历史性权利与海洋区域划界

IF 2.3 3区 社会学 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
C. Symmons
{"title":"历史性权利与海洋区域划界","authors":"C. Symmons","doi":"10.1163/9789004377028_009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Both Art. 12 of the TSC(1958) and Art. 15 of the LOSC make reference to \"historic title\" as a reason for departing from the general rule for delimitation of a territorial sea between States, namely, failing agreement, a median line; but no mention is made of such a proviso in respects of either delimitation of overlapping EEZs or continental shelves. For example, in Tunisia/Libya, Tunisia pleaded it had historic rights from past sedentary fishing activities. The relevance of claimed historic rights to maritime delimitation of expanded maritime zones such as the continental shelf remains somewhat unclear in the light of the above caselaw, though State practice in recent times suggests that historic rights, even if considered irrelevant to delimitation issues, may still be independently taken into account by special agreement as to access. Undoubtedly, some past continental shelf delimitations have taken into account historic claims in negotiating a maritime boundary.Keywords: continental shelves; EEZ; fishing activities; historic rights; LOSC; maritime boundary; maritime delimitation; maritime zones; territorial sea","PeriodicalId":44519,"journal":{"name":"Historic Environment-Policy & Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Historic Rights and Delimitation of Maritime Zones\",\"authors\":\"C. Symmons\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/9789004377028_009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Both Art. 12 of the TSC(1958) and Art. 15 of the LOSC make reference to \\\"historic title\\\" as a reason for departing from the general rule for delimitation of a territorial sea between States, namely, failing agreement, a median line; but no mention is made of such a proviso in respects of either delimitation of overlapping EEZs or continental shelves. For example, in Tunisia/Libya, Tunisia pleaded it had historic rights from past sedentary fishing activities. The relevance of claimed historic rights to maritime delimitation of expanded maritime zones such as the continental shelf remains somewhat unclear in the light of the above caselaw, though State practice in recent times suggests that historic rights, even if considered irrelevant to delimitation issues, may still be independently taken into account by special agreement as to access. Undoubtedly, some past continental shelf delimitations have taken into account historic claims in negotiating a maritime boundary.Keywords: continental shelves; EEZ; fishing activities; historic rights; LOSC; maritime boundary; maritime delimitation; maritime zones; territorial sea\",\"PeriodicalId\":44519,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Historic Environment-Policy & Practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-02-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Historic Environment-Policy & Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004377028_009\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Historic Environment-Policy & Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004377028_009","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

《海洋法公约》(1958年)第12条和《海洋法公约》第15条都提到“历史性所有权”作为偏离国家间领海划界一般规则的理由,即,如无协议,则以中间线为界;但在划定重叠专属经济区和大陆架问题上均未提及这一附带条款。例如,在突尼斯/利比亚,突尼斯辩称,它从过去的定居捕鱼活动中获得了历史性权利。根据上述判例法,所主张的历史性权利与诸如大陆架等扩大的海洋区域的海洋划界的相关性仍然有些不清楚,尽管最近的国家实践表明,即使被认为与划界问题无关的历史性权利,仍然可以通过特别协定独立考虑。毫无疑问,过去的一些大陆架划界在海洋边界谈判中考虑到了历史主张。关键词:大陆架;专属经济区;钓鱼活动;历史性权利;公法;海上边界;海上划界问题;海上区域;领海
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Historic Rights and Delimitation of Maritime Zones
Both Art. 12 of the TSC(1958) and Art. 15 of the LOSC make reference to "historic title" as a reason for departing from the general rule for delimitation of a territorial sea between States, namely, failing agreement, a median line; but no mention is made of such a proviso in respects of either delimitation of overlapping EEZs or continental shelves. For example, in Tunisia/Libya, Tunisia pleaded it had historic rights from past sedentary fishing activities. The relevance of claimed historic rights to maritime delimitation of expanded maritime zones such as the continental shelf remains somewhat unclear in the light of the above caselaw, though State practice in recent times suggests that historic rights, even if considered irrelevant to delimitation issues, may still be independently taken into account by special agreement as to access. Undoubtedly, some past continental shelf delimitations have taken into account historic claims in negotiating a maritime boundary.Keywords: continental shelves; EEZ; fishing activities; historic rights; LOSC; maritime boundary; maritime delimitation; maritime zones; territorial sea
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Historic Environment-Policy & Practice
Historic Environment-Policy & Practice HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
26.70%
发文量
14
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信