Dear IBRU recipients,
Please see the latest news added below:
The enclosed IBRU e-mails are via: June & July 2008 at:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=int-boundaries&T=0
-----Original Message-----
From: Kwiatkowska, Barbara
To: Oude Elferink, Alex [[log in to unmask]]; 'International
boundaries discussion list [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 18-6-2008 21:49 as updated 15-7-2008
Subject: RE: [INT-BOUNDARIES] Reef vs Island
Dear Alex.
Thanks for these important clarifications on the CLCS.
Please see also the latest U.S. news.
Best regards to all IBRU recipients,
Barbara Kwiatkowska
via: http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news?p=Bush :
U.S. President Bush Discusses Outer Continental Shelf Exploration of 14 July
2008 at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/07/20080714-4.html
via: http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/energy/ via:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ and President Bush Lifts Offshore Drilling Ban
and Urges Congress to Follow Suit, Challenging Democrats ["to lift or not to
lift, this is a question"] of 14 July 2008 at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7506346.stm &
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080715/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_26 &
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/15/us/15bush.html &
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/14/bush.offshore/index.html &
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080714/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_17 &
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080714/pl_nm/usa_energy_dc_13 &
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080714/pl_nm/usa_energy_dc_2 and U.S. Senator
Lugar's Oceans Leadership at: http://lugar.senate.gov/sfrc/sea.html
Previously via: http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news?p=Bush :
G-8 Summit, 6-9 July 2008, Toyako (Hokkaido Island) Japan:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7489993.stm &
http://www.whitehouse.gov/g8/2008/ & http://www.g8summit.go.jp/eng/ and The
Key G-8 Summit Issues of 9 July 2008 at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7498305.stm and 8 July 2008 at:
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=27298&Cr=food%20crisis&Cr1 via:
http://www.un.org/apps/news
U.S. President Bush Calls for Ending Offshore [including Outer
Continental Shelf] Drilling Moratorium of 18 June 2008 at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/06/20080618.html &
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7460767.stm &
http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/energy/ and StarShots at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/03/images/20080305_p030508cg-01
76jpg-515h.html &
http://www.theday.com/re_ap.aspx?re=/O/OFFSHORE_OIL &
http://www.canadaeast.com/rss/article/329680 &
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/18/bush.offshore/index.html &
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-06-18-bush-oil_N.htm &
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080618/pl_nm/bush_energy_price_dc_9
Submission of Barbados to the CLCS of 8 May 2008 at:
http://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/submission_brb.htm
via: CLCS at: http://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/clcs_home.htm via:
UNDOALOS at: http://www.un.org/Depts/los/index.htm as referred to in:
Britain Claims 200,000 sq.km Outer CS Around Ascension Island of 24 May 2008
at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/may/24/antarctica.arctic &
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7418723.stm and Barbados Oil Hopes,
Submission to the CLCS and 2006 B/T&T Award of 6 July 2008 at:
http://www.barbadosadvocate.com/NewViewNewsleft.cfm?Record=35901 and
Landmark 2006 Barbados/Trinidad & Tobago Award at:
http://www.pca-cpa.org/showpage.asp?pag_id=1152 via:
http://www.pca-cpa.org/showpage.asp?pag_id=1029 & XXVII UNRIAA 149 (2008)
at: http://www.un.org/law/riaa/ & 46 ILM 800 (2006) at:
http://www.asil.org/resources/ilm.html & 101 AJIL 149-157 (2007 No.1)
and the 2008 Revision of my B/T&T Award article [22 IJMCL 7-60 (2007 No.1)
at: http://www.brill.nl/product.asp?ID=18253] via Papers at NILOS at:
http://www.law.uu.nl/nilos &
http://www.uu.nl/uupublish/homerechtsgeleer/onderzoek/onderzoekscholen/nilos
/nilospublication/papers/23230main.html and Robin Churchill, Dispute
Settlement under the UNCLOS, 22 IJMCL 463, 470-483 (2007 No.3 at:
http://www.brill.nl/product.asp?ID=18253) and UNSG Ban Ki-Moon in Barbados
of 8 August 2007 at: http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2007/sgt2565.doc.htm
&
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=23453&Cr=barbados&Cr1 &
http://www.unmultimedia.org/photo/detail/149/0149941.html &
http://www.unmultimedia.org/photo/detail/149/0149998.html
Landmark Barbados/T&T Award Article, 39 George Washington International Law
Review 573-620 (2007) is listed under No.3 at:
http://catalogue.ppl.nl/DB=1/LNG=EN/REL?PPN=076251780 &
http://docs.law.gwu.edu/gwilr/issues.htm
Alex G. Oude Elferink (February 2008: [log in to unmask]), The outer
limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles under the
framework of article 76 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the
Sea (LOSC) - via Papers at NILOS at: http://www.law.uu.nl/nilos &
http://www.uu.nl/uupublish/homerechtsgeleer/onderzoek/onderzoekscholen/nilos
/nilospublication/papers/23230main.html
Donald R. Rothwell ([log in to unmask]), Issues and Strategies for
Outer Continental Shelf Claims, 23 IJMCL 185-211 (2008 No.2 at:
http://www.brill.nl/product.asp?ID=18253)
Victor Prescott's paper The Uncertainties of Middleton and Elizabeth
Reefs [at:
http://www.dur.ac.uk/resources/ibru/publications/full/bsb6-1_prescott.pdf]
UN Confirms Australia's Extended Marine Jurisdiction of 22 April 2008 at
pages 3-4 (of 4 in total) remains at:
http://www.ga.gov.au/news/index.jsp [or directly at:
http://www.ga.gov.au/news/index.jsp#clcs via: http://www.ga.gov.au/]
linking to Minister's Media Release at:
http://minister.ret.gov.au/TheHonMartinFergusonMP/Pages/UNCONFIRMSAUSTRALIA'
SRIGHTSOVEREXTRA.aspx and Australia Outer CS Map at:
http://www.ga.gov.au/image_cache/GA11214.pdf and Australia's Huge Asset of
21 April 2008 at:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/we-just-got-bigger--and-possibly-richer/
2008/04/21/1208742833965.html and CLCS at:
http://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/clcs_home.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: International boundaries discussion list on behalf of Oude
Elferink, Alex [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: 12-6-2008 17:12
Subject: Re: [INT-BOUNDARIES] Reef vs Island
Dear colleagues,
Having followed the recent discussion on Elizabeth and Middleton Reefs I
have some further observations.
First, the CLCS is not competent to express itself on the validity of
those reefs as relevant basepoints for establishing the EEZ of
Australia. What is more, as far as I can see, it was not necessary for
the Commission to deal with that point. All of the outer limit line of
Australia to the north of Elizabeth and Middleton Reefs is also within
350M of Lord Howe and Norfolk Islands, features which certainly have an EEZ
and continental shelf (this assumes that those two islands also have a
natural prolongation beyond 200M, which I suspect is indeed the case).
The status of Elizabeth and Middleton Reefs is relevant in other
respects. They do indeed make a difference as far as the outer limit of
the EEZ of Australia is concerned. They also make a difference for
defining the area of application of article 82 as far as Australia is
concerned. Both issues in respect of which the CLCS has no role to play.
It would be interesting to know what practice exists in respect of
Elizabeth and Middleton Reefs. E.g. have there been any protest by
States against using Elizabeth and Middleton Reefs as basepoints to
define the 200M limit of Australia? No State has communicated that view to
the Commission following the circulation of the Executive summary of the
Australian submission as far as I am aware.
Best regards,
Alex Oude Elferink
_______________________________________________
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
tel: .. 31 (0)30 2537033
fax: .. 31 (0)30 2537073
email: [log in to unmask]
_______________________________________________
-----Original Message-----
From: International boundaries discussion list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Anderson
[[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 14:19
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [INT-BOUNDARIES] Reef vs Island
Dear Paul Ure and Colleagues,
There is a difference between Rockall and some of the other features
mentioned in that the claim to measure an EEZ from Rockall was abandoned in
1997 upon accession to the LOS Convention in view of the terms of article
121(3).
I am not at all expert in appraising the two attached oceandots images (for
which many thanks), but it is not easy to see anything standing above water.
Regards,
David Anderson
[[log in to unmask]]
-----Original Message-----
From: International boundaries discussion list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paul Ure
[[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 10:27
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [INT-BOUNDARIES] Reef vs Island
Dear Colleagues
Further to previous discussion both on and off list on these mid ocean
features, Middleton and Elizabeth reefs must surely rank alongside
Rockall, the Spratleys, Okinotorishima and others when studies are
conducted on the impact and influence of low lying elevations in
generating full and extended EEZ's.
After viewing each of them at the referenced URL's consider the
question:
'What does make an island?' or more particularily 'What makes these
islands?'
http://www.oceandots.com/pacific/elizmid/elizabeth.htm
http://www.oceandots.com/pacific/elizmid/middleton2.htm
Regards
Paul Ure
Paul Ure [[log in to unmask]]
-----Original Message-----
From: International boundaries discussion list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paul Ure
[[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 20:38
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [INT-BOUNDARIES] The status of Elizabeth and Middleton
Reefs
Dear Colleagues
Thanks Victor for your educated guess on the validity of Middleton and
Elizabeth reefs being accepted by the Commission as relevant base points for
establishing an EEZ and while it would be helpful if those who presented to
the Commission could assist the debate in its absence we can do nothing
other than rely on the official submission to the Commission.
In reviewing the Annexes to the Executive Summary, it is apparent that the
Government of Australia has not used the 2,500-meter + 100-mile isobath for
any of their points. Point LHR-117 is delimited by the 350-mile line (as is
the arc between points ANZ25 and ANZ23) but point 117a:
'lies at the intersection of the outer limit of Australia's extended
continental shelf in the Lord Howe Rise region delineated in accordance with
the provisions of UNCLOS article 76, with the geodesic connecting points
ANZ27 and ANZ28 of the Australia-New Zealand Delimitation Treaty. This
treaty defines the boundary between the Australian and New Zealand
continental shelves in the Lord Howe Rise region.'
Despite this assertion, the Executive Summary is silent on what basis it has
used to extend its ex-200-mile claim all the way to the treaty line point
(117a) with New Zealand. This point is highly unusual because the extreme
southern end of the Australian ex-200-mile claim appears to extend beyond
the 350-mile cut-off line. See Figure 11 at
http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/aus04/Maps/lhr_map_es
2.pdf
And further, the Government's U.N. Submission Executive Summary at page 21
declares entitlements on Lord Howe Rise "by virtue of . . . Elizabeth and
Middleton Reefs and other islands." Although the submission refers to
Elizabeth and Middleton as "reefs," it apparently has drawn arcs of 200
nautical miles around the oceanic area in which the Islands approximately
are located. By so doing, it seems that Australia has claimed EEZ rights
over that area. However, even though the Executive Summary explicitly
identifies Lord Howe Island and Norfolk Island on Figures 10 and 11 with
their attendant EEZ arcs as being "islands," the name and location of
Elizabeth and Middleton Islands are conspicuously missing from both Figures.
Regards
Paul Ure [[log in to unmask]]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Professor Victor Prescott" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:56 AM
Subject: [INT-BOUNDARIES] The status of Elizabeth and Middleton Reefs
Dear Colleagues,
Paul has raised questions about the status of small offshore features.
Those involved in the presentation to the Commission are better qualified
to give the answers , but I will hazard a guess.
These features had been involved in delimitation of a continental shelf
boundary with New Zealand. Perhaps the Commission felt obliged to accept
their status as appropriate features.
Curiously, the Report 5-26 in Volume 5, 'International Maritime
Boundaries' (Colson and Smith), pp 3759-3766, did not include any
significant discussion about the two features.
Sincerely,
Victor
Professor Victor Prescott" <[log in to unmask]>
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
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
|
