Effect of natural prolongation with geological features on maritime delimitation

QIU Wenxian; JIN Xianglong; FANG Yinxia; WANG Kui

doi:10.1007/s13131-017-1002-6

Article Contents

Article Navigation > Acta Oceanologica Sinica > 2017 > 36(2): 35-42

QIU Wenxian, JIN Xianglong, FANG Yinxia, WANG Kui. Effect of natural prolongation with geological features on maritime delimitation[J]. Acta Oceanologica Sinica, 2017, 36(2): 35-42. doi: 10.1007/s13131-017-1002-6

Citation:

QIU Wenxian, JIN Xianglong, FANG Yinxia, WANG Kui. Effect of natural prolongation with geological features on maritime delimitation[J]. Acta Oceanologica Sinica, 2017, 36(2): 35-42. doi: 10.1007/s13131-017-1002-6

Citation:

PDF( 2963 KB)

Effect of natural prolongation with geological features on maritime delimitation

doi: 10.1007/s13131-017-1002-6

1.
Guanghua Law School, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310008, China
2.
Key Laboratory of Submarine Geosciences, Second Institute of Oceanography, State Oceanic Administration, Hangzhou 310012, China
3.
Key Laboratory of Marine Ecosystem and Biogeochemistry, Second Institute of Oceanography, State Oceanic Administration, Hangzhou 310012, China

Received Date: 2016-08-22
Rev Recd Date: 2016-11-07

Abstract

Abstract

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea entitled the coastal States to naturally extend the continental shelf, which has caused more drastic disputes of maritime delimitation. This paper devotes to clarifying the significant concept of natural prolongation through an effect method combing the legal principles and technical analysis. Firstly, the classic samples with respect of the development of geological features are traced. Based on these samples, the classification with a model is proposed in order to affirm the concept's significance under certain geomorphologic situations. Lastly, scientific analysis is used to present two potential prolongation situations and emphasize that all the technical analysis on maritime delimitation should be complied with international law and protect the common interest of all the mankind.
- natural prolongation,
- geological feature,
- the continental shelf,
- maritime delimitation

FullText(HTML)

References(27)

References

Antunes N M, Pimentel F M. 2003. Reflecting on the legal-technical interface of Article 76 of the LOSC:tentative thoughts on practical implementation. In:Third International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) and the International Association of Geodesy (IAG) Advisory Board on the Law of the Sea (ABLOS) Conference. Monaco:The Commission on the Legal Issues of the Outer Continental Shelf of the International Law Association, 15-33

Brekke H, Symonds P. 2011. Submarine ridges and elevations of Article 76 in light of published summaries of recommendations of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. Ocean Development and International Law, 42(4):289-306

Charney J I, Alexander L M. 1993. International Maritime Boundaries. Kluwer, Dordrecht:The American Society of International Law, 639-654

Conciliation Commission. 1981. Conciliation Commission on the Continental Shelf Area Between Iceland and Jan Mayen:Report and Recommendations to The Governments of Iceland and Norway. New York:United Nations, 26

Crawford J. 2012. Brownlie's Principles of Public International Law. 8th ed. Oxford:Oxford University Press, 10-12

Gao Z G. 2012. Separate opinion of the judgment concerning the delimitation of the maritime boundary between Bangladesh and Myanmar in the Bay of Bengal:International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, 35

Greenland. 2012. Partial submission of the Government of the Kingdom of Denmark together with the Government of Greenland, Executive summary of the Southern Continental Shelf:The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, 8-16

Greenland. 2013. Partial submission of the Government of Kingdom of Denmark together with the Government of Greenland, Executive Summary of the North-eastern Continental shelf:The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, 12-14

Gudlaugsson S T. 2004. Natural prolongation and the concept of the continental margin for the purposes of Article 76. In:Nordquist M H, Moore J N, Heidar T H, eds. Legal and Scientific Aspects of Continental Shelf Limits. The Netherlands:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 63

Highet K. 1993. The use of geophysical factors in the delimitation of maritime boundaries. In:Charney J I, Alexander L M, eds. International Maritime Boundaries. Netherlands:The American Society of International Law, 166

Huang Wei. 2011. The Legal Issues of Single Maritime Delimitation (in Chinese). Beijing:Social Science Academic Press, 96

International Court of Justice. 1969. North Sea Continental Shelf Cases. Netherlands, Denmark, the Federal Republic of Germany:International Court of Justice, 3

International Court of Justice. 1982. Case Concerning the Continental Shelf. Tunisia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya:International Court of Justice, 18

International Court of Justice. 1984. Case Concerning Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Gulf of Maine Area. Canada, United Nations of America:International Court of Justice, 246

International Court of Justice. 1985. Case Concerning the Continental Shelf. Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Malta:International Court of Justice, 23

International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. 2012. Dispute Concerning Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary. Bangladesh, Myanmar in the Bay of Bengal:International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, 177-340

Jenning R. 1998. Oppenheim's International Law (in Chinese). Translated by Wang Tieya. Beijing:Encyclopedia of China Publishing House, 189-201

Jewett M L. 1982. The evolution of the legal regime of the continental shelf:Part I. In:Canadian Yearbook of International Law. Vancouver:The University of British Columbia Press, 160

Larenz K. 2015. Methodology of Jurisprudence (in Chinese). Translated by Xu Xianming. Beijing:The Commercial Press, 193-228

Oda S. 1982. Dissenting Opinion Concerning the Judgment. Tunisia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya:International Court of Justice, 248

Permanent Court of Arbitration. 1976. Arbitration between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the French Republic on the delimitation of the continental shelf: Permanent Court of Arbitration, 26

Qiu Wenxian, Jin Xianglong, Schofield C, et al. 2013. Preliminary considerations on the potential influence of submarine fans on marine delimitation. Acta Oceanologica Sinica, 32(12):133-142

Symonds P A, Willcox J B. 1988. Definition of the Continental Margin Using U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (Article 76). Canberra:Bureau of Mineral Resources, 33-36

Symonds P A, Olav E. 2000. Characteristics of continental margins, Part 4. In:Cook P J, Carleton C M, eds. Continental Shelf Limits of the Scientific and Legal Interface. Oxford:Oxford University Press, 27-28

The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. 1999. Scientific and Technical Guidelines of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. New York:The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, 4-30

Tomasz G. 2009. A note on submarine ridges and elevations with special reference to the Russian Federation and the Arctic Ridges. Ocean Development and International Law, 40(1):51-60

United Nations Legislative Series. 1954. Laws and Regulations on the Regime of the High Seas. New York:United Nations, 192

Relative Articles

Supplements(0)

Cited By

Proportional views