Dissertations / Theses on the topic 'Maritime Boundary Delimitation'

The Gulf of Thailand, bordered by Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam, encapsulates many of the challenges facing coastal states seeking to resolve questions of jurisdiction worldwide. Among the key considerations for maritime boundary delimitation in the Gulf of Thailand are the fact that the Gulf is a relatively confined semi-enclosed sea. This necessitates maritime boundary delimitation betweenneighbouring states. A major constraint is also posed by the Gulf's complex coastalgeography, including the presence of numerous islands, large and small. The existenceof competing sovereignty claims to islands, has also complicated the development ofclaims and retarded attempts to resolve maritime boundary delimitation disputes.The problems posed by the existing national jurisdictional claims are also significant. There are multiple unresolved maritime boundary delimitations, lengthy straight baseline claims, maximalist unilateral maritime claims resulting in extensive areas of overlapping claims, and a number of undefined jurisdictional claims as well as claims based on alleged historic rights. Additionally, there exist a number of maritime boundary agreements, aspects of all of which are subject to interpretation, and several joint development or interim joint arrangements, which serve to defer delimitation and are themselves potentially open to question. These factors have to be set against the complexities of the coastal states' political and economic characteristics together withthe opportunities and challenges associated with the Gulf of Thailand itself. This study examines critically the development of the Gulf of Thailand coastal states' maritime claims and existing maritime boundary agreements with a view to exploring the challenges associated with resolving the remaining undelimited boundary situations. Its key aims can be summarised as follows: • to examine the interplay between between the disciplines of law and geography in the application of the law of the sea to the geographical realities of the Gulf of Thailand; • to analyse the baseline claims of the littoral states; • to review and evaluate unilateral national claims to maritime jurisdiction;• to provide an overview and analysis of existing maritime boundary agreements within the Gulf of Thailand; • to analyse unsettled boundary delimitations and disputes;• to offer prospects for the future including the options for maritime boundarydispute resolution in the Gulf of Thailand. Despite the obstacles to maritime boundary delimitation in the Gulf of Thailand outlined in this study, there are signs of progress and prospects for the future, particularly in the wake of the geopolitical transformation of the region in the 1990s, must be considered to be good.

This dissertation begins with a general description of facts, both physical and non-physical, on the dispute in the Gulf of Tonkin. The context in which the dispute arose is given first so that the reader can understand the background of the dispute in terms of both its regional setting (the South China Sea region) and its place in the overall bilateral disputes between Vietnam and China. Next, the physical aspects of the dispute, including coastal configuration, islands, resources, and geomorphological and geological conditions, are described. Then the development of the dispute and the positions of the parties are outlined. The second and third parts of the thesis attempt to answer three questions: (1) What rules and principles of international law are applicable to the delimitation of the territorial seas, exclusive economic zone, and continental shelf in the Gulf of Tonkin? (2) Did the 1887 Sino-French Convention establish the maritime boundary between Vietnam and China in the Gulf of Tonkin? (3) What is the course of the single maritime boundary between Vietnam and China in the Gulf of Tonkin from the eastern point of Tra Co to the closing line of the Gulf? In the examination of the applicable law, the rules on maritime delimitation are classified into legal principles, equitable criteria, relevant circumstances, and practical methods. A boundary line is drawn in the Gulf of Tonkin to illustrate the equitableness of the result reached in the research. The delimitation line was divided into three segments. In the first segment (from the land boundary terminus to the mid-point of oppositeness of coastal relationship), the basic criterion of equal division of the overlapping area requires the adoption of the bisector method based on the general direction of the coasts. Given the roughly equal lengths of the respective coasts of the Parties, the bisector line satisfies the equitable requirements. In the second segment, a median line is drawn from the end-point of the bisector line to the closing line of the Gulf of Tonkin so as to reflect the prevailing oppositeness of the coastal relationship. Finally, the presence and size of the Archipelago des Fai Tsi Long are taken into account in the same way as the Bijago Archipelago was in the Guinea--Guinea-Bissau case, that is, as a certain percentage of the length of the coast of Vietnam. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)

The tension between the Equidistance-Special Circumstances rule (articulated in the 1958 Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf) and the Equitable Principles-Relevant Circumstances rule (declared in the 1969 North Sea Continental Shelf cases of the International Court of Justice) prevented the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea from stipulating a specific method for the delimitation of the EEZ or the continental shelf. For this reason, the role or status in maritime delimitation of the equidistance method, equitable principles, and relevant circumstances must generally be determined by reviewing the decisions of international courts and tribunals. The equidistance method has been employed in international case-law as a means of constructing a ‘provisional’ line. Analysis of international case-law also shows that the current rule governing maritime delimitation is the ‘achievement of an equitable solution’ in and of itself. The concept of equity in maritime delimitation is therefore only relevant to the equitability of the ‘result’ to be reached. Thus, the argument that equitable principles applicable to the examination of relevant circumstances are ascertainable and meaningful in maritime delimitation should be dismissed. Guaranteeing the equitability of principles or processes does not necessarily lead to the achievement of an equitable result. The remaining concept of significance to the delimitation process is that of ‘relevant circumstances’, which must be taken into account in order to reach an equitable result. The patterns or processes involved when the delimitation rule is applied by taking account of relevant circumstances are not predictable. The achievement of an equitable solution in maritime delimitation is preceded by the flexible consideration of relevant circumstances. The increasing importance of relevant circumstances to the delimitation of maritime boundaries is proven by two practical instances. One is the establishment of a single maritime boundary, which constitutes one typical maritime boundary; the other is the delimitation of the outer continental shelf, which has recently been included in international case-law. In brief, this thesis will show how best to arrive at an equitable solution by drawing attention to the demise of equitable principles and the dominant role of relevant circumstances. The clarification of taking into account relevant circumstances enables us more clearly to understand what is entailed in the task of achieving an equitable solution.

Saudi Arabia was the first Arab country to claim offshore jurisdiction and the first Middle Eastern state to define its offshore waters. This study examines the principal geographical factors which have resulted in the present Saudi maritime boundary. The semi-enclosed sea, islands, reefs, natural resources of the continental shelf, exclusive economic zone and coastline, can all be considered principal geographical factors that have influenced Saudi territorial waters policy. Islands, for example, play an effective role in increasing the area of Saudi internal waters, increasing the breadth of the territorial sea, straight baseline and the delimitation of maritime boundary in the Red Sea and the Arabian Gulf with opposite and adjacent states. Natural resources demanded the swift implementation of unique agreements, used later as an example worldwide. The author has drawn the 1958 Saudi straight baseline and a theoretical straight baseline based on the 1982 Convention and states practice. The territorial sea which is drawn on this basis along the Red Sea and the Arabian Gulf coasts, is affected by the presence of islands and reefs. The Saudi Exclusive Fishing Zone claimed by the 1974 decree gave the Kingdom the same right as the 1982 Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), but the Kingdom had to adapt the latter in order to gain more control over its resources and non-mineral activities. The importance of the 1949 Saudi decree can be found in the contribution made by Saudi Arabia to the development of the law of the sea, and to safeguarding the national hydrocarbon resources (natural gas and oil) on and below its seabed. Saudi Arabia engaged in several agreements, mainly in the Gulf, in order to define its boundary. This study has highlighted these agreements as a model which can be used in different parts of the world to solve similar disputes, and can be adopted as methods of maritime delimitation between opposite and adjacent states. The importance of the economic factor has been shown, along with security, as the main factor influencing the successful conclusion of such agreements, but where there is no such importance, the boundary may become less significant and by the absence of such motivation the boundary may not be defined. Saudi waters are a rich and highly important maritime area. This is based on the facts that Saudi Arabia has 30 per cent of the world seawater desalination plants; that the sea represents food, fuel and wealth to Saudi Arabia; and that the existence of huge deserts emphasises the importance of the sea.

The purpose of this study was to clarify the ambiguity in the law relating to the extended continental shelf in Article 76 of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Another aim was to study the application of the law in a more focused part of the world, the region of East Asia, and in particular, Malaysia. The study also sought to propose solutions to issues relating to the extended continental shelf. The history of the law relating to the continental shelf, the codification of the law, and the enforcement of the law by the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf is presented. Besides that, Article 76 was also thoroughly discussed in order to identify the problems involved. Besides that, the two biggest issues which determine the outer limits of the continental shelf are examined. These are issues relating to ridges and submarine elevations and the application of the foot of continental slope provisions. The study examined the problems involved with the legal and scientific interface found in Article 76 and addressed them by referring to the legislative history of Article 76, State practice and the practice of the Commission. The continental shelf in the East Asian region is also analysed in order to provide an overview of the continental shelf issues in the region. Special reference to Malaysia is made as a State that has made a submission on its outer limits of the continental shelf. A thorough analysis was made based on the findings made in this study. This study also explored possible solutions to the continental shelf issues discussed.

The Arabian/Persian Gulf ('the Gulf') is a small semi-enclosed sea surrounded by eight States, namely Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Oman. The Gulf has long been an area of strategic and economic importance, rich in subsea hydrocarbon resources. Following a general introduction to the international law of the sea, this study analyses two forms of Gulf State practice; firstly, national legislation to date dealing with maritime limits and delimitation and secondly, the bilateral continental shelf agreements between the Gulf States, the majority of which delimit the continental shelf boundary between them. This analysis then assesses such state practice in the light of international law, with a particular focus on continental shelf delimitation. In so doing, this study places Gulf State practice in the context of the Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf 1958, the Geneva Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone 1958 and the Law of the Sea Convention 1982, as well as customary international law and international case law. This study reaches a number of conclusions in respect of delimitation in the Gulf more generally, but mainly in respect of continental shelf boundary delimitation in the Gulf, and how this compares with the international law of the sea. It notes the early references in Gulf legislation to delimitation on the basis of equitable principles, which were gradually superseded by references to the equidistance line. The reliance on equidistance as a method of delimitation, albeit often heavily modified, in the bilateral maritime boundary agreements is examined. The conclusions then seek to present such features of Gulf State practice in the context of the international law of the sea, noting innovative aspects of delimitation in the Gulf, as well as the relevance of international law to a small but extremely significant region of the world.

On January 27, 2014 the International Court of Justice, principal judicial organ of the United Nations ruled in the case of the maritime dispute (Peru v. Chile), being Peru the one that brought forth the case in January 2008. During the proceedings in Court, the parties presented fundamentally different positions on the existence of a maritime boundary between them and how the Court should proceed solving the dispute. The Court should have considered the multiple legal reasonings presented by the States parties over the years to arrive to its ruling. Particularly, some of the legal reasonings presented by Peru were accepted by the Court and considered in the ruling, beginning from the interpretation given to the proclamations of Peru and Chile in 1947, going through the reasonings Peru presented about the 1952 Santiago Declaration (It was the main topic presented by Chile, which was discarded by the Court) until the reasoning presented by Peru saying that the 1954 Special Maritime Frontier Zone Agreement didn’t create a zone of tolerance that extends to 200 nautical miles. However, the Court considered that in the 1954 agreement the parties accepted the existence of a tacit agreement, but this existence was not presented by them in the Court even though it has a legal support in the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice. Then, the Court had to determine the extent of the tacit agreement, a very difficult duty because the parties hadn’t considered the existence of that situation and its extension. After establishing the implied legal agreement was for 80 nautical miles along a parallel of latitude, the Court proceeded to establish a maritime boundary applying thoroughly the rules and principles of maritime delimitation presented by Peru, which applied to the case determine the presence of an equidistant line. In relation to the starting-point of the maritime boundary, the Court didn’t use the point presented by Peru but, in a correct way, made it clear that the starting-point of the maritime boundary and the starting-point of the land boundary don’t have to match necessarily. Finally, the way how the Court established the maritime boundary recognizes, with no doubt, that the area previously named “outer triangle” belongs to Peru, as this country claimed and as Chile opposed repeatedly over the years. In summary, it is a decision based on International Law and adopted under the evidence presented in Court. The Court applied and confirmed various legal arguments presented by Peru during the process, in spite of the opposing position of Chile.
El 27 de enero de 2014, la Corte Internacional de Justicia (CIJ), órgano judicial principal de la organización de las Naciones Unidas, dio su sentencia en el caso de la controversia marítima (Perú c. Chile), el cual el Perú presentó ante ella en enero de 2008. Durante el proceso ante la Corte, las partes presentaron posiciones fundamentalmente distintas sobre la existencia de un límite marítimo entre ellas y sobre cómo la Corte debía proceder para resolver este caso. Para llegar a su fallo, la Corte debió evaluar esos múltiples argumentos legales planteados por ambos Estados a lo largo de años. En particular, varios de los argumentos legales planteados por el Perú fueron aceptados por la Corte y acogidos en el fallo, desde la interpretación que dio a las proclamaciones de Perú y Chile de 1947, pasando por los argumentos que planteó el Perú sobre la Declaración de Santiago de 1952 (que había sido el núcleo del caso argumentado por Chile, el cual fue descartado por la Corte), hasta el argumento peruano en el sentido de que el Convenio sobre Zona Especial Fronteriza Marítima de 1954 no creó una zona de tolerancia que se extienda por doscientas millas marinas. Sin embargo, la Corte consideró que en ese tratado de 1954 las partes reconocieron la existencia de un acuerdo tácito, figura que no argumentaron las partes ante la Corte, pero que tiene su fundamentación legal en jurisprudencia previa de la CIJ. La Corte luego tuvo que determinar la extensión de ese acuerdo legal tácito, labor sumamente difícil ya que las partes no habían contemplado la existencia de esa figura ni argumentado hasta dónde se habría extendido la misma. Luego de establecer que el acuerdo legal tácito se extendía por ochenta millas marinas a lo largo de un paralelo de latitud, la Corte procedió a establecer un límite marítimo siguiendo exactamente las normas y principios sobre delimitación marítima planteados por el Perú, los cuales aplicados al caso determinan el establecimiento de una línea equidistante. Con relación al punto de inicio del límite marítimo, la Corte no empleó el punto planteado por el Perú pero, correctamente, dejó en claro que el punto de inicio del límite marítimo y el punto de inicio del límite terrestre no tienen necesariamente que coincidir. Finalmente, la manera como la Corte estableció el límite marítimo reconoce sin lugar a duda que el área antes llamada «triángulo exterior» corresponde exclusivamente al Perú, como ese Estado argumentó y Chile se opuso repetidas veces a lo largo de los años. En resumen, se trata de una decisión ajustada al derecho internacional y tomada sobre la base de la evidencia a disposición de la Corte, en la que esta emplea y confirma diversos de los argumentos legales planteados por el Perú durante el proceso, a pesar de todo lo que Chile argumentó contrariamente.

碩士
國立臺灣師範大學
政治學研究所
102
When nations seeking the interest in the maritime, the boundary disputes will occur. This thesis is focused on the methods to solve such issues by submitting issues to the international tribunals such as the International Court of Justice (I.C.J.), International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the Permanent Court of Arbitration. Based on the judgments of the International Court of Justice, indicated the trends and the mechanisms of how the courts determine the solution of such disputes can be observed. The regime of islands and the proportionality are two primary concerns when the court need to resolve the maritime disputes, this thesis will analyze several case judgments of the I.C.J. from 1982 to 2012 to understand the trends of maritime boundary delimitation. Though the regime of islands is a part of the United Nations Law of the Sea, the definitions of islands are not clear enough, which results disputes and potential conflicts of the claimants, the I.C.J. has to resolve such disputes by defining the rights and the boundary by prior agreements, population and other factors. The judgments indicated that the court has to determine the rights and the boundary of the relevant nations case by case. The proportionality can be considered as a vital part of the three-stage delimitation process implemented by the I.C.J., purposed in 1909’s Grisbadarna case, it has become a part of the UNCLOS. Ranging from the length of the relevant coast, relevant coast area and other factors, the court has defined a three-stage method, in the first stage, the Court establishes a provisional delimitation line between territories of the Parties by using methods that are geometrically objective and appropriate for the geography of the area to construct an equidistance line, where the relevant coasts are adjacent, or a median line between the two coasts, where the relevant coasts are opposite. In the second stage, the court considers whether there are any relevant circumstances which may call for an adjustment or shifting of the provisional equidistance/median line so as to achieve an equitable result. At the final stage, third stage, the court will verify that the line does not, as it stands, lead to an inequitable result by reason of any marked disproportion between the ratio of the respective coastal lengths and the ratio between the relevant maritime area of each State by reference to the delimitation line. Such three-stage process has become a crucial way in the delimitation process.

Maritime boundary delimitation is one of the oldest disputes between coastal States that remain until present and it is very likely continue to take place in the future. The main international legal framework on this subject matter is the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea regulates how States that is supported by the practice of international courts and tribunal. Until today over 200 maritime boundary disputes remain unresolved. There are many factors contributed to such, one of the factors is the difference view on how it should be delimited that is further complicated by the non-possibility to submit the dispute to international adjudication. This is due the fact that despite UNCLOS provides that all of maritime boundary delimitation shall be resolved by the parties and if cannot shall be submitted to one dispute settlement entailing binding decision in accordance with international law in order to achieve an equitable solution, the Convention also provides the possibility of States excluding themselves from such mechanism by making declaration under Article 298 (1) of UNCOS. One of Timor-Leste’s neighbours, Australia, made that declaration. Following the failure to solve their maritime boundary delimitation in the Timor Se for over 15 years, Timor-Leste submitted the dispute to compulsory conciliation under UNCLOS. This was the last evenue for Timor-Leste to finalise its maritime boundary delimitation. This research will try to analyse maritime boundary delimitation between Timor-Leste and Australia in accordance with International law that will be tried to established by looking at the rule of delimitation in the Convention and the practices developed by international courts and Tribunals. Following of that, as the dispute of the parties managed to be solved by compulsory conciliation, this thesis will then scrutinise the maritime boundary delimitation agreed by the parties.

博士
國立臺灣大學
法律學研究所
94
Coastal states are adopting maritime boundary delimitation as their primary maritime policy because maritime jurisdiction directly relates to vast economic interest. This becomes specially important and sensitive when complex maritime boundary issues are involved between neighboring coastal states. China has not actively carried out nor declared maritime boundary delimitation until recently with any country except Agreement between China and Viet Nam on the demarcation of the territorial water, the exclusive economic zones and the continental shelf of China and Viet Nam in the Gulf of Tonkin on 25 December 2000 (hereinafter, the Gulf of Tonkin Agreement). The principles that governs maritime boundary delimitation are to consider primarily an agreement between States concerned, however, if no agreement can be reached, all relevant circumstances are considered to achieve an equity between concerned States. Relevant circumstances are length of coastline, form of coastline, existence and position of island or islands, speciality of geology/topography, and factor of economy and defence. Factors which sinologists are considering in regard to continental shelf delimitation of the Yellow Sea are as follows ; i) geographical factor, ii) geological factor, iii) topographical factor, iv) environment and ecological factor, v) historic interest, and vi) social and economic interest. The ‘Gulf of Tonkin Agreement’ is completed by basically applying the principle of delimitation according to median line which seems that China has adopted the maritime boundary delimitation principle of ‘half and half’ which was the intention of Chinese government. At the same time, China recognized Viet Nam’s dominion and sovereign right over the partial exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf of Dao Bach Long Vi in Gulf of Tonkin. This case can be considered as an example of mutual concession or compromise in delimiting maritime boundary for states of concerned.

碩士
國立臺灣大學
政治學研究所
95
The capacity of islands to generate maritime zones and to influence the location of international maritime boundaries was a long-term dispute long before a single provision in the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Particularly, the problem of the effect of the islands'' delimitation in the sea had attracted the attention of international law. Regime of Islands in the UNCLOS has confirmed the legal definition of an island and its entitlement. However, the rules of the provision are too simple to be applied. In addition, the UNCLOS leaves open the function of the islands in the maritime delimitation. Therefore, the effect of the islands’ delimitation can only be found in the customary law. According to the numerous international judicial legal precedents and state practices, it is full effect, partial effect and zero effect that the islands could possibly obtain in delimitation, and it is the nature and position of the islands and other factors including economic and political consideration, trade-off value, disputed islands and so on that influence the effect of the islands’ delimitation in the sea. At last, this essay attempts to analysis the possible effect of Diaoyutai Islands in the maritime delimitation of the East China Sea in terms of the regime of islands in the UNCLOS and international judicial legal precedents and bilateral agreements concerning maritime boundaries involved. Both case law and state practices seem to suggest that the most appropriate and most likely effect of Diaoyutai Islands on the delimitation of the East China Sea may be no effect or at most be limited to circa 12 nautical miles. This value, if accepted, could certainly help to bring some solution to the complicated deadlock of the maritime delimitation in the East China Sea.

碩士
國立臺灣大學
法律學研究所
100
ABSTRACT This thesis aims to encompass the issue concerning the Gulf of Guinea maritime boundary delimitation from the perspective of the Democratic Republic of Sao Tome and Principe (hereinafter, Sao Tome and Principe) with particular reference to 2002 Land and Maritime Boundary Delimitation between Cameroon and Nigeria case. On 29 March 1994, the Republic of Cameroon filed an application before the International Court of Justice (I.C.J.) instituting proceedings against the Federal Republic of Nigeria in respect of a dispute described as “relating essentially to the question of sovereignty over the Bakassi Peninsula.” In addition, on 30 June 1999, the Republic of Equatorial Guinea instituted before the ICJ an application for permission to intervene in the case pursuant to article 62 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. The object was to seek protection of its legal rights and interests in the Gulf of Guinea by all legal means available and to inform the Court of the nature of its legal rights and interests that could be affected by the Court’s decision. Contrarily to Equatorial Guinea, Sao Tome and Principe however chose not to intervene on any basis, nor did pronounce any concern regarding the Court’s deliberation. Thus, in light of those concerns, this thesis tries to find out the underlying reasons of why Sao Tome and Principe choose not to intervene; secondly to find out what are the Sao Tome and Principe legal rights and interests in the Gulf of Guinea; and further to know how Sao Tome and Principe sees its legal rights and interests from the Court’s deliberation. The present thesis consists of five chapters. Chapter I present a brief introduction of geographical, historical and legal perspectives of the Gulf of Guinea. Chapter II presents an historical analysis of the Law of the Sea. Chapter III discusses and makes a comparative analysis of the International Court of Justice’s deliberation in case concerning Land and Maritime Boundary Delimitation between Cameroon and Nigeria. Chapter IV elaborates on Gulf of Guinea Maritime Boundary from the perspective of Sao Tome and Principe with a particular reference to 2002 Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria. Chapter V gives an conclusion of the overall thesis.

碩士
淡江大學
亞洲研究所碩士班
98
Japan is an island surrounded by the sea. Japan’s international norms and domestic norms have a certain degree of development. Until the system of exclusive economic zone has formulated, the territorial sea and the high sea continued for a long time. But the emergence of exclusive economic zone changed delimitation of the maritime boundary. Compete with the territorial sea , continental shelf , the high seas , exclusive economic zone is a completely new system in law of the sea. Islands is an important subject in the delimitation of the maritime boundary. Although the size of islands is small, and provided just in one article by United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Islands can affect a country''s territorial and maritime interests. That is why Japan and South Korea are still dispute over Takeshima even it is such a small place . All of the norm about exclusive economic zone、delimitation of the maritime boundary and the regime of islands are provided in United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. This thes started on the relevant norms of exclusive economic zone , and based on Japan’s the system of exclusive economic zone. Through this research to assist Taiwan also an island surrounded by the sea in establishing the system of exclusive economic zone.