 |
 |
Dear Martin, Maybe as a clarification to your e-mail, in my view in legal terms there is no precedence of the EEZ/continental shelf within 200 nautical miles over the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles and a "zone-locked" State has the same continental shelf entitlement. The extent of the continental shelf of neighboring States will have to be addressed through bilateral agreements in such a case (just as in any other case of overlapping entitlements). Best regards, Alex _______________________________________________ Alex G. Oude Elferink Netherlands Institute for the Law of the Sea (NILOS) School of Law Utrecht University Achter Sint Pieter 200 3512 HT Utrecht The Netherlands European Union tel: .. 31 (0)30 2537033 fax: .. 31 (0)30 2537073 email: [log in to unmask] _______________________________________________ -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: International boundaries discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Namens Martin Pratt Verzonden: zondag 17 mei 2009 20:52 Aan: [log in to unmask] Onderwerp: Re: deadline day Dear David, I was using the term zone-locked to refer to those states which - at least on the face of it - will not have continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles because in all directions their entitlement to continental shelf overlaps with the entitlements to continental shelf of neighbouring states whose coasts are closer than 400 nautical miles. I say 'on the face of it' because several ostensibly zone-locked states have made submissions to the CLCS. I imagine that all such submissions will be protested by neighbouring states with overlapping entitlements, and will therefore probably not be considered by the Commission. I doubt that there will be many more submissions by zone-locked states but I don't think we can rule out the possibility completely. m a r t i n -----Original Message----- From: International boundaries discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of [log in to unmask] Sent: 17 May 2009 17:55 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [INT-BOUNDARIES] deadline day For the amateurs on the list: what is "zone-locked"? David Phillips San Francisco -----Original Message----- From: International boundaries discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Martin Pratt Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2009 4:31 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: deadline day Dear colleagues, By my count there are five States which (i) became parties to UNCLOS before 13 May 1999, (ii) are not zone-locked, and (iii) have not provided at least preliminary information to the CLCS, namely: Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, Guatemala, the Marshall Islands and Nauru. My sense is that of these five States only The Bahamas might have a physical continental shelf extending beyond 200 nautical miles, but I am open to correction on that point. Equatorial Guinea submitted preliminary information to the CLCS on 14 May, technically missing its ten-year deadline by a day. I don't suppose that it will be penalised when its full submission is eventually considered by the Commission! There are ten States Parties which are not zone-locked whose 10-year clock is still ticking: Nicaragua (deadline = May 2010), Maldives (November 2010), Bangladesh (July 2011), Madagascar (August 2011), Tuvalu (December 2012), Kiribati (February 2013), Canada (November 2013), Denmark (November 2014), Morocco (May 2017) and Liberia (September 2018). Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Peru and the USA are non-zone-locked which have yet to become parties to UNCLOS. Regards, m a r t i n ================================== Martin Pratt Director of Research International Boundaries Research Unit Department of Geography Durham University Durham DH1 3LE United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)191 334 1964 Fax: +44 (0)191 334 1962 [log in to unmask] www.dur.ac.uk/ibru ================================== On Thu, 14 May 2009 09:17:05 +0200, Oude Elferink, A. (Alex) <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >By the way, would you happen to know if there is any State which was >facing the deadline of 12 May 2009 that has not made a submissions or >submitted preliminary information?