SEABED COUNCIL CONTINUES WORK ON NODULE MINING CODE; DISCUSSES EMERGENCY ORDERS, CONFIDENTIALITY OF DATA
Press Release
SEA/1625
SEABED COUNCIL CONTINUES WORK ON NODULE MINING CODE; DISCUSSES EMERGENCY ORDERS, CONFIDENTIALITY OF DATA
19990812(Received from the International Seabed Authority.)
KINGSTON, 11 August -- The Council of the International Seabed Authority, meeting in Kingston this morning, continued its consideration of the Mining Code governing exploration for polymetallic nodules in the international seabed area.
The discussion concentrated on two topics -- emergency orders which the Council might issue in response to a threat of "serious harm to the marine environment" arising from activities of seabed contractors, and the confidentiality of proprietary and commercially sensitive data and information provided by contractors to the Authority.
The Council, meeting in informal session, has now completed its first reading of all 33 regulations in the draft code except the first, which defines the use of terms. Following a formal meeting this afternoon the body will return to informal deliberations on the annexes to the regulations. It may also take up a proposal by one delegation for a new regulation that would specifically address "notice and general procedures", specifying the manner in which the Authority and seabed contractors would formally communicate with one another.
In the resumed discussion of regulation 30 on emergency orders, some delegations felt that the concept of "preventing" harm to the marine environment was out of place in the context of measures to be taken after an environmental incident. Some members thought the term "serious harm" needed to be more precisely defined, and others wanted the regulation to relate to any harm to the marine environment. Another delegation saw a serious gap in the regulation on the grounds that it did not deal with cases of imminent danger and was therefore not responsive to article 145 of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, concerned with protection of the marine environment in relation to the international seabed area.
One delegation suggested adding a paragraph that would allow contractors to apply for lifting of emergency orders issued by the Council. The contractor would have to provide evidence and reasons why the orders should be lifted and the Council would be required to respond within 90 days. Another member raised the question of financing of repairs to the environment in the - 2 - Press Release SEA/1625 12 August 1999
event that the contractor responsible for an accident should declare bankruptcy. He recalled a suggestion made at last year's session of the Authority to establish a special fund to deal with such cases.
Some delegations felt that the regulation reflected the interests of some groups, contractors and coastal States more than others, and called for a general clause to protect the rights of all States in accordance with international law.
During the discussion of regulation 31, dealing with confidentiality, several delegations observed that the principle of confidentiality should not be invoked as a pretext to limit the sharing of information which the Authority needed to comply with its mandate of monitoring seabed-mining activities. They stressed that protection of the environment took precedence over issues of confidentiality.
There was a call for a specific time limit to be established following cessation of a contract or the relinquishment of a seabed area to the Authority, after which confidential data could be made available. However, one delegation disagreed with this suggestion, stating that, once disclosed, the confidential information would lose all value. It was suggested that there should be clear definitions of the type of data that should be considered confidential and of the kinds of information that could be made available to the Authority.
One delegation suggested the addition of a new regulation, which could be entitled "Notice and General Procedures". This deals with everyday procedures relating to communications and correspondence between the Authority and prospectors, applicants or contractors, which the member felt were not adequately treated in the regulations. The topic is covered in section 25 of annex 4 of the mining code, but the sponsor thought it should be brought into the main body of the regulations.
No comments were offered on regulation 32, a brief clause stating that disputes over the application of the regulations would be settled in accordance with the settlement procedures in the Law of the Sea Convention.
The last regulation in the draft code, numbered 33, specifies that if a prospector of contractor finds resources other than polymetallic nodules, their exploration and exploitation would be subject to the Authority's rules, regulations and procedures. Some delegations argued that the regulation should oblige prospectors and contractors to notify the Authority of discoveries. Others suggested that contractors be allowed first option to mine their discoveries. One delegation suggested that the regulation was neither necessary nor appropriate.
* *** *