STATES PARTIES TO UNITED NATIONS SEA LAW CONVENTION HEAR REPORTS FROM HEADS OF SEABED AUTHORITY, CONTINENTAL SHELF COMMISSION

states parties to United Nationssea law convention hear reports

from heads of seabed authority, continental shelf commission

Speakers Review Procedural Issues, Take Note of Tribunal Auditors’ Report

States Parties to the Convention on the Law of the Sea were briefed on key developments concerning the International Seabed Authority and the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, as they continued their fourteenth meeting in two sessions today.

Satya N. Nandan, Secretary-General of the International Seabed Authority, said his organization, which was celebrating its tenth anniversary, had recently focused on developing regulations governing polymetallic sulphides and cobalt crusts.  Such rules about mining and exploration were difficult to devise since, unlike polymetallic nodules, the sulphides and crusts did not just lay near the surface of the seabed.  Presently, the Authority’s Council was considering draft regulations set forth by its Legal and Technical Commission.

The Authority had also received its first progress report from the Kaplan Project, which studied biodiversity, species range and gene flow in the abyssal Pacific nodule-bearing province.  Because the Project aimed to predict and manage the impacts of seabed mining, he expected that its research would facilitate future regulations on polymetallic nodule exploitation.

Also speaking was Peter Croker, Chairman of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf.  Quoting from a letter he had presented to the Meeting President (document SPLOS/111), he noted that the Commission, one of the three major bodies established by the Convention, considers data submitted by coastal States concerning claims to outer limits of the continental shelf that may extend beyond 200 nautical miles.  It also provides scientific and technical advice requested by such States.

He said the Commission had continued to facilitate and clarify the submission process, in addition to refining provisions of the Rules of Procedure.  Noting that interested developing countries had applied for assistance from a trust fund, which helped developing States prepare submissions to the Commission, he called for additional political and financial support for the fund.  He also mentioned that a second trust fund had been set up to help developing States defray the costs of participating in the Commission.

The representative of Kenya stressed that helping States prepare their submissions should be one of the Commission’s top priorities.  The posting of guidelines on the Commission’s web site was a good start, but he hoped that that would soon be supplemented by a training manual.  Turning to the International Seabed Authority, he urged it to focus more on protecting marine environments beyond national jurisdictions.  In such areas, rich and technologically advanced countries and corporations were threatening biodiversity and exploiting resources that should be shared by all of mankind.

Also today, the States Parties adopted a draft decision on the appointment of the Tribunal’s Auditor for 2004.  The decision, which, by an oral amendment, allowed the Tribunal to designate an Auditor, was introduced by Tribunal Registrar Philippe Gautier.

In addition, the Parties took note of the “Report of the External Auditors for the financial year 2002, with financial statements of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea as of 31 December 2002”, also introduced by
Mr. Gautier, as well as the information provided by Mr. Nandan and Mr. Croker.

Also participating in the discussion were the representatives of Japan, Senegal, Russian Federation, Italy, Australia, Jamaica and Mexico.

Towards the beginning of the meeting, Parties observed a moment of silence to honour Helmut Beiersdorf (Germany), a member of the International Seabed Authority’s Legal and Technical Commission, who recently died.

The States Parties will meet again at 10 a.m. tomorrow (16 June), to appoint their Credential Committee and begin consideration of article 319 of the Convention, which lists the Secretary-General’s responsibilities vis-à-vis the treaty.

Statement by Authority Secretary-General

SATYA N. NANDAN, Secretary-General of the International Seabed Authority, noted that ten years had passed since the Authority’s establishment.  In that context, he said a comprehensive ten-year report -- highlighting the body’s organizational, administrative and substantial work since 1994 -- had been prepared.

Regarding last year, he said the Authority had held two sessions, during which it had focused on developing regulations governing polymetallic sulphides and cobalt crusts.  Because those materials differed from polymetallic nodules, which largely existed on the surface of the seabed, devising rules about their mining and exploration was a difficult process.  For that reason, the Authority’s Legal and Technical Commission had consulted experts before submitting draft regulations to the Authority’s Council.  More recommendations were expected from a workshop on polymetallic sulphides and cobalt crusts, to be held in Jamaica in September.

Turning to the Kaplan Project -- dedicated to studying biodiversity, species range and gene flow in the abyssal Pacific nodule-bearing province -- he said the Project had submitted its first progress report to the Authority.  Because the Project aimed to predict and manage the impacts of seabed mining, he expected that its research would facilitate future regulations on polymetallic nodule exploitation.

He then said that, of the Authority’s 145 Member States, 117 were parties to the 1994 Agreement to implement provisions of Part XI of the Convention on the Law of the Sea.  In that context, he urged the 28 mainly small developing countries that had not yet done so to accede to the Agreement.  He also urged States Parties that had not yet done so to accede to or ratify the Protocol on Privileges and Immunities of the Authority.

NORMA TAYLOR ROBERTS (Jamaica) noted that the Authority’s ongoing efforts to promote greater understanding of the impact of activity in the deep seabed, promote marine scientific research and catalogue research data were in keeping with its broader role to protect and preserve the marine environment.  In view of scientific breakthroughs, and the current focus on marine scientific research, he saw an evolving regulatory role for the Authority.  The gap with respect to governance in areas beyond national jurisdiction was not in the legal framework, but in knowledge of the extent to which resources of the seabed could be equitably exploited.

Statement by Chairman of Continental Shelf Commission

PETER CROKER, Chairman of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, noted that the Commission’s function was to accept data submitted by coastal States on the outer limits of the continental shelf in areas where those limits extended beyond 200 nautical miles, and to provide scientific and technical advice requested by such States.  To date, it had received and completed the examination of its first submission, from the Russian Federation, and had conveyed its recommendations to the submitting State and the Secretary-General in July 2002.  The Commission had received a letter with several questions about the recommendations from the Russian Federation in June 2003, and had considered a response at the Commission’s thirteenth session in April 2004.

Reviewing other Commission work, he said the Commission had continued to facilitate and clarify the submission process, had refined and clarified provisions of the Rules of Procedure, and had incorporated some provisions of the Commission modus operandi into the rules.  He noted that interested developing countries had applied for assistance from the Trust Fund that assisted developing States in preparing submissions to the Commission, and called for additional political and financial support for the Fund.  A second Trust Fund had been set up to help developing States defray the costs of participating in the Commission.

Seven States, he continued, had informed the Secretariat that their submissions to the Commission should be completed within the next three years.  Among them, Brazil had delivered its submission to the Secretary-General in May 2004,Australia intended to submit data regarding the outer limits of its continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles before its original deadline expired in 2004.  Ireland planned to proceed with its submission in 2005, Norway not before 2006, Namibia in 2007, Pakistan in 2007/2008, and Sri Lanka in 2007.

AMOS WAKO, Attorney General of Kenya, said that implementing article 76 of the Convention was challenging to developing States that lacked technical expertise.  That was why submissions related to the outer limits of the continental shelf were lagging.  In that context, he stressed that helping States prepare their submissions should be one of the Commission’s top priorities.  The posting of guidelines on the Commission’s web site was a good start, but he hoped that that would soon be supplemented by a training manual.  Recognizing that such action required more resources, he appealed to those States which were in a position to do so to contribute to the appropriate trust fund.

Turning to the International Seabed Authority, he stressed that better management of the seabed relied on marine research.  Lauding the Authority for conducting helpful workshops, he said he nevertheless wished to emphasize that such educational events should be held in new venues, such as Africa.  He also urged the Authority to focus more on protecting marine environments beyond national jurisdictions.  In such areas, rich and technologically advanced countries and corporations were threatening biodiversity and exploiting resources that should be shared by all of mankind.

CHIEKH THIAM (Senegal) asked Mr. Croker about the time limits for coastal States to submit applications to the Commission.  Noting that article 4 of annex 2 of the Convention mentioned a ten-year period, he wondered what States could do if they reached the end of their allotted time.

Mr. Croker said the answer could be found in the documents and that additional questions should go through the Secretariat of the Commission.

The meeting then adjourned, and delegations continued their discussion in a working group.

Resuming its work this afternoon, the Meeting of States Parties heard introductions of a report and a draft decision on auditing of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.

Report of the External Auditors for 2002

PHILLIPPE GAUTIER, Registrar of the Tribunal, introduced the report of the external auditors for the financial year 2002, with financial statements of the International Tribunal for the Law of the sea as of 31 December 2002 (document SPLOS/L.39), noting that it showed positive results.

Draft Decision of the Appointment of the Auditor for 2004

He then introduced a draft decision on the appointment of the Auditor for the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea for the financial year 2004 (document SPLOS/L.39).  Quoting the Tribunal Financial Regulations, the decision noted that the States Parties shall appoint an auditor, which may be an internationally recognized form of auditors or an Auditor General or an official of a State Party with equivalent title, for a renewable four-year term.  The first auditor would cover the financial periods 2005-2006 and 2007-2008, which left 2004 without an audit.  The decision proposed that the Tribunal appoint a recognized firm of auditors to examine the Tribunal’s financial statements for 2004.

AKIMA UMEZAWA (Japan) asked how the Tribunal would choose an internationally recognized forum for the auditor.

MR. GAUTIER responded that a firm of auditors would be selected on the basis of a bidding process from three different auditors.

* *** *