1 For an analysis of the previous discussion see especially K OERS, "Participation of the European Economic Community in a New Law of the Sea Convention", 73 AJIL (1979), p. 426 off and BuHL, "The Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea", 18 CMLR (1981), p. 553 ff. 2 Also signature on the part of an organization is made conditional on the circumstance that '`a majority of its member States are signatories" to the Convention (Art. 2). 3 There are a few mixed agreements in which only some member States participate alongside the Community — for instance the Barcelona Convention of 16 February 1976 for the Protection of the Mediterranean Sea against Pollution (Arts. 24, 26 and 27). In these agreements participation by any member State is not a condition for the Communitv to be able to become a party. As TREES notes in "La decima sessione della Conferenza sul diritto del mare", 65 Rivista (1982), p. zq f£., an exception is given by the Canberra Convention of 20 May 1980 on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources. Under Art. XXIX, para. 2, of this Convention, accession by "regional economic integration organizations'' is allowed only if "one or more States" which are members of the organization have already become parties to the Convention.
4 This argument is developed also by TREVES cit.
5 The meaning of Art. 4, para. 5, is not altogether clear. A paragraph which at- tempted, to little avail, to clarify it was deleted by the Conference. One possible interpretation is that, as far as catching quotas are concerned, the coastal States' shares in the exclusive economic zones of all the member States which are parties to the Convention should be measured according to these States' capacity to harvest. Under Community Law the said shares could then be divided among the nationals of all the member States.
6 Had it competence under Community Law, the member State which becomes a party to the Convention before the Community should divide among nationals of all the EEC member States the quota allotted to the same State according to its own capacity to harvest. This solution was suggested by RIPHAGEN, "Some Reflections on 'Functional Sovereignty' ", 6 NethYIL (1975), p. 121 ff.