Pub Date : 2023-06-16DOI: 10.1163/24519391-08010007
N. H. Thao
The South China Sea disputes are becoming increasingly tense with more and more countries expressing their views on legal issues and actions of claimant Statess in the South China Sea. In December 2019, Malaysia deposited a partial submission to the United Nations Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf to establish the limits of its extended continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles in the northern part of the South China Sea. The submission sparked a new legal battle of diplomatic notes with the participation of South China Sea coastal States which can also be regarded as claimant States in the contet of the South China Sea disputes (Brunei, China, Malaysia, the Philippines and Viet Nam) as well as non-claimant States (Australia, France, Germany, Indonesia, Japan, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States). Following the article “South China Sea: New Battle of the Diplomatic Notes among claimants in 2019–2021” published in the Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy 6 (2021), this paper provides an analysis of the exchange of diplomatic notes between China and non-claimant States with the aim of understanding the impact of these exchanges on the prospect for the peaceful settlement of the maritime disputes in the South China Sea.
{"title":"South China Sea: Battle of the Diplomatic Notes among China and Non-Claimant States","authors":"N. H. Thao","doi":"10.1163/24519391-08010007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24519391-08010007","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The South China Sea disputes are becoming increasingly tense with more and more countries expressing their views on legal issues and actions of claimant Statess in the South China Sea. In December 2019, Malaysia deposited a partial submission to the United Nations Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf to establish the limits of its extended continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles in the northern part of the South China Sea. The submission sparked a new legal battle of diplomatic notes with the participation of South China Sea coastal States which can also be regarded as claimant States in the contet of the South China Sea disputes (Brunei, China, Malaysia, the Philippines and Viet Nam) as well as non-claimant States (Australia, France, Germany, Indonesia, Japan, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States). Following the article “South China Sea: New Battle of the Diplomatic Notes among claimants in 2019–2021” published in the Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy 6 (2021), this paper provides an analysis of the exchange of diplomatic notes between China and non-claimant States with the aim of understanding the impact of these exchanges on the prospect for the peaceful settlement of the maritime disputes in the South China Sea.","PeriodicalId":29867,"journal":{"name":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47604266","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-16DOI: 10.1163/24519391-08010009
J.J.P. Smith
Abstract With the question of sovereignty over Hans Island settled between Canada and Denmark, all territorial claims among Arctic states have been resolved. The 2022 agreement between the two states is discussed in the context of their cooperation in oceans matters, including a contemporaneous minor adjustment of a 1972 seabed boundary and coordinated extended continental shelf claims. The provision for the access of indigenous Inuit people to Hans Island is considered. The 2022 agreement as an exemplar of acting in mutual interest toward resolving a maritime territorial dispute is reviewed.
{"title":"Canada","authors":"J.J.P. Smith","doi":"10.1163/24519391-08010009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24519391-08010009","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract With the question of sovereignty over Hans Island settled between Canada and Denmark, all territorial claims among Arctic states have been resolved. The 2022 agreement between the two states is discussed in the context of their cooperation in oceans matters, including a contemporaneous minor adjustment of a 1972 seabed boundary and coordinated extended continental shelf claims. The provision for the access of indigenous Inuit people to Hans Island is considered. The 2022 agreement as an exemplar of acting in mutual interest toward resolving a maritime territorial dispute is reviewed.","PeriodicalId":29867,"journal":{"name":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy","volume":"103 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135622738","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-16DOI: 10.1163/24519391-08010005
J. Espenilla
For close to two decades, wto member countries have discussed the possibility of disciplining the practice of subsidizing fishing activities. Concrete progress has been made as there is now a consensus on eliminating certain forms of fisheries subsidies that contribute towards overcapacity, overfishing and illegal unreported and unregulated fishing. In June 2022, at the end of 12th Ministerial Conference in Geneva, Switzerland, the Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies (afs) was finally adopted. Against this backdrop, this paper will attempt to investigate the role that the afs might play in arresting the collapse of global fish stocks. Part i provides a brief background on the state of global fisheries and the role of subsidies in their depletion. Part ii discusses the key features of and contentious issues in the afs. Finally, Part iii considers the potential implications of the afs on disputed waters such as the South China Sea.
{"title":"A New wto Protocol on Fisheries Subsidies: Potential Implications for the South China Sea Disputes","authors":"J. Espenilla","doi":"10.1163/24519391-08010005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24519391-08010005","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000For close to two decades, wto member countries have discussed the possibility of disciplining the practice of subsidizing fishing activities. Concrete progress has been made as there is now a consensus on eliminating certain forms of fisheries subsidies that contribute towards overcapacity, overfishing and illegal unreported and unregulated fishing. In June 2022, at the end of 12th Ministerial Conference in Geneva, Switzerland, the Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies (afs) was finally adopted. Against this backdrop, this paper will attempt to investigate the role that the afs might play in arresting the collapse of global fish stocks. Part i provides a brief background on the state of global fisheries and the role of subsidies in their depletion. Part ii discusses the key features of and contentious issues in the afs. Finally, Part iii considers the potential implications of the afs on disputed waters such as the South China Sea.","PeriodicalId":29867,"journal":{"name":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45319928","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-16DOI: 10.1163/24519391-07020011
Keyuan Zou, Lei Zhang
China has pledged to achieve carbon peaking by 2030 and carbon neutrality by 2060. To achieve these goals, a significant reduction in carbon dioxide (co2) emissions is required and thus ocean-based carbon dioxide removal (cdr) technologies are needed. This article explores the legal issues of two ocean cdr approaches, i.e. offshore carbon dioxide storage (ccs) and seaweed cultivation under the legal regimes for both climate change and oceans. Although there are no specific Chinese laws and regulations governing the offshore ccs or seaweed cultivation for carbon removal in place, some relevant existing environmental and other laws and regulations are applicable to such activities.
{"title":"Removing Carbon Dioxide through Offshore ccs and Seaweed Cultivation in China: A Legal Perspective","authors":"Keyuan Zou, Lei Zhang","doi":"10.1163/24519391-07020011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24519391-07020011","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000China has pledged to achieve carbon peaking by 2030 and carbon neutrality by 2060. To achieve these goals, a significant reduction in carbon dioxide (co2) emissions is required and thus ocean-based carbon dioxide removal (cdr) technologies are needed. This article explores the legal issues of two ocean cdr approaches, i.e. offshore carbon dioxide storage (ccs) and seaweed cultivation under the legal regimes for both climate change and oceans. Although there are no specific Chinese laws and regulations governing the offshore ccs or seaweed cultivation for carbon removal in place, some relevant existing environmental and other laws and regulations are applicable to such activities.","PeriodicalId":29867,"journal":{"name":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42670688","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-16DOI: 10.1163/24519391-07020004
M. Seta
Asia-Pacific States have recourse to the dispute settlement system provided in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (unclos) and rely on the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (clcs) to delineate the extended continental shelf. unclos tribunals are responsible for delimitating maritime zones, and the clcs for delineating the outer limits of the continental shelf. However, the work of the clcs has been suspended at times, owing to other States’ objections. This article investigates the 2019 Malaysian submission to the clcs by reviewing the precedents and existing literature. This submission has become a contentious issue, because of diplomatic note verbales submitted by, among others, China. This article argues that the clcs should handle the Malaysian submission on the premise that the Malaysia–China dispute over the so-called “nine-dash line” can be regarded as resolved, based on a 2016 Arbitral Tribunal decision under Annex vii.
{"title":"The Effect of the Judicial Decision of unclos Tribunals on the clcs Procedure: The Case of the South China Sea Dispute","authors":"M. Seta","doi":"10.1163/24519391-07020004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24519391-07020004","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Asia-Pacific States have recourse to the dispute settlement system provided in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (unclos) and rely on the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (clcs) to delineate the extended continental shelf. unclos tribunals are responsible for delimitating maritime zones, and the clcs for delineating the outer limits of the continental shelf. However, the work of the clcs has been suspended at times, owing to other States’ objections. This article investigates the 2019 Malaysian submission to the clcs by reviewing the precedents and existing literature. This submission has become a contentious issue, because of diplomatic note verbales submitted by, among others, China. This article argues that the clcs should handle the Malaysian submission on the premise that the Malaysia–China dispute over the so-called “nine-dash line” can be regarded as resolved, based on a 2016 Arbitral Tribunal decision under Annex vii.","PeriodicalId":29867,"journal":{"name":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49161042","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-16DOI: 10.1163/24519391-07020010
C. Schofield, R. Poll
This article examines the straight baseline claims that have been made by coastal States in the Asia-Pacific region in light of the International Court of Justice’s ruling regarding Nicaragua’s straight baselines in the Caribbean Sea. Uncertainties over the relevant provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea are discussed before straight baseline claims made in the Asia-Pacific region are outlined with particular note made of Malaysia’s June 2022 clarification of its baselines claims through publication of the geographical coordinates of the base points concerned. The findings of the International Court of Justice concerning Nicaragua’s straight baselines are then discussed. This leads to the conclusion that the majority of State practice relating to straight baselines in the Asia-Pacific region would be deemed as contrary to customary international law were they to be assessed against the standard set by the Court in that case.
{"title":"Claims to Straight Baselines in the Asia-Pacific: Contrary to Customary International Law?","authors":"C. Schofield, R. Poll","doi":"10.1163/24519391-07020010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24519391-07020010","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the straight baseline claims that have been made by coastal States in the Asia-Pacific region in light of the International Court of Justice’s ruling regarding Nicaragua’s straight baselines in the Caribbean Sea. Uncertainties over the relevant provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea are discussed before straight baseline claims made in the Asia-Pacific region are outlined with particular note made of Malaysia’s June 2022 clarification of its baselines claims through publication of the geographical coordinates of the base points concerned. The findings of the International Court of Justice concerning Nicaragua’s straight baselines are then discussed. This leads to the conclusion that the majority of State practice relating to straight baselines in the Asia-Pacific region would be deemed as contrary to customary international law were they to be assessed against the standard set by the Court in that case.","PeriodicalId":29867,"journal":{"name":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44561388","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-16DOI: 10.1163/24519391-07020003
Suksoo Kim
As the expiration date of the Japan-Korea joint development of the continental shelf in the East China Sea comes closer, the joint development agreement is becoming a hot issue between Korea and Japan. The Joint Development Zone (jdz), established under the joint development agreement, is set to expire in 2028 unless the two countries agree otherwise. Despite not having any commercially significant discovery of oil and gas in the jdz, it has served as a provisional arrangement to manage peacefully the disputed continental shelf in the tri-junction where China also claims jurisdiction. Given its significant role in the peaceful management of overlapping marine resources and jurisdiction claims over decades, the two countries need to engage in negotiations to come up with a solution to the pending issues concerning the development of the jdz. The jdz area has the potential to become a flashpoint of conflicts in the strained relations between the two countries, if the agreement expires without any provisional or permanent arrangements.
{"title":"The Uncertain Status of the Korea-Japan Joint Development Agreement of the Continental Shelf and Its Prospects","authors":"Suksoo Kim","doi":"10.1163/24519391-07020003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24519391-07020003","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000As the expiration date of the Japan-Korea joint development of the continental shelf in the East China Sea comes closer, the joint development agreement is becoming a hot issue between Korea and Japan. The Joint Development Zone (jdz), established under the joint development agreement, is set to expire in 2028 unless the two countries agree otherwise. Despite not having any commercially significant discovery of oil and gas in the jdz, it has served as a provisional arrangement to manage peacefully the disputed continental shelf in the tri-junction where China also claims jurisdiction. Given its significant role in the peaceful management of overlapping marine resources and jurisdiction claims over decades, the two countries need to engage in negotiations to come up with a solution to the pending issues concerning the development of the jdz. The jdz area has the potential to become a flashpoint of conflicts in the strained relations between the two countries, if the agreement expires without any provisional or permanent arrangements.","PeriodicalId":29867,"journal":{"name":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44787058","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-16DOI: 10.1163/24519391-07020005
Arron N. Honniball, A. R. Darmawan
Article 51 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (unclos) governs the legitimate activities of an immediately adjacent neighbouring state within certain areas of an archipelagic state’s archipelagic waters, utilising open-textured terms and subsequent bilateral agreements to balance states’ interests. In the context of both the signing of the 2022 Expanded Framework Agreements between Indonesia and Singapore and the 40-year anniversary of the adoption of unclos, this article examines the interpretation and application of Article 51 in respect of military training activities. This analysis demonstrates that the purposively ambiguous wording of the exceptional ‘Singapore Clause’ is best understood in the light of Singaporean and Indonesian negotiation crafting, as well as their subsequent implementation efforts (1995–2022). On military training activities, the states have consistently sought to conclude bilateral arrangements which align with the object and purposes of an Article 51 bilateral agreement in all but name.
{"title":"Article 51 of unclos at 40: Military Training as Other Legitimate Activities?","authors":"Arron N. Honniball, A. R. Darmawan","doi":"10.1163/24519391-07020005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24519391-07020005","url":null,"abstract":"Article 51 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (unclos) governs the legitimate activities of an immediately adjacent neighbouring state within certain areas of an archipelagic state’s archipelagic waters, utilising open-textured terms and subsequent bilateral agreements to balance states’ interests. In the context of both the signing of the 2022 Expanded Framework Agreements between Indonesia and Singapore and the 40-year anniversary of the adoption of unclos, this article examines the interpretation and application of Article 51 in respect of military training activities. This analysis demonstrates that the purposively ambiguous wording of the exceptional ‘Singapore Clause’ is best understood in the light of Singaporean and Indonesian negotiation crafting, as well as their subsequent implementation efforts (1995–2022). On military training activities, the states have consistently sought to conclude bilateral arrangements which align with the object and purposes of an Article 51 bilateral agreement in all but name.","PeriodicalId":29867,"journal":{"name":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47740291","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-16DOI: 10.1163/24519391-07020002
Youngho Seo
This article explores the feasibility of creating a regime for the benefit of managing and resolving the South China Sea dispute in accordance with an analysis of a strand of thought in political science (institutional liberalism). The South China Sea is closer to a non-regime situation; however, the relevant circumstance of the region is ripe enough to discuss regime creation. This article shows how regime creation is feasible and beneficial to the claimants, not least China (the most important player), as opposed to the conventional wisdom among Chinese elites regarding the danger of the internationalization of the dispute. The establishment of a soft-law maritime regime (the “South China Sea Council”) and its operational particularity are suggested with reference to the Arctic Council.
{"title":"Regime Creation for the South China Sea Dispute: the Feasibility of the Creation of the South China Sea Council","authors":"Youngho Seo","doi":"10.1163/24519391-07020002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24519391-07020002","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This article explores the feasibility of creating a regime for the benefit of managing and resolving the South China Sea dispute in accordance with an analysis of a strand of thought in political science (institutional liberalism). The South China Sea is closer to a non-regime situation; however, the relevant circumstance of the region is ripe enough to discuss regime creation. This article shows how regime creation is feasible and beneficial to the claimants, not least China (the most important player), as opposed to the conventional wisdom among Chinese elites regarding the danger of the internationalization of the dispute. The establishment of a soft-law maritime regime (the “South China Sea Council”) and its operational particularity are suggested with reference to the Arctic Council.","PeriodicalId":29867,"journal":{"name":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48354370","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-16DOI: 10.1163/24519391-07020006
Pham Ngoc Minh Trang
40 years after the adoption of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (unclos), the regime related to the navigation of ships in archipelagic waters has remained underdeveloped. It is due to the paucity of practices of archipelagic states establishing archipelagic sea lanes (asl s) as well as adopting national laws and regulations concerning such passage. In the Southeast Asian region, Indonesia and the Philippines are the two archipelagic states, and they actively contributed in the development of the archipelagic regime during the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea. Nonetheless, they have not fully designated a system of asl s. This situation led to several contentious incidents at sea, particularly related to the passage of warships in archipelagic waters, between the two countries and other user states. This article will analyse the practices of Indonesia and the Philippines in establishing asl s and their concomitant consequences. Particularly, it focuses on the attempt to harmonize the domestic legal systems of these two countries with international rules and regulations prescribed in unclos, and their subsequent practices at the International Maritime Organization (imo). This article is a reflection of the archipelagic states regime of unclos after 40 years of adoption.
{"title":"Balancing Navigational Rights of Ships and Maritime Security of Coastal States: The Case of Designating Archipelagic Sea Lanes of Indonesia and the Philippines","authors":"Pham Ngoc Minh Trang","doi":"10.1163/24519391-07020006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24519391-07020006","url":null,"abstract":"\u000040 years after the adoption of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (unclos), the regime related to the navigation of ships in archipelagic waters has remained underdeveloped. It is due to the paucity of practices of archipelagic states establishing archipelagic sea lanes (asl s) as well as adopting national laws and regulations concerning such passage.\u0000In the Southeast Asian region, Indonesia and the Philippines are the two archipelagic states, and they actively contributed in the development of the archipelagic regime during the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea. Nonetheless, they have not fully designated a system of asl s. This situation led to several contentious incidents at sea, particularly related to the passage of warships in archipelagic waters, between the two countries and other user states.\u0000This article will analyse the practices of Indonesia and the Philippines in establishing asl s and their concomitant consequences. Particularly, it focuses on the attempt to harmonize the domestic legal systems of these two countries with international rules and regulations prescribed in unclos, and their subsequent practices at the International Maritime Organization (imo). This article is a reflection of the archipelagic states regime of unclos after 40 years of adoption.","PeriodicalId":29867,"journal":{"name":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45567651","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：