Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T17:36:07.991Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2016

Shabtai Rosenne
Get access

Extract

This article is divided into four parts. The first aims to place the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea in its historical context. The second describes some aspects of the first three sessions of that Conference (1973–1975). In the third an account of major specific interests and conflicts which have appeared in this Conference is given. Finally, some tentative conclusions are drawn—tentative, because the Conference has not yet completed its labours.

During its first session (1949) the newly established International Law Commission, set up by the General Assembly in accordance with the provision of Article 13 of the Charter relating to the codification and progressive development of international law, included the topics of the régime of the high seas and the régime of territorial waters in its provisional list of fourteen topics selected for codification. It placed the régime of the high seas on its priority list, and appointed Professor J.P.A. François (The Netherlands) as special rapporteur. At the recommendation of the General Assembly in resolution 374 (IV) of 6 December 1949 the Commission in 1950 included the régime of territorial waters on its priority list, and in 1951 it initiated work on that topic, for which Professor François was also designated special rapporteur. The Commission was heavily occupied with both these topics until 1956.

Type
Articles
Information
Israel Law Review , Volume 11 , Issue 1 , January 1976 , pp. 1 - 51
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and The Faculty of Law, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem 1976

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 First session, New York, 3–15 December 1973; second session, Caracas, 20 June-29 August 1974; third session, Geneva, 17 March-9 May 1975; fourth session (scheduled), New York, 29 March-21 May 1976. The possibility of further sessions in 1976 and later is left open. Following a recommendation of the Caracas session, the General Assembly, in resolution 3334 (XXIX) of 17 December 1974, has decided that the formal signing of a Convention on the Law of the Sea may take place at Caracas. The document symbol of the Conference is A/CONF. 62/—. The summary records and most of the documents of the first two sessions are published in Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, Official Records, vol. I, plenary meetings, 1–13th meetings (New York, 1973)Google Scholar, 14th-51st meetings (Caracas, 1974), General Committee, 1st-6th meetings (Caracas); vol. II, First Committee, 1st-17th meetings (Caracas), Second Committee, 1st-46th meetings (Caracas), Third Committee, 1st-17th meetings (Caracas); vol. III, documents of the Conference. New York and Caracas sessions. UN Publication Sales Nos. E.75.V.3, 4 and 5. No detailed citation of printed documents is given herein. Other documents are indicated by the expression “mimeographed only”.

2 (1949) Yearbook of the International Law Commission (hereinafter YBILC), Report for 1949 (A/925), §§ 16, 20, 21.

3 Ib., 1950, vol. II, Report for 1950 (A/1316), §§ 18; ib., 1951, vol. II, Report for 1951 (A/1858), § 86.

4 It is convenient to list the major Israeli comments on the law of the sea in the period 1949–1973 (other than in the conferences): note verbale of 24 January 1950, ib., 1950, vol. II at 55 (A/CN.4/19); note verbale of 17 March 1953 on the continental shelf, ib., 1953, vol. II at 257 (A/2456, Annex II); note verbale of 21 March 1956 on draft articles on the high seas and territorial sea, ib., 1956, vol. II at 52 (A/CN.4/99/Add.1); note verbale of 12 June 1970 on the desirability of convening a new conference on the law of the sea, A/7925 (mimeographed only). See also the statements of the representatives of Israel in the Sixth Committee, 488th meeting, 3 December 1956 (Jacob Robinson), 594th meeting, 3 December 1958, 644th and 645th meetings, 2 and 3 December 1959, and First Committee, 1708th meeting, 2 December 1969 (Sh. Rosenne).

Given its geo-political situation and the fact that it has two coastlines, Israel has vital interests on the sea. These are not limited to the issues of freedom of passage through and overflight over international straits and the freedom of the high seas generally. On that aspect, see Lapidoth, R., “Freedom of Navigation” (1975) 10 Is.L.R. 456.Google Scholar

5 (1956) YBILC, vol. II, Report for 1956 (A/3159) Chapter II.

6 Geneva, 24 February-27 April 1958. Document symbol A/CONF.13/—. See United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, Official Records, vols. I–VII (docs. A/CONF.13/37 to 43), UN Publication Sales No. 58.V.4, vols. I to VII.

7 18 April-10 May 1955. Document symbol A/CONF.10/—. For its Report see A/CONF.10/6. UN Publication Sales No. 55.II.B.

8 Geneva, 17 March-26 April 1960. Document symbol A/CONF.19/—. See Second United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, Official Records (doc. A/CONF.19/8), UN Publication Sales No. 60.V.6. That Conference was unsuccessful. A proposal fixing the breadth of the territorial sea at six nautical miles received 54 votes to 28 with 5 abstentions and was not adopted having failed to obtain the required two-thirds majority. Official Records, p. 30.

9 See Rosenne, Sh., League of Nations, Committee of Experts for the Progressive Codification of International Law [1925–1928] (New York, 1972)Google Scholar, passim. The rapporteur for territorial waters was W. Schücking (Germany), for the legal status of Government ships B. de Magalhães (Portugal), for the prevention of piracy M. Matsuda (Japan), and for the exploitation of the living resources of the sea J. L. Suárez (Argentina).

10 13 March-12 April 1930. See Rosenne, Sh., League of Nations, Conference for the Codification of International Law (1930) (New York, 1975), vol. II at p. 219Google Scholar (preparatory work), vol. III at p. 752 (8th plenary meeting) and vol. IV at p. 1203 (summary records of the Second Committee). The relevant texts drafted by the Second Committee were formally brought before the 1958 Conference in doc. A/CONF.13/21, 12 December 1957 (mimeographed only).

11 Whiteman, M., 5 Digest of International Law (Washington, D.C., 1965) 18.Google Scholar

12 UN Legislative Series, 1 Laws and Regulations on the Régime of the High Seas, doc. ST/LEG/SER.B/1 (New York, 1951, UN Publication Sales No. 51.V.2) 144.Google Scholar

13 Ib., at p. 38 (continental shelf) and p. 112 (coastal fisheries).

14 Survey of International Law in Relation to the Work of Codification of the International Law Commission: Preparatory work within the purview of article 18, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the International Law Commission (Memorandum submitted by the Secretary-General), UN Publication Sales No. 1948.V.1.(1), doc. A/CN.4/1/Rev.1 (New York, 1949); SirLauterpacht, Hersch, International Law, Collected Papers, Vol. 1, General Works (Lauterpacht, E. ed., Cambridge, 1970) 445.Google Scholar “In this branch of international law the task of codification will probably proceed on the basis of the achievements of the Hague Codification Conference of 1930 and of the preparatory work which preceded it”. Loc. cit., § 74.

15 The 1958 Conference was the first codification conference convened under the auspices of the United Nations, and the role of the “Expert” was not well defined. Since then the special rapporteur of the Commission is normally invited to participate in the Conference in the capacity of Expert Consultant, and he plays an important role. Cf. Daudet, Y., Les Conférences des Nations Unies pour la Codification du Droit international (Paris, 1968) 68 ff.Google Scholar

16 Entered into force on 10 September 1964. 516 United Nations Treaty Series 205. Israel's instrument of ratification was deposited on 6 September 1961. This and the instruments cited in the following notes are conveniently assembled together in the publication of the Office of Public Information, The Work of the International Law Commission, revised ed., UN Publication E.72.1.17 (1972) 127.Google Scholar Also in 12 K.A. No. 410, p. 190. For the parties to these instruments, see Multilateral Treaties in respect of which the Secretary-General performs Depositary Functions (annual), doc. ST/LEG/SER.D./—, Part 1, Chapter XXI.

17 Entered into force on 30 September 1962. 450 United Nations Treaty Series 11. 12 K.A., No. 410, p. 215. Israel's instrument of ratification was deposited on 6 September 1961.

18 Entered into force on 20 March 1966. 559 United Nations Treaty Series 285. Israel signed this Convention on 29 April 1958 but has not ratified it. 12 K.A., No. 410, p. 242.

19 Entered into force on 10 June 1964. 499 United Nations Treaty Series 311. 12 K.A., No. 410, p. 259. Israel's instrument of ratification was deposited on 6 September 1961.

20 Entered into force on 30 September 1962. 450 United Nations Treaty Series 169. 12 K.A., No. 410, p. 273. Israel signed that Optional Protocol “ad ref” (since its participation clause did not require ratification), but has not ratified it.

21 A/CONF.62/SR.53 at 8 (18 April 1975).

22 Loc. cit. supra n. 10, vol. I at xli. The same thought was echoed by the International Law Commission in its 1956 Report, § 30, supra n. 5.

23 Fisheries Jurisdiction (U.K. v. Iceland), Merits, I.C.J. Reports 1974, 3 at p. 23; id., (Federal Republic of Germany v. Iceland), Merits, ib., 175 at p. 191. Those judgments, both rendered on 25 July 1974, were received in Caracas too late to have any marked influence on the course of the debates in that phase of the Conference. The view has been expressed by some of the judges to the effect that the Court's reasoning was adopted with the intention of pointing the way for the participants in the Conference. See the declarations of Judge Ignacio-Pinto at pp. 37 and 210.

24 It is recalled that the breadth of the territorial sea is measured from the appropriate baselines which do not necessarily coincide with the low tide mark on the coast. Sea to the landward side of the baselines is technically internal water. With a heavily indented coastline such as that of Norway, the area of sea thus classed as internal waters may be considerable. The Institute of International Law, in its resolution of 31 March 1894, recommended a six miles limit. (1894–1895) 13 Annuaire de l'Institut de Droit international 331.

25 P.C.I.J., Series A, No. 11 [1927] (France/Turkey), jurisdiction in case of collision at sea. The judgment was given by the casting vote of the President and was found unsatisfactory in professional circles. Its effect was later changed by a series of treaties, including, finally the 1958 High Seas Convention.

26 I.C.J. Reports, 1949, p. 4 (U.K. v. Albania), innocent passage of warships through strait used for international navigation.

27 Ib., 1951, p. 116 (U.K. v. Norway), drawing of baselines and historic titles.

28 Ib., 1960, p. 150 (advisory opinion), aspects of the legal implications of “flags of convenience”.

29 Ib., 1969, p. 3 (Denmark/Federal Republic of Germany: Federal Republic of Germany/The Netherlands), delimitation of areas of continental shelf in the North Sea.

30 Ib., 1972, pp. 12, 30; 1973, pp. 3, 49, 302, 313; 1974, pp. 3, 175 (U.K. v. Iceland; Federal Republic of Germany v. Iceland), claim to exclusive fisheries jurisdiction in a zone extending to 50 natutical miles from the baselines.

31 Ib., 1973, pp. 99, 135; 1974, pp. 253, 457 (Australia v. France; New Zealand v. France), claim that the holding of atmospheric tests of nuclear weapons in the Pacific is contrary to international law, including the freedom of the high seas under the 1958 Convention. These cases were disposed of on preliminary grounds—the only ones in this group on which the Court itself made no pronouncement directly on the merits.

32 Mare liberum. The Freedom of the Seas, a dissertation, translated by Magoffin, R. (New York, 1916).Google Scholar This work was originally published anonymously in 1608, although its authorship was common knowledge.

33 De dominio maris dissertatio, first published in 1702 and revised in 1744. Translation by Magoffin, R. in the Classics of International Law (New York, 1923).Google Scholar

34 (1973) YBILC, vol. II, Report for 1973 (A/9010/Rev.l), §§ 157–162.

35 Official Records of the General Assembly, twenty-second session, First Committee, vol. I, 1515th and 1516th meetings. This speech is reproduced in Pardo, Arvid, The Common Heritage, International Ocean Institute, Occasional Papers No. 3 (Malta, 1975) 1.Google Scholar

36 For the Ac hoc Committee's Report, see Official Records of the General Assembly, twenty-third session (A/7230). Document symbol A/AC.135/—. This and other resolutions of the General Assembly and much other material are conveniently assembled in Oda, Shigeru, The International Law of Ocean Development, Basic Documents, 2 vols. (Leiden, 1972, 1975).Google Scholar And see Dag Hammarskjöld Library, The Sea: Legal and Political Aspects, and Economic and Technical Aspects, docs. ST/LIB/SER.B/14 and 15, UN Publications Sales No. E/F.74.I.9 and 16; same, Bibliography on the Sea, 1974–1975, doc. ST/LIB/SER.B/16, Sales No. E/F.75.I.12.

37 For the Committee's reports, see Official Records of the General Assembly, twenty-fourth session, Sup. No. 22 (A/7622 + Add.1) (1969); twenty-fifth session, Sup. No. 21 (A/8021) (1970); twenty-sixth session, Sup. No. 21 (A/8421) (1971); twenty-seventh session, Sup. 21 (A/8721) (1972); and twenty-eighth session, Sup. No. 21 (A/9021, six volumes) (1972). Document symbol A/AC.138/—.

38 Resolution 2750 C (XXV), 17 December 1970. Israel accordingly participated as observer in the work of the Committee from 1971 onwards.

39 Official Records of the General Assembly, twenty-fifth session, agenda item 25, doc. A/7925 + Add. 1–3 (mimeographed only). In the statement made at the 1708th meeting of the First Committee at the previous session (supra, n. 4), Israel had expressed considerable reserve towards the idea of convening a broad conference on the law of the sea, and the note of 12 June 1970 reflected that. During the twenty-fifth session Israel abstained in a series of votes on this aspect, voting in favour, however, of the final text of resolution 2750 C (XXV).

40 Since the 1958 Conventions were the product of the work of the International Law Commission, there were some who thought that the work of revision should also be conducted in the Commission. Cf. the statements of the Under-Secretary and Legal Counsel, Mr. Stavropoulos, in the 958th and 990th meetings of the Commission on 20 June 1968 and 2 June 1969. In 1971 the Secretariat made it clear that no role was anticipated for the Commission at that stage. Survey of International Law: working paper prepared by the Secretary-General, (1971) YBILC, vol. II (Part 2), doc. A/CN.4/245, §§ 313–17. In 1974 the new Legal Counsel expressed regret that the Commission had not been asked to prepare draft articles for the Conference. Statement of Mr. Suy at the 1265th meeting of the Commission, 27 May 1974.

41 Report of the Credentials Committee, doc. A/CONF.62/34 (23 August 1974).

42 Report of Credentials Committee, doc. A/CONF.62/44 (mimeographed only) (7 May 1975). Owing to events in South-East Asia, at the end of the third session the credentials of the delegations of the Khmer Republic and the Republic of Viet-Nam were not accepted.

43 Cf. M. W. Mouton, Recent Developments in the Technology of Exploiting the Mineral Resources of the Continental Shelf, preparatory document No. 20, doc. A/CONF. 13/25 (mimeographed only).

44 Seiden, John, Mare clausum, seu de domino maris libri II (London, 1635).Google Scholar English translation by Nedham, Marchamont, Dominion or Ownership of the Sea (London, 1652).Google Scholar This was a polemical reply to the work of Grotius cited supra n. 32. On a Jewish aspect of this work, see Rosenne, , “The Concept of ‘Territorial Sea’ in the Talmud” (1975) 10 Is.L.R. 503 at pp. 507, 508.Google Scholar

45 For the full terms of reference, see the Committee's Report for 1971 (supra n. 37) § 19, and for the addition, § 22. There is an obvious lack of balance in this subcommittee structure, but political factors led to the addition of the third Subcommittee. Amongst those political factors was the insistence of the developing countries to strengthen their representation on the Committee's General Committee, and through that on the corresponding organ of the Conference.

46 The Committee's Reports (supra n. 37) contain summaries of the various discussions held in the Committee and Subcommittees, and the full texts of all proposals and other documents submitted to it. However, the summary records exist only in mimeographed form, and there is a grave risk that they will deteriorate and become unavailable. In connection with the Caracas session, the United Nations prepared a Master File of Law of the Sea Documents (mimeographed, No. 74–10932, 30 April 1974), and this contains a useful check list of all the documents relative to the work of the ad hoc Committee and the Committee, including documents originating in the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council, UNEP, UNCTAD, FAO, IAEA, WHO, the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission and the International Hydrographic Organization.

47 Report for 1972, supra n. 37, §§ 158–196. The list was later adopted by the Conference unchanged. Doc. A/CONF. 62/29, 2 July 1974. See infra Annex 1.

48 See different statements in A/AG.138/SR.103 and 104 (mimeographed only).

49 Report for 1973 (supra n. 37) vol. I, § 57.

50 The only exception was that Mr. Galindo Pohl (El Salvador), who had been Chairman of Subcommittee II, would be replaced by a national of the host country, Mr. Aguilar, as Chairman of the Second Committee during the Caracas session. See the statements made in relation to that post at the 7th and 52nd plenary meetings (12 December 1973 and 17 March 1975). Mr. Galindo Pohl therefore assumed that Chairmanship at Geneva.

51 Doc. A/CONF.62/1, adopted at the 1st plenary meeting (3 December 1973).

52 An illustration is seen in the objections raised at the 46th plenary meeting (29 July 1974) to the introduction of the composite working paper contained in doc. A/CONF.62/L.4. The working paper was introduced, but the President would allow no discussion of its draft articles until the Second Committee had considered them. Another illustration of overlapping competence can be seen in the discussion on pollution in the 20th meeting of the Third Committee, 10 April 1975 (mimeographed only).

53 A/CONF.62/30/Rev. 1, UN Publication, Sales No. E.74.1.18 + A/CONF.62/Rev./1/Add.l (mimeographed only).

54 Report for 1972, supra n. 37, § 40.

55 See the work cited supra n. 10, vol. I at xxii–xxxi.

56 Method of Work and Procedure of the Conference: Report of the Secretary-General, §§ 27–29. United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, Official Records (supra n. 6), vol. I, p. 172 at p. 174 (A/CONF.13/11). The same rule was followed in 1960.

57 Official Records of the General Assembly, twenty-eighth session, agenda item 40, report of the First Committee (A/9278). The gentlemen's agreement was first adopted at the 1939th meeting of the First Committee on 26 October 1973, and was approved by the General Assembly at its 2169th meeting on 16 November 1973.

58 Israel took part in all these informal consultations.

59 A/CONF.62/2 (mimeographed only), replaced by a working paper, A/CONF.62/L.l, setting forth systematically the basic text proposed by the Secretary-General (including his own amendments resulting from the decisions taken at the first session on the organization of the Conference), and all formal amendments submitted. This document, dated 3 June 1974, formed the basis of the work of the final phase, and is reproduced in vol. III of the Official Records (supra n. 1).

60 A/CONF.62/2 (mimeographed only, incorporated in doc. A/CONF.62/L.1 [see previous note] ad article 39).

61 Supra n. 53. In its original form the compromise appeared in docs. A/CONF.62/WP.1 + Add.1, WP.2, WP.3 + Add.1, WP.4 + Add.1 and WP.6, 25–27 June 1974, adopted with amendments of verbal character at the 16th to 20th plenary meetings, 25, 26 and 27 June 1974. These documents are to be found in mimeographed form only, and they are not listed in the List of Documents printed on p. iii of vol. III of the Official Records of the Conference, supra n. 1.

62 For text, see infra Annex 2. And see Sohn, L., “Voting Procedure in United Nations Conferences for the Codification of International Law” (1975) 69 A.J.I.L. 310.Google Scholar

63 At the 16th plenary meeting (25 June) the President had proposed that the gentlemen's agreement in its revised form should simply appear in full in the summary record or in a conference document. The delegation of Israel was the first to insist at that meeting that it should be annexed to the rules of procedure.

64 On the rules of procedure of this Conference, see Vignes, Daniel, “Will the Third Conference on the Law of the Sea Work according to the Consensus Rule?” (1975) 69 A.J.I.L. 119.Google Scholar

65 For the position of Israel, see the statement by the head of the delegation, Ambassador A. Najar, at the 36th plenary meeting (10 July 1974). A summary of the work of the Caracas session is contained in doc. A/CONF.62/L.8/Rev.l, 17 October 1974.

66 For the policy statements of Israel in the First Committee see, on the international régime and machinery, statement of Ambassador Y. Doron, 6th meeting (16 July 1974); on economic implications of sea-bed mineral development, statements of Mr. E. Haran, 13th and 15th meetings (8 and 20 August 1974).

67 For the policy statements of Israel in the Third Committee see, on the preservation of the marine environment, statement of Mr. Y. Mintz, 5th meeting (17 July 1974); on scientific research and development and transfer of technology, statement of Mr. E. Haran, 8th meeting (19 July 1974). Israel also submitted some draft articles on the enforcement of provisions on the protection of the marine environment in doc. A/CONF.62/C.3/L.5, 29 July 1974.

68 Organization of the work of the Second Committee: statement of the Chairman at the 1st meeting, doc. A/CONF.62/C.2/L.2, 3 July 1974.

69 For the policy statements of Israel in the Second Committee, see, on the territorial sea, statements of Ambassador Rosenne, 2nd and 3rd meetings (9 and 11 July 1974); on the contiguous zone, statement of Ambassador Rosenne, 9th meeting (19 July 1974); on straits used for international navigation, statement of Ambassador Najar, 14th meeting (23 July 1974); on the continental shelf, statement of Lt. Col. G. Orion, 16th meeting (26 July 1974); on the exclusive economic zone, statement of Ambassador Rosenne, 22nd meeting (31 July 1974); on land-locked countries, statement of Ambassador Najar, 34th meeting (9 August 1974); on enclosed and semi-enclosed seas, statement of Ambassador Rosenne, 38th meeting (13 August 1974).

70 Although these papers were meticulously prepared and scrutinized in no less than 23 informal meetings, at Geneva complaints were made that important main trends had been omitted. See the remarks of the representative of Bolivia at the 47th meeting of the Second Committee, 18 March 1975. Some objection to this concept of “main trends” was made in the informal meetings of the Second Committee, on the ground that account should also be taken of trends expressed in the debate and not formalized in draft articles, but this view did not prevail.

71 Printed as Appendix 1 to Annex II of doc. A/CONF.62/L.8/Rev. 1, supra n. 65.

72 Statement of the Chairman of the Second Committee at its 47th meeting (18 March 1975) concerning the organization of the Committee's work, doc. A/CONF.62/C.2/L.87 (mimeographed only).

73 See Press Release SEA/41, 9 May 1975 (mimeographed only) and draft statement of the activities of the Second Committee, doc. A/CONF.62/C.2/L.89, 1 May 1975 (mimeographed only).

74 Reproduced in extenso in doc. A/CONF.62/C.2/L.86 (28 August 1974). Interesting in that respect is the refusal of the Committee at its 46th meeting to consent to that statement being included in the report of the activities of the Second Committee, ultimately annexed to doc. A/CONF.62/L.8/Rev. 1, supra n. 65.

75 Doc. A/CONF.62/WP.8/Part I, Part II and Part III, 7 May 1975 (mimeographed only), corresponding to the three Main Committees. These texts are usefully reproduced in (1975) 14 International Legal Materials 682. After the session had terminated, Part IV of the Informal Single Negotiating Text was presented by the President of the Conference (A/CONF.62/WP.9, 21 July 1975, mimeographed only). Devoted to the Settlement of Disputes, it consists of 18 articles and no less than seven annexes, themselves containing 85 articles. The President explained that since item 21 on the list of subjects and issues, “Settlement of disputes”, was of interest to the Conference as a whole, he considered it was the duty of the President of the Conference “by analogy” with what had been required of the three Chairman of the Main Committees, to submit a similar negotiating text for that topic. He had based it on the work of the Informal Group on the Settlement of Disputes. Infra n. 82.

76 This introduction was much later circulated in doc. A/CONF.62/C.1/L.16, 5 September 1975 (mimeographed only).

77 Geneva Press Release SEA/42, 9 May 1975.

78 Cf. text on conditions of exploration and exploitation, A/CONF.62/C.1/L.7, 16 August 1974; draft on development and transfer of technology, A/CONF.62/C.3/L.12, 22 August 1974, replaced by L.12/Rev.1, 24 April 1975 (mimeographed only); draft articles on marine research, A/CONF.62/C.3/L.13, 22 August 1974, replaced by L.13/Rev.1, 4 April 1975 (mimeographed only).

79 Proposals submitted by the United States include the following: working paper on the economic effects of deep sea-bed exploitation, A/CONF.62/C.1/L.5, 8 August 1974, draft appendix to the law of the sea treaty, concerning mineral resource development in the international sea-bed area, A/CONF.62/C.1/L.6, 13 August 1974, draft articles for a chapter on the economic zone and the continental shelf, A/CONF.62/C.2/L.47, 8 August 1974, draft article for inclusion in a chapter on the high seas, A/CONF.62/C.2/L.79, 23 August 1974, draft article for inclusion in a chapter on the high seas—living resources, A/CONF. 62/C.2/L.80, 23 August 1974.

80 Proposals submitted by the USSR alone or with other co-sponsors from its group include the following: draft articles on straits used for international navigation, A/CONF.62/C.2/L.11, 17 July 1974, draft articles on the territorial sea, A/CONF.62/C.2/L.26, 29 July 1974, draft articles on the contiguous zone, A/CONF.62/C.2/L.27, 29 July 1974, draft articles on the economic zone, A/CONF.62/C.2/L.38, 5 August 1974, working document on the basic' provisions of the rules and conditions governing the evaluation and exploitation of the mineral resources of the sea-bed beyond the limits of the continental shelf, A/CONF.62/C.1/L.12 + Corr. 1–4, 21 March 1975 (mimeographed only), additional draft articles on prevention of pollution of the marine environment, A/CONF.62/C.3/L.25 + Corr. 1, 25 March 1975 (mimeographed only), draft articles on marine scientific research, A/CONF.62/C.3/L.26, 3 April 1975 (mimeographed only).

81 Thus, draft articles on the prevention, reduction and control of marine pollution by several West and East European States, A/CONF.62/C.3/L.24, 21 March 1975 (mimeographed only).

82 Doc. A/CONF.62/L.7, 27 August 1974, and informal paper SD.Gp/2nd Session/No.l/Rev.5, 1 May 1975, circulated “for information purposes” (mimeographed only). This is one of the groups in which Israel and Arab representatives participated together. In connection with this issue, note that in the Fisheries Jurisdiction cases (supra n. 23) the International Court of Justice explained the difficulties which it would encounter were it to attempt to settle some of these disputes. See §§ 73 and 65 respectively of the judgments of 25 July 1974.

83 Official Records, supra n. 6, vol. VII, passim.

84 597 United Nations Treaty Series 3. Document symbol TD/TRANSIT/—. Israel is not a party to this Convention.

85 Sea-Bed Committee, Report for 1973, supra n. 37, vol. II p. 4, A/AC.138/89, 2 July 1973, replaced by A/CONF.62/33, 19 July 1974. Since 1958 the number of land-locked States in Africa has grown, and their problems have become acute.

86 A./CONF.62/23, 2 May 1974.

87 The principal proposals on behalf of land-locked States include: explanatory paper, A/CONF.62/C.2/L.29, 30 July 1974, draft articles on the territorial sea, A/CONF.62/C.2/L.33, 31 July 1974, draft articles on the participation of land-locked and other geographically disadvantaged States in the exploration and exploitation of the living and non-living resources of the area beyond the territorial sea, A/CONF.62/C.2/L.39, 5 August 1974, system of revenue distribution, A/CONF.62/C.1/L.13, 28 April 1975 (mimeographed only), representation in the Council and other organs of the International Sea-Bed Authority, A/CONF.62/C.1/L.14, 30 April 1975 (mimeographed only), draft amendments to the draft articles (A/CONF.62/C.3/L.19) on marine research, A/CONF.62/C.3/L.28, 24 April 1975 (mimeographed only). In some parts of the world disturbed political conditions exist between a given land-locked State and its transit State and, as has occurred in the past, this may make the smooth settlement of the issue more difficult.

88 A/CONF.62/C.2/L.3, 3 July 1974.

89 A/CONF.62/C.2/L.26, 29 July 1974.

90 A/CONF.62/C.2/L.16, 22 July 1974, sponsored by Malaysia, Morocco, Oman and Yemen.

91 Sea-Bed Committee, Report for 1973, supra n. 37, vol. III at p. 71, A/AC.138/SC.II/L.34.

92 Sea-Bed Committee, Report for 1971, supra n. 37, at p. 241, A/AC.138/SC.II/L.44.

93 Sea-Bed Committee, Report for 1973, supra n. 37, vol. III at p. 3, A/AC.138/SC.II/L.18, sponsored by Cyprus, Greece, Indonesia, Malaysia, Morocco, Philippines, Spain and Yemen.

94 Sea-Bed Committee, Report for 1973, vol. III at p. 1, A/AC.138/SC.II/L.15, supra n. 37, elaborated ib., at p. 102, A/AC.138/SC.II/L.48. Replaced by A/CONF.62/C.2/L.49, draft articles relating to archipelagic States, submitted by the four above named Powers. On innocent passage see the draft by Fiji in Sea-Bed Committee, Report for 1973, vol. III at p. 91, A/AC.138/SC.II/L.42 + Corr. 1 replaced by A/CONF.62/C.2/L.19.

95 Supra n. 29, at p. 13. The Central American Court of Justice, in its decision of 9 March 1917 in the Gulf of Fonseca case, had reached a similar conclusion regarding that Gulf. That decision resulted from a close examination of the physical features and the history of the area in question; see (1917) 11 A.J.I.L. 674. That decision, however, was largely if not entirely a matter of regional law.

96 A/CONF.62/C.3/L.1 + Corr.l, 22 July 1974 (mimeographed only).

97 A start has been made in the Inter-Parliamentary Conference of Coastal States on the Control of Pollution in the Mediterranean Area, Rome, 29 March-3 April 1974, document symbol CONF/MED/74/-, convened by the Inter-Parliamentary Union and the Italian Chamber of Deputies, and this is being followed by the Intergovernmental Meeting on the Protection of the Mediterranean, Barcelona, 28 January-4 February 1975 and still in progress, document symbol UNEP/WG.2/-, convened under the joint auspices of UNEP and FAO. Israel was represented by a Member of the Knesset (Ms. Herlitz) at the first of these, and by official delegations at the Intergovernmental Meetings. For fuller details on this aspect, see (1975) 14 International Legal Materials 464. FAO is also working on the problem of pollution control and fishery conservation in the Mediterranean.

98 Sea-Bed Committee, Report for 1972, supra n. 37, at p. 10, A/AC.138/80.

99 Main trends working paper, supra n. 71, provisions 221–8. For the silence in the Sea-Bed Committee, see Report for 1973, supra n. 37, vol. V, doc. SC.II/WG/Paper No. 4, sect. 17.

100 Cf., for the League of Nations, the paper Historic Bays, Memorandum by the Secretariat of the United Nations, Conference on the Law of the Sea, Official Records, supra n. 6, §§ 85–90, A/CONF.13/1. As for the International Law Commission, it confined its proposals on bays and straits to those belonging to a single State. Comments on articles 7 and 17 of its draft articles on the law of the sea, supra n. 5. At the 61st meeting of the First Committee in the First Conference (22 April 1958) the representative of Israel, Ambassador Comay, interpreted article 12 of the Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone as not applying to bays and gulfs bordered by more than two coastal States. Official Records, vol. III at p. 193.

101 On anadromous fish, see the memorandum of the United States in Sea-Bed Committee, Report for 1973, supra n. 37, vol. III at p. 11, A/AC.138/SC.II/L.20, and the proposals of the USSR, Ireland, USA and Canada in A/ CONF.62/C.2/L.38 + Corr.l, L.41, L.47 and L.81. For counter-proposals by Denmark and Japan see docs. L.37 and L.46. And see Haig-Brown, R., The Salmon (Ottawa, 1974)Google Scholar for a remarkable, if partisan, account of this. The question of catadromous fish appears to have been introduced in the informal meetings of the Second Committee at Caracas, probably as a result of close examination of the issue of anadromous fish. See the main trends working paper, supra n. 71, provision 111. The Official Records of the Conference do not supply indication of the origin of this provision.

102 The principal highly migratory species are identified as various species of tuna, mackerel, pomfrets, mariin, sailfish, swordfish, sauries, dolphin, oceanic sharks, whales and porpoises. On this, see the proposals of the United States in A/CONF.62/C.2/L.47, supra n. 79, and of Australia and New Zealand, A/CONF.62/C.2/L.57/Rev.l, 22 August 1974.

103 In terms of legal qualification the claims of these coastal States, especially as regards the anadromous and catadromous species, recall factors which have led to recognition of a legally identifiable interest and right in certain distinct types of agricultural produce such as the appelation d'origine (in French law) in respect of wine, Scotch whisky, Jaffa citrus fruit, and the like. International law is showing a tendency to extend its protection to rights and interests of this character.

104 Proposal by Turkey, Sea-Bed Committee, Report for 1971, supra n. 37, at p. 92, A/AC.138/48. In 1972 a similar proposal was advanced by Malta. Report for 1972, at p. 157, A/AC. 138/75 + Corr. 1.

105 Supra n. 23, §§ 53 and 45 respectively.

106 Official Records, supra n. 8, at p. 33, 14th plenary meeting (26 April 1960). Cf. at the 14th plenary meeting of the First Conference (25 April 1958), Official Records, supra n. 6, vol. II at p. 40.