No description available.

No description available.

Saudi Arabia was the first Arab country to claim offshore jurisdiction and the first Middle Eastern state to define its offshore waters. This study examines the principal geographical factors which have resulted in the present Saudi maritime boundary. The semi-enclosed sea, islands, reefs, natural resources of the continental shelf, exclusive economic zone and coastline, can all be considered principal geographical factors that have influenced Saudi territorial waters policy. Islands, for example, play an effective role in increasing the area of Saudi internal waters, increasing the breadth of the territorial sea, straight baseline and the delimitation of maritime boundary in the Red Sea and the Arabian Gulf with opposite and adjacent states. Natural resources demanded the swift implementation of unique agreements, used later as an example worldwide. The author has drawn the 1958 Saudi straight baseline and a theoretical straight baseline based on the 1982 Convention and states practice. The territorial sea which is drawn on this basis along the Red Sea and the Arabian Gulf coasts, is affected by the presence of islands and reefs. The Saudi Exclusive Fishing Zone claimed by the 1974 decree gave the Kingdom the same right as the 1982 Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), but the Kingdom had to adapt the latter in order to gain more control over its resources and non-mineral activities. The importance of the 1949 Saudi decree can be found in the contribution made by Saudi Arabia to the development of the law of the sea, and to safeguarding the national hydrocarbon resources (natural gas and oil) on and below its seabed. Saudi Arabia engaged in several agreements, mainly in the Gulf, in order to define its boundary. This study has highlighted these agreements as a model which can be used in different parts of the world to solve similar disputes, and can be adopted as methods of maritime delimitation between opposite and adjacent states. The importance of the economic factor has been shown, along with security, as the main factor influencing the successful conclusion of such agreements, but where there is no such importance, the boundary may become less significant and by the absence of such motivation the boundary may not be defined. Saudi waters are a rich and highly important maritime area. This is based on the facts that Saudi Arabia has 30 per cent of the world seawater desalination plants; that the sea represents food, fuel and wealth to Saudi Arabia; and that the existence of huge deserts emphasises the importance of the sea.

Thesis (M.Law)--University of Oslo, 2000. / Title from PDF t.p. (NIAS LINC, viewed on Aug. 24, 2009). Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Simon Fraser University, 1990. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 242-258).

This dissertation involves an analysis and discussion of the legal regime governing the exploitation of non-living marine resources within national jurisdiction in East Africa. This is in light of the relatively recent offshore oil and gas discoveries off the coasts of Mozambique and Tanzania which have resulted in offshore exploration activities along the Western Indian Ocean (including the Red Sea) in pursuit of these hydrocarbons. Before delving into legal analysis and discussion, the dissertation departs by providing background on the 1982 United Nations Law of the Sea Convention (LOSC)2 which is the international legal regime governing maritime spaces and the contributions made by, inter alia, East African coastal States to bring it about. From here, the dissertation ventures into an analysis and discussion of the legal zones claimed by East African coastal States within which exploitation activities may occur. This part of the discussion involves, among other things, an in depth analysis of the practices of East African coastal States as far as establishing maritime zones in terms of international law. The dissertation then proceeds to discuss which East African coastal States have delimited their maritime zones where they overlap with neighbouring States with adjacent and/or opposite coasts. The discussion highlights which States, in terms of international law, have clearly defined the ambit of their maritime jurisdiction by establishing a delimitation boundary where claims to maritime zones overlapped. This part of the dissertation also discusses which States have not delimited their overlapping maritime zones and the reasons for the lack of delimitation. Following this, the dissertation moves on to discuss the LOSC provisions applicable to exploiting non-living resources, and analyse whether the laws of East African coastal States that pertain to exploiting these resources adequately give effect to LOSC. Finally, in light of the above analysis and discussions, the dissertation moves on to establish if whether or not the legal infrastructure of East African coastal States is adequate for exploiting non-living resources within their national jurisdiction. Generally, the findings reflect favourably on the legal framework of East African coastal States. However, the pressing issue is the practices of some States in respect of claiming certain maritime zones and where necessary, not delimiting these zones. This results in uncertainty as to the maritime jurisdiction of a coastal State, especially with resources such as oil and gas which may straddle across boundaries. Moreover, it creates conflict and as such, threatens peace and security in the region as well as stunt economic and socio-economic development. As such, this dissertation, on the one hand, reflects the advancement of East African coastal States from contributing towards the adoption and coming into effect of LOSC, as well as giving effect to it domestically as far as exploiting non-living resources within national jurisdiction is concerned. On the other hand, it highlights the work that lays ahead for East African coastal States in order for them to fully enjoy their right.

This thesis is an examination of the United Arab Emirates claim to maritime zones and its practice in determining the boundaries of these zones. Such a comprehensive examination scarcely requires justification or introduction. The political and economic importance of determining the boundary of any state is self-evident. The matter of an undetermined boundary in the resource rich Gulf in particular was, and still is, a major threat to stability in the region. This study focuses on the problem of unsettled maritime boundaries with particular reference to the effect of certain disputed islands on the UAE-Iran boundary in the Arabian Gulf. The study assumes that the less the impact these Islands are afforded, the greater the opportunity of reaching a solution to the related sovereignty dispute between the two parties. Certain methods of dispute settlement are suggested where the restricted effect of these Islands could most readily be obtained. Finally, this work has the benefit of examining the UAE Federal Law of 1993 in respect of delimitation of its maritime boundaries; the Dubai/Sharjah Border Award of 1981, which was published in 1993; and the UAE-Saudi Arabia secret boundary agreement of 197 4, released in 1994. The thesis is divided into seven chapters. The first will examine the issue of maritime zones in international law, as well as the UAE practice in this field. The second and third chapters will address the issue of maritime boundary delimitation in international law. Chapter Four will focus on the UAE practice in determining its maritime boundaries both internal and external. It will also identify the UAE' s potential boundary with neighbouring states. Chapters Five, Six and Seven will be devoted to addressing the overall problem of the Iranian-UAE's un-delimited maritime boundaries. Chapter Five will examine the policy of the two states on offshore boundaries. It will also discuss the boundaries between Iran and the UAE in the Gulf of Oman and in the Abu-Dhabi sector. Chapter Six will discuss in some detail the issue of the three disputed islands, namely, Abu Musa, Greater and Little Tunbs islands, and their effect on the boundary of Iran and the UAE. It will also examine the effect of islands on maritime boundaries in general. The final chapter will address certain methods of disputes settlement that the parties have not yet utilised, which have the potential to facilitate an amicable solution.

In 1982 the USA and other major industrial states refused to sign the Convention on the Law of the Sea--the result of the Conference on the Law of the Sea--because of objections to its provisions on the seabed beyond state jurisdiction--the International Seabed Area. According to them the system set up by the Convention is favorable to the third world and inimical to the material and ideological interests of these industrial states. Concurrently, however, the US and its allies argue that the remaining provisions of the Convention are generally accepted and part of International Law. These provisions include, among other, transit passage through straits, the 12nm Territorial Sea, the 200nm Exclusive Economic Zone and the Continental Shelf. In opposition to the Convention's seabed system the US has promoted efforts at a Reciprocating States' Agreement which, thus far, has resulted in a Provisional Understanding among eight western states. In this work I argue that the limits of state jurisdiction are not conclusively set and that both the Exclusive Economic Zone and the Continental Shelf are subject to political and legal challenges. Moreover, these challenges will grow stronger because of competition, primarily among the major industrial states, over the resources and the military and waste disposal uses of the seabed and because of the inconsistencies of major maritime states in their defense of narrow zones of coastal jurisdiction. With respect to the argument of the US and some of its allies that the deep seabed provisions of the Convention are beneficial to the third world and inimical to the major industrial states I suggest that this is not the case. In fact, the major industrial states are the primary beneficiaries of the Convention's seabed resource system, as they are the beneficiaries of the systems regulating the military and waste disposal uses of the High Seas and the international seabed. The core characteristic of the resource system, however, is the protection it offers to the less endowed among these industrial states and to the major industrializing states. Inasmuch as the Provisional Understanding does not protect these states--most of which are in a position to challenge a variety of the Convention's remaining provisions--the Reciprocating States' Agreement strategy is conflictual and destabilizing.

This thesis considers the maritime boundary dispute between China and Japan in the East China Sea in an attempt to resolve the dilemma of continental shelf entitlement and delimitation. The dispute concerns how to delimit a maritime boundary where the parties rely on the different basis for continental shelf entitlement provided for in Article 76(1) of UNCLOS, namely natural prolongation and distance, and the area to be delimited is less than 400 nautical miles when measured from the coasts of both States. China asserts its entitlement based on natural prolongation to the outer edge of the continental margin, while Japan claims a 200 nautical mile distance continental shelf. Using the doctrinal approach, this thesis notes that delimitation must be carried out in accordance with entitlement and focuses on an analysis of the meaning of Article 76(1), enquiring into the role of natural prolongation in the establishment of the outer edge of the continental margin beyond 200 nautical miles. It re-assesses the ICJ's decision in the Libya/Malta case where it was held that unless the delimitation area is at least 400 nautical miles, natural prolongation is irrelevant. This thesis considers the status of natural prolongation under customary international law and UNCLOS, arguing that natural prolongation is a valid basis for continental shelf entitlement. In critiquing the Libya/Malta decision, this thesis argues that there is no 400 nautical mile rule in UNCLOS, that the determination of each State's entitlement must be conducted on an individual basis, the length of the delimitation area being immaterial. Arguing that the two criteria of natural prolongation and distance are equally valid, this thesis found that they could be applied simultaneously over the same area to determine the area of overlapping entitlements, which is then the area to be delimited. Other connected issues to this dispute including the role of the Diaoyu/Senkaku Island dispute and the duty of States in disputed maritime areas are also discussed in relation to the main delimitation question. On the basis of the analysis, two options for delimiting the East China Sea were considered: the three-stage methodology and an alternative involving the use of a median line to divide the area of overlapping entitlements. In both methods, the position taken was that natural prolongation and distance should be reflected as relevant circumstances. Thus, it was acknowledged that both methods could produce similar results. However, the second option was shown to be preferable as it is embodies the quality of objectivity compared with the threestage methodology where adjusting the line in the second stage to take account of relevant circumstances proved to be subjective and unpredictable.

Thesis--Université de Paris.