Meeting of States Parties

 to Law of Sea Convention

94^th Meeting (AM)

MEETING OF STATES PARTIES TO LAW OF SEA CONVENTION CONCLUDES WITH DISCUSSION

REGARDING CONTINENTAL SHELF, CAPACITY-BUILDING FOR SMALL ISLAND STATES

Main Achievements Include Election of Judges to International Tribunal,

Appointment of External Auditor, Consideration of Secretary-General’s Report

As the Meeting of States Parties to the Convention on the Law of the Sea concluded its work this morning, its participants took stock of the outcome of the session and took up such delegates’ concerns as the application of the rules of procedure of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, capacity-building of small island developing States, the format of the budget presentation for the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, and the number of days to be allotted to the Meeting.

In his closing statement, President of the Meeting Andreas D. Mavroyiannis (Cyprus) stressed that the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea occupied a unique place in international law as the cornerstone of all efforts to regulate and develop the legal framework for the oceans and seas and the use of their resources.  The high interest in the work of the bodies established by the Convention was confirmed by the fact that 148 States Parties had participated in the Meeting.

Among the Meeting’s achievements, he highlighted yesterday’s election of seven members of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the adoption of two decisions regarding the remuneration of the members of the Tribunal and the effects of fluctuations in exchange rates.  For the first time, the Secretary-General’s report to the General Assembly on oceans and the law of the sea had also been presented to the Meeting under article 319 of the Convention, which obliges the Secretary-General to report to States Parties on general issues linked to the treaty.  That item was subject of an extensive debate, with delegations expressing divergent views as to the status of the report presented. 

He added that the Meeting had also taken note of several reports on budgetary matters and appointed BDO Deutsche Warentreuhand as the Tribunal’s External Auditor for the financial periods 2005-2006 and 2007-2008. 

The representative of the Bahamas stressed the importance of capacity-building for small island developing States, and the representative of Palau listed the issues of marine environment, marine resources, and sustainable development among those countries’ most important concerns.  He was encouraged by the Secretary-General’s recognition of the central role of the oceans and seas in the development of small island developing States, he said, adding that in future reports to the Meeting, the Secretary-General should pay more attention to the destruction of habitats caused by construction and deep sea bottom trawling.

Also this morning, the representatives of Australia, Brazil and the Russian Federation expressed concern regarding the application of the rules of procedure by the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, particularly the rule concerning attendance of coastal States at relevant meetings of the Commission.  In that connection, Australia’s representative said that coastal States should be consulted in determining which proceedings were relevant, and the representative of the Russian Federation insisted that neither in its actions nor rules could the Commission digress from the Convention.

Following a discussion on how to proceed with alerting the Commission to the States Parties’ concerns, the President of the Meeting informed the participants that their views would be reflected in the report of the Meeting, and the attention of the Commission would be drawn to them.  The representative of Trinidad and Tobago agreed to such a course of action, provided that States could submit their views to the Commission.

The representative of Portugal announced that his country intended to make a submission to the Commission on the Limits of Continental Shelf in 2009.

Also presented in the debate was a suggestion by the representative of Jamaica that results-based budgeting, recently introduced at the United Nations, could perhaps be applied to the budget presentations of the Tribunal as a more efficient and transparent way of budget preparation.  The new methodology included the objectives and indicators of achievement.

Many speakers also supported the position of the Netherlands, whose representative, speaking on behalf of the European Union, said that the duration of this year’s Meeting seemed too long in the light of its agenda.  It would make sense to limit future meetings to five days at the longest.

Later on, the Meeting heard from Douglas B. Stevenson, Director of the Center for Seafarers’ Rights, who listed the entry into force of the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code and reduction in restrictions on merchant mariners’ access to shore leave and welfare facilities among the positive developments in the past year.  However, threats from pirates and maritime employers’ attempts to erode historic seafarers’ rights were among the remaining concerns.

Each of the participants of the Meeting could affect whether the Convention would fulfil its promise to protect the world’s seafarers, he stressed.  “Think about their suffering.  Think about their vulnerabilities.  Think about their need for legal protection.  Think about how UNCLOS can defend them”, he said.

Also participating the discussion were representatives of Grenada, Chile, United Kingdom, Norway, Iceland, Denmark, Mexico, New Zealand and the observer of the United States.  The Tribunal’s Registrar, Philippe Gautier, and Director of the Division of Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea, Vladimir Golitsyn, also took the floor.

Background

The Fifteenth Meeting of States Parties convened today to consider its last item on the agenda:  “Other matters”. 

Other Matters

The representative of Australia said the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf was now considering Australia’s submission.  Although the consideration had had a solid start, he was concerned at the Commission’s rules of procedure, in particular article 52 regarding attendance of coastal States at relevant meetings.  That rule was intended to implement article 5 of the Convention, which stated that coastal States might send representatives to participate in relevant procedures, but it did not give the Commission the power to determine which proceedings were relevant.  Coastal States should be consulted in determining which proceedings were relevant. 

The representative of Jamaica wanted to receive a response from the Registrar to the questions and comments she had made on the annual report of the Tribunal.  In particular, she had referred to a review on the implementation of the decisions of the Tribunal and made a suggestion that such information might be of interest to Member States.  Her other question related to the status of the discussions leading to a bilateral agreement between the Tribunal and Member States that imposed national taxes on the Tribunal staff.  She also suggested that the Tribunal might want “look into” the new results-based budgeting format that had been recently introduced at the United Nations.  The new methodology included the objectives and indicators of achievement.  Perhaps it could be applied by the Tribunal as a more efficient and transparent way of budget preparation.

The representative of the Bahamas said the question of capacity-building was of particular importance to small island developing States, including his own country.  Those countries were faced with challenges in implementing programmes to improve the lives of its citizens, who were for the most part dependent on the sustainability of a healthy marine environment.   He urged, therefore, those countries that were in a position to do so to support the efforts of small island developing States in capacity-building in that field.  His country would appreciate the opportunity to participate in any marine research conducted in its waters. 

The representative of Brazil supported Australia’s statement regarding the rules of procedure of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, saying that the coastal State had the same right to decide which proceedings were relevant as the Commission and send a representative to participate without the right to vote.  He invited the views of other States Parties.

The representative of the Russian Federation said that he shared the doubts expressed by Australia and Brazil on the rules of procedure of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, in particular rule 52.  To those, he added his concern about the practice of the application of those rules of procedure, which his country encountered in 2002, when it had made its submission to the Commission.  Unfortunately, he had to point out that in its practice, the Commission had gone “beyond the Convention”.  He realized that the Commission was a self-governing body, but neither in its actions nor rules could it digress from the Convention.

The representative of Grenada expressed appreciation for the work of the Tribunal and its President and pledged her country’s continued support for the activities of the Tribunal.  She also congratulated the members of the Tribunal elected yesterday.

The representative of the Netherlands, speaking on behalf of the European Union, said that the length of the Meeting seemed too long in the light of its agenda.  It would make sense to limit future meetings to five days at the longest.

The Tribunal’s Registrar, PHILIPPE GAUTIER, addressing concerns raised by the representative of Jamaica, said the Registry’s report was part of the Tribunal’s annual report.  Relevant information was also available in the Tribunal’s Yearbook.  He would, however, submit Jamaica’s request to the Tribunal.  Regarding reimbursement of national taxes, he said the matter had been covered in budget for the period 2005-2006, and the question would be considered when preparing the budget for the period 2007-2008.  Regarding the matter of the budget format, he said he had taken note of the concerns raised, in particular about transparency.  The matter would be considered in the preparation of the next budget.

Addressing concerns about the rules of procedure of the Commission, VLADIMIR GOLITSYN, Director, Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea, said that since the Commission’s Chairman had already left, the Secretariat would convey the concerns raised to the Commission.  He anticipated that those concerns would be addressed during the next session that would start on 29 August.  Regarding the presentation of the budget, he said that the Tribunal might use some of the United Nations practices, but that it was not mandatory. 

Mr. GAUTIER added that there was a provision regarding harmonizing budgetary procedures in the agreement of cooperation with the United Nations.  However, the difference in size between the Tribunal and the Organization should be taken into account. 

Brazil’s representative shared the concern expressed by the Netherlands regarding the length of the Meeting, saying that it did not need to be extended for the elections and should be limited to five days.  He also wondered how the Meeting should convey the participants’ concerns to the Commission on the Continental Shelf Limits.  Should States Parties address the Commission, expressing their views on the interpretation of the rules of procedure?  As Russia had said, the Commission’s rules of procedure could not overrule the Convention.

The representative Chile said that it would not be appropriate to follow the proposal by the Netherlands.  The Meeting should be allotted a minimum of five working days, particularly in the light of new developments.

The representative of Trinidad and Tobago recalled that the decision to extend the length of the Meeting by adding two additional days this year had been made, taking into account the fact that the elections of the members of the Tribunal had been protracted in the past.  In the future, however, she supported reverting to the five days’ session.

As for the interpretation of the rules of procedure of the Commission, she shared the view by Brazil, wondering whether the Meeting of States Parties should be the body to convey their concerns to the Commission.  That would mean having a discussion on the matter during the current Meeting.  Or maybe the views of States Parties should be sought in writing and submitted by a particular date.  As there was time, however, it was possible to have a discussion on the matter during the current Meeting.

Mr. GOLITSYN assured Member States that his communication with the Commission was not an attempt to substitute what Member States wanted to convey.  He simply had to inform the Commission about the deliberations.  As for the duration of the next Meeting, he understood it to be five working days.

The representative of the United Kingdom, commenting on the suggestion made by the representative of Brazil and others that the Meeting of States Parties formally interpret the Convention, said he had doubts about such a procedure.   The concerns raised should be expressed fully in the Meeting’s report, and the Secretariat could be asked to draw the Commission’s particular attention to those concerns.  For now, he was not in a position to have a more formal position.

The representative of Norwayassociated himself with views expressed by the representative of the United Kingdom and added that the next Meeting of States Parties should not exceed five working days.

The representatives of Iceland, Mexico and Denmark also expressed support of the position of the United Kingdom.

The representative of New Zealand said that the points made on the application of the rules of procedure of the Commission were important to her country, which intended to make a submission to Commission next year.  She supported the suggestion for States Parties to consider their views on the matter and offer them in writing to the Secretariat.

The observer for the United States supported the proposal to highlight the issue in the report of the Meeting and return to the issue next year, if necessary.

The President of the Meeting said that the participants’ views on the rules of procedure would be reflected in the report of the Meeting and the attention of the Commission would be drawn to those views.

Statement by Representative of Seamen’s Church Institute

Addressing the Meeting on behalf of the Seamen’s Church Institute of New York and New Jersey, DOUGLAS B. STEVENSON, Director of the Center for Seafarers’ Rights, mentioned among the positive developments the entry into force of the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code and improvements in connection with restrictions on merchant mariners’ access to shore leave and welfare facilities.  Much work remained to be done, however.  For example, ratification of the International Labour Organization (ILO) Seafarers Identity Document Convention (ILO-185) by all maritime nations would strengthen maritime security and improve seafarers’ access to shore leave.

Listing remaining challenges, he referred to threats from pirates and maritime employers’ attempts to erode historic seafarers’ rights.  For example, proposed provisions of the Consolidated Maritime Labour Convention that the ILO would consider next February would greatly reduce seafarers’ rights to medical care.  Also, the United States cruise line industry was pressing Congress to enact legislation that would essentially shield it from penalties for failing to pay its crews’ wages without sufficient cause.  The erosion of seafarers’ rights was accompanied by a trend of escalating seafarers’ exposure to criminal sanctions for non-criminal activities, including pollution incidents, marine casualties and crimes committed by others.  He was also disappointed over the fact that a week ago, the annual ILO conference had rejected a new convention that would have improved safety and working conditions for some 35 million people working in the global fishing sector.

Each of the participants of the Meeting could affect whether the Convention would fulfil its promise to protect the world’s seafarers, he stressed.  He was grateful to the nations that had embraced his suggestion last year that States Parties consider placing the protection for persons employed in the workplace of the sea and a review of how Member States’ implement the relevant provisions of the United Nations Law of the Sea Convention II on the agenda of the Meeting, as a priority item.  However, it was not his intention to open an extended debate on the meaning of article 319, or even ask States Parties to discuss the substance of the issues he had raised.  It was important to just turn attention to the world seafarers and the contributions they made to people’s lives and nations’ economies.  “Think about their suffering.  Think about their vulnerabilities.  Think about their need for legal protection.  Think about how UNCLOS can defend them”, he said.

The representative of Palau, addressing article 319 of the Convention and the Secretary-General’s report on oceans and the law of the sea, said the report was of significant value to small island States who had limited capacities to gather, assess, and act on the vast but scattered materials of interest on that matter.  The Secretary-General had done Palau and all States Parties a service by synthesizing the scientific, technical, and legal information available and reporting this generally in the forum of States Parties. 

He emphasized the value of the report, because it was given and received in the spirit of mutual capacity-building and cooperation that were the true foundations of the Convention.  Discussions about the substance of the Secretary-General’s report were not only appropriate at the States Parties meeting, but also necessary for the continued good faith operation of the Convention on the Law of the Sea.

He, then, highlighted a number of opportunities discussed in the Secretary-General’s report for capacity-building and cooperation, in which Palau had been involved, including issues of marine environment, marine resources, and sustainable development.  He was encouraged by the Secretary-General’s recognition of the central role of the oceans and seas in the historic, cultural and economic development of small island developing States, although he would like to see more attention in the future to avoiding destruction of habitats caused by construction expansion, and in particular to deep sea bottom trawling.  He also invited interested parties to attend the October meeting of the International Coral Reef Initiative, which Palau was co-hosting with Japan. 

The representative of Trinidad and Tobago said she understood that it would be difficult to discuss the rules of procedure of the Commission during the current Meeting.  She would agree to proceed, as proposed, on the understanding that the views of States Parties would be sought regarding the issue.  Perhaps the report of the Meeting should be looked into at the next meeting.

ANDREAS D. MAVROYIANNIS (Cyprus), the Meeting’s President, said that the States Parties’ views would be reflected in the report.  He also wanted to know if the Meeting wanted the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf to seek the opinions of States Parties in writing.

Mr. GOLITSYN, Director of the Division of Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea, said that from his point of view, it was premature at this stage to specifically seek the views of States Parties.  Those who wanted to do so, certainly could make their views known, but the Commission should be given an opportunity to look into the matter and make a decision.  If views of Member States were sought at this stage, it would be difficult for the Commission to address the matter at its next session in August, if it was still awaiting those communications.

The representative of Brazil said that perhaps it would be unnecessary to address the issue at the next Meeting, because it would have been addressed by the Commission already.

The representative of Trinidad and Tobago said that, in the light of the clarification regarding the time frames involved, she agreed that the Meeting should proceed as proposed, on the understanding that States could submit their views.

The representative of Australia, said the Secretariat should draw the Commission’s particular attention to the relevant paragraphs in the Meeting’s report regarding concerns raised.  It was not necessary to seek more detailed comments from States Parties at this moment.

Closing Statement

In closing remarks, the Meeting’s President, Mr. MAVROYIANNIS, said the Convention on the Law of the Sea occupied a unique place in international law as the cornerstone of all efforts to regulate and develop the legal framework for the oceans and seas and the use of their resources.  The high interest in the work of the bodies established by the Convention was confirmed by the fact that 148 States Parties had participated in the Meeting.

He said the Meeting of States Parties had before it a number of documents relating to financial matters of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the election of seven members [judges] of the Tribunal.  For the first time, the Report of the Secretary-General on Oceans and the Law of the Sea submitted to the General Assembly also served as a report under article 319 of the Convention for information of States Parties on issues of a general nature relevant to States Parties that have arisen with respect to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.  That item was subject of an extensive debate, with delegations expressing divergent views as to the status of the report presented. 

The Meeting took note of the reports on common staff costs and the budget performance for 2004 and adopted two decisions regarding the remuneration of the Tribunal’s members and the effects of fluctuations in exchange rates, Mr. Mavroyiannis continued.  He drew the attention of States Parties to the need to ensure that assessed contributions to the Tribunal and to the International Seabed Authority were paid in full and in a timely fashion.  He also urged States whose experts served on the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf to facilitate their participation in the Commission’s meetings and invited all States Parties to consider how to provide further support to the Commission.

He said the Meeting also took note of the report of the Tribunal’s External Auditors for the financial year 2003 and appointed BDO Deutsche Warentreuhand as External Auditor for the financial periods 2005-2006 and 2007-2008.  The Meeting further elected seven members of the Tribunal for a period of nine years.  He then proposed some items for inclusion on the agenda of the Sixteenth Meeting, which would probably take place in June 2006.

* *** *