UNCLOS 1982: Coastal State Jurisdiction over the Sea

This essay provides a comprehensive analysis of the various areas of a coastal state's jurisdiction over the sea, with specific reference to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) 1982. The introduction establishes UNCLOS as the foundational international agreement for maritime law, outlining its objectives and significance in defining the law of the sea and managing marine resources. The main body delves into key concepts such as territorial waters, contiguous zones, exclusive economic zones (EEZ), and the high seas, detailing the rights and responsibilities of coastal states within each zone. The essay examines the historical development of territorial water limits, the concept of innocent passage, and the specific powers coastal states possess in each maritime zone. It further discusses the role of international law, the International Seabed Authority (ISA), and the powers of coastal states over ports and in preventing pollution. The conclusion summarizes the key points, emphasizing the importance of UNCLOS in regulating and resolving disputes related to the law of the sea.

Discuss the various
areas of a coastal
state’s jurisdiction over
the sea with reference
to the UN Convention
on the Law of the Sea
1982

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3
MAIN BODY...................................................................................................................................3
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................8
REFERNCES:..................................................................................................................................8

INTRODUCTION
The United Convention on the Law of Sea (UNCLOS), 1982, is considered as an international
agreement which is an outcome derived from the third conference of United Nations which was
made in respect of law of sea. The main aim of the convention is to define the law of sea
accompanied by the usage of world’s ocean, international seas. Further the convention
formulated the guidelines in respect of the business and management of the marine resources. It
focus on resolving the problems related to ocean space. Further the convention set the limit in
respect of usage and also devised zones with the exclusive rights. Today it is considered as the
recognised regime which entertains the matters relating to the law of sea (Weiss and Daws,
2018). Thus, the report examined the various areas of a Coastal State’s jurisdiction in accordance
with the UN convention on the law of sea.
MAIN BODY
The United Nations Convention on Law of the sea defines the rights and responsibilities
of the nations in respect of sea, ocean resources usage and devise the guidelines and management
of maritime resources. It aims to resolve the disputes in respect of using the water zones. The
convention was signed on 10th December, 1982 and was participated by more than 150 countries
across the world. The convention contains 320 articles and nine annexes and governs the aspects
such as Ocean space, Scientific research, Transfer to technical expertise and technology,
Activities representing economic purpose, Commercial activities such as commercial mining and
mainly resolving disputes arising between the nations in respect of sea or ocean matters
(Inshakova and et. al., 2019). Thus, the convention is famous recognised regime which deals in
the law of sea by adhering the international law and conventions. And aims to address the
problems and provides effective solution to it. The conventions also focus to further make
development in some of the areas of the law of sea keeping in view the changing environment or
circumstances.
According to International Law territorial waters are referred to as that part or area of
which is adjacent to shores of the coastal state or region which led the territorial jurisdiction in
the hands of that coastal state. Territorial water play a crucial role for all the countries and is
distinct as internal or inland waters, which includes lakes or rivers wholly under the jurisdiction
of national territory. Further over the internal water state possess same sovereign jurisdiction as

it have on other territories. Thus, creates barrier for entry on any innocent passage through
internal waters.
Historically it was discovered that there is need for coastal state to exercise jurisdiction in
respect of water adjacent to its shores. In this regard earlier two concepts was formulated which
is the limit of will be equal to the range of cannon shot and the other in respect of width of area
which should be greater adjacent to the coast land. By the end of 18th century the concept was
compromised and proposed with the set limit of 3 nautical mile (5.5 Km). The concept failed to
get universal acceptance. It was later settled that the territorial water belt along with the seabed
and subsoil beneath it & above is to be considered as sovereignty of the coastal state. Further the
concept was qualified for innocent passage dealing in peaceful transit or any merchant vessels of
other nations (Sassòli, 2019). This excludes the transit contrary to order or security of the coastal
state. Also the right is not applicable for submerged submarines or aircraft and even excludes the
right to fishery. In respect to width of the belt there was no universal agreement except for the
concept determining the limit of a minimum 3 nautical miles. Apart from territorial waters the
central state claims no territory rights in the zones adjacent to the high seas but can exercise
limited jurisdiction for some special purposes.
In 1950, UNCLOS was convened in Geneva which was attended by 86 nations. The
nation led the development of the convention by affirming and commonly accepting the
principles in respect of the legal nature of the territorial sea and towards the right of innocent
passage. The effect of convention took place in between 1968 and 1970 which was later ratified
by 40 nations. In 1982 the Treaty on Law of Sea was accepted and signed by 117 countries
(Henckens and et. al., 2018). The law aimed to codify the international law for territorial waters,
seabed and for ocean resources. The treaty of 1982 determined the country’s sovereign territorial
water which can be extended to maximum limit of 12 nautical miles beyond its coastal region.
Further through this zone the foreign vessel has been granted the right to innocent passage. This
right is to be exercised by the foreign vessels unless and until they do not led into any activities
which is prohibited by the international law. Such activities are dealing of weapons, spying,
smuggling, scientific research or fishing. Fewer restrictions are enforced on in circumstances
when navigational rights of foreign ships is strengthened when it gets replaced by regime of the
innocent passage. The reason behind imposition of fewer restrictions on foreign ships is when

territorial water comprises a strait, which means part of sea which joins larger seas-for purpose
of international navigation. For example the Strait of Malacca, Mandeb.
The extended power of the coastal state is referred as contiguous zone. The zone is
between the high seas and territorial sea and enforcing jurisdiction to the coastal state. The
powers are exercised by the coastal zone when it seems to the state that any infringement of law
or standards are done within its territory or sea or within both. The zone is extended to maximum
24 nautical miles from baselines. The main aim of the contiguous zones is to prevent the
violations of international legislation and to punish accordingly. The coastal state can engage in
the activities of maritime security out to 24 nautical miles in order to prevent any violations. For
example import of weapons in the state (Bradley. and Swaddling, 2018).
Every coastal country has established an Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) which is
ranging 200 nautical miles (370 Km) beyond the territorial water. The coastal state has granted
an exclusive rights to these economic zones to conduct activities such as fishing, construction if
artificial island, for scientific research or for making use of zone for any economic purposes. As
the absence of these zones may led the freely transit or movement of foreign vessels through and
over the zones. The enforcement right of EEZ is complex because of its limited sovereign rights
and jurisdiction possessed by coastal state. According to Article 220 (3) the coastal state has the
right to acquire information in respect of foreign vessel if the state is suspicious that the vessel
has committed any act prohibited by law or contrary to international standards in EEZ or
territorial sea. Further the coastal state may inspect the vessel if the proper information is not
provided and may institute proceedings if the ship has caused major damage or threat to occur
such damage and detain such vessel according to article 220 (6) (Stein, 2017). Further the coastal
state possess less regulatory and enforcement powers in the economic zones. Their actions are
according to the rights bestowed in the article 56.
Further every coastal country has exclusive right on seabed beyond territorial water. The
range to exercise the right to oil, gas and other resources are limited upto 200 nautical miles from
its shore or outer edge of continental margin, whichever is further. This overall limit construes
the geological definition of continental shelf. The cases where neighbouring territorial water,
exclusive economic zones, continental shelf overlap led the formation of boundary line through
agreement with an aim to attain equitable solution or outcome for conflict. When countries fails
to attain an equitable solution or unable to reach agreement, in such circumstances the boundary

line is determined by International Court of Justice (major example is the boundary line between
Qatar and Bahrain) or through arbitration tribunal (boundary line between France and United
Kingdom). The boundary line is an equidistance line which can be modified on occasion of
special circumstances.
The high seas lie beyond the above zone is discussed same as above, the water and
airspace area is open to use by all countries. The usage must not be for the activities which are
prohibited by the International Law such as testing nuclear weapon, spying, scientific research
and others. International Seabed area is referred as the bed of high seas. In respect of seabed area
a separate regime accompanied by its details is construed in the convention (1982). The former
regime was not accepted to the developed countries because of the influence of supplementary
treaty (1994). Further the modified regime determined the mineral resources found on the ocean
beneath high sea as the common heritage and such is need to be administered by International
Seabed Authority (ISA). The commercial exploitation on mining of seabed which is carried out
by private or state concerns. The commercial mining need be licensed and regulated by the
International Seabed Authority (Danovaro and et. al., 2017). The global enterprise is established
when commercial mining initiates. The private and state concern is required to distribute their
fees and royalties or any profits earned by global enterprise to the developing countries. This
establish opportunities for private mining companies to promote their technology and their
technical expertise to the global expertise as well as to developing countries.
The coastal state as discussed above possess absolute jurisdiction in the internal waters
and excludes the right of innocent passage. The coastal state formulates its own measures in
respect of entering of a ship. The Internal waters are defined under article 8 of UNCLOS. It port
is included from being part of internal waters. The state has the power to access or deny the entry
of foreign vessel into ports. Further the coastal state is empowered to impose conditions to use its
ports or fines and may detain ship if it believes that the vessel has acted contrary to the
international standards (Leal-Arcas and Wouters, 2017). The Nicaragua Case led the power in
the hands of the coastal state to deny the entrance of foreign vessels to its port. Thus, the coastal
states enjoys sovereign powers over the internal waters.
Ports
The port is considered to be the part of internal waters on which the coastal state has
sovereign power. This ultimately led the power to coastal state to formulate own national

legislation and measures for imposing restrictions or fines. Article 211 (3) UNCLOS, provides
the coastal state to devise requirements to prevent pollution in the marine environment. Further
such requirements are set as conditions for entry of foreign vessel into their ports or internal
waters. Such conditions aims to encourage marine environment and is required to communicate
to the competent authority (Young, 2018). For example International Maritime Organisation. The
coastal state is required to adhere the national rules and other laws in respect of preventing
pollution.
Further in relation to violation of administrative measures the coastal state may detain the
vessel prior being administered. The coastal state may inspect the vessel if it feels suspicious that
the ship has violated laws and regulation of their state. The duty of the foreign vessel is to
furnish the true information in respect of its identity and registry of port. Further the state can
stop the release process if it finds that the vessel has caused further damaged or threat to cause
major damage and detain the vessel again. The coastal state has right to detain on spot if clear
evidence is found against the foreign vessel or the vessel has no compliance with the law. The
vessel is discharged after the request is made by that state. The coastal state is required to comply
the requests made by any state. The request can be made by the flag state, the state under whose
jurisdiction the detained vessel is licensed or registered. Also the judgements of certain case led
that the costal state does not enjoy unlimited power in relation to access ports. There are certain
rights such as freedom of communication and maritime commerce which is favouring the foreign
vessels and allowing them free access to ports. Moreover, the state can decide which ports are to
be kept open for international maritime commerce. The state has given the power to close ports
under certain circumstances and is required to give notice of closure. Failure to perform duty by
the state may led to suffer damage (DeCastro and et. al., 2019). Also the state is required not to
formulate requirements beyond the maritime conventions and regulations.
Nevertheless, the coastal jurisdiction is enjoyed by the coastal states within its zones. The
rights and duties are devised in respect of coastal states. Also the state has power to exercise in
case of breach of regulations or any law by the foreign vessels in its areas (McCulloch. and
McGarry, 2017). The main power of coastal state is Firstly, Prescriptive, the power to formulate
laws, rules, procedures, standards or requirements. Secondly, Enforcement, the coastal state has
the power to enforce such laws, regulations or standards.

The coastal states is required to adhere the rules or regulations determined by the
international law and conventions. The UNCLOS aims to outline the field of law related to sea
and further entrusting the rights and obligations to the coastal states within their jurisdiction
zones. The convention encourages the coastal state in respect of environmental protection. The
UNCLOS is the only convention with effective framework in respect of state jurisdiction in
maritime zones (Schoenbaum, 2018).
CONCLUSION
From the above report it is concluded that role of United Nation convention is major as it
determines the law and order of sea and establishes rules, regulation in respect to it. It also
governs the other economic aspects apart from the water matters. The coastal area exercises its
sovereign jurisdiction in maritime zone is the key feature of the convention. The above report has
discussed various areas where costal state enjoys absolute sovereign jurisdiction. The convention
entrusted many rights and responsibilities to the coastal state. Many maritime zones has been
discussed above of the coastal states. The power in the hands of coastal states is required to be
adhered effectively and efficiently in accordance with the convention and international law.

REFERNCES:
Books and Journals:
Bradley, M. and Swaddling, A., 2018. Addressing environmental impact assessment challenges
in Pacific island countries for effective management of deep sea minerals
activities. Marine Policy, 95, pp.356-362.
Danovaro and et. al., 2017. An ecosystem-based deep-ocean strategy. Science, 355(6324),
pp.452-454.
DeCastro and et. al., 2019. Europe, China and the United States: Three different approaches to
the development of offshore wind energy. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, 109, pp.55-70.
Henckens and et. al., 2018. Normative principles and the sustainable use of geologically scarce
mineral resources. Resources Policy, 59, pp.351-359.
Inshakova and et. al., 2019. Innovative technologies of oil production: tasks of legal regulation of
management and taxation. In Energy sector: A systemic analysis of economy, foreign
trade and legal regulations (pp. 79-94). Springer, Cham.
Leal-Arcas, R. and Wouters, J. eds., 2017. Research handbook on EU energy law and policy.
Edward Elgar Publishing.
McCulloch, A. and McGarry, J. eds., 2017. Power-sharing: Empirical and normative challenges.
Taylor & Francis.
Sassòli, M., 2019. International humanitarian law: Rules, controversies, and solutions to
problems arising in warfare. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Schoenbaum, T.J., 2018. Admiralty and maritime law. West Academic.
Stein, S.K. ed., 2017. The Sea in World History: Exploration, Travel, and Trade [2 volumes].
ABC-CLIO.
Weiss, T.G. and Daws, S. eds., 2018. The Oxford Handbook on the United Nations. Oxford
University Press.
Young, O.R., 2018. Research strategies to assess the effectiveness of international environmental
regimes. Nature Sustainability, 1(9), pp.461-465.