Meeting of States Parties

to Law of Sea Convention

138^th Meeting (AM)

Meeting of States Parties to Convention on Law of the Sea Decides to Nominate

Member, Alternate to International Tribunal’s Staff Pension Committee

 

Continuing its annual session this morning, the Meeting of States Parties to the Convention on the Law of the Sea decided to nominate States with a permanent diplomatic or consular presence in Berlin or Hamburg as a member and alternate member of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea’s Staff Pension Committee.

By a draft decision on the matter, the Meeting decided that the nominated States would then appoint local diplomats as their representatives on that body.  It also amended the terms of office for Committee members and alternate members from two to three years.

In a separate action, the Meeting took note of a report presented by the Tribunal’s Registrar, on budgetary matters for the financial periods 2007-2008 and 2009-2010.

Following those actions, the Meeting took up the Secretary-General’s reports under article 319 of the Convention on general issues arising with respect to that instrument.  The reports, providing an overview of developments and challenges in ocean affairs and the law of the sea, were intended to help the General Assembly in its annual review and evaluation of the Convention’s implementation and other related developments.

The representatives of Iceland, Russian Federation and the United States emphasized that substantive discussions on matters relating to the law of the sea should be taken up exclusively by the Assembly, pointing out that Meeting was not the place for them; its mandate was limited to addressing general financial and administrative matters.

However, the representative of the Republic of Korea asserted that a general debate on Convention-related issues would serve to facilitate its implementation and lead to further development of the law of the sea.

Several representatives underscored the necessity of building capacity in developing and small island States, with Brazil’s delegate noting that efforts in that regard should include training, access to technology and the interpretation of data.

Turning to the workload of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, Canada’s representative said discussions on the matter did not imply that the Commission was not working to make improvements.  She highlighted remaining issues to be considered, including the amount of resources needed, their source and effective means of application.

The Meeting also heard reports from the respective coordinators of its Open-Ended Working Groups of the Whole on the Workload of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, and on Budgetary Matters of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.

Other speakers today were the representatives of the United Republic of Tanzania, India, Mexico, Argentina, China, Spain (on behalf of the European Union) and Norway.

The Meeting will reconvene at 10 a.m. tomorrow, Friday, 18 June, to conclude its annual session.

Background

The Meeting of States Parties to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea met this morning to continue its annual session.  Before it was a report of the Secretary-General on oceans and the law of the sea (document A/64/66/Add.1 and Add. 2).  Addendum 1, which provides an overview of developments in ocean affairs and the law of the sea, is intended to assist the General Assembly in its annual review and evaluation in implementing the Convention and other related developments.

Among the various challenges and pressures facing the world’s oceans, the report draws particular attention to the threat posed by piracy to maritime security, the lives of seafarers and the safety of international shipping.  It also underscores the adverse impacts of several human activities on the health and productivity of the world’s oceans and seas.  For example, vulnerable marine ecosystems, such as corals, and important fisheries are being damaged by overexploitation; illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing; destructive fishing practices; invasive alien species; and marine pollution, especially from land-based sources.

The report stresses the need to enhance the resilience to climate change of coastal and marine ecosystems and vulnerable communities by increasing their adaptive capacities and reducing other pressures and threats, such as overfishing and land-based pollution.  The international community has a collective duty to constructively address the multifaceted challenges facing oceans and seas, and should do so within the solid legal framework provided by the Convention and related legal instruments.  Further concerted international efforts are needed to effectively implement laws governing the oceans and seas, and meet targets set by the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation of the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development.

Further, the report calls for enhanced scientific knowledge, information-sharing on anthropogenic impacts and increased capacity-building and technology transfer to developing States.  Noting the serious challenges posed by the large number of submissions before the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, it stresses that addressing that workload and identifying pragmatic solutions to ensure timely recommendations on the delineation of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles has become a priority.

Addendum 2 of the report contains information on scientific, technical, economic, legal, environmental and socio-economic activities by relevant organizations since the Secretary-General’s last report on the matter (document A/62/66/Add.2).  It also provides information on possible options and approaches to promoting international cooperation and coordination, and identifies key issues and questions whose consideration by States would benefit from more detailed background studies.

The report underlines the importance of marine biodiversity beyond areas of national jurisdiction for healthy functioning marine ecosystems, economic prosperity, global food security and sustainable livelihoods.  It draws attention to factors that continue to put essential marine ecosystems at risk: limited, albeit expanding, knowledge of the richness and resilience of biodiversity in some ocean areas; absence of regular monitoring programmes; limited capacity to implement and enforce relevant instruments; divergent views on the conservation and sustainable use of marine genetic resources beyond areas of national jurisdiction; difficulties in implementing integrated ocean management, ecosystem approaches and other management tools, owing, in particular, to limited cross-sectoral cooperation at all levels; and the lack of global policy guidance on some issues.

According to the report, there is a vital need to continue and strengthen efforts for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity beyond areas of national jurisdiction.  Recent developments indicate that the absence of global policy guidance on some issues may cause some coastal States to develop regional measures, such as creating marine protected areas.  Timely policy guidance by the Assembly to facilitate consistent and uniform application of the Convention and other relevant instruments is therefore, highly advisable.

Also before the Meeting was a report of the Secretary-General on oceans and the law of the sea (document A/65/69), which examines the relevance and scope of capacity-building, while presenting an overview of the capacity-building needs of States in the field of marine science and other areas of ocean affairs and the law of the sea.  It also addresses challenges that may constrain the potential of States, particularly least developed countries and small island developing States, to benefit from the resources of oceans and seas, thwarting their ability to implement the Convention and other legal instruments.

The report concludes that international cooperation and assistance to strengthen marine science and support technological capacities for the sustainable management of ocean-related activities could enhance scientific understanding of the oceans as a whole and support the sustainable global development and management of marine resources.  It concludes further that a comprehensive assessment of States’ existing needs and capacities in that regard is essential.

Open-Ended Working Groups

EDEN CHARLES (Trinidad and Tobago), Coordinator of the Open-Ended Working Group of the Whole on the Workload of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, said that, at that body’s request, the Drafting Committee had held two very productive meetings and made tremendous progress.  There remained small outstanding areas to consider in an informal meeting, he said, expressing hope that members would arrive at a decision agreeable to the Meeting.

NAMIRA NABMIL NEGM (Egypt), Coordinator of the Open-Ended Working Group of the Whole on Budgetary Matters of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, said that body had been able to finalize most items on its agenda after meeting on Tuesday and Wednesday.

She said several delegations had sought clarification of the draft budget proposals for the Tribunal (document SPLOS/2010/WP.1), while others had offered suggestions as to how to reduce the proposed budget.  The Tribunal’s Registrar had been available to answer questions, she said, adding that the Working Group would hold discussions in future on a possible independent body to assist States with budget issues.  The Working Group had then adopted the draft budget, with amendments.

Considering the budget report for 2007-2008 and 2009-2010 (document SPLOS/205), the Working Group had recommended that the plenary take note of it, she said.  Concerning the nomination of one member and one alternate member to the Tribunal’s Staff Pension Committee (document SPLOS/206) the Working Group had adopted the related draft decision, noting that both nominations should be from States with diplomatic representation in either Berlin or Hamburg.

She said the Working Group had then taken up document SPLOS/207, as delegations had confirmed their support of equal salary for members of the International Court of Justice and the Tribunal.  However, several had expressed concerns about automatic salary adjustments.  The Working Group had then adopted the draft decision, with amendments.

Statements

The representative of Brazil said capacity-building in the areas of marine science, ocean affairs and the law of the sea was of particular importance to developing States, and should include training, access to technology and interpretation of data.  Highlighting the need for developing States to increase their marine scientific research activities, he also underscored the importance of developing capacities for effective participation in economic activities.

The representative of Canada noted that discussions on the workload of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf did not imply that it had not itself been working to make improvements.  Questions remained with regard to the amount of resources required, their source and ways to effectively apply them so as to achieve results, she said.  Additionally, further Government deliberations, better cost estimates and an assessment matching resources to results over time were necessary to inform future discussions on the matter.

The representative of the United Republic of Tanzania urged States parties to consult with neighbouring countries before submitting disputes to the Commission, as a way to minimize disputes and reduce costs.  He said he was concerned about the Commission’s heavy workload and associated himself aligned with proposals to increase its capacity, bearing in mind the financial implications.  Citing the necessity of capacity-building in developing and small island States, he highlighted the United Nations programme of assistance in the teaching, study, dissemination and wider appreciation of international law as an important means of achieving development.

The representative of Iceland, emphasizing that the Assembly was the global forum for conducting an annual review and evaluation of the Convention’s implementation and other developments related to oceans and the law of the sea, said the title of the agenda item had important qualifications that must be respected.  It was for the information of States parties and limited to issues of a general nature and those arising with respect to the Convention.  The Meeting did not have any substantive role because that role was fulfilled by the Assembly and its facilitator, the United Nations Open-Ended Informal Consultative Process.  Iceland, therefore, as a matter of principle, would not take part in any substantive debate.

The representative of India expressed concern about the Commission’s long-projected timeline and increasing workload, urging the Meeting to focus on workable mechanisms to resolve those challenges.  He lauded the International Seabed Authority’s recent adoption of regulations for prospecting and exploration for poly-metallic sulphides, and expressed hope for significant progress during the seventeenth session of the India, Brazil, South Africa (IBSA) Dialogue Forum on draft regulations regarding prospecting and exploration for cobalt crusts.

He said the Indian Government was formulating a marine fisheries regulation and management act to enable conservation and the sustainable regeneration of fish stocks while ensuring environmentally sound and sustainable fishing.  It planned to regulate fishing activities outside the territorial sea by issuing permits.  He stressed the importance of an integrated coastal area management approach to sustainable development of coastal areas.  Referring to paragraph 63 of the Secretary-General’s report, on the need to strengthen coastal security, he called for strengthening national vessel registries, inter-agency coordination as well as effective coordination and cooperation among coastal security agencies, so as to create regional monitoring, control and surveillance networks.

The representative of Mexico said the Meeting was the ideal forum to discuss capacity-building measures, adding that priority should be given to strengthening institutions and standards, and providing least developed countries with the necessary human and technical tools to benefit fully from the Convention.  A redoubling of efforts was needed to build capacity in developing countries in order to improve their hydro-graphic services.  Referring to article 84, paragraph 2 of the Convention, he said his country had already deposited its geographical coordinates concerning the limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles to the Secretaries-General of the United Nations and the International Seabed Authority.  He said armed piracy off the coast of Somalia had shown the vital importance of strengthening national judicial systems and bringing perpetrators to justice.  National capacity-building must be prioritized to combat piracy at sea, he added.

The representative of the Republic of Korea said the Meeting was a forum for exchanging views and seeking consensus on general matters relating to the Convention, such as extending the deadline for submissions to the Commission in order to tackle the issue of the Commission’s workload.  Discussion on that matter was intended to result in timely, effective and efficient implementation of the Convention.  He said the matter of seat allocations on the Tribunal and the Commission had been agreed in 2009 after two years of discussion.

The representative of the Russian Federation supported the statement by the delegate of Iceland, emphasizing that there was no need to expand the mandate of the Meeting and that discussions on substantive matters should be address by the Assembly.  The Meeting should limit its focus to administrative and budgetary matters, such as the Tribunal’s finances and the Commission’s workload, which faced challenges requiring detailed consideration and constructive solutions.

The representative of Argentina said that a previous agreement had become an “abstract exercise” as it was considering a report on activities occurring over a year ago rather than more recent activities.  Such a practice was not a good idea, he said, requesting that explicit guidelines on date for the submission of general reports be given to the General Assembly.

With regard to the rights of coastal States, he noted that compliance with General Assembly resolutions in no way justified States to deny or ignore such rights, as established under the Convention.  No information present in Assembly resolutions could affect the sovereign rights of coastal States concerning the continental shelf; therefore, they should not be considered to be of greater importance than any interpretative instrument issued by the Meeting.

The representative of China, noting that the international community had made efforts to realize the long-term, peaceful and sustainable use of oceans, said that the Convention — as the result of negotiations within the international community — should be safeguarded as a cornerstone of maritime order.  Recognizing remaining problems in successfully implementing the Convention, he urged States to fulfil their obligations, while calling on the Tribunal, the Commission and the Seabed Authority to strengthen cooperation.  Such problems had attracted the attention of the international community, he said, noting that experts and scholars were holding symposiums globally to address them.

The representative of Spain, speaking on behalf of the European Union, said the report provided a great basis for next week’s discussions on capacity-building.  However, it did not include input from States, especially developing countries, which was of the utmost importance.  Considering the Convention as the legal framework for all ocean issues and related activities, the European Union attached significant importance to greater international cooperation in helping developing countries successfully exercise their rights as established under it, he said.

The representative of Norway said his delegation would offer comments on the report during upcoming discussions.

The representative of the United States, supporting the views expressed by the delegates of the Russian Federation and Iceland, pointed out that that the Meeting’s role was limited to financial and administrative matters, and article 319 did not in any way empower it to perform general reviews or interpret the provisions of the Law of the Sea.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record