Prolazak tjesnacima na primjeru rusko-ukrajinskih odnosa u Azovskom moru

Boren Petrinec, Leon Žganec-Brajša
{"title":"Prolazak tjesnacima na primjeru rusko-ukrajinskih odnosa u Azovskom moru","authors":"Boren Petrinec, Leon Žganec-Brajša","doi":"10.21857/94kl4czr1m","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea was, inter alia , an attempt to create an integral system of rules governing passage through straits. Never-theless, straits that are entryways into pluri-state bays remain a controversial issue. An interesting example of this situation is the Kerch Strait leading into the Sea of Azov. These areas received more attention from the international community after 25 Novem-ber 2018, when three Ukrainian vessels were prevented from passing through the Kerch Strait by the authorities of the Russian Federation. The Sea of Azov is wide enough to accommodate maritime areas in which freedom of navigation exists. However, in 2003 its coastal states, the Russian Federation and Ukraine, concluded the Agreement on Coope-ration on the Use of the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait. In this Agreement, the coastal states proclaimed that the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait form part of their internal waters, citing historical reasons for doing so. Regulation concerning navigation rights contained in the Agreement is stricter than the rules governing transit passage, which would be applicable as general law. This paper addresses the question of the admissibility of applying the 2003 Agreement to its target maritime areas. Some aspects of the rights and duties of ships in passage according to the regimes of both the 2003 Agreement and transit passage contained in the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention are also considered. The reason for this examination is that both the Russian Federation and Ukraine claim that the other side failed to comply with its duties. Finally, conclusions are drawn as to which regime seems to be applicable.","PeriodicalId":32324,"journal":{"name":"Poredbeno Pomorsko Pravo","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Poredbeno Pomorsko Pravo","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21857/94kl4czr1m","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea was, inter alia , an attempt to create an integral system of rules governing passage through straits. Never-theless, straits that are entryways into pluri-state bays remain a controversial issue. An interesting example of this situation is the Kerch Strait leading into the Sea of Azov. These areas received more attention from the international community after 25 Novem-ber 2018, when three Ukrainian vessels were prevented from passing through the Kerch Strait by the authorities of the Russian Federation. The Sea of Azov is wide enough to accommodate maritime areas in which freedom of navigation exists. However, in 2003 its coastal states, the Russian Federation and Ukraine, concluded the Agreement on Coope-ration on the Use of the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait. In this Agreement, the coastal states proclaimed that the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait form part of their internal waters, citing historical reasons for doing so. Regulation concerning navigation rights contained in the Agreement is stricter than the rules governing transit passage, which would be applicable as general law. This paper addresses the question of the admissibility of applying the 2003 Agreement to its target maritime areas. Some aspects of the rights and duties of ships in passage according to the regimes of both the 2003 Agreement and transit passage contained in the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention are also considered. The reason for this examination is that both the Russian Federation and Ukraine claim that the other side failed to comply with its duties. Finally, conclusions are drawn as to which regime seems to be applicable.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
塞尔维亚的旅行,例如俄罗斯和乌克兰在亚速尔海的关系
1982年的《联合国海洋法公约》,除其他外,是建立一个管理海峡通行的完整规则体系的一种尝试。然而,作为多国家海湾入口的海峡仍然是一个有争议的问题。这种情况的一个有趣的例子是通往亚速海的刻赤海峡。2018年11月25日,三艘乌克兰船只被俄罗斯联邦当局阻止通过刻赤海峡后,这些地区受到了国际社会的更多关注。亚速海足够宽,可以容纳有航行自由的海域。然而,在2003年,其沿海国家,俄罗斯联邦和乌克兰,签署了关于亚速海和刻赤海峡使用合作协议。在该协定中,沿海国宣布亚速海和刻赤海峡是其内水的一部分,理由是历史原因。《协定》中关于航行权的规定比过境通行规则更为严格,后者可作为一般法律适用。本文探讨了2003年协定适用于其目标海域的可受理性问题。根据2003年《协定》和1982年《海洋法公约》所载过境通行制度,还审议了船舶通行的权利和义务的某些方面。进行这种审查的原因是,俄罗斯联邦和乌克兰都声称对方没有履行其义务。最后,得出结论,哪种制度似乎是适用的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Draft Convention on the Judicial Sale of Ships: A Chance for the Revolutionary Use of the Internet for Notification and Other Issues The Impact of CMA CGM Libra on the Allocation of Risk in a Maritime Adventure Carriage of Goods in Swiss Maritime Law Advantages and Challenges of Intellectual Property Rights Related to the Shipbuilding Process Utvrđivanje granice pomorskog dobra de lege lata i de lege ferenda
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1