The Continental Shelf Delimitation Beyond 200 Nautical Miles

In The Continental Shelf Beyond 200 Nautical Miles Bjarni Már Magnússon explores various aspects of the establishment of the outer limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles and its interplay with maritime boundary delimitations.

"The last two decates witness a burgeoning interest in the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles (nm). The number of submissions concerning the delineation of the outer limits of the continental shelf to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) far exceeds the original anticipation of the Third United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III), and coastal States increasingly request international courts and tribunals to delimit the continental shelf beyond 200 nm in addition to maritime zones within 200 nm. The Bangladesh/Myanmar case decided by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) inaugurated the judicial process of delimiting the continental shelf beyond 200 nm, and in the following years cases concerning the continental shelf beyond 200 nm were launched before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and Annex VII tribunals under United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) as well"--

The Continental Shelf Delimitation Beyond 200 Nautical Miles provides an up-to-date and informed analysis of the now fast developing, yet confusing, field of the law of maritime delimitation. It examines the procedural matters in relation to the competence of international courts and tribunals in the light of the institutional framework of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and discusses the methodological questions arising out of the delimitation process. The book engages with the key concepts of maritime entitlement, delineation and delimitation with a view to developing a coherent and consistent approach to the delimitation of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles. Essentially, it argues that the delimitation of the continental shelf will be unified with existing maritime delimitation, and a common approach to maritime boundary-making within and beyond 200 nautical miles is likely to emerge.

New Knowledge and Changing Circumstances in the Law of the Sea focuses on the challenges posed to the existing legal framework, in particular the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and the various ways in which States are addressing these challenges.

Potential claims to Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) areas under the 1982 UN United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, may eventually cover more than 15 million square kilometres of seabed. Under Article 82 of the Convention, a portion of the revenue from the extraction of non-living resources on the OCS must be disbursed through the International Seabed Authority 'on the basis of equitable sharing criteria, taking into account the interests and needs of developing States, particularly the least developed and the land-locked among them'. Responsibility for the Implementation of article 82 rests with the Authority and with States that exploit the non-living resources of their OCS. However, Article 82 does not address many of the specifics of how this is to be accomplished and therefore careful consideration is required of the obligation, principles, and criteria for distribution of benefits, procedural aspects, the role of the Authority, the role of OCS States, and economic and temporal issues. To begin to answer these, and other questions, around the interpretation and application of Article 82, the Authority, in conjunction with the Energy, Environment and Development Programme of the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House) in the United Kingdom, convened a seminar for a group of invited experts to discuss the issues associated with Article 82. The present report, which examines the process for the delineation of the outer continental shelf and speculates on the location and feasibility of extraction of the various non-living resources which may occur in these areas, was originally prepared as a background paper for the seminar, and was subsequently extensively revised to take into account the views expressed by participants in the seminar.

Offers a comprehensive and systematical review of the case law on maritime delimitation, identifying various inconsistencies.