LAW OF SEA PARTIES ELECT NEW JUDGE FOR TRIBUNAL, DISCUSS CONTINENTAL SHELF DRAFT
Press Release SEA/1705 |
Meeting of States Parties
To Law of Sea Convention
57th Meeting (PM)
LAW OF SEA PARTIES ELECT NEW JUDGE FOR TRIBUNAL,
DISCUSS CONTINENTAL SHELF DRAFT
The Meeting of States parties to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea this afternoon elected Guangjian Xu (China) to fill a vacancy on the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.
Guangjian Xu was the only candidate, obtaining 92 votes out of 94 ballots cast with 1 invalid ballot and 1 abstention. The required majority was 62 votes. Judge Guangjian will complete the remainder of his predecessor’s six-year term, which would have ended on 30 September 2002.
Until his election, Judge Guangjian was a legal adviser with China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. He had served as a vice-president and senior adviser to the Chinese Society of International Law.
He has represented his country at the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, the informal consultations of the Secretary-General on Part XI of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and annual sessions of the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting.
Following announcement of the election results, China’s representative expressed his Government’s gratitude to other delegations for their support. China would continue to support the work of the Tribunal, he said.
Also this afternoon, two States parties were nominated as Vice-Presidents of the Eleventh Meeting. Namibia’s representative proposed Nigeria for the Group of African States and the Philippines delegate nominated India for the Asian Group.
As the Meeting resumed its discussion of continental shelf issues, the representative of Papua New Guinea introduced a related draft decision on behalf of the Pacific Island Forum States. By its terms, States parties would decide that in the case of a State that ratified or acceded to the Convention prior to
13 May 1999, the 10-year time period would be understood to begin from that date.
They would also decide that, in the case of ratification or accession after 13 May 1999, and in the case of ratification or accession following adoption of the draft decision, the 10-year time period would commence from the date of entry into force of the Convention of such a State.
Further by the text, the States parties would decide, notwithstanding the foregoing provisions, that the 10-year time period may be extended for any State that is unable, for financial or technical reasons, including lack of capacity, to comply in good faith with the time limitations.
There was an emerging consensus in the ensuing discussion on the idea of calculating the 10-year time period from 13 May 1999, while there was less agreement on extending the period for submission of information beyond the 10-year deadline.
Samoa's representative pointed out that the draft made no pretence at perfection and that even the Papua New Guinea representative had said it could be improved. It should be given a timeframe in order to avoid its implied open-endedness. While the Pacific Island Forum States did not discount the complexity and novelty of the issue, a clear decision by the Meeting was most important, he said. However, the Pacific Forum delegations were prepared to consider other forms of agreement.
Cuba's representative called for action on the proposed draft decision. Perhaps it could be amended to reflect the particular and most precarious difficulties faced by some developing countries as they sought to prepare their submissions. A holistic analysis of the issues, including technological requirements, should be taken into account.
Mexico's representative, welcoming the proposed draft decision, said that the scope of the Commission's mandate did not impinge on the sovereign rights of States parties over their area of the continental shelf. It was an expert body formed to facilitate the determination of States' rights over the continental shelf.
The representative of Iceland said that calculating a new starting period was a substantive matter and that an agreement was the best way to go about it. However, the Meeting should not take a decision on the provision of the draft decision, which proposed to extend the deadline for submissions.
Spain's representative said that setting the outer limits of the continental shelf was a technically difficult problem. No State had either done its work so far or put forward its proposals. Establishing the rights of States over their area of the continental shelf was not a matter of simply declaring those rights. It was in the interest of all States concerned that submissions be made as soon as possible. Spain could not accept certain provisions of the draft decision without amendment, he added.
The observer for the United States said the continental shelf was inherent in a coastal State's sovereign territory. There should not be any prejudice against a State which lacked the expertise to make a scientifically sound submission or failed to comply with the 10-year deadline. The Commission should welcome partial submissions and consider the State concerned to have complied with the 10-year period if it was informed that further submissions would be forthcoming. Good faith was essential, he added.
Also speaking this afternoon were the representatives of Argentina, Brazil, France, Guatemala, Sierra Leone, Russian Federation, Germany, China and Barbados.
The States parties to the Convention on the Law of the Sea will meet again at 10 a.m. tomorrow to conclude their discussion of continental shelf issues.
* *** *