In progress at UNHQ

Meeting of States Parties to Law of Sea Convention,
184th Meeting* (AM)
SEA/2017

Concluding Session, States Parties to Sea Law Convention Decide to Continue Consideration of Work Conditions for Continental Shelf Commission Members

Speakers Spotlight Maritime Disputes, National Initiatives to Uphold Treaty

Delegates concluded the twenty-fifth Meeting of States Parties to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea today, adopting a draft decision on the workspace needed for those involved in the implementation of the “oceans constitution”, and more broadly, tackling thorny maritime disputes that continued to hamper peaceful ocean governance.

In closing remarks, President of the twenty-fifth Meeting, Kriangsak Kittichaisaree, thanked delegates for their cooperative spirit and constructive mindset to overcome challenges, which should prevail in addressing issues such as the suppression of illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity beyond areas of national jurisdiction, and small island developing States’ equitable enjoyment of their rights.

“Make good things happen sooner rather than later”, the President said, “for the sake of our generation and of posterity.”

By its draft decision, the Meeting would continue its consideration of the conditions of service of Members of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf related to workspace and medical insurance coverage, with the intention of making progress on those matters during the General Assembly’s seventieth session.

Speaking before the adoption, Japan’s representative said it was his understanding that the Open-ended Working Group on the Conditions of Service of Commission members would consider how to finance “appropriate and necessary measures” described in decision’s operative paragraph 3.

After action, Argentina’s delegate said it was important to respect the confidentiality of the Commission’s work, and he hoped States could resolve that issue.  The spirit of “goodwill” would be essential in making decisions to be submitted to the General Assembly.  Along similar lines, Canada’s delegate hoped the draft decision would lead to a good outcome and she looked forward to information being provided, which would inform discussions in the fall.

Lawrence F. Awosika, Commission Chairperson, welcomed the adoption, as the Sea Law body had been working under stressful conditions — which he was pleased had been understood.  The Commission was required to make every effort to agree by consensus, which sometimes delayed the delivery of its recommendations.

Delegates also continued discussion of the Secretary-General’s report on Oceans and the Law of the Sea (document A/69/71/Add.1), which covered the 1 September 2013 to 31 August 2014 period.  Several delegations turned a spotlight on current maritime disputes, with Ukraine’s delegate stressing that the Russian Federation had impeded his country’s ability to provide safety of navigation and regulation of maritime traffic in its sovereign territory of Crimea — acts which were “unquestionable”, as endorsed by General Assembly resolution 68/262 (2014).  Ukraine had closed seaports in that area on 15 July 2014 to prevent the illegal use of maritime resources.  His Government would take measures to restore its legal regime, including its territorial sea and continental shelf.

To those comments, the representative of the Russian Federation said the Meeting did not have the mandate to consider the Crimea and its adjacent seas.  Measures by his Government to facilitate maritime traffic in the Black Sea were outlined in the appendix of circular letter 3471 to the International Maritime Organization (IMO) on 7 July 2014.  He underscored the role of consensus in maritime issues, expressing hope that the General Assembly President would do likewise in his consultations with States when determining a chair for the preparatory committee for the formulation of a new agreement on maritime biodiversity beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.

In a similar vein, the representative of the Philippines expressed concern over the expansionist policy of a State party that had taken destabilizing actions in her country’s exclusive economic zone.  In 2012, that party failed to withdraw its naval presence in Scarborough Shoal, a problem stemming from the apprehension by Philippine authorities of its fishing vessels.  The country had since erected a barrier to the shoal.  It also was engaging in ocean filling in the Johnson Reef, McKennan Reef and Mischief Reef, among others, expanding that area to 11 times its original size and violating both the Convention and the 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea.  She urged that State party to desist from such actions in areas where it had no sovereign rights or jurisdiction.

Responding, China’s representative, stressing that the Meeting was not the place to discuss such issues, said his Government’s construction activities were “legal, justified and reasonable”.  They had been taken to improve living conditions for personnel, fulfil maritime search and rescue obligations and provide better service to vessels.  In fact, that State had illegally occupied China’s islands and reefs, and had raised the issue in attempts to force China to make concessions.  “Let me make this clear,” he said.  “Their calculations are totally wrong.”

Other speakers took the floor to highlight national initiatives to uphold the Convention — in both letter and spirit.  Japan’s delegate said his Government had co-sponsored a draft resolution on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity within and beyond national jurisdiction.  The principles of international law, including on freedom of navigation and overflight on the high seas, should be respected and maritime disputes settled by peaceful means.  In that context, Japan had hosted a symposium on the rule of law in the seas of Asia.

Kenya’s representative clarified that, as a law-abiding nation, his country had conducted counter-piracy off the coast of Somalia, in line with Security Council resolutions.  It also continued to receive piracy subjects.  Kenya would continue to respect international law and had no interest in interfering with any countries’ maritime space.

The representative of India said oceans’ offshore winds were a potential renewable energy source.  With that in mind, India had formulated an offshore energy policy.

The United States’ representative, participating as an observer, commented on “case 21”, stressing that the United States supported efforts to address illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing through implementation of international instruments adopted for that purpose.  While the Seabed Disputes Chamber could issue advisory opinions, the Convention and its Annex VI did not provide for any additional advisory opinion jurisdiction for the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.  “Case 21” was the first in which it had asserted advisory jurisdiction, despite that its constitutional agreements did not provide for such.

Following those interventions, Gabrielle Goettsche-Wanli, the Director of the Division for Ocean Affairs and Law of the Sea, said the Secretary-General’s comprehensive report in recent years had been submitted to the General Assembly in two parts:  the first on the topic selected by the Assembly, and the second on an overview of developments in ocean affairs.

She also updated on the projected funding requirements of various trust funds managed by the Division.  The voluntary fund to help States in dispute settlement had a balance of $121,000 at the end of May.  The Hamilton Shirley Amerasinghe Memorial Fellowship on the Law of the Sea had a $5,000 balance, she said, noting that the cost for one award was $55,000.  The voluntary fund for the process of global reporting and assessment of the marine environment had a $50,000 balance, while that for helping developing countries attend the United Nations open-ended informal consultative process on oceans had a $30,000 balance.

Rounding out the day, Robert Ward, President of the International Hydrographic Organization (IHO), said his organization provided guidance on hydrographic, geodetic and marine scientific aspects of the Convention.  The fifth edition of its manual on the technical aspects of the Sea Law Convention included a substantial revision on geodesy.  He urged the three Convention bodies to consult the manual from the outset of their activities.

Argentina’s representative requested that delegates be informed in advance of statements such as that just delivered, stressing that his Government would like to consult the International Hydrographic Organization document.

__________

*     The 178th-183rd Meetings were not covered.

For information media. Not an official record.