Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T07:24:02.191Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Delimitation of the Territorial Sea

The Method of Delimitation Proposed by the Delegation of the United States at the Hague Conference for the Codification of International Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 May 2017

S. Whittemore Boggs
S. Whittemore Boggs*
Affiliation:
Department of State
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Since the legal rights of the coastal state and of foreign states within the territorial sea differ greatly from the rights of all states on the high sea, it should be made possible for a navigator, or a fisherman, or the coastal state, to determine with certainty whether or not a vessel is in territorial waters or on the high sea. It will be practically impossible to negotiate a general convention embodying fundamental international law relating to territorial waters until the geographical problem of delimiting the zone of territorial waters is solved. The complexity and importance of the geographical problem are evident in the fact that, of the 28 “ bases of discussion” which were formulated by the preparatory committee, for the consideration of the Commission on Territorial Waters at the Conference for the Codification of International Law recently held at The Hague, one-half related to the delimitation of territorial waters, while the other half related to legal rights and obligations.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 24 , Issue 3 , July 1930 , pp. 541 - 555
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1930

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 At the Conference for the Codification of International Law, which was held at The Hague, March 13-April 12, 1930, the Second Commission (that on Territorial Waters) chose the term “ territorial sea” in preference to the more commonly used term “ territorial waters.”

2 The nautical mile was defined by the Technical Subcommittee (appointed by the Commission on Territorial Waters) as the equivalent of one minute of latitude at the particular latitude concerned–varying about 19 meters between the equator and the poles. The American delegation recommended the adoption of 1852 meters as the invariable length of the nautical mile–the definition adopted by the International Hydrographic Conference at Monaco, in April, 1929, and already accepted by at least half a dozen countries.

3 The Technical Subcommittee of the Commission on Territorial Waters defined the baseline as follows:

Subject to the provisions regarding bays and islands, the breadth of the territorial sea is measured from the line of low-water mark along the entire coast.

For the purposes of this Convention, the line of low-water mark is that indicated on the charts officially used by the Coastal State, provided the latter line does not appreciably depart from the line of mean low-water spring tides.

4 These figures will be found on pages 546-547, infra

5 “National waters ” are also called “inland waters” and “interior waters.” These latter terms, although commonly employed, are somewhat inapt when applied to the waters of a bay or estuary which is contiguous with the territorial sea.

6 In Figure 1-c, note that although the arcs of circles of three-mile radius are drawn from all points on the coast, a small number of the arcs drawn from the outermost points on the coast extend out beyond all the others, and the outer portions of these constitute the “ envelope.” In the diagram these are the arcs which are swung from points A to L inclusive. The arcs described from all the intermediate points, for example from M, nowhere touch the “ envelope.”

7 I Proceedings, p. 97.

8 In a letter quoted in 13 (1894-95) Annuaire de I'Institut de Droit Int., p. 146: quoted in Jessup, The Law of Territorial Waters and Maritime Jurisdiction, p. 356.