jurisdiction marine pollution international fishing

57
International Ocean Law Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Upload: suzanna-fox

Post on 24-Dec-2015

220 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

International Ocean Law

JurisdictionMarine Pollution

International Fishing

Page 2: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Why the Oceans Matter

• 70% of the earth is covered in seas– Food source– Pollution assimilation – especially CO2– Shipping and transportation

• We know very little about the oceans

Page 3: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Jurisdiction

• Background principle– Freedom of the seas• Historically = free passage/ free fishing• “tragedy of the commons”

– Customary limitation: territorial seas• 3 miles from coast• “cannon shot rule”

Page 4: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Jurisdiction

• Continental shelf– After World War II– United States asserted jurisdiction over natural

resources and seabed of contiguous continental shelf

– Other countries followed• Creeping jurisdiction + increasing disputes

– UN Conference on the Law of the Sea 1958

Page 5: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Jurisdiction

• UNCLOS– United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea– 1982 signed– 1994 entered into force– (but many elements were already customary law

by then!)

Page 6: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Jurisdiction

• UNCLOS – Jurisdiction– Ports– Territorial Seas– Contiguous Seas– Exclusive Economic Zones– High seas

Page 7: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Jurisdiction

Page 8: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Jurisdiction

• UNCLOS – Jurisdiction– Ports = internal waters• Full national authority (with limited exceptions)

Page 9: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Jurisdiction

• UNCLOS – Jurisdiction– Territorial Seas = baseline to 12 nautical miles• Baseline = coast/harbor walls

– Subject to dispute

• Coastal state authority– = almost complete authority– Subject to right of innocent passage

Page 10: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Jurisdiction

• UNCLOS – Jurisdiction– Contiguous Seas = 12 to 24 nautical miles• “Limited” coastal authority• Except

– Customs– Fiscal– Immigration– Sanitary legislation and regulations

Page 11: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Jurisdiction

• UNCLOS – Jurisdiction– Exclusive Economic Zones = 12-200• Cover 30% of seas, 90% of commercial fisheries, and

almost all minerals• Coastal states have sovereign right to explore, exploit,

conserve and manage natural resources– May pass laws exercising these rights– May board, inspect and arrest crews on ships violating the

laws

Page 12: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Jurisdiction

• UNCLOS – Jurisdiction– Exclusive Economic Zones = 12-200• Coastal states shall ensure the conservation and

utilization of their living marine resources• States shall take measures to prevent and reduce

pollution• States shall avoid activities under their jurisdiction that

cause damage to other States and their environments

Page 13: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Jurisdiction

• UNCLOS – Jurisdiction– Exclusive Economic Zones = 12-200• But, in preventing pollution in their own jurisdiction,

States shall avoid interfering with activities carried out by other States in their exercise of their rights

Page 14: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Jurisdiction

Page 15: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Jurisdiction

• UNCLOS – Jurisdiction– Territorial v. EEZ jurisdiction – tension• Coastal state has regulatory jurisdiction over all sources

of pollution in its territorial waters• In EEZ, pollution regulations must comport with

generally accepted international standards – typically based on technical standards set by the International Maritime Organization (IMO)• Ship could be in compliance with IMO standards in EEZ,

but violate State standards once in territorial waters

Page 16: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Jurisdiction

• UNCLOS – Jurisdiction– High seas – beyond 200 nautical miles• No national jurisdiction

Page 17: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Jurisdiction

• Innocent passage– All jurisdictional zones are subject to “innocent

passage”= transit passage of vessels on the sea

Page 18: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Jurisdiction

• Innocent passage– Qualifications• Innocent passage does not protect

– Any act of wilful and serious pollution in contravention of international law or

– Any fishing activities

• Coastal state may adopt laws limiting right in regard to conservation of living marine resources, preservation of environment, and control/reduction of pollution– But not based on design, construction, crew or equipment,

unless based on international standards

Page 19: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Jurisdiction

• Coastal states v. flag states– Coastal states = countries with actual coastal territory• Have jurisdiction over ships when ships are in their

territorial seas

– Flag states = countries that license vessels to operate• Have jurisdiction over ships that fly their flags• Does not matter who owns the ship or what the nationality

of the crew is – only relevant thing is the flag• May create problems if dealing with “flags of convenience”

Page 20: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing
Page 21: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing
Page 22: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing
Page 23: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Oil Pollution

Page 24: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Oil pollution

• Oil pollution = most pervasive problem– 3,200 tankers per day– Huge: largest supertanker = 600,000 tons of oil• Line of fuel trucks 320 kilometers long

Page 25: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Oil Pollution: The Notorious Spills

Amoco Cadiz

Page 26: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Oil Pollution: Operational Discharges

If oil and ballast tanks are the same, emptying tanks will discharge oil – 0.4% of total cargo = 400 tons per voyage

Page 27: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Oil Pollution: Operational Discharges

Page 28: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Oil pollution impacts

• Impacts vary depending on type of oil– Different chemical compounds– Natural seeps are different from refined oils• Bacteria eat oil from natural seeps

– Location, species, depth, etc., all matter

Page 29: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Oil Pollution Early Treaties

• International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of Sea by Oil (OILPOL)– First – no discharges within 50 miles of coast– Then – no discharges unless• Proceeding en route• Discharge = less than 1/15,000 of capacity• Rate = less than 60 liters per mile• Distance = more than 50 miles from land

– Neither worked

Page 30: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Oil Pollution Treaty: MARPOL 73/78

• Covers operational discharges, spills, and unintentional releases

Page 31: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

MARPOL 73/78

• General requirements– States will establish international rules and

standards– “flag states” shall adopt laws for the prevention

and reduction of pollution from vessels flying their flags

– Coastal states may adopt regulations to prevent pollution• May apply them to vessels during innocent passage, so

long as they don’t hinder innocent passage

Page 32: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Oil pollution

• MARPOL – 3 elements– Mandatory discharge standards– Construction, design, equipment, and manning

specifications (CDEM)– Navigation standards

Page 33: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

MARPOL 73/78

• MARPOL – 3 elements– Mandatory discharge standards• = limits on discharges• Operating procedures for washing tanks and ballast

water• Port States must provide reception facilities

Page 34: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

MARPOL 73/78

• MARPOL – 3 elements– Construction, design, equipment, and manning

specifications (CDEM)• New ships must have segregated ballast tanks• Other requirements for filters• New ships need double hulls

Page 35: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Design Standards: Example

Page 36: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

MARPOL 73/78

• MARPOL – 3 elements– Navigation standards in special areas• Special areas – oceanographical/ecological condition

– Need special protection and standards– Examples: Mediterranean Sea, Baltic Sea, Black Sea, Red Sea,

Gulf– No discharge allowed

Page 37: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Does MARPOL 73/78 work?

Page 38: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

MARPOL 73/73

• MARPOL – Compliance– Specific tanker standards– Reporting and documentation requirements

Page 39: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

MARPOL 73/78

• MARPOL – Compliance– Specific tanker standards• Tankers > 150 tons• Ships > 400 tons• Must get International Oil Pollution Prevention (IOPP)

Certificate – shows that ship meets technical standards• Surveys at least every 5 years + intermediate inspection• IOPPs issued by international classification societies

– Not States– Is this good or bad?

Page 40: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

MARPOL 73/78

• MARPOL – Compliance– Specific tanker standards• If ship doesn’t meet applicable standards and ship

owner/operator does not take corrective action, IOPP withdrawn and Port state notified

Page 41: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

MARPOL 73/78

• MARPOL – Compliance– Reporting and documentation requirements• Oil Record Book

– Records every ballasting/discharge– Loading of oil– Transfer of oil– Etc.

Page 42: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

MARPOL 73/78

• MARPOL – Compliance– Certification societies• Private companies• Often have different standards• What risks?

– Pseudo-IOPPs

Page 43: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

MARPOL 73/78

• MARPOL – Compliance– Oil book and self-reporting• What risks?• What opportunities?

Page 44: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

MARPOL 73/78

• MARPOL – Compliance– Oil book and self-reporting• What risks?

– Would you report every time you drove over the speed limit?

• What opportunities?– Passengers – garbage discharges– Crew – “magic pipes”

Page 45: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

MARPOL 73/78 – “Magic Pipe”

Page 46: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Oil Pollution: Sources of Spills

Page 47: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Oil pollution enforcement: flag states v. coastal states

• Flag states– Vessel is part of a flag state’s territory or

nationality– Flag states can enforce against flagged vessel’s

violations• Except coastal state authority is more powerful in

territorial seas

Page 48: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Oil pollution enforcement: flag states v. coastal states

• Coastal states– May use territorial authority to enforce against

flagged vessels in their territorial seas, so long as they don’t infringe on innocent passage

Page 49: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Oil pollution enforcement: flag states v. coastal states

• Port states– Jurisdiction based on presence of vessel in port

• Port v. Coastal:– Coastal state jurisdiction – if pollution occurs in

coastal waters, state acts as coastal state– If the only connection is based on ship’s presence,

then state acts as port state

Page 50: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Oil pollution enforcement: MARPOL

• IOPP certificates– Port state may inspect to verify a valid IOPP exists– Port state may detain ship until ship can proceed

to sea without presenting unreasonable threat of harm to marine environment if• clear grounds for believing ship doesn’t conform to

IOPP or that IOPP is not valid, • Clear grounds for believing master or crew is not

familiar with procedures

– If ship doesn’t have IOPP, ok to inspect

Page 51: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Oil pollution enforcement: MARPOL

• Coastal states may detain and institute legal proceedings if ships violate rules and cause “major damage or threat of major damage”– If violation happens in territorial waters, coastal

state may enforce– Otherwise, coastal state must pass along findings

to flag State for enforcement• Except: history of non-enforcement

Page 52: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Oil pollution enforcement: MARPOL

• Flag states– If violation alleged, flag state may• Find vessel not guilty• No action b/c insufficient evidence• No action for “other and unspecified reason”• Give a warning• Levy a fine• Take other unspecified actions

Page 53: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Oil pollution enforcement: MARPOL

• Flag states– Enforcement by Flag state preempts coastal or

port State, except:• If discharge caused major damage to coastal State• If flag State has a history of non-enforcement

Page 54: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Oil pollution enforcement: MARPOL

• Flags of Convenience– Ship owners often register vessels in countries

known for weak enforcement– 30% of world’s shipping carried by ships operating

under Liberia or Panama flags• Can employ foreign crews for cheap wages• Corporate laws allow anonymity = prosecution is

difficult

Page 55: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing
Page 56: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Oil pollution enforcement: MARPOL

• Flags of convenience – remedies?– Port state inspections + detention until repairs

made– Port states may enforce violations outside of the

EEZs – i.e., on the high seas• Coastal states may enforce for violations within EEZs

Page 57: Jurisdiction Marine Pollution International Fishing

Oil pollution enforcement: MARPOL

• Flags of convenience – remedies?– Limits on detention• May detain ship to inspect and enforce• But may not “unduly detain”