No description available.

This thesis investigates the mechanisms that might be used to determine the rights and obligations of Turkey, Syria and Iraq to govern the Tigris and Euphrates River Basin (TERB) in accordance with the international water law. In particular, it advocates for the protection of Iraq?s equitable rights through the establishment of a legal and institutional framework for joint use of the TERB. As a contribution towards addressing the issues of transboundary water law at the TERB level, this thesis explores the possibilities for potential cooperation between the three riparian States of the TERB through forming a legally binding treaty under the auspices of contemporary international water law. From this perspective, the thesis hypothesises that international law provides a solid basis on which the State of Iraq can rely on for achieving its legal entitlements to the equitable and reasonable use of the TERB. In this context, the thesis first examines international law in order to establish how it applies to the TERB. Next, the thesis considers how the legal positions of the riparian States can be determined under international law. When the aforesaid requirements are met, the thesis makes recommendations on how international water law can strengthen the legal framework for equitable joint use of the TERB. The thesis offers the methodology and analytical framework that deals with different relevant issues covered within the scope of the thesis. Later on, water uses within the TERB are discussed, followed by a literature review of publications on contemporary Middle East transboundary water conflict and cooperation. Afterwords, the thesis examines the applicable international law and international water law to the riparian States of the TERB. Finally, it explores the legal regime of the inter-State relationships in order to foster improved transboundary water management of the TERB.

The rights and obligations of States concerning their shared transboundary groundwates are not fully understood. The primary reasons for this are the complex characteristics and behaviours of groundwater, and the lack of full understanding of its interconnection with the surrounding environment. Consequently, States appear to be reluctant in concluding legally binding arrangements that specifically address this topic. This complexity is further intensified under difficult political situations, whereby the Parties sharing groundwater are unable to foresee the benefits of cooperation concerning this resource. This thesis represents an inquiry into the rules and principles governing the utilization of shared transboundary groundwater, and how cooperative frameworks can be initiated implemented, in the complex political context of the Mountain Aquifer shared between Israel and Palestine. The main objective of this thesis is to achieve an integrative mutually beneficial arrangement in the case of the Mountain Aquifer, based on lessons learnt from international law. The proposal for approaching the problem within the Palestinian-Israeli context is to progressively establish a solid basis for long-term sustainable arrangements. The progressive approach starts with a non-binding flexible arrangement that can serve the short-term need, which gradually builds up into a final legally binding arrangement based on international law.

Le cadre juridique régissant les ressources hydrauliques partagées dans la région de l’Est Méditerranéen dite du Levant souffre d’insuffisances manifestes et semble inadapté à la réalisation de la tâche que ses géniteurs lui ont assigné. Produit essentiellement de conventions bilatérales dont les dispositions s’avèrent parfois contradictoires, il est le fruit d’un contexte politique tendu, sévissant depuis longtemps dans cette partie du monde au point d’en constituer le trait de marque et valorisant une logique de confrontation entre des volontés souveraines peu soucieuses des intérêts des Etats tiers. Il dénote ainsi fermement une absence de prise de conscience du caractère commun des ressources hydrauliques et la nécessité de leur partage au sein d’une communauté d’intérêts. Il se trouve, par ailleurs, en retrait des mutations que connaît dernièrement le droit international des ressources hydrauliques partagées tant superficielles que souterraines. Loin de respecter l’unité hydrologique du bassin du Jourdain, ses stipulations ne permettent pas de donner leur plein effet aux principes de l’utilisation équitable et non dommageable de ses eaux. Or, ces principes coutumiers, désormais codifiés, préconisent une gestion intégrée et globale desdites ressources qui peine toujours à se réaliser le cas échéant. Ils se trouvent d’autant plus dénaturés dans la mesure où leur champ d’application demeure restreint incluant certains Etats riverains à l’exclusion d’autres. Pourtant, l’eau au Levant, dont la situation précaire est évidente, peut se transformer d’un élément générateur de tensions récurrentes à un facteur déclencheur d’une dynamique de coopération sur une échelle régionale. Des impératifs divers y contribueront immanquablement. Cette démarche aura toutefois tout à gagner en empruntant aux dernières avancées du droit international en la matière les modalités et procédures qu’elles prescrivent. Cet apport serait le garant d’une coopération multifonctionnelle et institutionnalisée, s’inscrivant dans un corpus juridique cohérent et global et oeuvrant à l’affermissement d’une culture de la paix. / The current legal framework that dictates the water distribution in the Levant can be considered as inapt and insufficient in the way it overlooks the populations’ current needs. Negotiated upon through a series of bilateral conventions that favored the interests of some sovereign states at the expense of others, today’s legal framework is sustaining the long-standing political tensions in the region. In hindsight, it appears as though the bilateral conventions have shaped a status quo that failed to take into account the vital characteristic of the natural resource in question and its essential need to be shared and equitably distributed in an approach that subscribes within the common interest. Today, although the international water distribution practices witnessed significant evolution, the Levant region nevertheless still finds itself enacting an outdated framework, one that overlooks the hydrological unity of the Jordan Basin. In practice, the bilateral conventions led to a sectarian division of resources as opposed to a more balanced and fair regional one allowing a full implementation to the principles of equitable and non harmful use of international water. These customary principles, now codified, can’t fully be effective through this lacking and deficient legal framework. However, the Levant’s water resources can go from being the bearer of regional tension, to triggering a series of cooperative talks. With a high number of imperatives at stake it is only a matter of time until the regional players reconvene and adopt a more suitable and equitable distribution practice. Doing so would bring about new levels of institutionalized and cooperative practices, which would ultimately lead to a strong affirmation of peace in the region.

Achieving global water sustainability through a resilient international legal architecture presents one of the most pressing challenges within our resource finite planet. A staggering 42 percent of the total land area of the earth is covered by transboundary river basins, where more than 40 percent of the global population lives and depends on the ecosystem services of the 286 transboundary river basins and 200 transboundary aquifers stretching across the political boundaries of 151 countries. There is already evidence of water resources becoming a source of conflict in many regions and constraining a whole myriad of securities – climate, human, environmental, food, economic, energy – on various levels of society. The international legal architecture to manage this critical natural resource is the overarching area of inquiry in this thesis, and requires improvement to address current and predicted future transboundary water challenges, conflicts and strengthen cooperation. Despite the establishment of around 690 river basin treaties, many of these agreements completely miss or provide unclear provisions on principles and rules of international water law. Until recently there was no legally binding global treaty on transboundary watercourses and customary international law has provided the default rules in the absence of agreements and facilitated the re-interpretation of older agreements in accordance with the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Now there are potentially two global treaties, with the recent entry into force of the 1997 UN Watercourses Convention and the global opening up of the 1992 pan-regional United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Water Convention, to all UN member states. There is also a plethora of other international environmental legal and non-legally binding instruments, indirectly addressing international law relevant to transboundary watercourses and freshwater ecosystems. Legal regimes for the protection and use of international river basins cannot be interpreted and applied in isolation from other relevant norms of international environmental and general international law. This thesis seeks to understand the rising role and contribution of regional approaches relevant to international law on transboundary watercourses and freshwater ecosystems. More specifically it explores the contribution of the UNECE Water Convention and other relevant UNECE environmental instruments as a structurally distinctive ‘regime’. This thesis introduces a novel conception of a broader ‘UNECE water regime’ which includes the Water Convention, the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice (Aarhus Convention), the Convention on Transboundary Environmental Impact Assessment (Espoo Convention), the Convention on the Transboundary Effects of Industrial Accidents, as well as their protocols and non-binding instruments. This research demonstrates how these instruments and their institutions can be interpreted and understood to form a common framework of rules, principles and approaches which fills critical gaps in basin treaties, and collectively contributes to the clarification and development of international law on transboundary watercourses and freshwater ecosystems. This analysis also explores institutional interaction and coordination between and beyond the UNECE pan-regional agreements, as well as the role of soft law or non-binding instruments, and state and non-state actors in the regime. This thesis seeks to contribute to a more coherent understanding of the relationship between the UNECE water regime, international water law, international environmental law and general international law. The UNECE water regime has contributed to clarifying many of the cornerstone rules and principles of international water law and it is argued that the UNECE water regime is lex specialis, which can and mostly does go beyond the UN Watercourses Convention. The UNECE water regime has also arguably spearheaded a paradigm shift in international water law, which sees it moving beyond its historically predominant focus on issues of transboundary impact and utilisation towards a stronger ecosystem orientated approach to environmental protection and equitable use of transboundary river basins. This research identifies key elements of an ecosystem approach, drawing from international environmental and international water law and demonstrates how the ecosystem approach, including ecosystem services, as supported by the UNECE water regime, affects interpretation of international water law towards enhancing ecosystem protection and intra-state equity. This research also explores how the UNECE regime goes beyond what exists elsewhere in international law and international water law on public participation and access to justice. Finally, this research examines the contribution of the UNECE regime vis-à-vis international and European Union water law, across the spectrum of pan-European river basins, especially focusing on the Danube, Sava and Western Bug basins. The UNECE water regime is the most evolved pan-regional regime of its kind, providing ambitious detailed standards and clarification of rules and principles relevant to transboundary watercourses and freshwater ecosystems. It also provides a valuable model of institutional cooperation, progressively engaging state and non-state actors. As this regime takes steps towards realising its global ambition, with almost all instruments now open to all UN member states, and the recent accession by Chad to the Water Convention, this analysis demonstrates why this is predominantly a positive endeavour but also highlights potential challenges and hurdles. This research thus explores the implications and benefits of the UNECE’s rising role in strengthening the international legal architecture to protect the world’s fragile transboundary watercourses and freshwater ecosystems.

International water law has been unable to translate its principles into effective institutions for the management of shared water resources. National interest has often override any real commitment to the principles of international water law as reflected by the draft Articles of the ILC. Based on the theory of sovereignty, it emphasises a discretionary power to co-operate. However, the community of interest's theory is rather recommended as basis for co-operation. The draft Articles does not take sufficient account of the role domestic water policies, international relations and economics play in the co-operation of states. An integrated approach that considers social and economic effects within an environmental context is proposetL The political economy of water includes the potential of 'virtual water' through the importation of staple grains. A holistic approach, taking global trade in agriculture into account, is recommended. The SADC countries should also consider the potential of regional trade in 'virtual water'. / Law / LL. M. (Law)

International water law has been unable to translate its principles into effective institutions for the management of shared water resources. National interest has often override any real commitment to the principles of international water law as reflected by the draft Articles of the ILC. Based on the theory of sovereignty, it emphasises a discretionary power to co-operate. However, the community of interest's theory is rather recommended as basis for co-operation. The draft Articles does not take sufficient account of the role domestic water policies, international relations and economics play in the co-operation of states. An integrated approach that considers social and economic effects within an environmental context is proposetL The political economy of water includes the potential of 'virtual water' through the importation of staple grains. A holistic approach, taking global trade in agriculture into account, is recommended. The SADC countries should also consider the potential of regional trade in 'virtual water'. / Law / LL. M. (Law)