《海洋法》争端解决机制是一个学术性很强的领域, 经济, 和政治利益,其中公法与私法之间的关系正在不断发展并不断显示出新的挑战.
本讲座和分析的目的是创建一个论坛,以反思国际公法和国际私法之间的最新发展. 历史上, 海洋法被划分为公共领域和私有领域. We speak of it mostly in the context of interstate relations and private issues are often relegated to admiralty or maritime law (留置权, 对海员的伤害, 等等). 然而, 海洋法遍及公有和私有领域,国际公法逐渐在某些方面影响个人,并融合到国家法律体系中, 例如, 安全, 导航, 环保, 资源保护与开发, 科学研究, 民事和刑事管辖权. 也, 石油公司非常关注海洋区域的划界,而捕鱼船队则关注专属经济区的权利和义务 (专属经济区). Private activity is often the catalyst for conflicts between States as to rights and obligations on the sea. These conflicts demand methods for dispute settlements and many were borrowed from national legal systems.
在生效后 1994 的 1982 海洋法公约 (视线), dispute settlement methods flourished and the tide is still rising twenty years later. States mostly remain the featured players in these forms of dispute settlement methods but there are some avenues for private actors to engage in as their interests almost always lie behind the interests of State actors.
此后,根据海洋法解决争端的下列方法蓬勃发展 1994 重点发展和案例:
- 谈判
- 调解
- 调解
- 仲裁
- 司法解决
- 大陆架委员会
Overview of the Law of the Sea Convention (视线)
《海洋法公约》旨在全面规范海洋法的各个方面, 制定基准和内部水域的形成规则, 在几个海域 (领海, 毗连区, 专属经济区, 大陆架和扩展大陆架, 公海和深海底地区).
It is possible for islands to generate some or all of the maritime zones. 文章 121 of the Law of the Sea Convention provides that an “island” is a form of land above the water at high tide which can generate all of the maritime zones if it can sustain human habitation and economic life. 然而, 一个不能独自维持人类居住和经济生活的岛屿是只产生领海的“岩石”.
《海洋法公约》还规定了有关海峡的规则, 群岛, 封闭的海洋, 内陆国家, 海上船舶管辖权规则.
部分 11 《公约》在谈判中引起了极大的关注,因为它规定了与开发深海底区域和体制结构有关的规则 (包括律师和集会).
部分 12 of the Convention sets forth rules for environmental protection of maritime areas. Some of these rules are regarded as a sophisticated environmental law treaty embedded within the Law of the Sea Convention.
以来 1994, we have acquired a very detailed set of rules relating to the conduct of State and non State actors in relation to the seas. These rules offer a template to evaluate whether a conduct is permissible or not.
其中一些规则不是很清楚, such as the rules on delimitation of the zones between States. When we refer to the appropriate rules in case of a dispute on the zones, 《公约》规定,对经济区进行分层的程序, 专属经济区, 大陆架“应根据国际法受协议影响,以实现公平解决方案”, 这是一种相当不确定的说法,即国家应该团结起来达成协议并以公平的思想为指导, but does not provide how the delimitation process should go forward. If States cannot reach an agreement without a reasonable amount of time, 届时,他们将诉诸于根据《海洋法公约》第二部分规定的争端解决程序 15 公约的.
部分 15 《公约》建立了一个非常创新的解决争端的制度. 部分 1 包括非强制性争端程序,并呼吁各国进行谈判, 调解, 调解. If these avenues do not solve the dispute, 部分 2 规定了强制性争端程序,其中包括国际海洋法法庭 (ITLOS) 根据附件六, 国际法院 (国际法院), 根据附件七设立仲裁庭, 并成立了一个由专家小组组成的特别仲裁庭, 不一定是律师, 处理因特定地区引起的争议 (例如. 渔业, 海洋环境, 科学研究, 导航, 等等).
The innovative aspect of dispute resolution under the Law of the Sea Convention is that it does not impose a single method to settle disputes on a compulsory basis but allows for a lot of flexibility. How does one know which avenue to take? When joining the Convention, new members select one of the four mechanisms set out above. When a dispute arises and that both parties have selected the same mechanism upon joining, they are obligated to use it. When a member has failed to make a selection, it is deemed to have selected an Arbitral Tribunal under Annex VII by default. When both parties have selected different options upon joining, they are both deemed to have selected an Arbitral Tribunal under Annex VII. In shirt, 仲裁是默认流程.
在导致起草公约的谈判中, it was considered important to establish certain automatic and optional carve outs to the compulsory dispute settlement methods. These are provided for in Section 3 部分 15 并包括, 除其他外, 强制性争端解决的自动例外,可以防止在国际法院面前质疑允许捕捞量的确定, ITLOS or an Arbitral Tribunal. There are also optional carve outs which can be invoked by a State upon joining the Convention (例如. 一个成员可能会选择不接受关于划界争议的强制性争议解决, 有关历史海湾的纠纷, 或有关军事活动的纠纷). 例如, 中国批准《海洋法公约》时, 它援引了所有三个可选排除项,然后声称与这些事项有关的任何索赔都没有依据中国.
即使各国在加入《公约》时选择了一些可选的办法, 但是,他们有义务采取非强制性的争端解决方法,例如谈判, 调解与调解. These do not however lead to legally binding decisions.
现在有 167 《海洋法公约》的成员国和 147 缔约国 1994 与深海海底有关的协定 (“关于执行《联合国海洋法公约》第十一部分的协定 10 十二月 1982”). 以来 1994, 为了阐明海洋法则,人们付出了更多的努力。, 一些协议是全球性的 (例如. 处理过鱼区) 或地区 (例如. 特定区域的鱼类资源), 有些是双边的, 其他人处理沉船事故, 文化文物, 等等. All these agreements constitute a rather complicated web of regulations which are always to be considered against the backdrop of well established rules of customary international law.
1970年代和1980年代谈判《海洋法公约》时, 人们对与深海床有关的资源的开发产生了浓厚的兴趣,但随着考虑其他途径来代替从契德海床开采的某些矿物,这种资源逐渐减少。 (例如. 合成材料, 陆上矿物的新来源,特别是在发展中国家). 然而, 在过去的 10 年份, 国际海底管理局从希望进行海底勘探的公司收到的应用程序的大量增加以及技术的进步使人们对契德海底的兴趣似乎再次增长。.
海洋争端解决的法律形式
谈判
当代海洋法下的详细规则, the increasing interest in exploiting resources and the threat of compulsory dispute settlement mechanisms encourage States to enter into negotiations. Identifying the fact that negotiations are going forward is difficult as States often keep them quiet. Studies have however reported 16 来自的谈判 1994 至 2012, 其中一些成功, 如那个 2003 阿塞拜疆之间的谈判, 哈萨克斯坦和俄罗斯联邦, 的 2004 澳大利亚和新西兰之间的谈判, 的 2008 毛里求斯-塞舌尔专属经济区划界条约, 等等.
谈判有时会导致以条约形式或其他形式的争端解决机制解决争端. 到目前为止,谈判是国家首选的解决争端的方法,只有在谈判停顿时才考虑采用其他途径.
在边界划界的背景下, there are some real disadvantages in pursuing compulsory dispute mechanisms and considerable advantages in negotiating. During negotiations, 各方保留对一系列非常重要问题的控制权,包括划定边界的确切结果, 线的定义方式, the terms and the timing of the agreement and the way the agreement is presented publically. It is generally believed that litigation always carries risks for the parties and that the range of legal findings available to the tribunal is more restricted than the range of options open to the negotiators. 也, 出庭时适用国际法, 各方在缺乏灵活性,没有创造力的余地的特定框架下运作,并且往往总是偏向一方,而没有考虑所有参与者的利益. 然而, 在谈判中, 双方在海域进行共同发展的进程,并能够搁置法律纠纷,将重点放在确保双方基本目标的实际措施上, 特别是当各方希望进行不同类型的剥削时.
调解
相比之下, States rarely resort to mediation or good offices. 例如, 的 2015 美洲国家组织(OAS)对伯利兹-危地马拉边境争端的调解尚未解决争议,并已导致当事方向国际法院提起诉讼。.
调解
部分提供调解 15 of the Law of the Sea Convention but is almost never used by States. 的 1981 关于杰伊·梅恩岛的冰岛/挪威大陆架争端是有史以来为数不多的调解之一.
国家不倾向于使用调解,因为一旦它们决定放弃对争端的控制并允许第三方机构作出正式决定,, States prefer to go all the way to an ultimately binding decision. There is not much to gain from a process which looks a lot like arbitration without the benefit of legal certainty flowing from the issuance of an arbitral award. 也, 各国也希望放弃仲裁,有理由撤销裁决,而不是失去调解,也没有任何法律依据撤销裁决.
仲裁
有时, the parties will reach an impasse during the negotiations but nevertheless need to resolve the dispute as they might not otherwise be able to exploit resources. They will then turn to compulsory dispute resolution. Some countries, 如尼加拉瓜, 对此过程非常熟悉,曾多次出现在国际法院之前. The more familiar States become with the process, the more likely they are to prefer compulsory Law of the Sea dispute resolution in the future.
以来 1994, 仲裁已成为解决海事纠纷的最流行手段. 根据《海洋法公约》附件七, 法庭由 5 仲裁员, 争端各方指定一名仲裁员,他们共同指定其余三名. In the event that it is needed, the President of ITLOS serves as the appointing authority. The arbitral tribunal decides on its own procedures which provides for a lot of flexibility.
LOSC附件VII仲裁的一些示例包括:
- 澳大利亚和新西兰v. 日本 (“南部蓝鳍金枪鱼仲裁”)
- 爱尔兰v. 英国 (“ Mox工厂仲裁”)
- 马来西亚v. 新加坡 (“土地开垦仲裁”)
- 巴巴多斯v. 特立尼达和多巴哥海域划界仲裁
- 圭亚那v. 苏里南海域划界仲裁
- 孟加拉国v. 印度 (“孟加拉湾海事边界仲裁”)
- 莫里斯·V. 英国 (“查戈斯群岛仲裁”)
- 阿根廷v. 加纳 (“ ARA Libertad仲裁”)
- 菲律宾v. 中国 (“华南 / 西菲律宾海上仲裁”)
- 马耳他v. 圣多美和普林西比 (“杜兹吉特诚信仲裁”)
- 荷兰v. 俄罗斯联邦 (“北极日出仲裁”)
- 丹麦关于法罗群岛v. 欧洲联盟 (“大西洋-斯堪的纳维亚人鲱鱼仲裁”)
《海洋法公约》没有, 通过它自己, seek to address issues of sovereignty over territory. It is therefore important to keep in mind, 在分析附件七的仲裁中, 每当法庭要求裁决哪个国家对特定领土拥有主权时,就会出现管辖权问题.
例如, 在查戈斯群岛仲裁中, 毛里求斯声称英国对群岛的管理是非法的,毛里求斯领土应包括查戈斯群岛. 毛里求斯提出诉讼程序时 2010, it tried to frame it in a way that only indirectly touched sovereignty issues. 然而, 三月 2015, 法庭认为它缺乏管辖权,因为争端直接涉及主权, 这不在其管辖范围之内. 但是,仲裁庭指出,一些较小的主权问题, 附属索赔的辅助, 可以裁定.
在菲律宾v. 中国仲裁, the Philippines are challenging China’s activity in the South China Sea and Seabed Area and argues that China’s claims over the area delimited by the “Nine-Dash Line” are not lawful under the Law of the Sea Convention. The Philippines are therefore seeking a finding that China’s claims over this area is unlawful. The Philippines are also asking the tribunal to determine whether some features claimed by both the Philippines and China qualify as islands, and a finding regarding the Philippines’ rights beyond its exclusive economic zone. China rejects the tribunal’s jurisdiction 除其他外 on the ground that the essence of the subject matter of the dispute is sovereignty. A hearing on jurisdiction was scheduled for July 2015 和, 如果发现管辖权, 关于案情的听证会稍后在 2015.
States are using arbitration more and more because tribunals are quick are issuing decisions and give the parties a lot of control over the procedure. A downside of arbitration is the fact that it is more expensive than court proceedings.
司法解决
- ITLOS
《海洋法公约》的一个重要特征是建立了一个新机构, 国际海洋法法庭 (ITLOS) 在汉堡, 可能会听到有关海洋法解决争端的有争议和无争议的案件.
21 选出的法官 9 缔约国任职十年. 每个缔约国最多可提名两名候选人. There is a process to ensure equitable distribution among the judges and the term of one third of them expires every three years. ITLOS operates somewhat in similar way to the ICJ in terms of having some permanence to the institution and a rotation system.
国际海洋法法庭的特殊之处在于,当沿海国扣押外国船只及其船员时,能够迅速审理“迅速释放”案件 (通常在其专属经济区) 并将其带入港口.
地位不仅限于国家行为者,自然人或法人也可以出庭 (尽管他们必须获得船旗国的许可).
尽管汉堡有一个非常强大的法院,可以审理有争议和无争议的案件, litigation before ITLOS has been very modest. 的 22 cases registered are almost all related to “prompt release” matters and ITLOS very rarely decides cases on the merits. Although States mostly prefer going before the ICJ, 越来越多的案件在ITLOS之前注册 (例如ITLOS案号. 16 “关于界定孟加拉湾与孟加拉国之间海洋边界的争端”和 ITLOS案例号. 23 “关于加纳和科特迪瓦在大西洋之间划定海洋边界的争端”).
- 国际法院
无疑, 寻求有关海洋法司法解决的国家的第一大论坛是国际法院 (国际法院) 这不限于海洋法问题,然后可以决定海洋和主权问题.
自2000年以来国际法院关于海洋法的一些判决 1994 包括:
- 1998 渔业管辖权 (西班牙v. 加拿大) 2001 海上划界和领土问题 (卡塔尔v. 巴林)
- 2002 陆地和海洋边界 (喀麦隆v. 奈及利亚: 赤道几内亚干预)
- 2007 加勒比海的领土和海洋争端 (尼加拉瓜v. 洪都拉斯)
- 2012 领土和海事纠纷 (尼加拉瓜v. 哥伦比亚)
- 2009 黑海的海上划界 (罗马尼亚v. 乌克兰)
- 2014 海事纠纷 (秘鲁v. 智利)
- 2014 在南极捕鲸 (澳大利亚v. 日本: 新西兰介入)
The ICJ jurisprudence is fairly robust and contributes greatly to our understanding of how Law of the Sea disputes should be decided. 例如, 很多年了, 用于定界的方法尚不确定,但在过去的几十年中, 特别是在黑海争端方面, 建立了三部分的划界方法 (第一, 法庭从划界争端两个缔约国海岸的基点画出一条临时等距线; 第二, 仲裁庭考虑了需要进行调整的因素,例如一国海岸上的小颠簸严重影响了临时等距线; 第三, 仲裁庭进行比例分析,以分析水的两部分, 考察比例和海岸线,并确定授予每个州的海上空间是否存在明显的不均衡). 仲裁庭的做法具有很大的灵活性,当代法理学证明了这种情况, 特别是在存在岛屿或其他特征的情况下, matter a lot. Depending on their size, 岛屿有时会非常重要,并将决定绘制临时等距线的位置, 或有时会被法庭推翻,并且不会用于决定案件.
Geographic considerations are the dominant force driving these cases. Issues about which State entity should be entitled to which area, 经济资源以及哪个参与者对环境更有利.
- 咨询意见
The ICJ or ITLOS may render Advisory Opinions. ITLOS recently issued its first Advisory Opinion for the West African Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission. 委员会向ITLOS提出了四个与之相关的问题, 除其他外, to the rights and obligations of flag and coastal States regarding fishing in the Exclusive Economic Zone. The backdrop to the request was allegations by African States that third States were not properly regulating their vessels. Twenty-two States parties to the Convention filed written statements before ITLOS. 无疑, 将来将需要更多咨询意见,以获取有关国际法规定的国家权利和义务的进一步指导.
也有可能从海底争端分庭获得咨询意见, a sub unit of ITLOS which can both hear disputes between State and non State actors and issue Advisory Opinions. 在 2011, 它发表了关于海底采矿的第一份咨询意见.
- 大陆架委员会
根据LOSC, 几乎每个州都有一个大陆架 200 nautical miles but States sometimes argue that their Continental Shelf continues past this line. Extending a State’s Continental Shelf allows it to exploit resources further but also takes away other States’ ability to exploit resources in the area.
The Law of the Sea Convention created a Commission to hear the numerous Extended Continental Shelf Claims and their underlying scientific arguments. The Commission consists of 21 成员, 地质和物理学领域的专家, 谁将对索赔做出裁决,并就应在何处划定大陆架的界限以及哪一个提出建议, 如果遵循, 被视为具有约束力的定界 对面 LOSC的所有各方.
已有77个国家向委员会提交了获得此类建议书的意见书,迄今为止已经发布了22个建议书.
关于海洋争端解决法的结论
实际上,在海洋法下解决争端的潮流正在由目前可用的详细规则驱动, 对海上资源以及保护这些资源的兴趣日益浓厚, 和强制解决争端的前景笼罩着国家行为者.
New forms of dispute are now starting to emerge. Global climate change is generating a significant amount of disputes as seas are rising from the melting of glaciers, arctic ice and the expansion of water generally. Baselines are therefore changing. Some nations, 岛国, 也许有一天甚至会消失.
资源: 拉文讲座, 15 七月 2015, 日内瓦, 涨潮: 海洋法下的争端解决, 肖恩·墨菲教授
讲者: 马塞洛·科恩(Marcelo Kohen), 迈克尔·施耐德, 肖恩·墨菲
- Summary by Olivier Marquais, Aceris Law LLC