Content area
Full Text
ITLOS
In its decision regarding the confiscation of the Panama-flagged vessel "M/V Virginia G" and its cargo,1 the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) provided States with some useful guidance regarding the extent of State power to regulate activities within their "exclusive economic zones" (EEZs).2
The Claim
The dispute arose on 21 August 2009, when the Guinea- Bissau officials arrested the M/V Virginia G, a Panama- flagged oil tanker, for "bunkering" - refuelling ships - within Guinea-Bissau's EEZ in violation of that State's national law. Six days later, the State formally confiscated the ship and the fuel on board, releasing the ship by order of the relevant national authorities 14 months later. Both countries being Parties to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the ITLOS case was commenced by special agreement between the Parties nearly 23 months after the initial confiscation/arrest.
As originally filed, the case involved allegations by Panama that Guinea-Bissau had violated UNCLOS in the arrest and later confiscation. Guinea-Bissau counterclaimed that Panama had violated the UNCLOS flag-State provisions, in that there did not "exist a genuine link between the State and the ship".3
Legal Bases
Panama's allegations were rooted in Article 56 of UNCLOS, under which a coastal State is accorded rights and jurisdiction within its EEZ as follows:
sovereign rights for the purpose of exploring and exploiting, conserving and managing the natural resources, whether living or non-living, of the waters superjacent to the seabed and of the seabed and its subsoil, and with regard to other activities for the economic exploitation and exploration of the zone, such as the production of energy from the water, currents and winds [and] jurisdiction as provided for in the relevant provisions of this Convention with regard to [inter alia] the protection and preservation of the marine environment [as well as] other rights and duties provided for in [UNCLOS]".
In granting States these rights, however, Article 56 imposes limits. Unlike their basic sovereign rights within other areas under sovereign jurisdiction (the States' land areas and territorial seas), a State's rights within its EEZ must be exercised with "due regard to the rights and duties of other States" and "in a manner compatible with [UNCLOS]".
Connected to this, Article...