Asian Yearbook of International Law, Volume 22 (2016)最新文献

{"title":"Unilateral Actions and the Rule of Law in Maritime Boundary Disputes","authors":"Anne Hsiu-an Hsiao","doi":"10.1163/9789004379633_012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004379633_012","url":null,"abstract":"The development of the modern international law of the sea regime has allowed States to extend their territorial claims and exercise of sovereignty beyond the traditional spatial domain. However, this has also led to overlapping maritime territorial or boundary claims among countries, resulting in an increase in the number of international disputes. States which face such kinds of situations often take unilateral measures to consolidate their own legal positions and safeguard important national interests, as international law imposes a certain disadvantage to a State who does “nothing” in response to another State’s claim of rights that may challenge or prejudice its own. Interactions between the unilateral actions by two or more States involved in a certain dispute could lead to an escalation of the dispute; sometimes even armed conflict. In other words, unilateral actions are relevant to maintaining rule of law as well as peace and security in the international system. In relation to the management of maritime disputes, the governance of unilateral actions is arguably no less important than peaceful settlement of disputes. In fact, the former could be an indispensable component of the latter. More recently, maritime disputes in some parts of the world have resurged and escalated, for example, in the South China Sea; in the East China Sea (particularly over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands), or between Israel and Lebanon in the East Mediterranean Sea. The range of actions States undertake vis-à-vis their rival claimants have not only proliferated but also diversified. The legality of some of those actions may also be questioned. Nonetheless, the issue concerning how international law and the law of the sea regulate a State’s unilateral conducts in maritime dispute seems to have received much less attention in scholarly writings. This article will be a preliminary attempt to fill this gap. Apart from Introduction and Conclusions, the main body of the article will be divided into the following sections. The first section will provide a general categorization of unilateral actions in maritime boundary disputes, and explores their possible conceptual natures under international law. The second and third sections try to identify rules and principles relevant to States’ unilateral","PeriodicalId":348811,"journal":{"name":"Asian Yearbook of International Law, Volume 22 (2016)","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117337479","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"International Law in Asia: A Bibliographic Survey – 2016","authors":"Lowell B. Bautista","doi":"10.1163/9789004379633_026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004379633_026","url":null,"abstract":"This bibliography provides information on books, articles, notes, and other materials dealing with international law in Asia, broadly defined. Only English language publications are listed. Most of the materials can be listed under multiple categories, but to save space each item is listed under a single category. Edited books, however, may appear more than once if multiple chapters from the book are listed under different categories. Readers are advised to refer to all categories relevant to their research. The bibliography is limited to new materials published in 2016 or previously published materials that have updated editions in 2016. The headings used in this year’s bibliography are as follows:","PeriodicalId":348811,"journal":{"name":"Asian Yearbook of International Law, Volume 22 (2016)","volume":"2 2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132570036","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Framework for the Joint Development of Hydrocarbon Resources","authors":"Robert Beckman, Leonardo Bernard","doi":"10.1163/9789004379633_006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004379633_006","url":null,"abstract":"Beyond Territorial Disputes in the South China Sea: Legal Framework for the Joint Development of Hydrocarbon Resources (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2013), especially works by Gavin Maclaren and Rebecca James, „Negotiating Joint Development Agreements‟, at 139-144 and by David Ong, „Implications of Recent Southeast Asian State Practice for the International Law on Offshore Joint Development‟, at 192-193. FRAMEWORK FOR THE JOINT DEVELOPMENT OF HYDROCARBON RESOURCES","PeriodicalId":348811,"journal":{"name":"Asian Yearbook of International Law, Volume 22 (2016)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126016376","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Marine Data Collection: US Perspectives","authors":"J. Roach","doi":"10.1163/9789004379633_010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004379633_010","url":null,"abstract":"Coastal State jurisdiction over foreign marine data collection activities depends on which type of activity is involved and on the maritime zone in which it is conducted. The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea2 (los Convention) does not use the term “marine data collection” which is used in this article as a generic term without legal content, as the umbrella under which to consider the various data collection activities in the marine environment.3 Under “marine data collection” the following five categories, with seven subcategories, are considered: – Marine scientific research (msr); – Surveys – Hydrographic surveys; and – Military surveys; – Operational oceanography – Ocean state estimation; – Weather forecasting; and – Climate prediction; – Exploration and exploitation4 of – Natural resources; and – Underwater cultural heritage (shipwrecks); and – Monitoring and environmental assessment.","PeriodicalId":348811,"journal":{"name":"Asian Yearbook of International Law, Volume 22 (2016)","volume":"303 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115546708","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Management of Fishery Resources: A Starting Point Towards Cooperation in the East China Sea","authors":"Kuan-Hsiung Wang","doi":"10.1163/9789004379633_005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004379633_005","url":null,"abstract":"The disputes in the East China Sea could be categorized into two parts: one is on the sovereignty of those island features, and the other is the maritime zones claimed by related Parties in the region. It is understandable that the best way to solve the disputes might be delimiting boundaries so that the areas of sovereignty and jurisdiction could be decided. However, such situation is not always possible. It is mainly because negotiation and adoption of a maritime boundary between the related Parties always focused on political considerations and there are no well-established as well as well-recognized regulations for making boundaries. It is recognized that “equitable solution” is one of the most important principles in boundary making. However, there are no definite elements which have been decided in jurisprudence. There have been cases which recognize geographical and geological factors, coastal length, traditional fishing activities, relative impact on the livelihood and economic dependency as considerations in setting maritime boundaries. Under such circumstances, joint development/joint cooperation then could be treated as a way to solve the disputes. This is not only an expectation made by the related Parties, but could also be found in the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (unclos). Articles 74(3) and 83(3) of unclos,1 both provide “provisional arrangements” in situations before the boundary lines are agreed upon. The term “provisional arrangement” could be interpreted to refer to “joint cooperation” which is a popular term quoted and cited by the leaders of the Parties in the region. However, no practical exercises have been realized. Lack of political will is a possible reason. It is not difficult to locate opportunities for joint cooperation in the East China Sea region. Joint military exercises, joint development of hydrocarbon","PeriodicalId":348811,"journal":{"name":"Asian Yearbook of International Law, Volume 22 (2016)","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128962491","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Joint Development in the South China Sea: Is the Time Ripe?","authors":"Jianwei Li, Pingping Chen","doi":"10.1163/9789004379633_008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004379633_008","url":null,"abstract":"The South China Sea disputes are very complicated. They involve six parties – China (Taiwan), Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam – and concern overlapping claims over both land features and maritime zones. Although it is recognized that peaceful resolution of these disputes is important to the region as well as the world, it is unlikely that this aim could be reached in any near future. Demand for resources, living and non-living, has pushed claimant States to take unilateral activities for resources exploration and exploitation in the disputed sea area. These unilateral activities are against the spirit of Declaration of Conduct for the Parties in the South China Sea (doc) which was reached between China and the member States of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (asean) in 2002. They have met and will be meeting strong protests from other claimant States. With situations in the South China Sea being intensified since 2009, various means have been attempted and reconsidered to control the disputes from being escalated or even spilling out of control. This article discusses the concept of joint development arrangements ( jda) and its possible application in the South China Sea proper.1 The next section introduces the concept of jda from an international law perspective and its evolution. Section iii takes the South China Sea Region2 as a site for observation to study the policies of all the claimant countries in relation to jda, followed by examination of the jda cases in the region to which","PeriodicalId":348811,"journal":{"name":"Asian Yearbook of International Law, Volume 22 (2016)","volume":"333 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134360012","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The South China Sea Disputes: An Opportunity for the Cross Taiwan Strait Relationship","authors":"Yen-Chiang Chang","doi":"10.1163/9789004379633_004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004379633_004","url":null,"abstract":"The South Sea, also called the South China Sea, is a semi-enclosed marginal sea in the Pacific Ocean. It is located north of China and the island of Taiwan, east of the Philippines, south of Kalimantan Island and Sumatra Island and west of the Malay Peninsula and the Indo-China peninsula. States and territories with borders on the South China Sea, include mainland China, Taiwan (China), Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, Brunei and the Philippines.1 The total area of the South China Sea is 350 square kilometres. The South China Sea contains over 230 small islands, atolls, cays, and shoals, collectively known as the South China Sea islands. These islands are geographically divided into four parts: the Paracel Islands, the Macclesfield Bank, the Pratas Islands and the Spratly Islands. Most of these islands are very small, the largest of which is Pratas, with 12 square kilometres and Itu Aba Island, the largest island of Spratly Islands, is also only 0.4 square kilometres in size.2 Territorial disputes on the South China Sea islands began in the mid-late 20th Century. Since the 1970s, neighbouring countries in the South China Sea, such as Vietnam, the Philippines and Malaysia, began to conduct activities in the South China Sea islands and claim sovereignty over the Spratly Islands, for the following two reasons. On the one hand, the South China Sea is rich in natural resources including oil, gas and fish. On the other hand, the South China Sea, as a strategic road connecting the Pacific Ocean and Indian Ocean and a major shipping lane connecting Asia and Oceania, Europe and Africa,","PeriodicalId":348811,"journal":{"name":"Asian Yearbook of International Law, Volume 22 (2016)","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129534471","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Participation in Multilateral Treaties","authors":"Kevin Y. L. Tan","doi":"10.1163/9789004379633_016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004379633_016","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":348811,"journal":{"name":"Asian Yearbook of International Law, Volume 22 (2016)","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128229312","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}