Xuan Zang
3 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
4International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
5 By Transnational Alliance to Combat Illicit Trade
