These IBRU e-mails of Martin & Maurice are under September 2006, lower at:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/int-boundaries.html
Re: sources, in addition to Martin's VLIZ Maritime Boundaries
Geodatabase at
http://www.vliz.be/vmdcdata/marbound/index.php [re-enclosed below], please
see also:
* U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE - invaluable Legislation & U.S. Protests
- at: www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/html/20051m.htm
* invaluable U.S. LIMITS IN THE SEAS!! at:
http://www.state.gov/g/oes/ocns/c16065.htm
* invaluable UNDOALOS at:
www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/index.htm
* ASIL/IMB Vol.V (2005) at: www.brill.nl/product_id21989.htm
Regards, Barbara
Prof. Dr. Barbara Kwiatkowska
Professor of International Law of the Sea
Deputy Director NILOS
Faculty of Law - Utrecht University
Achter Sint Pieter 200
3512 HT Utrecht - The Netherlands
Phone: 31 30 253 7037/7038
Fax: 31 30 253 7073
http://www.law.uu.nl/nilos
mailto:[log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: International boundaries discussion list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Martin Pratt
mailto:[log in to unmask]
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 19:20
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [INT-BOUNDARIES] Country maritime border defined as EEZ
Dear Damien,
Despite the caveats raised by Maurice Mendelson, I would encourage you to
try and show claimed maritime zones, agreed maritime boundaries and (where
no boundaries have yet been agreed) equidstance lines between overlapping
zones on your map. Even if you end up somewhat oversimplifying the true
picture of maritime jurisdiction in the southwest Pacific, in my opinion it
is still far preferable to adopt this approach than to draw a series of
arbitrary 'boxes' around the land territory of the states of the region - as
far too many atlas publishers continue to do. Such boxes may have made
cartographic sense prior to the introduction of the EEZ, offering a quick
visual indication of which islands belonged to each state, but today they
are unnecessary and potentially highly misleading.
There are numerous sources of data on maritime claims and boundaries around
the world. One increasingly useful resource is the VLIZ Maritime Boundaries
Geodatabase at
http://www.vliz.be/vmdcdata/marbound/index.php. It isn't yet nearly as
reliable as General Dynamics' Global Maritime Boundaries Database and it
certainly shouldn't be used for large-scale mapping purposes, but as a
source of data for for small-scale illustrative maps it is worth a look.
Regards,
m a r t i n
==================================
Martin Pratt
Director of Research
International Boundaries Research Unit
Department of Geography
University of Durham
South Road
Durham DH1 3LE
United Kingdom
+44 (0)191 334 1964 (direct line)
+44 (0)191 334 1962 (fax)
mailto:[log in to unmask] (email)
http://www.dur.ac.uk/ibru (World Wide Web)
==================================
-----Original Message-----
From: International boundaries discussion list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Maurice Mendelson QC
mailto:[log in to unmask]
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 12:58
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [INT-BOUNDARIES] Country maritime border defined as EEZ
Briefly (pressed for time) I can answer you as follows (though no doubt
others will point out that this is only a partial answer).
1. States do not have an EEZ unless they have proclaimed them: you cannot
assume that they have one.
2. States do not have an EEZ of course if there is insufficient room for
one in a given area, e.g. if they and their opposite neighbour are less
than 24 NM apart and they both claim a 12 NM territorial sea.
3. EEZ claims are not definitive in all cases. A neighbour might be able
to challenge the boundary on the ground that some of the area claimed
"belongs" to it. And a claimed boundary might not be valid even against
non-neighbours if it has a false or challengable basis (e.g. if it is
calculated from baselines that do not comply with international law).
4. More fundamentally, you should not fall into the trap of equating EEZs
with the State's territory. Though the rights in an EEZ are extensive, they
do not amount to sovereignty. The outer limit of the territorial sea is the
outer limit of the State's territory proper.
5. Conversely, the EEZ limit might not be the outermost limit of the
State's maritime claims. I do not know all there is to know about the
geography of the seabed adjacent to each of the Pacific islands, but it is
certainly possible, and does happen elsewhere, that the outer limit of the
continental shelf (in the lawyer's sense of this term) extends at some
points BEYOND the outer limit of the EEZ if certain conditions are
met. This is not sovereign territory either, but there are sovereign
rights over the seabed and its natural resources for certain purposes.
There are many complications, and I have to say, with respect, that I would
regard it as rather rash to try and identify the maritime boundaries without
a thorough knowledge of the law and what the various interested parties
claim. Land boundaries is a separate can of worms, but luckily for you
there are few of these amongst the Pacific islands.
I hope this helps.
Maurice Mendelson QC
-----Original Message-----
From: International boundaries discussion list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Damien Demaj
mailto:[log in to unmask]
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 05:11
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [INT-BOUNDARIES] Country maritime border defined as EEZ
Hi everyone,
I am putting together a map of the Pacific Islands and I wanted to get
some feedback on the correct maritime borders/country borders to show for
the Pacific Islands.
Is it correct to define the islands maritime borders/country borders as
the Exclusive Economic Zones for each country? or is there other border
lines that I should use?
Some of the more recent Atlases appear to be showing the Pacific Island
countries borders as the EEZ. Is this OK to do so?
If someone could help me out here that would be great.
Regards,
Damien Demaj
mailto:[log in to unmask]
Maurice Mendelson, Q.C.
Blackstone Chambers Barristers
Blackstone House
Temple, London EC4Y 9BW,
England.
Tel. +44 20 7583 1770; fax +4420 7822 7350; email
mailto:[log in to unmask]
website www.blackstonechambers.com
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may be confidential and
legally privileged. This e-mail is intended to be read only by the
addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any
review, dissemination or copying of this e-mail is prohibited and that
privilege has not been waived. If you have received this e-mail in error,
please notify the sender by replying by email or by telephone and
then delete the e-mail.
|