Oceans and the Law of the Sea: Report of the Secretary-General, 2001t

in Ocean Yearbook Online
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?

Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.

Help

 

Have Institutional Access?

Login with your institution. Any other coaching guidance?

Connect

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

References
  • 'tEDITORS' NoTe.-This document is provided by the United Nations Division for Ocean Affairs. and the Law of the Sea. It is extracted from "Oceans and the Law of the Sea: Report of the Secretary-General," A/56/58, 9 March 2001, Fifty-sixth session. Available online: .

  • 1. GESAMP, A Sea of Troubles, GESAMP Reports and Studies No. 70, United Nations Environment Programme, 15 January 2001. 2. In recent years, it has become established practice to refer to the Convention as "UNCLOS," although originally this acronym, in the form of "UNCLOS III," was used to refer to the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea.

  • 3.TheLawof theSea:DeclarationsandStatementurithrespecttotheUnitedNationsConventionon theLawoftheSeaandtotheAgreementrelatingtotheImplementationofPartXIoftheUnitedNationsConventionontheLawof theSea (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.97.V.3). 4. The report of the Tenth Meeting is contained in SPLOS/60. It is also available at the web site of the Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea:

  • 5. General Assembly resolution 55/7, para. 9. 6. Ibid.., paras. 18 and 20.

  • 7. References to the respective letters containing the protests may be found in Law of the Sea Information Circular No. 12, p. 37.

  • 8. S/2000/821.

  • 9.HandbookontheDelimitationof MaritimeBoundaries (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.Ol.V.2).

  • 10. These reports can be found at the web site of the Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea: .

  • 11. ABLOS is the acronym for the Advisory Board on Geodetic, Hydrographic and Ma- rine Geo-Scientific Aspects of the Law of the Sea (also referred to as the Advisory Board on the Technical Aspects of the Law of the Sea). It was formed in September 1994 by the Interna- tional Hydrographic Organization and the International Association of Geodesy to provide advice and guidance and, where applicable, offer expert interpretation of the hydrographic, geodetic, and other technical aspects of the law of the sea to the parent organizations, their member States, or to other organizations on request. In 1999 the Intergovernmental Oceano- graphic Commission of UNESCO was invited to become associated with ABLOS. The Advisory Board is composed of three representatives from each organization and one additional mem- ber representing the United Nations Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea of the Office of Legal Affairs in an ex-officio capacity.

  • B 12. Proceedings of the International Conference on Technical Aspects of Maritime Boundary Delineation and Delimitation (Including UNCLOS Article 76 Issues), International Hydrographic Bureau, Monaco, 9 and 10 September 1999.

  • 13. Extracted from the statement of the Secretary-General of IMO on World Maritime Day 2000: "IMO-Building Maritime Partnerships." 14. UNCTAD Review of Maritime Transport 2000 (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.OO.ILD.34), para. 124. 15. Ibid.

  • 16. Law of the Sea Bulletin, No. 31, table listing the competent international organizations.

  • 17. See report of the 72nd session of MSC, document MSC 72/23. 18. IMO document MEPC 46/12/3, para. 13.

  • 19. See report of the 73rd session of MSC, document MSC 73/21.

  • 20. See n. 17 above.

  • 21. See IMO document STW 32/6. 22. MSC 72/6/2, annex.

  • 23. ILO press release ILO/01/05 of 26 January 2001, available on the ILO web site at: . 24. The report of the second session is contained in IMO document LEG 83/3.

  • 25. The report is available on the FAO web site: .

  • 26. FAO press release 01/02. 27. For the report of the Working Group, see IMO document FSI 9/15. 28. See report of the 72nd session of MSC, document MSC 72/23.

  • 29. NPT/CONF.2000/28, Part I, pp. 10-11.

  • 30. ITfIR-T,ASS news agency, Moscow, 5 February 2001. 31. Kyodo News Seruice, Tokyo, 22 December 2000. 32. Business Day web site, Johannesburg, 22 January 2001.

  • 33. NPT/CONF.2000/SR.11. 34. The report of the Workshop is contained in IMO document LC/SG 23/11, an- nex 6. 35. Communique of the 31st meeting of the Pacific Island Forum, 27-30 October 2000; A/55/536, paras. 28-33.

  • 36. For the texts, see the report of the 73rd session of MSC, document MSC 73/21.

  • 37. See MSC 72/23, para. 10.75, and MSC 73/21, para. 11.33. 38. See n. 19.

  • 39. See n. 34.

  • Self-assessmentof flagStateperformance 160. IMO recalled that the IMO Assembly at its 21st session in November 1999 had adopted resolution A.881 (21) on self-assessment of flag State performance, in which it urged member Governments to assess their capabilities and performance in giving full and complete effect to the various instruments to which they were party. The resolution includes a flag State performance self-assessment form (SAF), which is intended to establish a uniform set of internal and external criteria to be used by flag States on a voluntary basis to obtain a clear picture of how well their maritime administrations are functioning and to make their own assessment of their perfor- mance as flag States. Member Governments are also encouraged to use the SAF when seeking technical assistance from or through IMO. However, the submission of a completed form is voluntary and is not a prerequisite for receiving technical assistance. The IMO Assembly invited member Governments to submit a copy of their self-assessment report to enable the establishment of a database to assist IMO in its efforts to achieve consistent and effective implementation of IMO instruments. At its 73rd session, MSC discussed in depth the features of the SAF database to be maintained by the IMO secretariat.

  • 40. Introductory remarks by the Secretary-General of IMO to the 9th session of the Sub- committee on Flag State Implementation. 41. FSI9/5/1. 42. Draft report of the 9th session of the Subcommittee, FSI 9/WP.7, paras. 3.5-3.7. 43. MSC 73/14/5. In its submission to the Subcommittee, Norway provided information on the procedure for registration of ships in Norway aimed at avoiding double registration; FSI g/5.

  • 44. FSI 9/WP.7, sect. 5.

  • 45. The texts of the Convention and the Protocols are contained in A/55/383. 46. The National (Papua, New Guinea), 24 January 2001.

  • 47. MSC 73/21, sect. 14. 48. See article entitled "Piracy attacks rise to alarming new levels, ICC report reveals," dated 1 February 2001, on the web site of ICC at .

  • 49. Presentation by the International Maritime Bureau at the IMO Regional Seminar and Workshop on Piracy and Armed Robbery against Ships (India, March 2000); MSC 73/ 14/1, para. 28. 50. See article entitled "East Asian Governments must clamp down on piracy to- gether," posted on the web page of ICC at: .

  • 51. As at 31 January 2001, 52 States had ratified or acceded to the Convention and 48 States to the Protocol.

  • 52. Circulated as MSC/Circ.984.

  • 53. For the texts, see IMO document MSC 73/INF.4.

  • 54. In 1998, IMO conducted two expert missions: one to the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia, and another to Brazil. 55. For the oral report on the outcome of the meeting, see MSC 73/21, para. 14.7. 56. Ibid., para 14.8.

  • 57. International Maritime Bureau, Special Report on Piracy and Armed Robbery (March 1998); Oil Companies International Marine Forum, Piracy and Armed Robbery at Sea; International Chamber of Shipping/International Shipping Federation, Pirates and Armed Robbers-A Master's Guide (3rd ed., 1999).

  • (iii)Investigationsofincidentsandexchangeofinformation/intelligence 212. MSC Circular 622/Rev.l and the draft Code of Practice state that, to encour- age masters to report all incidents, coastal States should make every effort to ensure that masters and their ships are not unduly delayed. They should clearly establish an entity responsible for conducting investigations into reported incidents. The IMO draft Code lays down the principles for an investigative strategy. Coastal States are encouraged, where appropriate, to enter into bilateral or multilateral agree- ments to facilitate the investigation of piracy and armed robbery. 213. The draft Code also provides that it is important to involve relevant organi- zations (e.g., Interpol, International Maritime Bureau) at an early stage, where ap- propriate, to take account of the possibility that transnational organized crime may

  • 58. Bernama news agency web site, Kuala Lumpur, 23 October 2000. 59. MSC 73/21, para. 14.7.

  • 60. For the text of the model national law, see CMI Yearbook 2000-Singapore 1: Documents for the Conference, Report of the Joint International Working Group, annex A. 61. Migration News Sheet, June 2000, p. 6. 62. Extract from Quarterly Bulletin, No. 21, summer 2000, published by the International organization for Migration and available on its web site at . 63. RNE Radio 1, Madrid, 3 October 2000.

  • 64. See article on "Warning to ship agents against conspiracies to ship illegal immi- grants," at the web site of ICC, at: . 65. The texts of the Convention and the Protocol are contained in document A/55/ 383, annexes I and III.

  • tic 66. See the interpretative notes for the official records (travauxpriparatoires) of the nego- tiation of the Convention and the Protocols, A/55/383/Add.l.

  • 67. See the report of the Facilitation Committee at its 28th session, document FAL 28/ 19, annex 4.

  • 68. For the text of the three instruments, see InternationalFisheries Instruments with IndeX (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.98.V.11). 69. Contribution of FAO to the present report.

  • 70. General Assembly resolution 49/116, para. 1. 71. General Assembly resolutions 52/29, para. 7, and 53/33, para 7. 2 72. Official Records of the Economic and Social Council, 1999, Supplement No. 9 (E/1999/ 29), chap. I. C, decision 7/1, para. 18. 73. Ibid., para. 35 (a). 74. General Assembly resolutions 55/7, para. 24, and 55/8, paras. 16-18. 75. Illegal, Unregulated and Unreported (IUU) Fishing and Related Matters, Outcome of the first meeting of the Joint FAO/IMO Ad Hoc Working Group on IUU Fishing and Related Matters, Rome, 9-11 October 2000, Subcommittee on Flag State Implementation, 9th session, agenda item 15, IMO, 8 November 2000, document FSI 9/15.

  • 76.Ibid., para. 24.

  • 7'7.Ibid., annex. F 78. See Report of the Committee on Fisheries, Twenty-fourth session, Rome, Italy, 26 �bruary-2 March 2001. 79. International Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing, Nature and Scope of IUU Fishing and the International Plan of Action, II, 3.1-3.3. 80. 1995 Fish Stocks Agreement, article 23; Compliance Agreement, article V (2); Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, article 8.3.2.

  • 81. A/53/456, para. 267; A/54/429, para. 269; A/55/386, paras. 151-152. 82. A/53/456, paras. 268-271; A/53/473, para. 135; A/55/386, paras. 156-157. 83. A/53/473, para. 138; A/54/429, para. 275; A/55/386, para. 159-161. 84. A/55/386, para. 144.

  • 85. Ibid., para. 147. 86. Ibid., para. 250. 87. Contribution by the South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission (SOPAC) to the present report.

  • 88. Contribution by the South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission (SOPAC) to the present report. 89. FAO Fishery and Agricultural Legislation: United Kingdom, Fishery Limits Act 1976, sect. 3 (6), vol. 26, No. 2, 1977, p. 89; Sri Lanka, Fisheries Act No. 59 of 1979, Regulation of Foreign Fishing Boats, vol. 29, No. 1, 1980, p. 89; Trinidad and Tobago, Archipelagic Waters and Exclusive Economic Zone Act 1986, sect. 32, vol. 36, No. 2, 1987, p. 107. 90. Contribution by FAO to the present report. 91. Law No. 18.892 of 1989 and modifications, General Law on Fisheries and Aquacul- ture, art. 165, Library of the National Congress of Chile, Juridical-Legislative System, Most consulted law, web site at: .

  • 92. Contribution by the South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission (SOPAC) to the present report. 93. Article XX (g) of the 1994 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) reads as follows: "Subject to the requirement that such measures are not applied in a manner which would constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination between countries where the same conditions prevail, or disguised restriction on international trade, nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to prevent the adoption or enforcement by any contracting Party of measures: '-.. (g) Relating to the conservation of exhaustible natural resources if such measure are made effective in conjunction with restrictions on domestic production or consumption; ..." 94. Coastal State Requirements for Foreign Fishing Database, FAO Legal Office, http: / / faolex.fao.org/ cgi-bin / fishery. 95. Contribution by the South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission (SOPAC) to the present report.

  • 96. France, Law No. 66-400 of 18 June 1966, as amended by Law of 18 November 1997. 97. Argentina, Act No. 23.968 of 14 August 1991, reprinted in Lam of the Sea Bulletin, No. 20 (1992); Chile, Act 19.079 of 12 August 1991, amending Act 18.892, article 154, Officials Journal of the Republic of Chile, 6 September 1991; and Peru, Ley General de Pesquarias, ap- proved by Decree-Law 25977 of 7 December 1992, article 1, Diario el Peruano-Normas Legales, 22 December 1992. 98. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, 2000, The "Camouco" Case (Panama v. France), Application for Prompt Release, Case No. 5, Judgment, para. 68. 99. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, The "month Confurco" Case (Seychelles v. France), Application for Prompt Release, Case No. 6, Judgment, para. 79.

  • 100. Adoption of the 1995 Fish Stocks Agreement and the 1995 Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries.

  • 101. Progress Report on the Implementation of Conference Resolution 13/97 (Review of FAO Statutory Bodies) and the Strengthening of FAO Regional Fishery Bodies, Committee on Fisheries, Twenty-third Session, Rome, 15-19 February 1999, document COFI/99/4, para. 4. 102. Report of the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean, Twenty-fourth session, Alicante, Spain, 12-15 July 1999 (GFCM Report 24), paras. 27-28. 103. COFI/99/4, para. 5. 104. Report of the Third Session of the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission, Mahe, Sey- chelles, 9-12 December 1998, document IOTC/03/98/R [E], appendix H. 105. A/54/461, paras. 33 and 44; Summary Report of the Eighteenth Annual Meeting of NEAFC, 22-25 November 1999, para. 7. 106. Report of the Fifteenth Meeting of the Commission for the Conservation of Antarc- tic Marine Living Resources, Hobart, Australia, 21 October-1 November 1996, document CCAMLR-XV, pp. 7-20. 107. Ibid., Conservation measures adopted in 1996: Conservation measure 103/XV, p- 54. 108. A/54/429, para. 298.

  • 109. Article 5 (a), (d) and (f); article 6; articles 12 and 13. 110. Article 2; article 3 (e) and (g); article 7 and 10; article 19. 111. Article 5 (a), (b), (c) and (e); article 7 (e), (f) and (g). 112. Report of the Meeting of FAO and Non-FAO Regional Fishery Bodies or Arrange- ments, Rome, 11-12 February 1999, document X1212/E, para. 27. 113. Final press release, 2000 Annual Meeting, Adelaide, Australia: http://ourworld. compuserve.com / homepages/ iwcoffice / PRESSRELEASE2000.htm.

  • 114. Ibid. 115. Final press release, 28 September, Tenth Meeting of NAMMCO, Sandefjord, Nor- way, 25-28 September 2000: . 116. Ibid. 117. Ibid. 118. UNEP/CBD/COP/5/23, pp. 74-80.

  • R 119. Report of the thirtieth session of GESAMP, Monaco, 22-26 May 2000, GESAMP Reports and Studies, No. 69, para. 7.7.

  • 120. UNEP/CBD/COP/5/3, recommendation V/14, annex II.B. 121. GESAMP, Report of the thirtieth session, Monaco, 22-26 May 2000, GESAMP Re- ports and Studies, No. 69, para. 7.3.

  • 122. Much of the following information is excerpted from the information notes pre- pared by the International Seabed Authority relating to the workshop.

  • 123. The following paragraphs have been excerpted from the contribution of the Inter- national Seabed Authority to the present report. 124. The seven registered pioneer investors are the Government of India; Institut trancais de recherche pour 1'exploitation de la mer (IFREMER) /Association française pour etude et la recherche des nodules (AFERNOD) (France); Deep Ocean Resources Develop- ment Co. Ltd. (DORD) (Japan); Yuzhmorgeologiya (Russian Federation); China Ocean Min- eral Resources Research and Development Association (COMRA) (China); Interoceanmetal Joint Organization (IOM) (Bulgaria, Cuba, Czech Republic, Poland, Russian Federation and Slovakia); and the Government of the Republic of Korea.

  • 125. Excerpted from documents and contributions of UNEP and the GPA Coordination Office.

  • 126. See the report of the twenty-second Consultative Meeting of Contracting Parties to the London Convention (September 2000), IMO document LC 22/14, paras. 2.3-2.6, avail- able on the web site of the Office of the London Convention, at: . 127. Ibid., annexes 3-10.

  • 128. IMO document LC 22/3/2.

  • 129. For the text, see report of the 44th session of MEPC, document MEPC 44/20, annex 3. M: 130. For the text of the amendments, see report of the 45th session of MEPC, document MEPC 45/20, annexes 3 and 7. 131. Ibid., paras. 7.18-7.107, and annex 9.

  • 132. See n. 34.

  • 133. Participants' Declaration of Resolve from the International Marine Debris Confer- ence on Derelict Fishing Gear and the Ocean Environment, 6-11 August 2000, Hawaii, IMO document MEPC 46/INF.8, annex 2. 134. MEPC 46/INF.8, para. 22. 135. IMO document AFS/CONF/2.

  • 136. MEPC 45/20, para. 2.22.

  • 137. MEPC 46/3, para. 3.2.2. 138. IMO document LEG 82/12, annexes 2 and 3.

  • 139. For the text of the 2000 Protocol, see IMO document LEG/CONF.11/6. 140. For the text of the resolution, see IMO document LEG/CONF.11/8. 141. The draft text is contained in IMO document LEG/CONF.12/3. 142. Black Sea, Caribbean, East Africa, East Asia, ROPME Sea Area (Kuwait region), Mediterranean, North-West Pacific, Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, South Asia, South-East Pacific, South Pacific, West and Central Africa, Baltic, Arctic and North-East Atlantic.

  • 143. United Nations Environment Programme, Regional Seas: A Survival Strategy for our oceans and Coasts (Geneva, UNEP, 2000), p. 3.

  • 144. The Meeting recognized the twinning arrangements between the Baltic Marine Environment Commission and UNEP as Secretariat of the Nairobi Convention and between the Jeddah Convention and Kuwait Convention. 145. Further information on the work undertaken by UNEP regarding the regional seas programme in 1999-2000 in general and in specific regions can be found in document UNEP (DEC) R/S 3.1.0, on the web site of the Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea: .

  • 1 146. Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area, 1992, article 3. b 147. The subsidiary bodies are: Strategy Group; Monitoring and Assessment Group; Sea- led Pollution Group; Land-based Pollution Group; Nature Conservation and Coastal Zone Management Group. b 148. France and the United Kingdom abstained and are therefore not bound. Luxem- our was absent.

  • 149. The Arctic Council is a high-level intergovernmental forum that provides a mecha- nism to address the common concerns and challenges faced by the Governments and the peoples of the Arctic. 150. According to a list compiled by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, there are 41 States and Territories listed as small island developing States; see annex VI to the present report.

  • 151. UNCLOS arts. 6, 7(1), 13, 47(1), 47(41, 121(2) re archipelagic States; arts. 46, 4�(1), 53(5) re regime of islands; art. 121 re island States; Agreement relating to the Imple- mentation of Part XI of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982, annex, sect. 3, para. 15 (d); United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change; Agenda 21, chap. 17.G; the 1994 Declaration of Barbados and Programme of Action for the sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States, which includes chapter I, "Cli- ate change and sea level rise," and chapter IV, "Coastal and marine resources." 152. See para. 384. 153. Malm6 Declaration, para. 2. 154. The Global Environment Facility operates the financial mechanisms for the Con- vention on Biological Diversity and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

  • 155. See A/55/386. 156. Biodiversity; climate change; ozone layer; international waters. 157. For GEF/UNDP-funded projects affecting small island developing States (focal area: International Waters Programme), see the GEF-UNDP web site: . 158. Fifteen Pacific island States and Territories participated in the consultations in a series of multilateral high-level conferences over six years which was concluded on 4 Septem- ber 2000. 159. Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, article 2.

  • 160. Formerly called the South Pacific Forum, an intergovernmental organization with observer status in the United Nations General Assembly. It is made up of 16 member States, 14 of which are Pacific Small Island States. 161. Summary for Policy Makers, posted by IPCC on its web site , 22 January 2001. 162. See IPCC report, pp. 7 and 10 and fig. 5, for illustrations. " 163. See IPCC report entitled "The Regional Impacts of Climate Change," chap. 9; Small Island States," at the IPCC web site: . 164. Thirty-first Pacific Islands Forum, Tarawa, Kiribati, 27-30 October 2000, Forum Communique 2000, paras. 28-31. Paragraph 29 noted the continuation of constructive dia- 10gue between Forum members and government and nuclear industry representatives from France, Japan and the United Kingdom on a liability regime for compensating the region for economic losses to tourism, fisheries and other industries affected as a result of an accident

  • involving a shipment of radioactive materials and MOX fuel even if there were no actual environmental damage. 165. Fourth meeting of the Special Committees for the Protection and Conservation of the Environment and the Caribbean and Natural Resources, Port of Spain, 21-23 June 2000, Meeting records, "Transportation of Nuclear Waste in the Caribbean Sea." While acknowl- edging the legality of shipping under internationally accepted standards, participants raised concerns that even one accident would be devastating to the region, given its fragility and vulnerability. 166. Forms were distributed to delegates who were in attendance at the Consultative Process to allow them to register their participation. The number quoted is a reflection of the number of States that filled out the forms indicating their participation. The form also provided for a listing of participants in each delegation. 167. General Assembly resolution 55/7, para. 45. 168. Ibid., para. 18 and annex II.

  • . 169. Second meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, decision 11/10, annex I, para. (iv). 170. A/55/274, part B, para. 28, and part C, para. 2 (e).

  • 171. See MEPC 45/20.

  • 172. See n. 161. 173. Not yet in force. The Protocol is based on the concept of "common but differenti- ated responsibilities" (art. 3), in which developed States (known as Annex 1 countries) take the lead in reducing national greenhouse gas emissions (although some have argued in favour of increasing their levels of emission) to agreed levels that would lead overall to decreased emission of greenhouse gases into the Earth's atmosphere. 174. See, in particular, UNCLOS, parts II and V. 175. Report to the Sixth Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 20 November 2000.

  • 176. See ACC/2000/12, paras. 24-29.

  • 177. For further details on the 10-year review of Agenda 21 and the preparatory pro- cesses, see the following web site: . 178. The updated list of conciliators and arbitrators drawn up by the Secretary-General of the United Nations in accordance with article 2 of Annex V and article 2 of Annex VII, respectively, to UNCLOS, as well as the updated list of special arbitrators under article 2 of Annex VIII to UNCLOS received by the Secretary-General of the United Nations from FAO, UNEP, IOC and IMO, are periodically published in the Law of the Sea Information Circular by the Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea. 179. Excerpted from the contribution of ICJ. See also the annual report of the Court to the General Assembly, Official Records of the General Assembly, Fifty-fifth Session, Supplement No- 4 (A/55/4), and the ICJ web site: .

  • 180. Excerpted from Tribunal documents.

  • 181. The composition of the special chamber (P. Chandrasekhara Rao, President; Judges: Caminos, Yankov, Wolfrum; and Judge ad hoc: Orrego Vicuna) was determined by the Tribunal with the approval of the parties. In keeping with the Statute of the Tribunal, a judgment rendered by the special chamber will be considered as having been rendered by the full Tribunal (see annual report of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea for 2000, SPLOS/63).

  • 182. The full text of the Award and the dissenting opinion are posted on the ICSID web site: .

  • 183. For further details, see Marine Saentific Research, a Guide to the Implementation of the Relevant Provisions of UNCLOS (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.91.V.3); and "Marine scientific research: report of the Secretary-General" (A/45/563). . 184. See David A. Ross and Judith Fenwick: Marine scientific research: US perspective on jurisdiction and international cooperation; in Lewis M. Alexander, Scott Allen, Lynne Carter Han- son (eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the Law of the Sea Institute, June 12-16, 1988, p. 217.

  • 185. See Alfred H. A. Soons: The developing regime of marine scientific research: recent European experience and State practice, and David A. Ross and Judith Fenwick, op. cit., n. 184 above.

  • 186. United Nations publication, Sales No. E.89.V.9. 187. See n. 183. 188. United Nations publication, Sales No. E.94.V.13. 189. United Nations publication, Sales No. E.94.V.9. 190. See also the discussions on article 246 in: Marine Scientific Research: Legislative History of Article 246 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (see n. 189 above). . 191. See United Nations publication Marine Scientific Research: A guide to the releoant provis- tons of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.9i.V.3), annex I. International organizations are encouraged to use the same form, although they are not required to do so under article 247. 192. The questionnaire was prepared in collaboration with the Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea. Fewer than 25 States responded.

  • 193. See IOC/WGLOSI/6/Rev.l.

  • 194. Final Act of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, annex VI. In: The Law of the Sea: Official Texts of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 and of the Agreement relating to the Implementation of Part XI of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December- 1982, with Index and excer�ts from the Final Act o,r the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea (United Nations publication, Sales No- E.97.V.10), p. 206.

  • 195. See IOC/INF-961 (1994).

  • 196. See Twenty-seventh Session of the IOC Executive Council, Paris, 5-12 July 1994, document IOC/EGXXVII/3. 197. See IOC Assembly resolution XIX-19 and annex for terms of reference of ABE- LOS. 198. The Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea is also an invited observer at ABE-LOS meetings.

  • 200. Cited in "Capacity Assessment and Development," Technical Advisory Paper No. 3, Bureau for Development Policies, UNDP, January 1998, footnote 5.

  • 201. See the web site of the UNDP SIOCAM programme: siocam.sdnp.undp.org.

  • 202. For a detailed description of the programme, see A/54/429, paras. 588-594, and A/ 55 / 61, paras. 267-268.

  • 203. The TRAIN-X network is a UNDP-sponsored cooperative network of United Na- tions agency human resources development programmes, one of which is the TSC Pro- gramme.

  • 204. GESAMP 2000. Report of the Thirtieth Session, Monaco, 22-26 May 2000. GESAMP Reports and Studies, No. 69, 68 p. 205. WHO confirmed its support for the evaluation and its preparedness to be actively involved, but stated that it was not in a position to contribute to defraying the costs.

  • 206. See also the report on the work of the Consultative Process at its first meeting, A/ 55/2'74, part A, paras. 1-50. 207. Ibid., part C, paras. 1-4.

Index Card
Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 23 20 1
Full Text Views 48 48 0
PDF Downloads 0 0 0
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0