The Great Tuna Boat Chase and Massacre case

1255 Words3 Pages

The Great Tuna Boat Chase and Massacre Case has Ecuador claiming that the United States is in violation of its 200-mile territorial sea. From it’s inception, Ecuador had accepted the customary three mile limit as the demarcation of its territorial waters. However, after 130 years, Juan Valdez achieved power in 1952. Under his regime, he proclaimed that the three mile boundary was never meant to be considered a fixed and unalterable boundary, and that historical practices as well as the natural features of the area justified a 200-mile territorial sea. Each Ecuadorian president since Valdez claimed this as well.

Under the UN 1982 treaty, a state’s territorial sea extends twelve nautical miles from the national coastline (Slomanson 305). Within this area, Ecuador exercises its sovereignty over these waters as if it were a landmass (Slomanson 305). All aspects of the sea are under its control, including the seabed and airspace. Furthermore, Ecuador is allowed to impose laws that regulate the territory and consume resources that lie inside this defined area. Within this territorial sea, Ecuador “must exercise its sovereign power in this adjacent strip of water” (Slomanson 305). Additionally, Ecuador is expected to chart this water and to provide warning of navigational hazards (Slomanson 305). However, Ecuador did not act upon this and was “lax in enforcing it”. In 1951, the International Court of Justice issued this statement in response to a ruling:

“To every State whose land territory is at any place washed by the sea, international law attaches a corresponding portion of maritime territory consisting of what the law calls territorial waters... No maritime States can refuse them. International law imposes upon a m...

... middle of paper ...

... laws governing the activities of foreign states in its EEZ. Ecuador’s blatant violation demonstrates their lack of respect for UN law. Donald Thomas was simply conducting his business to preserve his quality of life and his rights were infringed upon. To allow this case to go unresolved endangers the livelihood of many more fishermen. Ruling in favor of Ecuador would set a precedent that has far-reaching consequences: Exclusive Economic Zones are territorial waters. As a result, rights would be granted to States in their territorial waters that were not intended to be by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The violence exhibited by the Ecuadorian navy shows a lack of restraint parallel to the actions of rogue nations. The United States continues to insist that Ecuador did not meet the customary international standard in handling this situation.

Open Document