|
Date of most recent addition:
23 October 2007
Declarations and statements
PLEASE NOTE: All declarations and statements with respect to the Convention
and to the Agreement on Part XI made before 31 December 1996 - upon signature,
ratification or accession - have been analyzed and published in "The
Law of the Sea: Declarations and statements with respect to the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea and to the Agreement relating to the
Implementation of Part XI of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea",
(United Nations publication, Sales No. E.97.V.3).
Official information regarding the declarations and
statements under articles 287, 298 and 310 of the Convention is available at the
web site of the Treaty Section of the Office of Legal Affairs of the United
Nations at:
http://untreaty.un.org/ENGLISH/bible/englishinternetbible/partI/chapterXXI/treaty6.asp#Declarations
http://untreaty.un.org/ENGLISH/bible/englishinternetbible/partI/chapterXXI/treaty7.asp#Declarations
Introduction:
Article 310 of the Convention allows States and entities to make declarations
or statements regarding its application at the time of signing, ratifying or
acceding to the Convention, which do not purport to exclude or modify the legal
effect of the provisions of the Convention.
Article 310 reads:
"Article 310. Declarations and statements
"Article 309 does not preclude a State, when signing, ratifying or
acceding to this Convention, from making declarations or statements, however
phrased or named, with a view, inter alia, to the harmonization of its laws
and regulations with the provisions of this Convention, provided that such
declarations or statements do not purport to exclude or to modify the legal
effect of the provisions of this Convention in their application to that
State."
Article 287, paragraph 1, provides that States and entities, when signing,
ratifying or acceding to the Convention, or at any time thereafter, may make
declarations specifying the forums for the settlement of disputes which they
accept.
Article 287, paragraph 1, reads:
"Article 287. Choice of procedure "When
signing, ratifying or acceding to this Convention or at any time thereafter, a
State shall be free to choose, by means of a written declaration, one or more
of the following means for the settlement of disputes concerning the
interpretation or application of this Convention:
(a) the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea established in
accordance with Annex VI;
(b) the International Court of Justice;
(c) an arbitral tribunal constituted in accordance with Annex VII;
(d) a special arbitral tribunal constituted in accordance with Annex VIII
for one or more of the categories of disputes specified therein."
In addition, article 298, paragraph 1, allows States and entities to declare
that they exclude the application of the compulsory binding procedures for the
settlement of disputes under the Convention in respect of certain specified
categories kinds of disputes. Article 298, paragraph 1, reads:
United Nations Convention on the Law of
the Sea:
Declarations made upon signature, ratification, accession or
succession or anytime thereafter
Algeria
[Original: French]
Upon signature
(10 December 1982):
It is the view of the Government of Algeria that its
signing the Final Act and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
does not entail any change in its position on the non-recognition of certain
other signatories, nor any obligation to co-operate in any field whatsoever with
those signatories.
Upon
ratification (11 June 1996):
Declaration 1
The People's Democratic Republic of Algeria does not consider itself bound by
the provisions of article 287, paragraph 1 (b), of the United Nations Convention
on the Law of the Sea dealing with the submission of disputes to the
International Court of Justice. The People's Democratic Republic of Algeria
declares that, in order to submit a dispute to the International Court of
Justice, prior agreement between all the parties concerned is necessary in each
case.
Declaration 2
The Algerian Government declares that, in conformity with the provisions of
Part II, section 3, subsections A and C, of the Convention, the passage of
warships in the territorial sea of Algeria is subject to an authorization
fifteen (15) days in advance, except in cases of force majeure as provided for
in the Convention.
Angola
Upon signature (10
December 1982):
"The Government of the People's Republic of Angola
reserves the right to interpret any and all articles of the Convention in the
context of and with due regard to Angolan Sovereignty and territorial integrity
as it applies to land, space and sea. Details of these interpretations will be
placed on record at the time of ratification of the Convention.
The present signature is without prejudice to the
position taken by the Government of Angola or to be taken by it on the
Convention at the time of ratification."
Argentina
[Original: Spanish]
Upon signature
(5 October 1984):
The signing of the Convention by the Argentine
Government does not imply acceptance of the Final Act of the Third United
Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea. In that regard, the Argentine
Republic, as in its written statement of 8 December 1982 (A/CONF.62/WS/35),
places on record its reservation to the effect that resolution III, in annex I
to the final Act, in no way affects the "Question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas)",
which is governed by the following specific resolutions of the General Assembly:
2065 (XX), 3160 (XXVIII), 31/49, 37/9 and 38/12, adopted within the framework of
the decolonization process.
In this connection, and bearing in mind that the
Malvinas and the South Sandwich and South Georgia Islands form an integral part
of Argentine territory, the Argentine Government declares that it neither
recognizes nor will it recognize the title of any other State, community or
entity or the exercise by it of any right of maritime jurisdiction which is
claimed to be protected under any interpretation of resolution III that violates
the rights of Argentina over the Malvinas and the South Sandwich and South
Georgia Islands and their respective maritime zones. Consequently, it likewise
neither recognizes nor will recognize and will consider null and void any
activity or measure that may be carried out or adopted without its consent with
regard to this question, which the Argentine Government considers to be of major
importance.
The Argentine Government will accordingly interpret the
occurrence of acts of the kind referred to above as contrary to the
aforementioned resolutions adopted by the United Nations, the patent objective
of which is the peaceful settlement of the sovereignty dispute concerning the
islands by means of bilateral negotiations and through the good offices of the
Secretary-General of the United Nations.
Furthermore, it is the understanding of the Argentine
Republic that, whereas the Final Act states in paragraph 42 that the Convention
"together with resolutions I to IV, [forms] an integral whole", it is
merely describing the procedure that was followed at the Conference to avoid a
series of separate votes on the Convention and the resolutions. The Convention
itself clearly establishes in article 318 that only the Annexes form an integral
part of the Convention; thus, any other instrument or document, even one adopted
by the Conference, does not form an integral part of the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea.
Upon ratification
(1 December 1995):
(a) With regard to those provisions of the Convention which deal with
innocent passage through the territorial sea, it is the intention of the
Government of the Argentine Republic to continue to apply the regime currently
in force to the passage of foreign warships through the Argentine territorial
sea, since that regime is totally compatible with the provisions of the
Convention.
(b) With regard to Part III of the Convention, the Argentine Government
declares that in the Treaty of Peace and Friendship signed with the Republic of
Chile on 29 November 1984, which entered into force on 2 May 1985 and was
registered with the United Nations Secretariat in accordance with Article 102 of
the Charter of the United Nations, both States reaffirmed the validity of
Article V of the Boundary Treaty of 1881 whereby the Strait of Magellan (Estrecho
de Magallanes) is neutralized forever with free navigation assured for the flags
of all nations. The aforementioned Treaty of Peace and Friendship also contains
specific provisions and a special annex on navigation which includes regulations
for vessels flying the flags of third countries in the Beagle Channel and other
straits and channels of the Tierra del Fuego archipelago.
(c) The Argentine Republic accepts the provisions on the conservation and
management of the living resources of the high seas, but considers that they are
insufficient, particularly the provisions relating to straddling fish stocks or
highly migratory fish stocks, and that they should be supplemented by an
effective and binding multilateral regime which, inter alia, would facilitate
cooperation to prevent and avoid overfishing, and would permit the monitoring of
the activities of fishing vessels on the high seas and of the use of fishing
methods and gear. The Argentine Government, bearing in mind its priority
interest in conserving the resources of its exclusive economic zone and the area
of the high seas adjacent thereto, considers that, in accordance with the
provisions of the Convention, where the same stock or stocks of associated
species occur both within the exclusive economic zone and in the area of
the high seas adjacent thereto, the Argentine Republic, as the coastal State,
and other States fishing for such stocks in the area adjacent to its exclusive
economic zone should agree upon the measures necessary for the conservation of
those stocks or stocks of associated species in the high seas.
Independently of this, it is the understanding of the Argentine Government
that, in order to comply with the obligation laid down in the Convention
concerning the conservation of the living resources in its exclusive economic
zone and the area adjacent thereto, it is authorized to adopt, in accordance
with international law, all the measures it may deem necessary for the purpose.
(d) The ratification of the Convention by the Argentine Government does not
imply acceptance of the Final Act of the Third United Nations Conference on the
Law of the Sea. In that regard, the Argentine Republic, as in its written
statement of 8 December 1982 (A/CONF.62/WS/35), places on record its reservation
to the effect that resolution III, in annex I to the Final Act, in no way
affects the 'Question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas)', which is governed by
the following specific resolutions of the General Assembly: 2065 (XX), 3160 (XXVIII),
31/49, 37/9, 38/12, 39/6, 40/21, 41/40, 42/19, 43/25, and Assembly decisions:
44/406, 45/424, 46/406, 47/408 and 48/408, adopted within the framework of the
decolonization process.
In this connection, and bearing in mind that the Malvinas and the South
Sandwich and South Georgia Islands form an integral part of Argentine territory,
the Argentine Government declares that it neither recognizes nor will recognize
the title of any other State, community or entity or the exercise by it of any
right of maritime jurisdiction which is claimed to be protected under any
interpretation of resolution III that violates the rights of Argentina over the
Malvinas and the South Sandwich and South Georgia islands and their respective
maritime zones. Consequently, it likewise neither recognizes nor will recognize
and will consider null and void any activity or measure that may be carried out
or adopted without its consent with regard to this question, which the Argentine
Government considers to be of major importance.
The Argentine Government will accordingly interpret the occurrence of acts of
the kind referred to above as contrary to the aforementioned resolutions adopted
by the United Nations, the objective of which is the peaceful settlement of the
sovereignty dispute concerning the islands by means of bilateral negotiations
and through the good offices of the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
The Argentine Republic reaffirms its legitimate and inalienable sovereignty
over the Malvinas and the South Georgia and South Sandwich islands and their
respective maritime and island zones, which form an integral part of its
national territory. The recovery of those territories and the full exercise of
sovereignty, respecting the way of life of the inhabitants of the territories
and in accordance with the principles of international law, constitute a
permanent objective of the Argentine people that cannot be renounced.
Furthermore, it is the understanding of the Argentine Republic that the Final
Act, in referring in paragraph 42 to the Convention together with resolutions I
to IV as forming an integral whole, is merely describing the procedure that was
followed at the Conference to avoid a series of separate votes on the Convention
and the resolutions. The Convention itself clearly establishes in article 318
that only the Annexes form an integral part of the Convention; thus, any other
instrument or document, even one adopted by the Conference, does not form an
integral part of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
(e) The Argentine Republic fully respects the right of free navigation as
embodied in the Convention; however, it considers that the transit by sea of
vessels carrying highly radioactive substances must be duly regulated.
The Argentine Government accepts the provisions on prevention of pollution of
the marine environment contained in Part XII of the Convention, but considers
that, in the light of events subsequent to the adoption of that international
instrument, the measures to prevent, control and minimize the effects of the
pollution of the sea by noxious and potentially dangerous substances and highly
active radioactive substances must be supplemented and reinforced.
(f) In accordance with the provisions of article 287,
the Argentine Government declares that it accepts, in order of preference, the
following means for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or
application of the Convention: (a) the International Tribunal for the Law of the
Sea; (b) an arbitral tribunal constituted in accordance with Annex VIII for
questions relating to fisheries, protection and preservation of the marine
environment, marine scientific research and navigation, in accordance with Annex
VIII, article 1. The Argentine Government also declares that it does not accept
the procedures provided for in Part XV, section 2, with respect to the disputes
specified in article 298, paragraph 1 (a), (b) and
(c).
Australia
(original: Spanish)
Made after
ratification (22 March 2002):
Declaration of 21 March 2002 under articles 287 and 298
of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
The Government of Australia declares, under paragraph 1
of article 287 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea done at
Montego Bay on the tenth day of December one thousand nine hundred and
eighty-two that it chooses the following means for the settlement of disputes
concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention, without
specifying that on has precedence over the other:
(a) The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
established in accordance with Annex VI of the Convention; and
(b) The International Court of Justice.
The Government of Australia further declares, under
paragraph 1 (a) of article 298 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of
the Sea done at Montego Bay on the tenth day of December one thousand nine
hundred and eighty-two, that it does not accept any of the procedures provided
for in section 2 of Part XV ( including the procedures referred to in
paragraphs (a) and (b) of this declaration) with respect of disputes concerning
the interpretation or application of articles 15, 74 and 83 relating to sea boundary
delimitations as well as those involving historic bays or titles.
These declarations by the Government of Australia are
effective immediately.
Austria
Upon ratification
(14 July 1995):
With regard to article 287 of the Convention of the Law of the Sea, Austria
declares the following:
In the absence of any other peaceful means to which it would give preference,
the Government of the Republic of Austria hereby chooses one of the following
means for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or
application of the two Conventions in accordance with article 287 of the
Convention on the Law of the Sea, in the following order:
1. The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea established in
accordance with Annex VI;
2. A special arbitral tribunal constituted in accordance with Annex VIII;
3. The International Court of Justice.
Also in the absence of any other peaceful means, the Government of the
Republic of Austria hereby recognizes as of today the validity of special
arbitration for any dispute concerning the interpretation or application of the
Convention on the Law of the Sea relating to fisheries, protection and
preservation of the marine environment, marine scientific research and
navigation, including pollution from vessels and by dumping.
The Permanent Mission of Austria to the United Nations would like to draw the
attention of the Secretary-General to the fact that, as a member of the European
Union, Austria has transferred competence to the Union in certain matters
governed by the Convention. A detailed declaration on the nature and extent of
the competence transferred to the European Union will be made in due course in
accordance with the provisions of Annex IX of the Convention.
Bangladesh
Upon
ratification (27 July 2001):
1.
The Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh understands that the
provisions of the Convention do not authorize other States to carry out in the
exclusive economic zone and on the continental shelf military exercise or
manoeuvres, in particular, those involving the use of weapons or explosives,
without the consent of the coastal State.
2.
The Bangladesh Government is not bound by any domestic legislation or by any
declaration issued by other States upon signature or ratification of this
Convention. Bangladesh reserves the right to state its position concerning all
such legislation or declarations at the appropriate time. In particular,
Bangladesh ratification of the Convention in no way constitutes recognition of
the maritime claims of any other State having signed or ratified the Convention,
where such claims are inconsistent with the relevant principles of international
law and which are prejudicial to the sovereign rights and jurisdiction of
Bangladesh in its maritime areas.
3.
The exercise of the right of innocent passage of warships through the
territorial sea of other States should also be perceived to be a peaceful one.
Effective and speedy means of communication are easily available and make the
prior notification of the exercise of the right of innocent passage of warships
reasonable and not incompatible with the Convention. Such notification is
already required by some States. Bangladesh reserves the right to legislate on
this point.
4.
Bangladesh is of the view that such a notification requirement is needed in
respect of nuclear-powered ships or ships carrying nuclear or other inherently
dangerous or noxious substances. Furthermore, no such ships shall be allowed
within Bangladesh waters without the necessary authorization.
5.
Bangladesh is of the view that the sovereign immunity as envisaged in article
236 does not relieve a State from the obligation, moral or otherwise, in
accepting responsibility and liability for compensation and relief in respect of
damage caused by pollution of the marine environment by any warship, naval
auxiliary, other vessels or aircraft owned or operated by the State and used on
government non-commercial service.
6.
Ratification of the Convention by Bangladesh does not ipso facto imply
recognition or acceptance of any territorial claim made by a State party to the
Convention, nor automatic recognition of any land or sea border.
7.
The Bangladesh Government does not consider itself bound by any of the
declarations or statements, however phrased or named, made by other States when
signing, accepting, ratifying or acceding to the Convention and that it reserves
the right to state its position on any of those declarations or statements at
any time.
8.
The Bangladesh Government declares, without prejudice to article 303 of the
Convention on the Law of the Sea, that any objects of an archaeological and
historical nature found within the maritime areas over which it exercises
sovereignty or jurisdiction shall not be removed, without its prior notification
and consent.
9.
The Government of Bangladesh shall, at an appropriate time, make declarations
provided for in articles 287 and 298 relating to the settlement of disputes.
10.
The Government of Bangladesh intends to undertake a comprehensive review of
existing domestic laws and regulations with a view to harmonizing them with the
provisions of the Convention.
Belarus
Upon signature
(10 December 1982):
1. The Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic declares
that, in accordance with article 287 of the United Nations Convention on the Law
of the Sea, it accepts, as the basic means for the settlement of disputes
concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention, an arbitral
tribunal constituted in accordance with Annex VII. For the consideration of
questions relating to fisheries, the protection and preservation of the marine
environment, marine scientific research and navigation, including pollution from
vessels and by dumping, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic chooses a
special arbitral tribunal constituted in accordance with Annex VIII. The
Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic recognizes the competence of the
International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in relation to questions of the
prompt release of detained vessels or their crews, as envisaged in article 292.
2. The Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic declares
that, in accordance with article 298 of the Convention, it does not accept
compulsory procedures entailing binding decisions in the consideration of
disputes concerned with the delimitation of marine limits, disputes relating to
military activity and disputes in relation to which the United Nations Security
Council performs functions entrusted to it under the United Nations Charter.
Upon ratification
(30 August 2006)
1. In accordance with article 287 of the Convention,
the Republic of Belarus accepts as the basic means for the settlement of
disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention an
arbitral tribunal constituted in accordance with Annex VII. For the settlement
of disputes concerning fisheries, protection and preservation of the marine
environment, marine scientific research or navigation, including pollution from
vessels and by dumping, the Republic of Belarus will use a special arbitral
tribunal constituted in accordance with Annex VIII. The Republic of Belarus
recognizes the jurisdiction of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
over questions concerning the prompt release of detained vessels or their crews,
as envisaged in article 292 of the Convention; 2. In accordance with article 298
of the Convention, the Republic of Belarus does not accept compulsory procedures
entailing binding decisions for the consideration of disputes concerning
military activities, including by government vessels and aircraft engaged in
non-commercial service, or disputes concerning law enforcement activities in
regard to the exercise of sovereign rights or jurisdiction, or disputes in
respect of which the Security Council of the United Nations is exercising the
functions assigned to it by the Charter of the United Nations.
Belgium
[Original: French]
Upon signature (5
December 1984):
The Government of the Kingdom of Belgium has decided to
sign the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea because the Convention
has a very large number of positive features and achieves a compromise on them
which is acceptable to most States. Nevertheless, with regard to the status of
maritime space, it regrets that the concept of equity, adopted for the
delimitation of the continental shelf and the exclusive economic zone, was not
applied again in the provisions for delimiting the territorial sea. It welcomes,
however, the distinctions established by the Convention between the nature of
the rights which riparian States exercise over their territorial sea, on the one
hand, and over the continental shelf and their exclusive economic zone, on the
other.
It is common knowledge that the Belgian Government
cannot declare itself also satisfied with certain provisions of the
international régime of the sea-bed which, though based on a principle that it
would not think of challenging, seems not to have chosen the most suitable way
of achieving the desired result as quickly and surely as possible, at the risk
of jeopardizing the success of a generous undertaking which Belgium consistently
encourages and supports. Indeed, certain provisions of Part XI and of Annexes
III and IV appear to it to be marred by serious defects and shortcomings which
explain why consensus was not reached on this text at the last session of the
Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, in New York, in April
1982. These shortcomings and defects concern in particular the restriction of
access to the Area, the limitations on production and certain procedures for the
transfer of technology, not to mention the vexatious implications of the cost
and financing of the future International Sea-Bed Authority and the first mine
site of the Enterprise. The Belgian Government sincerely hopes that these
shortcomings and defects will in fact be rectified by the rules, regulations and
procedures which the Preparatory Commission should draw up with the twofold
intent of facilitating acceptance of the new régime by the whole international
community and enabling the common heritage of mankind to be properly exploited
for the benefit of all and, preferably, for the benefit of the least favoured
countries. The Government of the Kingdom of Belgium is not alone in thinking
that the success of this new régime, the effective establishment of the
International Sea-Bed Authority and the economic viability of the Enterprise
will depend to a large extent on the quality and seriousness of the Preparatory
Commission's work: it therefore considers that all decisions of the Commission
should be adopted by consensus, that being the only way of protecting the
legitimate interests of all.
As the representatives of France and the Netherlands
pointed out two years ago, the Belgian Government wishes to make it abundantly
clear that, notwithstanding its decision to sign the Convention today, the
Kingdom of Belgium is not here and now determined to ratify it. It will take a
separate decision on this point at a later date, which will take account of what
the Preparatory Commission has accomplished to make the international régime of
the sea-bed acceptable to all, focusing mainly on the questions to which
attention has been drawn above.
The Belgian Government also wishes to recall that
Belgium is a member of the European Economic Community, to which it has
transferred powers in certain areas covered by the Convention; detailed
declarations on the nature and extent of the powers transferred will be made in
due course, in accordance with the provisions of Annex IX of the Convention.
It also wishes to draw attention formally to several
points which it considers particularly crucial. For example, it attaches great
importance to the conditions to which Articles 21 and 23 of the Convention
subject the right of innocent passage through the territorial sea, and it
intends to ensure that the criteria prescribed by the relevant international
agreements are strictly applied, whether the flag States are parties thereto or
not. The limitation of the breadth of the territorial sea, as established by
Article 3 of the Convention, confirms and codifies a widely observed customary
practice which it is incumbent on every State to respect, as it is the only one
admitted by international law: the Government of the Kingdom of Belgium will not
therefore recognize, as territorial sea, waters which are, or may be, claimed to
be such beyond 12 nautical miles measured from baselines determined by the
riparian State in accordance with the Convention. Having underlined the close
linkage which it perceives between Article 33, paragraph 1 (a), and Article 27,
paragraph 2, of the Convention, the Government of the Kingdom of Belgium intends
to reserve the right, in emergencies and especially in cases of blatant
violation, to exercise the powers accorded to the riparian State by the latter
text, without notifying beforehand a diplomatic agent or consular officer of the
flag State, on the understanding that such notification shall be given as soon
as it is physically possible. Finally, everyone will understand that the
Government of the Kingdom of Belgium chooses to emphasize those provisions of
the Convention which entitle it to protect itself, beyond the limit of the
territorial sea, against any threat of pollution and, a fortiori, against
any existing pollution resulting from an accident at sea, as well as those
provisions which recognize the validity of rights and obligations deriving from
specific conventions and agreements concluded previously or which may be
concluded subsequently in furtherance of the general principles set forth in the
Convention.
In the absence of any other peaceful means to which it
obviously gives priority, the Government of the Kingdom of Belgium deems it
expedient to choose alternatively, and in order of preference, as Article 287 of
the Convention leaves it free to do, the following means of settling disputes
concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention:
1. an arbitral tribunal constituted in accordance with
Annex VIII;
2. the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
established in accordance with Annex VI;
3. the International Court of Justice.
Still in the absence of any other peaceful means, the
Government of the Kingdom of Belgium wishes here and now to recognize the
validity of the special arbitration procedure for any dispute concerning the
interpretation or application of the provisions of the Convention in respect of
fisheries, protection and preservation of the marine environment, marine
scientific research or navigation, including pollution from vessels and by
dumping.
For the time being, the Belgian Government does not
wish to make any declaration in accordance with Article 298, confining itself to
the one made above in accordance with Article 287. Finally, the Government of
the Kingdom of Belgium does not consider itself bound by any of the declarations
which other States have made, or may make, upon signing or ratifying the
Convention, reserving the right, as necessary, to determine its position with
regard to each of them at the appropriate time.
Upon ratification
(13 November 1998):
The Kingdom of Belgium notes that, as a State member of the European
Community, it has transferred competence to the Community for some matters
provided for in the Convention, which are listed in the
declaration
made by the European Community upon formal confirmation of the Convention by
the European Community on 1 April 1998.
In accordance with article 287 of the Convention, the Kingdom of Belgium
hereby declares that it chooses, as a means for the settlement of disputes
concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention, in view of its
preference for pre-established jurisdictions, either the International Tribunal
for the Law of the Sea established in accordance with Annex VI (art. 287.1 (a))
or the International Court of Justice (art. 287.1(b)), in the absence of any
other means of peaceful settlement of disputes that it might prefer.
Bolivia
(Original: Spanish)
Upon
signature (27 November 1984):
On signing the United Nations Convention on the Law of
the Sea, the Government of Bolivia hereby makes the following declaration before
the International community:
1. The Convention on the Law of the Sea is a
perfectible instrument and, according to its own provisions, is subject to
revision. As a party to it, Bolivia will, when the time comes, put forward
proposals and revisions which are in keeping with its national interests.
2. Bolivia is confident that the Convention will
ensure, in the near future, the joint development of the resources of the
sea-bed, with equal opportunities and rights for all nations, especially
developing countries.
3. Freedom of access to and from the sea, which the
Convention grants to land-locked nations, is a right that Bolivia has been
exercising by virtue of bilateral treaties and will continue to exercise by
virtue of the norms of positive international law contained in the Convention.
4. Bolivia wishes to place on record that it is a
country that has no maritime sovereignty as a result of a war and not as a
result of its natural geographic position and that it will assert all the rights
of coastal States under the Convention once it recovers the legal status in
question as a consequence of negotiations on the restoration to Bolivia of its
own sovereign outlet to the Pacific Ocean.
Brazil
[Original: English]
Upon
signature (10 December 1982):
"I. Signature by Brazil is ad referendum,
subject to ratification of the Convention in conformity with Brazilian
constitutional procedures, which include approval by the National Congress.
II. The Brazilian Government understands that the régime
which is applied in practice in maritime areas adjacent to the coast of Brazil
is compatible with the provisions of the Convention.
III. The Brazilian Government understands that the
provision of article 301, which prohibits "any threat or use of force
against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in
any other manner inconsistent with the principles of international law embodied
in the Charter of the United Nations", apply, in particular, to the
maritime areas under the sovereignty or the jurisdiction of the coastal State.
IV. The Brazilian Government understands that the
provisions of the Convention do not authorize other States to carry out in the
exclusive economic zone military exercises or manoeuvres, in particular those
that imply the use of weapons or explosives, without the consent of the coastal
State.
V. The Brazilian Government understands that, in
accordance with the provisions of the Convention, the coastal State has, in the
exclusive economic zone and on the continental shelf, the exclusive right to
construct and to authorize and regulate the construction, operation and use of
all types of installations and structures, without exception, whatever their
nature or purpose.
VI. Brazil exercises sovereignty rights over the
continental shelf, beyond the distance of two hundred nautical miles from the
baselines, up to the outer edge of the continental margin, as defined in article
76.
VII. The Brazilian Government reserves the right to
make at the appropriate time the declarations provided for in articles 287 and
298, concerning the settlement of disputes."
Upon ratification
(22 December 1988):
In accordance with article 310 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of
the Sea, the Government of the Federal Republic of Brazil makes the following
statement:
(I) The Brazilian Government understands that the provisions of article 301
prohibiting "any threat or use of force against the territorial integrity
of any State, or in other manner inconsistent with the principles of
international law embodied in the Charter of the United Nations" apply in
particular to the maritime areas under the sovereignty or jurisdiction of the
coastal State.
(II) The Brazilian Government understands that the provisions of the
Convention do not authorize other States to carry out military exercises or
manoeuvres, in particular those involving the use of weapons or explosives, in
the exclusive economic zone without the consent of the coastal State.
(III) The Brazilian Government understands that in accordance with the
provisions of the Convention the coastal State has, in the exclusive economic
zone and on the continental shelf, the exclusive right to construct and to
authorize and to regulate the construction, operation and use of all kinds of
installations and structures, without exception, whatever their nature or
purpose.
Canada
Declaration made upon ratification (7
November 2003):
"With regard to article 287 of the
Convention on the Law of the Sea, the Government of Canada hereby chooses the
following means for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation
or application of the Convention without specifying that one has precedence
over the other:
(a) the International Tribunal for the Law
of the Sea established in accordance with Annex VI of the Convention; and
(b) an arbitral tribunal constituted in
accordance with Annex VII of the Convention.
With regard to Article 298, paragraph 1 of
the Convention on the Law of the Sea, Canada does not accept any of the
procedures provided for in Part XV, section 2, with respect to the following
disputes:
- Disputes concerning the interpretation
or application of articles 15, 74 and 83 relating to sea boundary
delimitations, or those involving historic bays or titles;
- Disputes concerning military activities,
including military activities by government vessels and aircraft engaged in
non-commercial service, and disputes concerning law enforcement activities
in regard to the exercise of sovereign rights or jurisdiction excluded from
the jurisdiction of a court or tribunal under article 297, paragraph 2 or 3;
- Disputes in respect of which the
Security Council of the United Nations is exercising the functions assigned
to it by the Charter of the United Nations, unless the Security Council
decides to remove the matter from its agenda or calls upon the parties to
settle it by the means provided for in the Convention.
According to Article 309 of the Convention
on the Law of the Sea, no reservations or exceptions may be made to the
Convention unless expressly permitted by other articles of the Convention. A
declaration or statement made pursuant to article 310 of the Convention cannot
purport to exclude or to modify the legal effect of the provisions of the
Convention in their application to the state, entity or international
organization making it. Consequently, the Government of Canada declares that
it does not consider itself bound by declarations or statements that have been
made or will be made by other states, entities and international organizations
pursuant to article 310 of the Convention and that exclude or modify the legal
effect of the provisions of the Convention and their application to the State,
entity or international organization making it. Lack of response by the
Government of Canada to any declaration or statement shall not be interpreted
as tacit acceptance of that declaration or statement. The Government of Canada
reserves the right at any time to take a position on any declaration or
statement in the manner deemed appropriate."
Cape Verde
Declaration
made upon signature (10 December 1982) and confirmed
upon ratification (19 August 1987):
"The Government of the Republic of Cape Verde
signs the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea with the following
understandings:
I. This Convention recognizes the right of coastal
States to adopt measures to safeguard their security interests, including the
right to adopt laws and regulations relating to the innocent passage of foreign
warships through their territorial sea or archipelagic waters. This right is in
full conformity with articles 19 and 25 of the Convention, as it was clearly
stated in the Declaration made by the President of the Third United Nations
Conference on the Law of the Sea in the plenary meeting of the Conference on
April 26, 1982.
II. The provisions of the Convention relating to the
archipelagic waters, territorial sea, exclusive economic zone and continental
shelf are compatible with the fundamental objectives and aims that inspire the
legislation of the Republic of Cape Verde concerning its sovereignty and
jurisdiction over the sea adjacent to and within its coasts and over the seabed
and subsoil thereof up to the limit of 200 miles.
III. The legal nature of the exclusive economic zone as
defined in the Convention and the scope of the rights recognized therein to the
coastal state leave no doubt as to its character of a sui generis
zone of national jurisdiction different from the territorial sea and which is
not a part of the high seas.
IV. The regulations of the uses or activities which are
not expressly provided for in the Convention but are related to the sovereign
rights and to the jurisdiction of the coastal State in its exclusive economic
zone falls within the competence of the said State, provided that such
regulation does not hinder the enjoyment of the freedoms of international
communication which are recognized to other States.
V. In the exclusive economic zone, the enjoyment of the
freedoms of international communication, in conformity with its definition and
with other relevant provisions of the Convention, excludes any non-peaceful use
without the consent of the coastal State, such as exercises with weapons or
other activities which may affect the rights or
interests of the said state; and it also excludes the threat or use of force
against the territorial integrity, political independence, peace or security of
the coastal State.
VI. This Convention does not entitle any State to
construct, operate or use installations or structures in the exclusive economic
zone of another State, either those provided for in the Convention or those of
any other nature, without the consent of the coastal State.
VII. In accordance with all the relevant provisions of
the Convention, where the same stock or stocks of associated species occur both
within the exclusive economic zone and in an area beyond and adjacent to the
zone, the States fishing for such stocks in the adjacent area are duty bound to
enter into arrangements with the coastal State upon the measures necessary for
the conservation of these stock or stocks of associated species."
Upon ratification: (10 August 1987)
I. ...
II. The Republic of Cape Verde declares, without prejudice to article 303 of
the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, that any objects of an
archaeological and historical nature found within the maritime areas over which
it exerts sovereignty or jurisdiction shall not be removed without its prior
notification and consent.
III. The Republic of Cape Verde declares that, in the absence of or failing
any other peaceful means, it chooses, in order of preference and in accordance
with article 287 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the
following procedures for the settlement of disputes regarding the interpretation
or application of the said Convention:
(a) The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea;
(b) The International Court of Justice.
IV. The Republic of Cape Verde, in accordance with article 298 of the United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, declares that it does not accept the
procedures provided for in Part XV, section 2, of the said Convention for the
settlement of disputes concerning military activities, including military
activities by Government-operated vessels and aircraft engaged in non-commercial
service, as well as disputes concerning law enforcement activities in regard to
the exercise of sovereign rights or jurisdiction excluded from the jurisdiction
of a court or tribunal under article 297, paragraphs 2 and 3, of the
aforementioned Convention.
Chile
[Original: Spanish]
Statement
made upon signature (10 December 1982) and confirmed upon ratification (25
August 1997):
In exercise of the right conferred by article 310 of
the Convention, the delegation of Chile wishes first of all to reiterate in its
entirety the statement it made at last April's meeting when the Convention was
adopted. That statement is reproduced in document A/CONF.62/SR.164. . . . in
particular to the Convention's pivotal legal concept, that of the 200 mile
exclusive economic zone to the elaboration of which [the Government of Chile]
country made an important contribution, having been the first to declare such a
concept, 35 years ago in 1947, and having subsequently helped to define and earn
it international acceptance. The exclusive economic zone has a sui generis
legal character distinct from that of the territorial sea and the high seas. It
is a zone under national jurisdiction, over which the coastal State exercises
economic sovereignty and in which third States enjoy freedom of navigation and
overflight and the freedoms inherent in international communication. The
Convention defines it as a maritime space under the jurisdiction of the coastal
State, bound to the latters' territorial sovereignty and actual territory, on
terms similar to those governing other maritime spaces, namely the territorial
sea and the continental shelf. With regard to straits used for international
navigation, the delegation of Chile wishes to reaffirm and reiterate in full the
statement made last April, as reproduced in document A/CONF.62/SR.164 referred
to above, as well as the content of the supplementary written statement dated 7
April 1982 contained in documentA/CONF.62/WS/19.
With regard to the international sea-bed régime, [the
Government of Chile wishes] to reiterate the statement made by the Group of 77
at last April's meeting regarding the legal concept of the common heritage of
mankind, the existence of which was solemnly confirmed by consensus by the
General Assembly in 1970 and which the present Convention defines as a part of jus
cogens . Any action taken in contravention of this principle and outside
the framework of the sea-bed régime would, as last April's debate showed, be
totally invalid and illegal.
Upon ratification (25 August 1997):
...
2. The Republic of Chile declares that the Treaty of Peace and Friendship
signed with the Argentine Republic on 29 November 1984, which entered into force
on 2 May 1985, shall define the boundaries between the respective sovereignties
over the sea, seabed and subsoil of the Argentine Republic and the Republic of
Chile in the sea of the southern zone in the terms laid down in articles 7 to 9.
3. With regard to part II of the Convention:
(a) In accordance with article 13 of the Treaty of Peace and Friendship of
1984, the Republic of Chile, in exercise of its sovereign rights, grants to
the Argentine Republic the navigation facilities through Chilean internal
waters described in that Treaty, which are specified in annex 2, articles 1 to
9.
In addition, the Republic of Chile declares that by virtue of this Treaty,
ships flying the flag of third countries may navigate without obstacles
through the internal waters along the routes specified in annex 2, articles 1
and 8, subject to the relevant Chilean regulations.
In the Treaty of Peace and Friendship of 1984, the two Parties agreed on
the system of navigation and pilotage in the Beagle Channel defined in annex
2, articles 11 to 16. The provisions on navigation set forth in that annex
replace any previous agreement on the subject that might exist between the
Parties.
We reiterate that the navigation systems and facilities referred to in this
paragraph were established in the 1984 Treaty of Peace and Friendship for the
sole purpose of facilitating maritime communication between specific maritime
points and areas, along the specific routes indicated, so that they do not
apply to other routes existing in the zone which have not been specifically
agreed on.
(b) The Republic of Chile reaffirms the full validity and force of Supreme
Decree No. 416 of 1977, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which, in
accordance with the principles of article 7 of the Convention - which have
been fully recognized by Chile - established the straight baselines which were
confirmed in article 11 of the 1984 Treaty of Peace and Friendship.
(c) In cases in which a State places restrictions on the right of innocent
passage for foreign warships, the Republic of Chile reserves the right to
apply similar restrictive measures.
4. With regard to part III of the Convention, it should be noted that in
accordance with article 35 (c), the provisions of this part do not affect the
legal regime of the Strait of Magellan, since passage through that strait is
"regulated by long-standing international conventions in force specifically
relating to such straits" such as the 1881 Boundary Treaty, a regime which
is reaffirmed in the Treaty of Peace and Friendship of 1984.
In article 10 of the latter Treaty, Chile and Argentina agreed on the
boundary at the eastern end of the Strait of Magellan and agreed that this
boundary in no way alters the provisions of the 1881 Boundary Treaty, whereby,
as Chile declared unilaterally in 1873, the Strait of Magellan is neutralized
forever with free navigation assured for the flags of all nations under the
terms laid down in article V. For its part, the Argentine Republic undertook to
maintain, at any time and in whatever circumstances, the right of ships of all
flags to navigate expeditiously and without obstacles through its jurisdictional
waters to and from the Strait of Magellan.
Furthermore, we reiterate that Chilean maritime traffic to and from the north
through the Estrecho de Le Maire shall enjoy the facilities laid down in annex
2, article 10 of the 1984 Treaty of Peace and Friendship.
5. Having regard for its interest in the conservation of the resources in its
exclusive economic zone and the adjacent area of the high seas, the Republic of
Chile believes that, in accordance with the provisions of the Convention, where
the same stock or stocks of associated species occur both within the exclusive
economic zone and in the adjacent area of the high seas, the Republic of Chile,
as the coastal State, and the States fishing for such stocks in the area
adjacent to its exclusive economic zone must agree upon the measures necessary
for the conservation in the high seas of these stocks or associated species. In
the absence of such agreement, Chile reserves the right to exercise its rights
under article 116 and other provisions of the United Nations Convention on the
Law of the Sea, and the other rights accorded to it under international law.
6. With reference to part XI of the Convention and its supplementary
agreement, it is Chile's understanding that, in respect of the prevention of
pollution in exploration and exploitation activities, the Authority must apply
the general criterion that underwater mining shall be subject to standards which
are at least as stringent as comparable standards on land.
7. With regard to part XV of the Convention, the Republic of Chile declares
that:
(a) In accordance with article 287 of the Convention, it accepts, in order
of preference, the following means for the settlement of disputes concerning
the interpretation or application of the Convention:
(i) The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea established in
accordance with annex VI;
(ii) A special arbitral tribunal, established in accordance with annex
VIII, for the categories of disputes specified therein relating to
fisheries, protection and preservation of the marine environment, and marine
scientific research and navigation, including pollution from vessels and by
dumping.
(b) In accordance with articles 280 to 282 of the Convention, the choice of
means for the settlement of disputes indicated in the preceding paragraph
shall in no way affect the obligations deriving from the general, regional or
bilateral agreements to which the Republic of Chile is a party concerning the
peaceful settlement of disputes or containing provisions for the settlement of
disputes.
(c) In accordance with article 298 of the Convention, Chile declares that
it does not accept any of the procedures provided for in part XV, section 2
with respect to the disputes referred to in article 298, paragraphs 1 (a), (b)
and (c) of the Convention.
China
[Original: Chinese]
Upon ratification
(7 June 1996)1/:
In accordance with the decision of the Standing Committee of the Eighth
National People's Congress of the People's Republic of China at its nineteenth
session, the President of the People's Republic of China has hereby ratified the
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 and at the
same time made the following statement:
1. In accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the
Law of the Sea, the People's Republic of China shall enjoy sovereign rights and
jurisdiction over an exclusive economic zone of 200 nautical miles and the
continental shelf.
2. The People's Republic of China will effect, through consultations, the
delimitation of the boundary of the maritime jurisdiction with the States with
coasts opposite or adjacent to China respectively on the basis of international
law and in accordance with the principle of equitability.
3. The People's Republic of China reaffirms its sovereignty over all its
archipelagos and islands as listed in article 2 of the Law of the People's
Republic of China on the territorial sea and the contiguous zone, which was
promulgated on 25 February 1992.
4. The People's Republic of China reaffirms that the provisions of the United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea concerning innocent passage through the
territorial sea shall not prejudice the right of a coastal State to request, in
accordance with its laws and regulations, a foreign State to obtain advance
approval from or give prior notification to the coastal State for the passage of
its warships through the territorial sea of the coastal State.
Declaration made
after ratification (25 August 2006)
Declaration under article 298:
The Government of the People's Republic of China does
not accept any of the procedures provided for in Section 2 of Part XV of the
Convention with respect to all the categories of disputes referred to in
paragraph 1 (a) (b) and (c) of Article 298 of the Convention.
Costa Rica
(Original: Spanish)
Upon signature
(10 December 1982):
The Government of Costa Rica declares that the
provisions of Costa Rican law under which foreign vessels must pay for licences
to fish in its exclusive economic zone, shall apply also to fishing for highly
migratory species, pursuant to the provisions of articles 62 and 64, paragraph
2, of the Convention.
Croatia
[Original: English]
Statement made upon succession
(5 April 1995) 2/:
The Republic of Croatia considers that, in accordance with article 53 of the
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 29 May 1969, there is no peremptory
norm of general international law which would forbid a coastal State to request
by its laws and regulations foreign warships to notify their intention of
innocent passage through its territorial waters, and to limit the number of
warships allowed to exercise the right of innocent passage at the same time
(articles 17 to 32 of the Convention).
Declaration
made after succession (4 November 1999):
Declaration under article 287:
In implementation of article 287 of the [Convention],
the Government of Croatia [declares] that, for the settlement of disputes
concerning the application or interpretation of the Convention and of the
Agreement adopted on 28 July 1994 relating to the Implementation of Part XI, it
chooses, in order of preference, the following means:
i) The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
established in accordance with annex VI;
ii) The International Court of Justice."
Cuba
[Original: Spanish]
Upon signature (10
December 1982):
"At the time of signing the Convention on the Law
of the Sea, the Cuban Delegation declares that, having gained possession of the
definitive text of the Convention just a few hours ago, it will leave for the
time of the ratification of the Convention the issuing of any statement it deems
pertinent with respect to articles:
287 -- on the election of the procedure for the
settlement of controversies pertaining to the interpretation or implementation
of the Convention;
292 -- on the prompt release of ships and their crews;
298 -- on the optional exceptions to the applicability
of Section 2;
as well as whatever statement or declaration it might
deem appropriate to make in conformity with article 310 of the Convention."
Upon ratification
(15 August 1984):
With regard to article 287 on the choice of procedure for the settlement of
disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention, the
Government of the Republic of Cuba declares that it does not accept the
jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice and, consequently, will not
accept the jurisdiction of the Court with respect to the provisions of articles
297 and 298.
With regard to article 292, the Government of the Republic of Cuba considers
that once financial security has been posted, the detaining State should proceed
promptly and without delay to release the vessel and its crew and declares that
where this procedure is not followed with respect to its vessels or members of
their crew it will not agree to submit the matter to the International Court of
Justice.
Czech Republic
[Original: English]
Upon ratification
(21 June 1996):
The Government of the Czech Republic, having considered the declaration of
the Federal Republic of Germany of 14 October 1994, pertaining to the
interpretation of the provisions of Part X of the United Nations Convention on
the Law of the Sea, which deals with the right of access of land-locked States
to and from the sea and freedom of transit, states that the above-mentioned
declaration of the Federal Republic of Germany cannot be interpreted with regard
to the Czech Republic in contradiction with the provisions of Part X of the
Convention.
Denmark
Upon ratification
(16 November 2004) The Kingdom of Denmark makes
the following declaration: It is the position of the Government of the Kingdom
of Denmark that the exception from the transit passage regime provided for in
article 35 (c) of the Convention applies to the specific regime in the Danish
straits (the Great Belt, the Little Belt and the Danish part of the Sound),
which has developed on the basis of the Copenhagen Treaty of 1857. The present
legal regime of the Danish straits will therefore remain unchanged.
The Government of the Kingdom of Denmark declares
pursuant to article 287 of the Convention that it chooses the International
Court of Justice for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or
application of the Convention.
The Government of the Kingdom of Denmark declares
pursuant to article 298 of the Convention that it does not accept an arbitral
tribunal constituted in accordance with Annex VII for any of the categories of
disputes mentioned in article 298.
The Government of the Kingdom of Denmark declares, in
accordance with article 310 of the Convention, its objection to any declaration
or position excluding or amending the legal scope of the provisions of the
Convention. Passivity with respect to such declarations or positions shall be
interpreted neither as acceptance nor rejection of such declarations or
positions.
The Kingdom of Denmark recalls that, as a member of the
European Community, it has transferred competence in respect of certain matters
governed by the Convention. In accordance with the provisions of Annex IX of the
Convention, a detailed declaration on the nature and ex tent of the competence
transferred to the European Community was made by the European Community upon
deposit of its instrument of formal confirmation. This transfer of competence
does not extend to the Faroe Islands and Greenland.
Egypt
[Original: Arabic]
Upon ratification
(26 August 1983):
Upon ratification, the Government of Egypt, under the provisions of article
310 of the Convention, made the following declarations:
Declaration concerning the territorial sea
1. The Arab Republic of Egypt establishes the breadth of its territorial sea
at 12 nautical miles, pursuant to article 5 of the Ordinance of 18 January 1951
as amended by the Decree of 17 February 1958, in line with the provisions of
article 3 of the Convention.
2. The Arab Republic of Egypt will publish, at the earliest opportunity,
charts showing the baselines from which the breadth of its territorial sea in
the Mediterranean Sea and in the Red Sea is measured, as well as the lines
marking the outer limit of the territorial sea, in accordance with usual
practice.
Declaration concerning the contiguous zone
The Arab Republic of Egypt has decided that its contiguous zone (as defined
in the Ordinance of 18 January 1951 as amended by the Presidential Decree of 17
February 1958) extends to 24 nautical miles from the baselines from which the
breadth of the territorial sea is measured, as provided for in article 33 of the
Convention.
Declaration concerning the passage of nuclear-powered and similar ships
through the territorial sea of Egypt
Pursuant to the provisions of the Convention relating to the right of the
coastal State to regulate the passage of ships through its territorial sea and
whereas the passage of foreign nuclear-powered ships and ships carrying nuclear
or other inherently dangerous and noxious substances poses a number of hazards,
Whereas article 23 of the Convention stipulates that the ships in question
shall, when exercising the right of innocent passage through the territorial
sea, carry documents and observe special precautionary measures established for
such ships by international agreements,
The Government of the Arab Republic of Egypt declares that it will require
the aforementioned ships to obtain authorization before entering the territorial
sea of Egypt, until such international agreements are concluded and Egypt
becomes a party to them.
Declaration concerning the passage of warships through the territorial sea of
Egypt
[With reference to the provisions of the Convention relating to the right of
the coastal State to regulate the passage of ships through its territorial sea:]
Warships shall be ensured innocent passage through the territorial sea of Egypt,
subject to prior notification.
Declaration concerning passage through the Strait of Tiran and the Gulf of
Aqaba
The provisions of the 1979 Peace Treaty between Egypt and Israel concerning
passage through the Strait of Tiran and the Gulf of Aqaba come within the
framework of the general regime of waters forming straits referred to in Part
III of the Convention, wherein it is stipulated that the general regime shall
not affect the legal status of waters forming straits and shall include certain
obligations with regard to security and the maintenance of order in the State
bordering the strait.
Declaration concerning the exercise by Egypt of its rights in the
exclusive economic zone
The Arab Republic of Egypt will exercise as from this day the rights
attributed to it by the provisions of Parts V and VI of the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea in the exclusive economic zone situated beyond
and adjacent to its territorial sea in the Mediterranean Sea and in the Red Sea.
The Arab Republic of Egypt will also exercise its sovereign rights in this
zone for the purpose of exploring and exploiting, conserving and managing the
natural resources, whether living or non-living, of the seabed and subsoil and
the superjacent waters, and with regard to all other activities for the economic
exploration and exploitation of the zone, such as the production of energy from
the water, currents and winds.
The Arab Republic of Egypt will exercise its jurisdiction over the exclusive
economic zone according to the modalities laid down in the Convention with
regard to the establishment and use of artificial islands, installations and
structures, marine scientific research, the protection and preservation of the
marine environment and the other rights and duties provided for in the
Convention.
The Arab Republic of Egypt proclaims that, in exercising its rights and
performing its duties under the Convention in the exclusive economic zone, it
will have due regard for the rights and duties of other States and will act in a
manner compatible with the provisions of the Convention.
The Arab Republic of Egypt undertakes to establish the outer limits of its
exclusive economic zone in accordance with the rules, criteria and modalities
laid down in the Convention.
[The Arab Republic of] Egypt declares that it will take the necessary action
and make the necessary arrangements to regulate all matters relating to its
exclusive economic zones.
Declaration concerning the procedure chosen for the settlement of disputes in
conformity with the United Nations
[With reference to the provisions of article 287 of the Convention:] The Arab
Republic of Egypt declares that it accepts the arbitral procedure, the
modalities of which are defined in Annex VII to the Convention, as the procedure
for the settlement of any dispute which might arise between Egypt and any other
State relating to the interpretation or application of the Convention.
The Arab Republic of Egypt further declares that it excludes from the scope
of application of this procedure those disputes contemplated in article 297 of
the Convention.
Statement concerning the Arabic version of the text of the Convention
The Government of the Arab Republic of Egypt is gratified that the Third
United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea adopted the new Convention in
six languages, including Arabic, with all the texts being equally authentic,
thus establishing absolute equality between all the versions and preventing any
one from prevailing over another.
However, when the official Arabic version of the Convention is compared with
the other official versions, it becomes clear that, in some cases, the official
Arabic text does not exactly correspond to the other versions, in that it fails
to reflect precisely the content of certain provisions of the Convention which
were found acceptable and adopted by States in establishing a legal regime
governing the seas.
For these reasons ..., the Government of the Arab Republic of Egypt takes the
opportunity afforded by the deposit of the instruments of ratification of the
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea to declare that it will adopt
the interpretation which is best corroborated by the various official texts of
the Convention.
Equatorial
Guinea
Declaration
made after ratification (20 February 2002):
Declaration under article 298
The Government of the Republic of Equatorial Guinea
hereby enters a reservation and declares that, under article 298, paragraph 1,
of the United Nations Convention of 1982 on the Law of the Sea, it does not
recognize as mandatory ipso facto with respect to any other State any of the
procedures provided for in part XV, section 2, of the Convention as regards the
categories of disputes set forth in article 298, paragraph 1 (a).
Estonia
Upon accession (26 August 2005)
"1. As a member state of the European Community, the
Republic of Estonia has transferred competence in certain matters governed by
the Convention to the European Community according to the declaration made by
the European Community on April 1, 1998 while acceding to the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea.
2. Pursuant to Article 287, paragraph 1 of the
Convention the Republic of Estonia chooses the International Tribunal for the
Law of the Sea established in accordance with Annex VI and the International
Court of Justice as means for the settlement of disputes concerning the
interpretation or application of this Convention."
European Community
Upon
signature (7 December 1984):
"On signing the United Nations Convention on the
Law of the Sea, the European Economic Community declares that it considers that
the Convention constitutes, within the framework of the Law of the Sea, a major
effort in the codification and progressive development of international law in
the fields to which its declaration pursuant to Article 2 of Annex IX of the
Convention refers. The Community would like to express the hope that this
development will become a useful means for promoting co-operation and stable
relations between all countries in these fields.
The Community, however, considers that significant
provisions of Part XI of the Convention are not conducive to the development of
the activities to which that Part refers in view of the fact that several Member
States of the Community have already expressed their position that this Part
contains considerable deficiencies and flaws which require rectification. The
Community recognises the importance of the work which remains to be done and
hopes that conditions for the implementation of a sea bed mining regime, which
are generally acceptable and which are therefore likely to promote activities in
the international sea bed area, can be agreed. The Community, within the limits
of its competence, will play a full part in contributing to the task of finding
satisfactory solutions.
A separate decision on formal confirmation(*)
will have to be taken at a later stage. It will be taken in the light of the
results of the efforts made to attain a universally acceptable Convention."
Competence of the European Communities with regard to
matters governed by the Convention on the Law of the Sea (Declaration made
pursuant to article 2 of Annex IX to the Convention)
Article 2 of Annex IX to the Convention on the Law of
the Sea stipulates that the participation of an international organisation shall
be subject to a declaration specifying the matters governed by the Convention in
respect of which competence has been transferred to the organisation by its
member states.
The European Communities were established by the
Treaties of Paris and of Rome, signed on 18 April 1951 and 25 1957,
respectively. After being ratified by the Signatory States the Treaties entered
into force on 25 July 1952 and 1 January 1958(**).
In accordance with the provisions referred to above
this declaration indicates the competence of the European Economic Community in
matters governed by the Convention.
The Community points out that its Member States have
transferred competence to it with regard to the conservation and management of
sea fishing resources. Hence, in the field of sea fishing it is for the
Community to adopt the relevant rules and regulations (which are enforced by the
Member States) and to enter into external undertakings with third states or
competent international organisations.
(*) Formal confirmation is the term used in the
Convention for ratification by international organisations (see Article 306 and
Annex IX, Article 3).
(**) The Treaty of Paris establishing the
European Coal and Steel Community was registered at the Secretariat of the
United Nations on 15.3.1957 under No. 3729; the Treaties of Rome establishing
the European Economic Community and the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom)
were registered on 21 April and 24 April 1958, respectively under Nos 4300
and 4301. The current members of the Communities are the Kingdom of Belgium, the
Kingdom of Denmark, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Hellenic Republic, the
French Republic, Ireland, the Italian Republic, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg,
the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea shall
apply, with regard to matters transferred to the European Economic Community, to
the territories in which the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community
is applied and under the conditions laid down in that Treaty.
Furthermore, with regard to rules and regulations for
the protection and preservation of the marine environment, the Member States
have transferred to the Community competences as formulated in provisions
adopted by the Community and as reflected by its participation in certain
international agreements (see Annex).
With regard to the provisions of Part X, the Community
has certain powers as its purpose is to bring about an economic union based on a
customs union.
With regard to the provisions of Part XI, the Community
enjoys competence in matters of commercial policy, including the control of
unfair economic practices.
The exercise of the competence that the Member States
have transferred to the Community under the Treaties is, by its very nature,
subject to continuous development. As a result the Community reserves the right
to make new declarations at a later date.
AnnexCommunity texts applicable
in the sector of the protection and preservation of the marine environment and
relating directly to subjects covered by the Convention
Council Decision of 3 December 1981 establishing a
Community information system for the control and reduction of pollution caused
by hydrocarbons discharged at sea (81/971/EEC) (OJ No L 355, 10.12.1981, p. 52).
Council Directive of 4 May 1976 on pollution caused by
certain dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment of the
Community (76/464/EEC) (OJ No L 129, 18.5.1976, p. 23).
Council Directive of 16 June 1975 on the disposal of
waste oils (75/439/EEC)(OJ No L 194, 25.7.1975, p. 23).
Council Directive of 20 February 1978 on waste from the
titanium dioxide industry (78/176/EEC) (OJ No L 54, 25.2.1978, p. 19).
Council Directive of 30 October 1979 on the quality
required of shellfish waters (79/923/EEC) (OJ No L 281, 10.11.1979, p. 47).
Council Directive of 22 March 1982 on limit values and
quality objectives for mercury discharges by the chlor-alkali electrolysis
industry (82/176/EEC) (OJ No L 81, 27.3.1982, p. 29).
Council Directive of 26 September 1983 on limit values
and quality objectives for cadmium discharges (83/513/EEC) (OJ No L 291,
24.10.1983, p. 1 et seq.).
Council Directive of 8 March 1984 on limit values and
quality objectives for mercury discharges by sectors other than the chlor-alkali
electrolysis industry (84/156/EEC) (OJ No L 74, 17.3.1984, p. 49 et seq.).
Annex
The Community has also concluded the following
Conventions:
Convention for the prevention of marine pollution from
land-based sources (Council Decision 75/437/EEC of 3 March 1975 published in OJ
No L 194, 25.7.1975, p. 5).
Convention on long-range transboundary air pollution
(Council Decision of 11 June 1981 published in OJ No L 171, 27.6.1981, p. 11).
Convention for the protection of the Mediterranean Sea
against pollution and the Protocol for the prevention of pollution of the
Mediterranean Sea by dumping from ships and aircraft (Council Decision
77/585/EEC of 25 July 1977 published in OJ No L 240, 19.9.1977, p. 1).
Protocol concerning co-operation in combating pollution
of the Mediterranean Sea by oil and other harmful substances in cases of
emergency (Council Decision 81/420/EEC of 19 May 1981 published in OJ No L 162,
19.6.1981, p. 4).
Protocol of 2 and 3 April 1983 concerning Mediterranean
specially protected areas (OJ No L 68/36, 10.3.1984)."
Declaration
made upon formal confirmation (1 April 1998): Declaration concerning the competence of the European Community
with regard to matters governed by the United Nations Convention on the Law of
the Sea of 10 December 1982 and the Agreement of 28 July 1994 relating to the
implementation of Part XI of the Convention
The European Community presents its compliments to the Secretary-General of
the United Nations and has the honour of depositing its instrument of formal
confirmation of the United Nations Convention of 10 December 1982 on the Law of
the Sea and the Agreement adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 28
July 1994 relating to the implementation of Part XI of the United Nations
Convention of 10 December 1982 on the Law of the Sea.
By depositing this instrument, the Community has the honour of declaring its
acceptance, in respect of matters for which competence has been transferred to
it by those of its Member States which are parties to the Convention, of the
rights and obligations laid down for States in the Convention and the Agreement.
The declaration concerning competence provided for in Article 5(1) of Annex IX
to the Convention is attached.
The Community also wishes to declare, in accordance with Article 310 of the
Convention, its objection to any declaration or position excluding or amending
the legal scope of the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of
the Sea, and in particular those relating to fishing activities. The Community
does not consider the Convention to recognize the rights or jurisdiction of
coastal States regarding the exploitation, conservation and management of
fishery resources other than sedentary species outside their exclusive economic
zone.
The Community reserves the right to make subsequent declarations in respect
of the Convention and the Agreement and in response to future declarations and
positions.
The Community takes this opportunity to reiterate to the Secretary-General of
the United Nations the assurance of its highest consideration.
(Declaration made pursuant to article 5(1) of Annex IX to the
Convention and to article 4(4) of the Agreement)
Article 5(1) of Annex IX of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the
Sea provides that the instrument of formal confirmation of an international
organization shall contain a declaration specifying the matters governed by the
Convention in respect of which competence has been transferred to the
organization by its member States which are Parties to the Convention. 1/
Article 4(4) of the Agreement relating to the implementation of Part XI of
the United Nations Convention the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 2/provides
that formal confirmation by an international organization shall be in accordance
with Annex IX of the Convention.
The European Communities were established by the Treaties of Paris (ECSC) and
of Rome (EEC and Euratom), signed on 18 April 1951 and 25 March 1957
respectively. After being ratified by the Signatory States, the Treaties entered
into force on 25 July 1952 and 1 January 1958. They have been amended by the
Treaty on European Union, which was signed in Maastricht on 7 February 1992 and
entered into force, after being ratified by the Signatory States, on 1 November
1993, and most recently by the Accession Treaty signed in Corfu on 24 June 1994,
which entered into force on 1 January 1995. 3/
The current Members of the Communities are the Kingdom of Belgium, the
Kingdom of Denmark, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Hellenic Republic, the
Kingdom of Spain, the French Republic, Ireland, the Italian Republic, the Grand
Duchy of Luxembourg, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Republic of Austria,
the Portuguese Republic, the Republic of Finland, the Kingdom of Sweden and the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the Agreement
relating to the Implementation of Part XI of the Convention shall apply with
regard to the competences transferred to the European Community, to the
territories in which the Treaty establishing the European Community is applied
and under the conditions laid down in that Treaty, in particular Article 227
thereof.
This declaration is not applicable to the territories of the Member States in
which the said Treaty does not apply and is without prejudice to such acts or
positions as may be adopted under the Convention and the Agreement by the Member
States concerned on behalf of and in the interests of those territories.
In accordance with the provisions referred to above, this declaration
indicates the competence that the Member States have transferred to the
Community under the Treaties in matters governed by the Convention and the
Agreement.
The scope and the exercise of such Community competence are, by their nature,
subject to continuous development, and the Community will complete or amend this
declaration, if necessary, in accordance with Article 5(4) of Annex IX to the
Convention.
*****
The Community has exclusive competence for certain matters and shares
competence with its Member States for certain other matters.
1. Matters for which the Community has exclusive competence:
- The Community points out that its Member States have transferred
competence to it with regard to the conservation and management of sea fishing
resources. Hence in this field it is for the Community to adopt the relevant
rules and regulations (which are enforced by the Member States) and, within
its competence, to enter into external undertakings with third States or
competent international organizations. This competence applies to waters under
national fisheries jurisdiction and to the high seas. Nevertheless, in respect
of measures relating to the exercise of jurisdiction over vessels, flagging
and registration of vessels and the enforcement of penal and administrative
sanctions, competence rests with the Member States whilst respecting Community
law. Community law also provides for administrative sanctions.
- By virtue of its commercial and customs policy, the Community has
competence in respect of those provisions of Parts X and XI of the Convention
and of the Agreement of 28 July 1994 which are related to international trade.
2. Matters for which the Community shares competence with its Member States:
- With regard to fisheries, for a certain number of matters that are not
directly related to the conservation and management of sea fishing resources,
for example research and technological development and development
cooperation, there is shared competence.
- With regard to the provisions on maritime transport, safety of shipping
and the prevention of marine pollution contained inter alia in Parts II, III,
V, VII and XII of the Convention, the Community has exclusive competence only
to the extent that such provisions of the Convention or legal instruments
adopted in implementation thereof affect common rules established by the
Community. When Community rules exist but are not affected, in particular in
cases of Community provisions establishing only minimum standards, the Member
States have competence, without prejudice to the competence of the Community
to act in this field. Otherwise competence rests with the Members States.
A list of relevant Community acts appears in the Appendix. The extent of
Community competence ensuing from these acts must be assessed by reference to
the precise provisions of each measure, and in particular, the extent to which
these provisions establish common rules.
- With regard to the provisions of Parts XIII and XIV of the Convention,
the Community's competence relates mainly to the promotion of cooperation on
research and technological development with non-member countries and
international organizations. The activities carried out by the Community here
complement the activities of the Member States. Competence in this instance is
implemented by the adoption of the programmes listed in the Appendix.
3. Possible impact of other Community policies
- Mention should also be made of the Community's policies and activities in
the fields of control of unfair economic practices, government procurement and
industrial competitiveness as well as in the area of development aid. These
policies may also have some relevance to the Convention and the Agreement, in
particular with regard to certain provisions of Parts VI and XI of the
Convention.
*****
- 1/ When it signed the Convention, the Community made the
requisite declaration, in accordance with Article 2 of Annex IX, in which it
specified the matters dealt with by the Convention for which competence had
been transferred to it by its Member States.
- 2/ Signed by the Community on 29 July 1994 and applied
by it provisionally with effect from 16 November 1994.
- 3/ The Treaty of Paris establishing the European Coal
and Steel Community was registered with the Secretariat of the United
Nations on 15 March 1957 under No. 3729; the Treaties of Rome establishing
the European Economic Community and the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom)
were registered on 21 April and 24 April 1958 respectively under Nos. 4300
and 4301. The Treaty on European Union was registered on 28 December 1993
under No. 30615; the Accession Treaty of 24 June 1994 was published in OJ No
C 241 of 29 August 1994.
-
-
- APPENDIX
Community Acts which refer to matters governed by the
Convention and the Agreement
In the maritime safety and prevention of marine pollution sectors
Council Decision of 25 February 1992 on radionavigation systems for
Europe (92/143/EEC) (OJ No L 59, 4.3.1992, p. 17)
Council Directive of 21 December 1978 concerning pilotage of vessels
by deep sea pilots in the North Sea and English Channel (79/115/EEC) (OJ
No L 33, 8.2.1979, p. 32)
Council Directive of 13 September 1993 concerning minimum
requirements for vessels bound for or leaving Community ports and
carrying dangerous or polluting goods (93/75/EEC) (OJ No L 247,
5.10.1993, p. 19)
Council Directive of 23 November 1993 concerning the minimum safety
and health requirements for work on board fishing vessels (thirteenth
individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive
89/391/EEC) (93/103/EC) (OJ No L 307, 13.12.1993, p. 1)
Council Directive of 22 November 1994 on common rules and standards
for ship inspection and survey organizations and for the relevant
activities of maritime administrations (Classification Societies
Directive) (94/57/EC) (OJ No L 319, 12.12.1994, p. 20)
Council Directive of 22 November 1994 on the minimum level of
training of seafarers (94/58/EC) (OJ No L 319, 12.12.1994, p. 28)
Council Directive of 19 June 1995 concerning the enforcement, in
respect of shipping using Community ports and sailing in the waters
under the jurisdiction of the Member States, of international standards
for ship safety, pollution prevention and shipboard living and working
conditions (port State control (95/21/EC) (OJ No L 157, 7.7.1995, p. 1)
Council Directive of 20 December 1996 on marine equipment (96/98/EC)
(OJ No L 46, 17.2.1997,p. 25)
Council Regulation of 4 March 1991 on the transfer of ships from one
register to another within the Community (91/613/EEC) (OJ No L 68,
15.3.1991, p.1) and Commission Regulation of 28 July 1993 concerning the
application of amendments to the International Convention for the Safety
of Life at Sea, 1974, and to the International Convention for the
Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, for the purpose of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 613/91 (2158/93/EEC) (OJ No L 194, 3.8.1993, p. 5)
Council Regulation of 21 November 1994 on the implementation of IMO
Resolution A.747(18) on the application of tonnage measurement of
ballast spaces in segregated ballast oil tankers (2978/94/EEC) (OJ No L
319, 12.12.1994, p. 1)
Council Regulation of 8 December 1995 on the safety management of
roll-on/roll-off passenger ferries (ro-ro ferries) (3051/95/EEC) (OJ No
L 320, 30.12.1995, p. 14)
In the field of protection and preservation of the marine environment
Part XII of the Convention
Council Decision of 3 December 1981 establishing a Community
information system for the control and reduction of pollution caused by
hydrocarbons discharged at sea (81/971/EEC) (OJ No L 355, 10.12.1981, p.
52)
Council Decision of 6 March 1986 establishing a Community information
system for the control and reduction of pollution caused by the spillage
of hydrocarbons and other harmful substances at sea (86/85/EEC) (OJ No L
77, 22.3.1986, p. 33)
Council Directive of 16 June 1975 on the disposal of waste oils
(75/439/EEC) (OJ No L 194, 25.7.1975,p. 23)
Council Directive of 15 July 1975 on waste (75/442/EEC) (OJ No L 194,
25.7.1975, p. 39)
Council Directive of 8 December 1975 concerning the quality of
bathing water (76/160/EEC) (OJ No L 31, 5.2.1976, p. 1)
Council Directive of 4 May 1976 on pollution caused by certain
dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment of the
Community (76/464/EEC) (OJ No L 129, 18.5.1976, p. 23)
Council Directive of 20 February 1978 on wastes from the titanium
dioxide industry (78/176/EEC) (OJ No L 54, 25.2. 1978, p. 19)
Council Directive of 30 October 1979 on the quality required of
shellfish waters (79/923/EEC) (OJ No L 281, 10.11.1979, p. 47)
Council Directive of 15 July 1980 on air quality limit values and
guide values for sulphur dioxide and suspended particulars (80/779/EEC)
(OJ No L 229, 30.8.1980, p. 30)
Council Directive of 22 March 1982 on limit values and quality
objectives for mercur |