SEABED COUNCIL ELECTS PRESIDENT AND COMMISSION MEMBER; DISCUSSES PROCEDURES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL EMERGENCIES
Press Release
SEA/1661
SEABED COUNCIL ELECTS PRESIDENT AND COMMISSION MEMBER; DISCUSSES PROCEDURES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL EMERGENCIES
20000322 biographical note(Received from the International Seabed Authority.)
KINGSTON, 22 March -- Meeting in Kingston this morning, the Council of the International Seabed Authority elected by acclamation Sakiusa S. Rabuka (Fiji) as its President for the 2000 session.
The 36-member Council also elected two vice-presidents and a new member to the Legal and Technical Commission. It then resumed its informal consultations on draft regulations on prospecting and exploration for polymetallic nodules in the international seabed area, opening discussion on emergency orders to deal with environmental incidents linked to seabed mining.
The new President of the Council was nominated by the Republic of Korea on behalf of the Asian Group. He succeeds Charles Manyang D'Awol (Sudan), who presided last year. Mr. Rabuka is Legal Adviser to the Fijian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and its representative at the current and previous sessions of the Authority. (A biographical note appears as Press Release SEA/1662.)
The two vice-presidents of the Council elected for this year's session are Poland, nominated by the Russian Federation for the Eastern European Group, and the Sudan, nominated by Nigeria for the African Group. Two more vice-presidents are to be proposed by regional groups later this week.
Nominated by Jamaica, International Law Professor Frida Maria Armas Pfirter, from Argentina, was elected to the Legal and Technical Commission, giving the Latin American and Caribbean Group a fourth seat on the expert body and increasing its membership to 23. Ms. Armas Pfirter is general coordinator on her country's National Commission on the Outer Limit of the Continental Shelf and professor of Public International Law and Political Science at the Catholic University of Argentina, Buenos Aires.
The Council had agreed last August to a proposal by that regional group that it could propose this year a candidate for the rest of the current term of office, without prejudice to future elections to the Commission or future decisions about the number of its members. Members serve in their personal capacity, normally for a five-year term. The current term of all members expires in 2001.
- 2 - Press Release SEA/1661 22 March 2000
Informal Consultations
The Council resumed its consideration of the draft mining code at its informal meeting this morning by taking up regulation 33, dealing with emergency orders. This is the second of four regulations in the environmental part of the nine-part draft (ISBA/5/C/4/Rev.1), which is being discussed in a second reading. The Council dealt yesterday afternoon, 21 March, with the first regulation (32) of this part, containing general provisions on protection and preservation of the marine environment.
Regulation 33 would authorize the Council to issue emergency orders in the case of an incident resulting from or caused by a contractor's activities in the international seabed area when such an incident "has caused, or is likely to cause, serious harm to the marine environment". The orders would have to be "reasonably necessary to prevent, contain and minimize serious harm to the marine environment" arising out of such activities. They could include a call for the suspension or adjustment of operations.
The regulation, based on provisions in the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, spells out procedures for dealing with such events. The first step, once the Authority's Secretary-General was advised of an incident, would be for him to notify the contractor and its sponsoring State or States, and to report to the Legal and Technical Commission. The Commission, meeting as soon as possible, would decide what measures to take, whereupon the Council might issue emergency orders, taking account of the Commission's recommendations and information from the contractor. Pending a Council decision, the Secretary- General could take immediate temporary measures with effect for no longer than 90 days or until the Council acted, whichever came first. If the contractor did not comply, the Council could take measures itself or through others acting on its behalf.
The first speaker opened the discussion with a suggestion to change the first part of the regulation to read: "When the Secretary-General is notified by a contractor or other source of an incident resulting from or caused by a contractor's activities in the Area ... ." This change, which adds the phrase "by a contractor or other source", was supported by most delegations taking part in the exchange of views.
Another suggestion was that the Secretary-General should notify other international organizations in the event of an environmental incident.
Much of the discussion addressed a comment by one speaker that the regulation was drafted "too timidly" and did not effectively address emergency situations. It was generally felt that emergencies needed urgent response and that the procedures outlined in the first paragraph were far too time-consuming. One suggestion winning wide support was that, instead of having to meet in person, the Council and the Legal and Technical Commission could conduct deliberations and make decisions though the use of contemporary means of
- 3 - Press Release SEA/1661 22 March 2000
communication such as electronic mail, as was the practice in several United Nations bodies.
In support of this proposal, another speaker suggested redrafting the regulation to avoid the explicit mention of meetings. In that way, the bodies could act in the most efficient manner available if the need arose.
One speaker wanted the role of the Secretary-General to be extended beyond the taking of immediate measures. He explained that his country had recently experienced unforeseen delayed effects of an environmental accident on its coastline. He, therefore, urged that the Secretary-General be called upon to follow the development of an environmental situation for an extended period of time.
The requirement that an incident must involve "serious harm" was of concern to one delegation, which felt that the phrase implied too high a threshold before emergency procedures could commence. It was suggested that the term "harmful effects" be substituted, in keeping with the wording in regulation 32.
The question of how long the temporary measures taken by the Secretary- General should remain in effect was briefly debated. While one speaker felt that the period should be reduced from the 90 days stipulated in the draft, several others felt that 90 days was a reasonable time frame; they pointed out that once the Council had made a decision on the environmental incident, the 90-day period would become irrelevant.
Some delegations were concerned that no mention was made of sanctions to be imposed on contractors who failed to comply with an emergency order. It was suggested that punitive measures should be determined, based on an incremental approach.
One speaker thought it too vague to provide that the Council might act through "arrangements with others" if a contractor did not comply. He wondered to what "others" the Council could reasonably delegate its powers.
The Council will meet again at 3 p.m. today to continue its informal discussions on this regulation.
* *** *