The fundamental principle governing the law of the sea is that ‘the land dominates the sea’ so

that the land territorial situation constitutes the starting point for the determination of the
maritime rights of a coastal state.

Rationale for seeking Rights over Seas

Western states wanted to protect their shipping routes by ensuring freedom of passage through
international straits and aimed to secure their economic interests by keeping access to high seas
resources and deep-sea mining unrestricted.

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is often referred to in three major
contexts, as each one provides a framework for understanding different aspects of international
maritime law. Here’s a breakdown of each:

1. UNCLOS I (1958)

This was the first United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, held in Geneva. It resulted in
four separate conventions:

  Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone:

 Defined territorial seas and introduced the concept of contiguous zones.

 Established a framework for the sovereignty of coastal states over their adjacent waters.

  Convention on the High Seas:

 Outlined the rights and freedoms of states on the high seas.

 Set rules on navigation, freedom of fishing, and regulations against piracy.

  Convention on Fishing and Conservation of Living Resources of the High Seas:

 Focused on conserving and managing living marine resources to prevent overfishing.

 Emphasized cooperation among states to regulate fishing in international waters.

  Convention on the Continental Shelf:

 Defined the concept of the continental shelf, giving coastal states rights over the resources on
their continental shelves.

 Provided the foundation for the exploration and exploitation of seabed resources.

While UNCLOS I provided a legal framework, it was limited in scope and failed to address the full
range of issues regarding maritime boundaries and jurisdiction.

2. UNCLOS II (1960)

 Objective: To resolve the gaps and unresolved issues left by UNCLOS I, especially concerning the
extent of territorial waters.

 Outcome:

 Despite efforts, UNCLOS II did not reach a consensus on critical issues, particularly
regarding the limits of territorial seas.
  Major disagreements arose around how far a state's territorial sea should extend, with many
states advocating for 12 nautical miles and others for less.

 Although it was less productive in terms of new conventions, it laid the groundwork for
further discussions.

 Significance: UNCLOS II highlighted the need for a more comprehensive approach to maritime
law, ultimately leading to UNCLOS III.

3. UNCLOS III (1973-1982)

 This was the most comprehensive convention, taking nearly a decade of negotiations and
concluding with the adoption of the modern UNCLOS, often referred to as "the Constitution
for the Oceans."

  Territorial Sea:

 Established a maximum limit of 12 nautical miles from the baseline for a state’s territorial
waters, where the state has sovereignty.

  Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ):

 Defined the EEZ, allowing coastal states exclusive rights to explore, exploit, conserve, and
manage natural resources within 200 nautical miles from their coast.

  Continental Shelf Rights:

 Extended coastal states’ rights over the continental shelf up to 200 nautical miles or further if
the shelf naturally extends.

  High Seas:

 Defined the high seas as areas beyond national jurisdiction, ensuring freedoms such as
navigation, fishing, and scientific research.

  Deep Seabed Mining:

 Established the International Seabed Authority to regulate mining activities in international

waters, ensuring shared benefits from resource extraction.

  Straits and Transit Passage:

 Created provisions for transit passage through international straits, balancing the interests of
coastal states with international navigation rights.

UNCLOS III came into force in 1994 and remains the core legal framework governing international
maritime law.

United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) 1982, also known as Law of the
Sea divides marine areas into five main zones namely- Internal Waters, Territorial Sea,
Contiguous Zone, Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and the High Seas.
  UNCLOS is the only international convention which stipulates a framework for state
jurisdiction in maritime spaces. It provides a different legal status to different maritime
zones.

 It provides the backbone for offshore governance by coastal states and those navigating the
oceans. It not only zones coastal states’ offshore areas but also provides specific guidance for
states’ rights and responsibilities in the five concentric zones.

Maritime Zones
 Baseline:

o It is the low-water line along the coast as officially recognized by the coastal state.

o article 5 of the 1982 Convention

 Normal Baseline:

 This is the low-water line along the coast, including any islands or other coastal features, as
shown on official large-scale charts. It’s the most common baseline, following the natural
shape of the coastline.

 Straight Baseline:

 Used where the coastline is deeply indented or has many islands close to shore (e.g.,
archipelagic states or places with fjords).

 Straight baselines connect fixed points along the coast, cutting across bays or around groups
of islands.

 Example: Norway uses straight baselines along its fjord-lined coast.

 Anglo Norwegian fisheries case (uk vs norway)

In the Anglo-Norwegian Fisheries case, Norway used straight baselines (lines connecting
outer points of islands and rocks along its coast) instead of the typical low-water line to set its
territorial sea boundary. This enclosed areas that would otherwise be high seas under
international law.

The UK challenged this, arguing that Norway’s method was not legal. However, the
International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled in favor of Norway, reasoning that:

Geographic Uniqueness: Norway’s deeply indented coastline and chain of islands made it
impractical to use a traditional baseline.
 Practice and Acceptance: Norway’s system of straight baselines had been consistently used
for years without objections from other states, including the UK initially, which validated it as
acceptable under international law.

This decision helped establish that, in unique coastal situations, a straight baseline system
can be used. This concept was later included in Article 7 of the 1982 United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), allowing straight baselines for deeply
indented coasts or those with nearby island fringes, as long as they follow the coast’s
general direction and are closely connected to the land.

 Low-Tide Elevations:

 If a low-tide elevation is within 12 nautical miles of the mainland or an island, its low-water
line can be used as part of the baseline.

 If the elevation lies further out (beyond the 12-mile mark), it can’t be used to measure the
territorial sea.

Determining Baseline

 If there’s a piece of land visible only at low tide (a "low-tide elevation") and it’s
within the coastal area of a country, that country can use it to help set the width of its
territorial sea.
 If this low-tide elevation is completely outside any country's territorial sea, it doesn’t
add any territorial area for that country.
 If this low-tide elevation is in a zone where two countries’ territorial seas overlap,
both countries can use it to help set their territorial boundaries.

Example- If there’s a low-tide elevation (a piece of land visible only at low tide) located 8
nautical miles from the coast, Since this low-tide elevation is within 12 nautical miles of
the coast, it can legally be used as a baseline point. the territorial sea will then extend 12
nautical miles out from this new baseline point.

8 nautical miles (distance to the low-tide elevation) + 12 nautical miles (territorial sea
measured from the low-tide elevation), making it 20 nautical miles from the original
coast.

In summary, by using this low-tide elevation as a baseline, the country can legally extend its
territorial sea boundary up to 20 nautical miles from the mainland coast.

 Bay Closing Line

 Purpose: When a country has a coastal bay with an entrance of less than 24 nautical
miles wide, the country can "close" this bay off with an imaginary line across the
entrance.
 How It Works: The bay closing line is drawn from one side of the bay’s entrance to
the other. Once drawn, the waters inside this line are considered internal waters
 rather than part of the territorial sea, meaning the coastal state has full sovereignty
over these waters.

Archipelagic Baselines

 Purpose: This is used by archipelagic states, which are countries made up of groups
of closely spaced islands.
 How It Works: Archipelagic baselines are drawn by connecting the outermost
points of the outer islands. This creates an enclosed area around the main islands and
the waters between them.
 Internal Waters: The water within these lines is considered internal waters of the
archipelagic state, where it has full sovereignty.
 Example: Indonesia and the Philippines, being archipelagic states, use this method.
They connect the outermost islands with straight lines to enclose their main islands,
treating the waters between them as internal, rather than international, waters.
  Access for Other States: Baselines shouldn’t block another state’s access to the
high seas or exclusive economic zone.
  Neighboring State Rights: If a neighboring state traditionally uses parts of the
archipelagic waters, these rights and any existing agreements must be respected
  InternalWaters:

o Internal waters are waters on the landward side of the baseline from which the
breadth of the territorial sea is measured.

o Each coastal state has full sovereignty over its internal waters as like its land
territory. Examples of internal waters include bays, ports, inlets, rivers and even lakes
that are connected to the sea.

o There is no right of innocent passage through internal waters.

 The innocent passage refers to the passing through the waters which are not
prejudicial to peace and security. However, the nations have the right to
suspend the same.

Which law to prevail in internal waters?

 Jurisdiction in Internal Waters: Coastal states generally exercise jurisdiction over

foreign ships in their internal waters to enforce their own laws.

 Concurrent Jurisdiction: Both the coastal state and the flag state (the country whose flag
the ship flies) may have jurisdiction in cases where crimes occur on board the ship.

 Case Example – *R v. Anderson (1868):

 An American committed manslaughter aboard a British ship within French internal

waters.
 The British court claimed jurisdiction and convicted him, despite:
o The crime occurring under French sovereignty.
o The offender being an American national (potential American jurisdiction).
 The case showed that British law could apply, establishing a precedent for concurrent
jurisdiction in complex scenarios where multiple states could have authority.

Internal Waters- warship (exception)

If a foreign warship enters a country’s waters, the coastal country can’t enforce its laws on
the ship or its crew unless the captain or the country that owns the warship (the “flag state”)
agrees. This is because a warship is seen as a direct representation of its country’s
government.

Territorial Sea:
 Article3
 o The territorial sea extends seaward up to 12 nautical miles (nm) from its baselines.

 A nautical mile is based on the circumference of the earth and is equal to one
minute of latitude. It is slightly more than a land measured mile (1 nautical
mile = 1.1508 land miles or 1.85 km).

o The coastal states have sovereignty and jurisdiction over the territorial sea. These
rights extend not only on the surface but also to the seabed, subsoil, and
even airspace.

o But the coastal states’ rights are limited by the innocent passage through the
territorial sea. This is the primary distinction between internal waters and territorial
seas.

o There is no right of innocent passage for aircraft flying through the airspace above the
coastal state’s territorial sea.

 Contiguous Zone:
o The contiguous zone extends seaward up to 24 nm from its baselines.

o It is an intermediary zone between the territorial sea and the high seas.

o This zone exists to bolster a State’s law enforcement capacity and prevent criminals
from fleeing the territorial sea.

o The coastal state has the right to both prevent and punish infringement of fiscal,
immigration, sanitary, and customs laws within its territory and territorial sea.

o Unlike the territorial sea, the contiguous zone only gives jurisdiction to a state on
the ocean’s surface and floor. It does not provide air and space rights.

 Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ):

o Each coastal State may claim an EEZ beyond and adjacent to its territorial sea that
extends seaward up to 200 nm from its baselines.

o Within its EEZ, a coastal state has:

 Sovereign rights for the purpose of exploring, exploiting, conserving and

managing natural resources, whether living or nonliving, of the seabed and
subsoil. These resources encompass both living resources, such as fish, and
non-living resources, such as oil and natural gas.

 Rights to carry out activities like the production of energy from the water,
currents and wind.

o Unlike the territorial sea and the contiguous zone, the EEZ only allows for the
above-mentioned resource rights. It does not give a coastal state the right to
prohibit or limit freedom of navigation or overflight, subject to very limited
exceptions.
 rights and duties within the EEZ (Exclusive Economic Zone) for states other than
the coastal state:

 Freedom of Navigation and Overflight:

o Article 87 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC) allows all
states to freely navigate, fly over, and lay submarine cables in the high seas.
o Article 58 extends these freedoms to the EEZ, allowing navigation, overflight,
and cable-laying activities, as long as they comply with international laws and
the convention's rules.
 EEZ as International Waters:
o Article 86 clarifies that the EEZ and high seas are “international waters”
where navigation and overflight rights apply.
 Prohibition of Force:
o Article 301 prohibits states from using force against others within the EEZ,
aligning with principles of international law under the UN Charter.
 Military Activities:
o Many countries agree that conducting military activities in another country’s
EEZ is an internationally lawful use of the sea.
 Air Defense Identification Zones (ADIZ):
o Coastal states can establish ADIZs for security, requiring identification from
aircraft approaching their airspace. Certain States, however, purport to require
all aircraft penetrating an ADIZ to comply with ADIZ identification
procedures, whether or not the aircraft intends to enter their national airspace.
The U.S., however, only recognizes ADIZ rules if the aircraft intends to enter
national airspace.
 Surveillance and Intelligence:
o While China opposes foreign surveillance within its EEZ, the U.S. considers
passive intelligence gathering in international airspace as legal, provided it
doesn’t involve hostilities.

 Continental Shelf

Definition:
The continental shelf is the natural extension of a country’s land, sloping underwater
from the coast, then dropping steeply, and finally leading to the deep seabed.

economic Rights:
  Under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC), a coastal state has rights
over resources (like oil, gas, and minerals) up to 200 nautical miles from its coastline.
If the shelf extends beyond this, the state may claim more, based on geological data.

Rights and Restrictions:

 The coastal state has exclusive rights to non-living resources (like oil) and certain
sedentary living resources (like shellfish).
 coastal State to build artificial islands, installations, and structures
 Other countries can harvest non-sedentary resources (like fish), lay cables and
pipelines, and conduct research, as they would in international waters.
 These rights do not allow a coastal state to restrict navigation in the area.

Determining Boundaries:
Gardiner Formula:
Measures the thickness of rock layers under the sea. The boundary is drawn where the rock
layer becomes very thin, less than 1% of the thickness of soil which usually marks the end of
the natural shelf.

Hedberg Formula: This method uses a fixed distance approach, allowing the boundary to be
drawn 60 nautical miles from the point where the continental slope begins to steepen.
However, there are limits to how far this can go:
 No more than 350 nautical miles from the coastline, or
 No more than 100 miles beyond the 2,500-meter depth line

 HighSeas:

o The ocean surface and the water column beyond the EEZ are referred to as the high
seas.

o It is considered as “the common heritage of all mankind” and is beyond any national
jurisdiction. ," meaning it doesn’t belong to any single country.

o States can conduct activities in these areas as long as they are for peaceful purposes,
such as transit, marine science, and undersea exploration.

For resources:
 Living resources (like fish) are free for any country to catch, though the LOSC
encourages regional cooperation to help conserve fish populations.
 Non-living resources (like minerals) are regulated by the International Seabed
Authority (ISA), an international body based in Jamaica, which oversees and manages
mineral extraction projects in the Area.

Article87
Freedom of the high seas

1. The high seas are open to all countries, whether they have a coastline or not. This
freedom, as stated in this Convention and other international laws, allows:
o (a) Navigation freedom
o (b) Freedom to fly over the high seas
o (c) Freedom to lay submarine cables and pipelines (with specific conditions)
o (d) Freedom to build artificial islands and other installations (following
international law)
o (e) Freedom to fish (with certain rules)
o (f) Freedom to conduct scientific research (under specific regulations)
2. All countries must respect each other’s rights to use the high seas and consider the
rules set out in the Convention when engaging in activities in these areas.

Hot Pursuit (Article 111):

The doctrine of hot pursuit in international law recognizes the right of a State to pursue a
vessel belonging to a foreign State which has violated any law within its territorial
boundaries and jurisdiction.

1. Purpose of Hot Pursuit: Traditionally, hot pursuit was developed to let a coastal
state enforce its laws against vessels escaping into open seas, especially to counter
smuggling and piracy. It is an exception to the rule that vessels can freely navigate
the high seas.
2. Limitations: Hot pursuit doesn’t apply if the pursued vessel enters another country’s
territorial waters.
3. Codification in UNCLOS: The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
(UNCLOS) formally included this right in 1982, with specific requirements for a
legitimate pursuit. These were confirmed by the International Tribunal for the Law of
the Sea (ITLOS) in the M/V Saiga case, which ruled that each condition must be met
for the pursuit to be lawful.
4. Applicable Offenses: The right of hot pursuit applies to violations of a coastal state’s
laws within its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) or continental shelf, including safety
zones around offshore installations.
5. Where Pursuit Begins: Pursuit must start while the foreign ship is within the
territorial waters, internal waters, archipelagic waters, or contiguous zone of the
pursuing state.
 MISCELLANEOUS
Equidistance Principle

 Definition: The equidistance principle is a method for delimiting maritime boundaries

by drawing a line that is equidistant from the nearest points of the baselines of the
adjacent coastal states. This principle is often applied in situations where two states
have adjacent coasts.
 Application:
o Under this principle, the boundary line is determined by measuring the same
distance from the coastlines of both states.
o For example, if State A and State B are neighboring countries, the maritime
boundary would be drawn such that every point on the boundary line is the
same distance from the nearest points of each state's baseline.
 Legal Basis: The equidistance principle is recognized in international law,
particularly in Article 15 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
(UNCLOS), which provides for the delimitation of the territorial sea between states
with opposite or adjacent coasts.

Equitable Principle

 Definition: The equitable principle focuses on achieving a fair and just maritime
boundary between coastal states, taking into consideration various factors beyond
mere distance. This method aims to ensure that the interests of both states are fairly
represented in the delimitation process.
 Application:
o The equitable principle considers various geographical, historical, and socio-
economic factors that may affect the rights of coastal states.
o For instance, it may take into account the presence of islands, the length of
coastlines, population distribution, and any historical claims that might impact
the delimitation process.
 Legal Basis: The equitable principle is emphasized in international law to ensure that
the final delimitation is just and reasonable. It is often applied when the equidistance
line would result in significant disadvantages for one of the states or where there are
special circumstances that warrant a different approach.

Innocent passage

It is a concept in the law of the sea that allows a ship to pass through another country's
territorial waters as long as it doesn’t threaten the peace, security, or order of the coastal state.
According to UNCLOS Article 19, a passage is considered "innocent" if:
 1. It does not harm the peace, order, or security of the coastal state and follows
international laws.
2. A passage is no longer "innocent" if the ship engages in certain activities, such as:
o Using or threatening force,
o Practicing with weapons,
o Gathering sensitive information,
o Launching aircraft or military devices,
o Polluting or fishing,
o Carrying out research,
o Disrupting communication or facilities, or
o Doing anything unrelated to straightforward passage.

Innocent passage respects a coastal country's claim to its territorial waters, unlike freedom of
navigation, which challenges it. This law was established in 1958, affirmed in 1982, and is
recognized as customary international law.

Transit Passage:

Ships and aircraft can freely pass through international straits, moving continuously between
areas of open sea or exclusive economic zones (EEZs).

 Uninterrupted Passage: Coastal states cannot stop or suspend transit passage during
peacetime, even if a warship is involved in conflict with another country.
 Differences from Innocent Passage:
1. Both ships and aircraft are allowed.
2. Passage cannot be stopped by coastal states.
3. Submarines can remain submerged, unlike in innocent passage, where they
must surface.

CASE LAW
1. 2The “Enrica Lexie” Incident (Italy v India)

Incident:
On February 15, 2012, two Indian fishermen aboard St. Antony, off the Kerala coast, were
shot dead by Italian marines on the Italian ship Enrica Lexie. The marines, fearing piracy,
fired on the boat when it was 20.5 nautical miles from India, within India’s contiguous zone.
The Indian Coast Guard detained the Enrica Lexie, bringing it to Kochi. Italian marines
Massimiliano Latorre and Salvatore Girone were charged under Indian law, including
murder.

Jurisdiction Dispute:
Italy argued that the incident happened outside India's territorial waters and cited UNCLOS
(specifically Articles 97 and 92), asserting that only the flag state (Italy) has jurisdiction in
such cases. India claimed jurisdiction based on domestic law, which allows prosecuting
foreigners for crimes in its EEZ. The case went to the Supreme Court of India, which ruled
that India has jurisdiction over its 200-mile EEZ but that the Indian government (not the
Kerala state government) should handle the case.

International Arbitration:
Unresolved, Italy approached the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS),
where it continued to challenge India's jurisdiction. In 2015, ITLOS requested both countries
to suspend further legal action and negotiate a resolution. As relations strained, Kerala and
Tamil Nadu compensated the victims’ families, and Italy paid additional compensation.
During this time, diplomatic ties between India and Italy soured.

Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) Ruling:

In 2015, Italy took the case to the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) at The Hague,
which reviewed the matter over several years. In 2020, the PCA delivered a decision that
favored Italy’s claim. The PCA ruled that Italy had jurisdiction over the marines, citing their
immunity under international law as military personnel. However, the PCA also directed Italy
to compensate India for the loss of life and harm suffered by the victims’ families.

This decision effectively settled the dispute: Italy paid compensation to India, and the
marines were allowed to return to Italy. The PCA ruling acknowledged Italy’s responsibility
to provide compensation but respected the marines' immunity, concluding the legal and
diplomatic dispute between the two countries.

2. Bay of Bengal Maritime Boundary Arbitration between

Bangladesh and India

Overview of the Arbitration Award

 On July 7, 2014, an Arbitral Tribunal ruled on the maritime boundaries in the Bay of
Bengal between Bangladesh and India.
 Bangladesh was awarded approximately 106,613 km², while India received 300,220
km² from a total area of 406,833 km².
 The decision clarified the maritime entitlements for both countries.

Creation of a Grey Area

 Similar to a previous case involving Bangladesh and Myanmar, the arbitration

resulted in a small "grey area" with overlapping maritime claims involving
Bangladesh, India, and Myanmar (which did not participate in the arbitration).
 While the ruling resolved major uncertainties, it also introduced new complexities in
the grey area.
Encouragement for Cooperation

 The Tribunal encouraged Bangladesh and India to work together regarding their rights
in the grey area, referencing successful precedents where states shared maritime rights
to find beneficial solutions.

Background of the Case

 Bangladesh initiated arbitration in October 2009, seeking to define the land boundary
and delimit territorial sea, exclusive economic zones (EEZ), and continental shelves
due to overlapping claims.
 Both countries are parties to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
(UNCLOS), which governs maritime boundary delimitations.

Tribunal's Decisions

Territorial Sea Delimitation:

the tribunal delimited the territorial sea between the two states based on Article 15 of
UNCLOS, using a modified equidistance line to account for the specific location of the land
boundary terminus. The tribunal referenced the 1947 Radcliffe Award to establish the
terminus along the Haribhanga River.

EEZ and Continental Shelf Delimitation:

 The Tribunal deliberated on how to fairly delimit the EEZ and continental shelf, with
India favoring the equidistance/relevant circumstances method, while Bangladesh
preferred the angle-bisector method due to the Bay's unique geography.
 The Tribunal concluded that the equidistance/relevant circumstances method was
generally preferable and adjusted the line slightly to account for the Bay's concave
shape, ensuring the outcome was not disproportionate.

The Grey Area Explained

 The ruling created a "grey area" where Bangladesh has a potential claim to the
continental shelf but not an EEZ, while India has claims to both.
 The Tribunal urged both nations to respect each other's rights under the Convention
and explore further agreements for cooperation.

Concurring and Dissenting Opinion of Dr. P. S. Rao

 Dr. P. S. Rao, appointed by India, issued a separate opinion agreeing that the
equidistance method was preferable but objecting to the way the tribunal adjusted the
equidistance line and to the creation of the “grey area.” Dr. Rao believed the
adjustments were unwarranted and introduced unnecessary complications.
  Overall, this arbitration served as an example of peaceful resolution in maritime
boundary disputes, providing clarity for both countries and promoting cooperative
governance.

3. SOUTH CHINA SEA ARBITRATION CASE

background

 Parties Involved: The case was initiated by the Philippines against China regarding
territorial disputes in the South China Sea.
 Context of Dispute: The South China Sea is a vital area for trade and fishing, and
both countries have overlapping claims. China asserts its rights over a large portion of
this sea, particularly the Scarborough Shoal, through a historical claim known as the
"nine-dash line."
 International Proceedings: In 2013, the Philippines filed a case with the Permanent
Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague, seeking a legal resolution to the disputes
based on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

2. Issues

 China’s Historical Claims: China argued that its historical rights over the South
China Sea, as shown by the nine-dash line, give it control over vast maritime areas,
regardless of international law.
 Legal Rights of the Philippines: The Philippines contested this claim and sought a
ruling on several key issues, including its rights to fish in the waters surrounding
Scarborough Shoal and other areas in the Spratly Islands.
 Maritime Entitlements: The case also examined the legal status of various islands
and reefs in the South China Sea to determine whether they could generate exclusive
economic zones (EEZs) for either country.

3. Findings (ruling 2016)

 Rejection of China’s Claims: The tribunal ruled that China’s claims based on the
nine-dash line have no legal foundation under UNCLOS. The historical rights claim
does not confer rights to resources in the waters enclosed by the line.
 Assessment of Maritime Features: The tribunal concluded that many features
claimed by China in the Spratly Islands do not qualify as islands under international
law, meaning they cannot generate an EEZ. This limits China’s ability to claim
extensive maritime rights.
 Philippines’ Fishing Rights: The tribunal found that the Philippines has traditional
fishing rights in the Scarborough Shoal, which China cannot interfere with. This
decision affirmed the Philippines' sovereign rights to its maritime areas.
  Implications for International Law: The ruling reinforced the importance of
UNCLOS as the legal framework for resolving maritime disputes and set a precedent
for how similar cases may be handled in the future.

China's response
 China rejected the ruling, calling it "null and void". China has continued to assert its
territorial sovereignty and maritime rights in the area. China has also stated that it
respects freedom of navigation in the South China Sea, but has used water cannons,
dangerous maneuvers, and other tactics to interfere with Philippine vessels.

Bodies established under the United Nations Convention on the

Law of the Sea
1. International Seabed Authority (ISA)

 Establishment and Purpose:

Formed under the 1982 UNCLOS and the 1994 Agreement.
Regulates mineral-resource activities in the international seabed area ("the Area") for the
benefit of mankind.

It aims to ensure that the exploration and exploitation of these resources are conducted for the
benefit of all humankind.

• Common Heritage: The Area's resources are considered the common heritage of mankind.

• Scope: Covers approximately 54% of the world’s oceans.

• Environmental Mandate: Ensures protection of the marine environment from harmful

effects of deep-seabed activities.

• Membership: All States Parties to UNCLOS are automatically members; as of May 1,

2020, there are 168 members, including 167 states and the EU.

Functions: It issues exploration licenses for seabed mining and oversees environmental
sustainability measures.

The ISA also collects fees and royalties from mining operations to support developing
countries and marine research.

It ensures that mining operations are environmentally sustainable

 Governance Structure: The ISA has a Council, which is the main decision-making body,
and an Assembly, where all member states have a voice. It also has a secretariat to support its
activities.

2. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS)

 Purpose: ITLOS is an independent judicial body that resolves disputes arising from
UNCLOS, ensuring adherence to international maritime law.
 Functions: The Tribunal adjudicates cases related to maritime boundaries, fishing
rights, and marine conservation. It can also issue provisional measures to protect
rights during disputes and provide advisory opinions on legal questions.
 Composition: Made up of 21 judges elected by UNCLOS parties, ITLOS operates
under a set of procedural rules ensuring fairness and transparency.
Chambers: The Tribunal has established various chambers to deal with specific types
of cases, including:
 Chamber of Summary Procedure
 Chamber for Fisheries Disputes
 Chamber for Marine Environment Disputes
 Chamber for Maritime Delimitation Disputes
It can also create special chambers upon request.
Mandatory Jurisdiction: The Tribunal’s jurisdiction is mandatory for issues like the
prompt release of vessels and crews and provisional measures during arbitration,
unless the parties agree otherwise.
Advisory Opinions: The Seabed Disputes Chamber can provide advisory opinions on
legal questions related to the International Seabed Authority. ITLOS can also offer
advisory opinions under relevant international agreements connected to the
Convention.
3. Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS)
 Purpose: The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) helps
implement the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea by establishing the
outer limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles from the baselines of a
coastal state.
 Role: The CLCS provides recommendations to coastal states on how to define these
limits.
 Functions: It reviews submissions from coastal states about their continental shelf
limits, assessing scientific data and making non-binding recommendations to help
states establish their legal boundaries for resource rights.
 Composition: Composed of experts in relevant scientific fields, the CLCS focuses on
technical assessments of submissions.