Meeting of States Parties

to Law of Sea Convention

101^st & 102^nd Meetings (AM & PM)

state actions will determine commitment to peace, security, sustainable

development, delegate tells state parties to law of sea convention

He Calls for Exertion of Political Will to Make Sacrifices,

Concessions Required to Ensure Ecosystem-Based Ocean Management

With oceans and seas covering more than 70 per cent of the Earth’s surface and 90 per cent of the world’s goods transported by sea, the actions of States parties to the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea would be the benchmark in determining their commitments to global peace, security and sustainable development, Nigeria’s representative told delegates to the sixteenth Meeting of States parties to the landmark treaty as it continued its work today.

Noting that shipping was of vital importance for the global economy and that sea transport remained by far the most cost-effective way to move bulk cargo around the world, he stressed the need for States parties to develop the political will to make the sacrifices and concessions required to bring about much-needed integrated ecosystem-based management for the sustainable use of the oceans.  Whatever was done to the environment would either benefit or harm humankind and the ecosystem approach to managing the marine environment and resources was, therefore, an imperative rather than an option.

Taking up the Secretary-General’s comprehensive annual report to the General Assembly on oceans and the law of the sea, the Meeting, which is expected to conclude its week-long session tomorrow, discussed a range of issues, including the conservation and management of marine resources, the dangers posed by marine debris and pollution, the protection of biodiversity on the high seas, piracy and robbery at sea, and the threat posed by terrorists to maritime security.

As several speakers welcomed the Secretary-General’s report, the representative of Palau said the discussion of that document was of immeasurable value to her country as a small island State.  While Palau’s identity was tied to the oceans, it had limited capacity to gather, assess and act on vast but scattered areas of interest generated every year.  The Secretary-General had done Palau a service by synthesizing available scientific, technical and legal information.  Discussion on the report’s substance was not only appropriate, but also necessary for continued good-faith cooperation on the Convention.

Other delegations, however, cautioned against holding a debate on the substance of the report, as the Convention, also known as the “Constitution of the Oceans”, gave States parties only a financial and administrative mandate rather than a substantive one.

While Iceland attached great importance to preserving the integrity of the Convention, which was the only treaty to deal comprehensively with the law of the sea, that integrity included the need for proper interpretation and application of the treaty, that country’s representative said.  Annexes II and VI of the Convention stated that the role of the Meeting of States parties was limited to financial and administrative issues and the General Assembly was the global forum with the competence to undertake an annual review of the Convention and other related matters.  The Meeting had no substantive role and Iceland would not take part in any substantive debate in the current forum.

Austria’s representative, speaking on behalf of the European Union, agreed that, while the Secretary-General’s report was comprehensive and contained useful information, the Assembly was the appropriate and most inclusive forum in which to discuss it substantively.  As it had been discussed extensively during last week’s meeting of the United Nations Open-ended Informal Consultative Process on Oceans and the Law of the Sea, the present Meeting should limit its consideration to taking note of the report.

A debate on matters of substance might give rise to political discussion, the Republic of Korea delegate added.  That, in turn, could introduce a variety of vital interests retained by States and end up transforming the Meeting into a forum for renegotiating or undermining the Convention.  Given the wide range of issues contained in the Convention, debate on any specific question might not ensure concentrated discussion on that topic and thereby might not lead to consensus-building.

The representative of the Russian Federation also agreed that discussion of substantive matters relating to the oceans and the law of the sea was not part of the competence of the Meeting, the mandate of which was to hear reports from the organs established under the Convention and to consider related financial matters.  In its remaining time, the Meeting should focus on unresolved issues.

Argentina’s representative said he was committed to keeping the Convention’s integrity, as it represented a balance of interests that had been difficult to achieve.  Partial application of the Convention, among other things, could compromise its integrity.  The Meeting should be the one to unify the work of multiple forums dealing with the law of the sea.  There was a critical need for a legal regime governing the use of marine resources in the international seabed, the absence of which could lead to chaos and unilateralism.

Also speaking today were the representatives of Chile (also on behalf of Guatemala, Mexico, Dominican Republic and Uruguay), Mexico, Singapore, Kenya, Sri Lanka, Cuba, Norway, Guatemala, Brazil, India, Japan, Canada, Trinidad and Tobago, United States and the Dominican Republic.

In other business today, Germany’s representative briefed the States parties on the status of informal consultations, noting that progress had been made on the paper he had submitted and that a constructive spirit had prevailed in the Meeting’s deliberations.

The States parties will meet again at 10 a.m. Friday, 23 June, to conclude their Meeting.

Background

States parties to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea met today as they continued their sixteenth Meeting with a consideration of the Secretary-General’s report on oceans and the law of the sea (document A/61/63).  (For further background on the week-long session, see Press Release SEA/1859 issued on 16 June.)

The Secretary-General’s comprehensive annual report contains information on the status of the Convention and its implementing Agreements, on declarations and statements made by States under articles 287, 298, and 310 of the Convention, and on recent submissions to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf.  It also includes a section on capacity-building activities and elaborates on recent developments regarding international shipping, safety and security of navigation, people at sea, protection of the marine environment and conservation of marine living resources and the Indian Ocean tsunami.  It provides information concerning the settlement of disputes and inter-agency cooperation.

According to the report, although a wide range of actions have been taken to address the multifaceted issues relating to ocean affairs and the law of the sea during the review period, much more remains to be done in order to translate the Convention’s objectives and other international legal instruments into concrete action.  In light of recent developments with regard to various uses of the sea and its resources, the Secretary-General’s deposit of charts or of lists of geographical coordinates of points becomes an increasingly important tool for providing adequate information to the international community and users of the seas regarding the outer limits of maritime zones of coastal States, the lines of maritime boundaries delimitation, as well as baselines.

The application of ecosystem approaches to ocean management is important for the achievement of sustainable development, the report says.  The common denominator for ecosystem approaches is that they are a comprehensive and science-based approach for the conservation and management of natural resources.  Adopting and implementing an ecosystem approach should be considered an evolutionary step and an increased focus should be placed on ways to facilitate its implementation, both at the regional and national levels.  Because ecosystems do not respect maritime boundaries, regional cooperation is essential.  As the scientific understanding of ocean ecosystems is still very limited, further research is needed, as is the application of the precautionary approach in the face of uncertainty.

In the context of fisheries management, an ecosystem approach requires, in particular, the use of the best scientific evidence available for the conservation and management of marine living resources, the report says.  It also requires improved monitoring, not only of the status and trend of fisheries, but also the status of key environmental factors, habitats, endangered species and non-target and dependent species associated with the target species.  The ecosystem approach should reflect due concern about the long-term effects of fishery management on marine ecosystems by restricting the environmental impacts of fishing to acceptable levels, including by reducing by-catch and incidental mortality of non-targeted species.

Stronger capacity-building efforts are crucial to the effective management of resources and the protection of the marine environment and ecosystems by developing countries, in particular small island developing States, the report notes.  Another important area where cooperation is vitally important is maritime security and safety.  Creating the conditions that enable the safe and efficient navigation of ships through the world’s oceans is essential for global trade.  Given that today’s challenges to maritime security are wide-ranging, global in scope and often connected, cooperation on all threats to security issues is crucial for their prevention and suppression, as well as for safety of navigation.  It is, therefore, important to intensify cooperation at all levels to address threats to maritime security and safety in a comprehensive manner through bilateral and multilateral instruments, as well as mechanisms aimed at monitoring, preventing and responding to such threats.

Statements

ALVARO ARÉVALO (Chile), speaking also on behalf of Guatemala, Mexico, Dominican Republic and Uruguay, said that one of the key elements in promoting regional cooperation and capacity-building was the establishment of regional centres of scientific research and marine technology, as provided for in articles 276 and 277 of the Convention.  The Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission was considered to play an important role in promoting the creation of those regional centres.  In addition, training courses for technical and administrative personnel of developing coastal States in the preparation of submissions before the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf deserved appreciation.

He also highlighted the services provided by the Assistance Fund of the Conference of Maritime Delimitation in the Caribbean, saying they constituted a forum for facilitating regional cooperation and promoting the provision of technical assistance and capacity-building necessary for carrying out voluntary negotiations on the delimitation of maritime areas in the Caribbean Sea.  The Dominican Republic would host the Conference’s fourth plenary meeting in October.

In its 10 years of activity, he said, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea had put forth a valuable contribution to the development of international law, providing elements that enriched the application and interpretation of the Convention.  With the passing of time, the Tribunal would continue to be consolidated as a privileged mechanism for settling maritime disputes.  There was a need to define the genuine link between the flag State and the ship, as provided in article 19 of the Convention, and it was crucial that flag States effectively exercise their jurisdiction and comply with their obligations regarding ships flying their respective flags.

He agreed with several conclusions of the inter-agency meeting of 7 and 8 July 2005 at the headquarters of the International Maritime Organization, in particular those dealing with the non-exhaustive nature of article 94 of the Convention, which enunciates the duties of the flag State, the port State’s complementary role in flag State control, and the importance of promoting a “culture of compliance”.  The General Assembly should address that matter once again, which might result in a need to reconvene the inter-agency meeting.

At its next session, he said, the Council of the International Seabed Authority would continue its examination of the draft regulations prepared by the Legal and Technical Commission on prospecting and exploration of polymetallic sulphides and cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts.  It was fundamental that seabed exploration, prospecting and future exploration in the international seabed area be carried out on the basis of regulations that adequately reflected the legal framework of the Convention and the evolution of international law, particularly in the field of the environment.  Therefore, the Council must, in examining the regulations, take into account that those minerals were found in fragile marine ecosystems.  Also, the Authority should continue making efforts to defray the costs of developing-country participants in meetings of the Legal and Technical Commission and the Finance Committee.  Likewise, it should continue promoting the participation of experts and scientists from developing countries in workshops and programmes.

He said fishing subsidies artificially contributed to increased fishing capacity and in many cases, were directly responsible for carrying out viable fishing operations on the high seas that would not be possible otherwise.  In the future, the matter of fishing subsidies should be included and further emphasized in the Secretary-General’s annual report, indicating progress in the framework of the World Trade Organization, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and other relevant international organizations.

ALFONSO ASCENCIO ( Mexico) stressed the need for a broad vision of development with regard to the law of the sea, noting that his country supported the various reports before the Meeting, including that of the Secretary-General, which covered a great number of general questions about the Convention.  On the issue of ecosystem approaches, it was important to take into account legal frameworks, environmental policy tools, the protection of marine diversity, public participation and public awareness, education and research.

On the question of international migration of persons on the seas, he stressed the need to respect the human rights of migrants and international obligations regarding rescue.  States must ensure the safety of all persons regardless of their status.  Mexico was concerned about the security of seafarers and took note of the progress made in that regard, such as the adoption of the Maritime Labour Convention.  There had also been notable progress on the just treatment of seafarers in maritime accidents.  Issues concerning seafarers must receive more attention from States parties.

MARCUS SONG (Singapore), noting that the Secretary-General’s report mentioned the Regional Agreement on Combating Piracy and Armed Robbery against Ships in Asia, said that was the first regional Government-to-Government agreement to promote cooperation against piracy and armed robbery.  Over 30 per cent of the world’s commerce and half of its oil passed through the Malacca and Singapore Straits and disruption of those vital sea lanes would have immediate economic and strategic repercussions, which would be felt far beyond the Asia-Pacific region.

He said Japan had proposed the Agreement in October 2001 with the aim of enhancing multilateral cooperation among the 10 Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries, as well as China, Japan, Republic of Korea, India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh to combat piracy and armed robbery against ships in regional waters.  It had been finalized in Tokyo on 11 November 2004 and opened for signature on 28 February 2005.  As the depository of that Agreement, Singapore was pleased to announce that it would enter into force on 4 September 2006 now that the requisite 10 notifications had been deposited.

The Agreement’s significance had been recognized by regional and international organizations, he said.  The General Assembly had approved resolution 60/30 on oceans and the law of the sea, which, among other things, welcomed the Agreement and urged States to give urgent attention to adoption cooperation agreements at the regional level in high-risk areas.  Under the Agreement, member countries would institutionalize their cooperation by setting up an Information Sharing Centre in Singapore.  The Centre aimed to facilitate communication and information sharing among national authorities of member countries in order to deal with piracy attacks more effectively.  It would also provide analysis of the piracy and sea robbery situation in the region, and support capacity-building efforts to help members improve their capability to combat piracy and sea robbery.  As the Centre’s host, Singapore had made preparations to ensure that it would be operational soon after the Agreement’s entry into force.

JUDITH MBULA BAHEMUKA ( Kenya) said that, while her country appreciated the help provided by the Division for Ocean Affairs and Law of the Sea, through the Trust Fund, to enable Member States to prepare their submissions, that assistance was not sufficient and was limited to financing the initial planning activities.  The most complex and expensive part of preparing a submission was data acquisition, yet that component was not supported under the Trust Fund.  Kenya urged States parties to explore the possibility of expanding the Trust Fund’s scope to cover that component and to encourage and promote data-sharing cooperation between States.

Due to the technical nature of submissions regarding the continental shelf, it might be difficult for developing countries to meet the 10-year time limit cited in annex II to the Convention, she said.  Thus, flexibility was needed.  Where a coastal State was unable to submit within the time limit, it should be given due consideration, provided it gave sufficient grounds for its failure to submit, and an undertaking to submit within an agreed period.  Kenya welcomed the proposal that the General Assembly should consider the Commission’s request to explore the possibility of funding members from the United Nations regular budget.

She expressed appreciation for the continuing work of the International Seabed Authority, which at its eleventh meeting, had completed its first reading of the draft regulations on prospecting and exploration of polymetallic sulphides and cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts.  Kenya welcomed the steps that the Authority had taken to issue the plan of work for exploration to the German Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, and had applied to have one of its scientists participate in the programme.  Kenya also welcomed the proposal to establish an endowment fund from fees paid by the pioneer investors to facilitate the participation of scientists from developing countries in international marine scientific research programmes.

TOMAS H. HEIDAR ( Iceland) said his country attached great importance to preserving the integrity of the Convention, the only treaty dealing comprehensively with the law of the sea.  That integrity included the need for proper interpretation and application of the Convention, whose annexes II and VI stated that the role of the Meeting of States Parties was limited to financial and administrative issues.  The issue of funding for members of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf and increasing the effectiveness of the Commission’s work, which the Meeting had been discussing for the last two days, provided a good example in that respect.

In contrast, the Meeting had not been given any substantive role, he said, adding that proposals for a broader role had been rejected by the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea.  The General Assembly was the global forum with the competence to undertake an annual review of the Convention and other matters related to oceans and the law of the sea.  The Secretary-General’s annual comprehensive report had been prepared in response to the Assembly’s request in its resolution 60/30 of last fall.

The report was for the information of States parties and was limited to issues of relevance to States parties and those arising with respect to the Convention.  The Meeting had no substantive role, which was fulfilled by the Assembly and its facilitator, the United Nations Open-Ended Informal Consultative Process on Oceans and the Law of the Sea, which had recently concluded its seventh meeting.  Iceland would not take part in any substantive debate in the current forum.

ROHAN PERERA ( Sri Lanka) said he expected that practical and cost-effective modalities would be worked out to ensure the continuity of the Commission’s work and stressed the need for continued interaction between submitting States and the Commission at all stages of the submission.  The submitting coastal State should have every opportunity to respond to the Commission’s queries.  In October 2003, Sri Lanka had established a project relating to the delimitation of the continental shelf, in preparation for its submission, which it hoped to make during the course of 2007.

He said his country was greatly concerned by the threats to maritime security posed by terrorists.  Combined with human, arms and drug trafficking, such threats constituted an unprecedented challenge to maritime security and the security of States.  That challenge called for concerted global action.  Sri Lanka extended its cooperation to all regional and international efforts to enhance cooperation in dealing with that threat.  As a country deeply affected by the 2004 tsunami, Sri Lanka had strengthened its disaster-management laws and national mechanisms.  The country thanked the Division for Oceans and Law of the Sea for its capacity-building activities and expressed its appreciation for the generosity of others in that area.

JUANA ELENA RAMOS ( Cuba) stressed her country’s interest in matters relating to the law of the sea, saying it had been a party to the Convention since 1994 and was studying the 1995 Agreement on the implementation of the 1982 Convention on the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks.  The Convention was the right legal framework under which all activities on the oceans and seas should take place.  Cuba welcomed the fact that, with the number of States parties currently at 149 with Estonia’s accession, progress towards its universalization continued.

She said her country welcomed the fact that the Meeting was playing a substantive role and that it did not deal only with administrative and budgetary matters in keeping with the Convention.  Cuba welcomed the Secretary-General’s report and its usefulness for the current and future meetings, and hoped its quality would not be affected by decisions on the review of mandates currently being carried out at the United Nations.

Cuba was also grateful for the report submitted by the President of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and was pleased to see that the Tribunal continued to make progress particularly in the administrative aspects of personnel, budget and finance, and hoped the Headquarters Agreement with Germany would soon enter into force.

THOMAS LOIDL (Austria), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said the Secretary-General’s report was comprehensive and contained useful information on the practice of States and general issues relating to oceans and the law of the sea.  However, the General Assembly was the appropriate and most inclusive forum to substantially discuss the report and matters concerning oceans and the law of the sea.  The report, particularly Chapter XX on ecosystem approaches, had been discussed extensively at last week’s meeting of the Informal Consultative Process on Oceans and the Law of the Sea.  Therefore, consideration of the report at the present Meeting should be limited to taking note of it.

JENS ELKAAS (Norway), agreeing with the representative of Austria that the report contained much useful information, also underlined the appropriateness of the General Assembly as the forum to discuss its substance and matters concerning oceans and the Law of the Sea.

ANNA LYUBALINA ( Russian Federation) confirmed that discussion of substantive matters relating to the oceans and the law of the sea was not part of the competence of the Meeting of States parties, the mandate of which was to hear reports from the organs established under the Convention and to consider related financial matters.  Substantive discussion of the Secretary-General’s report should take place in the General Assembly.  In the remaining time, the Meeting should focus on matters relating to the three organs.  It was appropriate at the present stage for the Meeting to take note of the report and return to the unresolved issues falling under the Meeting’s competence.

ANA CRISTINA RODRIGUEZ PINEDA ( Guatemala) said that, in addition to terrorism, other threats to maritime security included the irreversible effect of climate change, which caused an increase in sea level, which in turn posed a serious threat to everyone, particularly small island developing States.  Human activities also had an impact on the maritime ecosystem.  Great attention should be paid to the uncontrolled growth of tourism, which impacted the environment in which it took place.  Also, States could not fail to examine such social factors as poverty, which led marginal populations to undertake illegal activities.  It was imperative to strengthen cooperation among States, which could take many forms, including exchange of information and transfer of technology, as well as capacity-building and financial assistance.

MARCOS L. DE ALMEIDA ( Brazil) said the Meeting was the appropriate forum to discuss any issue regarding the implementation of the principles and provisions of the Convention given the need to preserve its integrity and avoid misunderstanding and misinterpretation by other forums.  Most relevant for States parties was the work conducted by the ad hoc working group established by the General Assembly, and Brazil looked forward to its continuation as the starting point of a process.  Considering the excellent initiative of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, Brazil suggested that, in future meetings, States parties should receive presentations on such issues as improvements in lessons learned.

SYAMAL KANTI DAS ( India) said his country attached high importance to the effective functioning of the institutions established under the Convention.  Given that India’s coastline extended 4,000 miles and that it had 1,300 islands, the country had a traditional interest in maritime and ocean affairs and its large coastal population had always looked to the sea for sustenance.

All institutions under the Convention had made considerable progress in their respective areas of work, he said, adding that India had worked closely with all those institutions and had invested heavily in exploring for minerals in the deep seabed.  Indeed, India continued to incur considerable expense for the collection of data as a primary investor and now as a contractor.  India appreciated the role of the International Seabed Authority in the conservation of biodiversity, especially the elaboration of the rules and regulations to ensure the effective protection of the marine environment.

The international community had continued to focus over the past year on issues relating to navigation, conservation and the management of marine resources, he said.  Discoveries of highly complex ecosystems in areas beyond national jurisdictions, coupled with technological advances, had led to increasing activity in relation to resources beyond national jurisdictions.  As a corollary to those developments, general debate over the legal status of genetic resources in the seabed beyond national jurisdictions was also becoming intense, and the need for new approaches to promote international cooperation to conserve and share resources could not be overemphasized.  Participation by developing countries depended greatly on additional scientific information, the promotion of information and the transfer of knowledge.

In the area of navigation, he expressed concern over the issue of piracy and robbery at sea.  Recent incidents involving the killing of crew members, hostage-taking and the hijacking of a ship chartered by the World Food Programme to carry food aid to Somali survivors of the Indian Ocean tsunami reflected the grave threat to maritime security.  India had set up an interim tsunami early-warning system and the full fledged system would be set up by September 2007.

With respect to the Secretary-General’s report, he said that, while the General Assembly was the more inclusive forum for discussing it, States parties were not precluded by that reason from discussing substantive issues relating to the law of the sea in the present forum.  However, duplication of agenda items should be avoided.

HOLGER MARTINSEN ( Argentina) said he was concerned about, and committed to keeping, the integrity of the Convention, as it represented a balance of interests that had been difficult to achieve.  Partial application of the Convention, among other things, opposed its integrity.  The Meeting of States parties should be the one to unify the work of multiple forums dealing with the law of the sea.  Argentina agreed with Austria that the General Assembly was the most inclusive forum to deal with law of the sea issues.  Among other things, Argentina also agreed with other delegations on the need to define the genuine link between the flag State and the ship.  It was important that States exercise their jurisdiction with regard to flag States.

He expressed satisfaction that the United Nations inter-agency coordination mechanism on oceans and coastal issues, known as UN-OCEANS, was becoming a reality.  At the same time, it was essential that the task force on biodiversity take into account the positions that States took during General Assembly debates on those issues.  That matters relating to the implementation of the Convention were being considered in a fragmentary way in other forums was not favourable to maintaining its integrity.  It was necessary to build a transactional body to negotiate with different aspects of the treaty’s implementation.

The legal regime applicable to all resources in the international seabed area was consistent with the common heritage of humankind, he reiterated.  The elaboration of non-biding instruments to comply with that would not be sufficient and the absence of norms allowing for the full use of those resources could lead to a chaotic situation characterized by unilateralism.  That dispute would have to be resolved at some point.  Regarding the protection of biodiversity on the high seas, Argentina agreed with the European Union proposal to establish protected marine areas on the high seas and viewed that proposal as part of a package to address that situation.

JUNG AE HUH ( Republic of Korea) recalled that divergent views and legal arguments had been expressed at previous Meetings by a number of delegations under article 319 of the Convention on the role of the Meeting of States parties.  The fourteenth Meeting had adopted a compromise decision to keep the item on its agenda, while indicating that it should be inserted in the Secretary-General’s report for the information of the States parties.  Such a reference had been made in the latest Secretary-General’s report, which action discharged the Secretary-General’s duty under article 319 2(a) to report to States parties on issues of a general nature that had arisen with respect to the Convention.

The wording of that provision did not explicitly require a convening of the Meeting to discuss the report, she said, adding that the textual interpretation faithful to the letter of that provision did not militate in favour of the opinion that the Meeting was mandated to cover issues of a general nature relating to the Convention.  The Republic of Korea was concerned, on the other hand, that any debate on matters of substance might give rise to political discussion, which would bring in a variety of vital interests retained by States and end up transforming the meeting into a forum for renegotiating or undermining the Convention.  In addition, owing to the wide range of issues contained in the Convention, debate on any substance might not ensure concentrated discussion on that topic and thereby might not lead to consensus-building.

Given those legal and practical reasons, she said, the Republic of Korea was of the view that the Meeting was not currently mandated for matters of substance relating to the Convention.  For the time being and until otherwise decided, the Republic of Korea respected the decision made at the fourteenth Meeting as a compromise.  States parties’ comments on the report should be limited to matters that were relevant to the Convention.  Regarding the nature of such comments, the Republic of Korea supported the position of Austria and the Russian Federation that the Meeting’s consideration of the report should be confined to taking note of it.

JOAN YANG ( Palau) said the Meeting of States parties and discussion of the Secretary-General’s report were of immeasurable value to small island States.  While Palau’s identity was tied to the oceans, it had limited capacity to gather, assess and act on vast but scattered areas of interest generated every year.  Indeed, the Secretary-General had done Palau a service by synthesizing available scientific, technical and legal information.  Although some delegations had expressed the position that an annual meeting was an inappropriate forum for discussing the Secretary-General’s report, the discussion continued to give Palau an opportunity to assist in areas of concern to States parties, which had obligations of cooperation and good faith, and which faced common difficulties.  Discussion on the substance of the Secretary-General’s report was not only appropriate, but also necessary for continued good-faith cooperation on the Convention.

KAZUHIKO KOKUBU ( Japan) expressed support for the statements made by Iceland and Austria, saying that the Meeting of States parties should devote its attention to budgetary and administrative matters relating to the Convention.

MICHAEL SHEWCHUK ( Canada), saying he wished to focus on implementation of ecosystem approaches and marine biological diversity beyond national jurisdiction, said that domestically, his country was implementing the ecosystem approach in marine management.  It had also advocated an ecosystem-based approach for the conservation and management of biodiversity on the high seas.  As a priority, work must continue to modernize regional fisheries management organizations and Canada was encouraged by the outcome of the recent review conference on the United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement.  Those States that had not acceded to or ratified that Agreement were strongly urged to do so.

Noting that marine biodiversity beyond national jurisdictions was being discussed in various forums, he said priority in that regard should be given to the implementation of existing agreements.  Regarding genetic resources on the seabed, it was important to know what States were seeking to regulate, and to work on better understanding the issues involved.

I.A. AYUA ( Nigeria) said the Convention remained a landmark legal instrument which impacted on the well-being of current and future generations.  As the seas covered about 70 per cent of the world, the actions of States parties would be the benchmark determining commitments to global peace, security and sustainable development.

He noted that since 90 per cent of goods traded among nations were transported by sea, shipping was of vital importance for the global economy and sea transport remained by far the most cost-effective way to move bulk cargo around the world.  To that end, Nigeria had taken significant steps towards incorporating various conventions of the International Maritime Organization into domestic legislation.  The country had also been collaborating with the International Labour Organization to implement instruments relating to the welfare of seafarers.  Nigeria placed a great premium on regional cooperation and would continue to play an active role in such bodies as the Maritime Organization of West and Central African States.

He said his country remained deeply concerned about the dangers posed by marine debris and marine pollution.  Apart from hydrocarbon exploration activities, which constituted a major source of marine pollution, developing countries had been victims of the dumping by unscrupulous entities of chemical wastes.  To deter would-be perpetrators and save current and future generations from the ravages of such practices, Nigeria recognized the need to impose the stiffest sanctions on defaulters.  Regarding the recent meeting of the United Nations Consultative Process on Oceans and the Law of the Sea, practical steps must be taken to transfer technology and share research findings with developing countries.

Lack of capacity remained one of the cardinal obstacles to the effective participation by the developing world in the Convention’s implementation, he said.  It was for that reason that Nigeria appreciated the intensified capacity-building activities of the Division of Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea.  Nigeria further welcomed the various trust funds established to facilitate implementation of the Convention’s various aspects.  It was worrisome to note, however, that while most of the funds were quite rich, no relevant applications for assistance had been received from developing countries in recent times.  It was, therefore, apparent that most would-be beneficiary Member States were not aware of the existence of those funds.  The need for the Division to establish measures to draw attention to them could not be overemphasized.

Regarding fisheries and related matters, he noted the outcome of the recently concluded Review Conference on the 1995 Fish Stocks Agreement and urged States to abolish practices and policies with negative implications for developing countries.  Nigeria called for a healthy balance between industrial fishing firms and their artisanal counterparts.  Nigeria also reiterated the urgent need for practical national, regional and international measures to address such destructive practices as illegal, unreported and regulated fishing and deep-bottom trawling.

Public education would also have to be given a special place in efforts to implement the Convention, he continued.  That would involve, among other things, the simplification and demystification of issues pertaining to the world’s maritime space.  High-sounding technical parlance would have to be replaced with terms that ordinary people could understand and accept, since, as must be universally realized, they had a serious stake in the sustainable use of marine environment and resources.  Nigeria was worried about the paucity of information in national and international media on that subject.  To that end, the United Nations Department of Public Information must deploy its officers in the Division of Ocean Affairs.

He further stressed the need for States parties to develop the political will and readiness to make sacrifices and concessions that could bring about much-needed integrated ecosystem-based management for the sustainable use of the oceans upon which depended the survival of current and future generations.  Whatever was done to the environment would either benefit or harm humankind and the ecosystem approach to managing the marine environment and resources was, therefore, not an option, but an imperative.  In formulating the ecosystem package, care must be taken to maintain a balance among the environmental, social and economic aspects, and to ensure that no Member State, subregion or region was short-changed.

EDEN CHARLES ( Trinidad and Tobago), stressing the need to enable developing country participants to contribute to the work of the International Seabed Authority’s Legal and Technical Commission, said his country had contributed $10,000 to the Trust Fund for that purpose and urged others to do so as well.  Also, States parties and others with legal obligations under the Convention should ensure that the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf had the necessary resources to carry out its mandate, especially at the current juncture when it was expected to have an increased workload.  Trinidad and Tobago also supported the work of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and looked forward to the day when more States accepted its jurisdiction in dispute settlement.

Noting the reference in the Secretary-General’s report to an ecosystem-based management approach, he said that his country, as a coastal State, viewed any effort at developing an integrated approach to ocean management as consistent with the overall obligations under the Convention.  Regarding a reference in paragraph 66 of the report on the transhipment of nuclear waste and hazardous material, Trinidad and Tobago and other countries of the region viewed the Caribbean Sea as more than just a transport highway; it was a main source of economic livelihood and development.

CONSTANCE ARVIS ( United States) said that the language in article 319 of the Convention differed from language in other multilateral conventions with regard to the role of the Meeting of States parties in overseeing the implementation and elaboration of the agreement.  Not incorporating such language into article 319 had been intentional and reflective of the negotiations on the role of the States parties.  During the negotiations on the Convention, a number of delegations had supported proposals that would have provided for a periodic review of the treaty, but those proposals had failed to attract the necessary support.  The final result was article 319, concerning reports by the Secretary-General for the information of States parties on general issues regarding the Convention.

Article 319 did not empower the Meeting of States parties to discuss issues of a general nature, she continued.  The United States urged States parties to resist setting aside the intent of article 319, and associated itself with Iceland, Austria, Norway, Republic of Korea and Japan, especially their suggestion that the Meeting simply take note of the report.

Mr. MARTINSEN ( Argentina) said that the whole of today’s discussion should be directly reflected in the report of the Meeting.

NAPOLEON BERAS ( Dominican Republic) reiterated the importance of the fourth plenary meeting of the Caribbean Conference on Maritime Delimitation, which his country would host in October.  The Caribbean Sea held a strategic position in terms of international security and trade, and that added to the complexity of delimitation.

Mr. ASCENCIO ( Mexico) said the Meeting should reflect today’s debate in its report and include the positions of the respective delegations, both favourable and adverse.

Ms. RAMOS ( Cuba) supported the statements made by Argentina and Mexico with regard to the reflection of today’s debate in the report of the Meeting.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record