Areas beyond national jurisdiction or the high seas are vital areas for biodiversity and marine resources in our oceans, yet the protection and conservation of this global resource is insufficient due to absence of international agreement concerning the matter. Therefore, the new Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) agreement was recently agreed upon, with the objective of ensuring protection for these resources.This study endeavours to assess the applicability of Ostrom's and Stern'sprinciples, as the theoretical frameworks for sustainable governance of global commons, on the BBNJ agreement. By employing deductive reasoning, this study compares and contrasts the principles proposed by Ostrom and Stern, using them as lenses to examine the agreement. As a case study, this research investigates the utilization of international agreements as integral components of international law for the governance of shared resources. Conducted as a qualitative desk study, the analysis involved scrutinizing the BBNJ agreement to identify keywords and themes associated with eachprinciple. The study’s findings reveal that Ostrom's and Stern's principles exhibit varying degrees of applicability. Despite sharing certain similarities, they embody distinct foundational approaches, with Stern's principles demonstrating better applicability to the governance of global commons. The study suggests that the BBNJ agreement holds the potential to govern the global commons in a sustainable manner.