Law of the Sea Convention

2774 Words6 Pages

The merits of this choice is that equidistance, referred as the "natural line" by Antunes, is an objective tool which reflects the basis of the entitlement to the continental shelf . It is furthermore a method that convenes more than any other the advantages of convenience and certainty in its application and could therefore be used widely as long as not resulting in an

Conjunction of all rules under a unique scheme is a big achievement. No precise rule within LOSC in order to achieve best interests for states and absence of agreement on means

- Consistently applied by international judicial bodies and works for EEZ, territorial sea, continental shelf and SMB = reasonable predictability of international bodies delimitations.

- got around the difficulty of the sui generis character of each maritime boundary differences in legal basis and variability of circumstances. = best scheme available

- "add science and calculations" to the process =>

- Can be relied on by states when settling negotiation if they are willing to do so in good faith. Admittedly there could still be debate outside judicial bodies on what is an equitable result.

- Enough because it settled for one method rather than alternative methods which would have necessarily lead to controversy between states because one method always more favourable than the other.

Not taking into account minor differences to avoid conflict arising on them.

Is there enough guidance regarding maritime boundaries in international law?

1.

1.1. A convenient three step process with a starting and ending point that conciliate stability and flexibility build by international judicial bodies

Following the wide ratification and entry into force of the Law o...

... middle of paper ...

... hypothetical, could still have consequences. While judicial decisions are not subject to appeal, an agreement could still be asked to be renegotiated by one party. In such a situation, the two possible outcomes would be unsatisfying : either the parties will agree to renegotiate and it would hurt at least the permanent character of maritime boundaries ; or in the worst case, could it lead to political tensions, especially so if the boundaries have been agreed without any or little legal basis.

Consequently, it is not possible at the moment to state that one means of settling boundaries is best suited for all the different political situations. It is still possible that whereas negotiations could only ever work when states have close enough diplomatic ties because no mutual or unilateral concession can be made outside of a legal context without mutual trust.

Open Document