Suchergebnisse

This article looks at the role negotiations and adjudication have been playing in settling maritime boundaries between neighbouring States and the role international law plays in both processes. As regards the former issue, the complementarity of the two modes of dispute settlement is highlighted. A review of the mode of submission of delimitation disputes to the judiciary points out that unilateral submissions have increased significantly over time. The article considers the implications of that trend. The availability of compulsory dispute settlement may provide States with an effective mechanism to break the deadlock in negotiations with neighbouring States. International law plays a significant role in negotiations and adjudication. The article demonstrates that the application of the law by the judiciary continues to be characterised by inconsistencies and departures from the avowed general approach to delimitation, notwithstanding assertions to the contrary. Assessing the impact of international law on negotiations is much more difficult to gauge. However, as the article sets out, States in negotiating maritime boundaries are operating in the context of a detailed set of legal rules. This implies that political bargaining takes place in a legal framework that puts limits on what States can credibly claim.

While the international security dimensions of climate change have received an increasing amount of attention, one impact that has not been widely discussed is the role that sea level rise could play in rendering maritime boundaries around the globe uncertain. The argument of this article is that this confusion of maritime boundaries could have potentially significant consequences in creating inter-state disputes, possibly leading to conflicts and international instability. This article will outline how sea level rise will confuse maritime boundaries and how these maritime boundary shifts could lead to inter-state disputes and conflict.

Morsko razgraničenje u uvjetima poluzatvorenog mora poput Jadrana uvijek je složeno pitanje. Prvi bilateralni sporazum o granici na moru u Jadranskome moru postignut je već u prvoj etapi u povijesti morskoga razgraničenja, no nakon političkih promjena u početku 1990-ih i povećanja broja obalnih država, potencijalni sustav morskih granica postao je još složeniji nego dotad. U izlaganju se daje pregled razvitka sustava morskih granica, naglašavaju se postojeći granični sporovi te naposljetku vrednuju i mogućnosti rješenja spornih točaka, pod pretpostavkom da sređen sustav morskih granica pridonosi općoj regionalnoj stabilnosti. ; The delimitation of maritime boundaries in semi-closed seas such as Adriatic is always a complex issue. The first bilateral maritime boundary agreement in the Adriatic Sea was reached at an early stage in the history of maritime delimitation, but potential offshore boundary system became more complicated following political changes in the 1990's and increase in the number of coastal states. This paper provides an overview of the development of maritime boundary system in the Adriatic, highlights disputes and remaining problems and evaluates potential solutions to disputes, claiming that completion of maritime boundary system should enhance regional stability.

Maritime boundaries play an essential role in determining the state's sovereignty, rights to exploit natural resources, maintain security, and territorial integrity. However, maritime boundaries often overlap between states, which can amount to conflicts. Maritime areas whose boundaries have not been agreed between neighboring states are referred to as "undelimited maritime boundaries" (UMB). Indeed, Article 74 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982 has set out rules regarding UMB. However, conflicts still arise between states; for instance, the conflict related to law enforcement between Indonesia and Viet Nam in the South China Sea. This study aims to analyze law enforcement issues and the rights and obligations of states in UMB under international law. This study uses normative legal research which applies the method of legislative, conceptual, and analytical approaches. This study finds that states involved in UMB are prohibited from carrying out excessive law enforcement since it could trigger more conflicts and will hamper the ongoing final maritime delimitation negotiation process. In order to ensure zero conflicts during the negotiation process, this paper recommends that Indonesia should make every effort to enter into a comprehensive provisional arrangement about UMB with its neighboring states. Keywords: International Law, Law Enforcement, Undelimited Maritime Boundaries.

One of the most difficult areas for maritime boundary delimitation is the seas adjacent to Central East Asia. This area, which encompasses the South China Sea, the East China Sea, the Sea of Japan, and the Yellow Sea, is surrounded by the People's Republic of China, Taiwan (the Republic of China), Japan, North and South Korea, the Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Russia. Only a few of the maritime boundaries in the area have been settled, leaving most open to dispute. (See map 1, p. 726.) Efforts to settle the unresolved boundaries have not moved forward. Much has been written about the boundary disputes in this area, and efforts to resolve them have explored means other than delimitation.

On March 19, 2009, in Tirana has ended the negotiations and initialed the "Agreement between Greece and Albania on the delimitation of continental shelf and other maritime areas belonging, according to the International Law". This agreement was signed in Tirana, from the two respective Ministers of Foreign Affairs, on April 27, 2009. Since its introduction, the agreement states that "the maritime borders between Albania and Greece, will be determined on the basis of equity distance expressed by the medium line". Merits of the case would require study of the complete file of the agreement, including the texts of the agreement in three languages: English, Greek and English, as well as the maps of the agreement, which has so far has not been made public. Emphasize that Albania has ratified UNCLOS, on June 23, 2003, while Greece on July 21, 1995. This agreement was ratified by the Albanian parliament, but was unapproved by the Albanian Constitutional Court, arguing that conflicted with the Constitution of Albania and the UN Third Convention of the International Law of the Sea of the year 1982. The paper will address the importance of signing this agreement, in the context of historical, economic and geopolitical, as well as losses or profits caused by its unapproval. DOI:10.5901/ajis.2015.v4n3p143