INTRODUCTION

• The term United ________________________________________ (UNCLOS, also called simply the Law of the Sea or LOS) refers to several United Nations events and one treaty. The events the term refers to are the (First) United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea, the Second United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea, and the Third United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea. The treaty resulting from the Third United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea also bears the name United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea and is the most recent major development in international law governing the oceans. The treaty provided new universal legal controls for the management of marine natural resources and the control of pollution. Its Secretariat resides within the _______________________________________________________.

2. HISTORY

• 20th century many nations expressed a need to extend national claims, in order to include mineral resources, to protect fish stocks, and to have the means to enforce pollution controls. This was recognized by the League of Nations, and a conference was held in 1930 at the Hague, but did not result in any agreements. One nation that reflected the customary international law principle of a nation's right to protect its natural resources was the United States, when in 1945 President Truman extended his nation's control, to cover all the natural resources of their continental shelf. Other nations were quick to emulate the USA. Between 1946 and 1950, Argentina, Chile, Peru, and Ecuador all extended their sovereign rights to a 200 nautical miles distance—so as to cover their Humboldt Current fishing grounds. Other nations extended their territorial seas to 12 nautical miles.
• By 1967 only 25 nations still used the old three nautical miles limit, 66 nations had set a 12 nautical miles territorial limit, and eight had set a 200 nautical miles limit. For the latest table of maritime claims, as compiled by the United Nations, see. According to that table, as of June 30, 2006, only a handful of countries use the old 3 miles limit (______________ __________________________). It also used in certain Australian islands, an area of Belize, some Japanese straits, certain areas of Papua New Guinea, and a few UK dependencies, such as Anguilla.


• UNCLOS I
o In 1956, the United Nations held its first Conference on the Law of the Sea (“UNCLOS I”) at Geneva, Switzerland. UNCLOS I resulted in four treaties concluded in 1958.
 Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone, entry into force:________________________
 Convention on the Continental Shelf, entry into force: 10 June 1964
 Convention on the High Seas, entry into force: 30 September 1962
 Convention on Fishing and Conservation of Living Resources of the High Seas, entry into force: 20 March 1966
o Although UNCLOS I was considered a success, it left open the important issue of breadth of territorial waters.

• UNCLOS II
o The United Nations followed this in 1960 with its second Conference on the Law of the Sea (“UNCLOS II”). UNCLOS II did not result in any international agreements. During the six-week conference at Geneva, UNCLOS II did not achieve much. Generally speaking, the developing countries participated only as clients, allies, or dependents of United States or the former Soviet Union; there was no voice for countries of the third world or the developing nations.

• UNCLOS III
o The issue of varying claims of territorial waters was raised in the UN in 1967 by Arvid Pardo, of Malta, and in 1973 the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea was convened in New York to write a new treaty covering the oceans. The conference lasted until 1982 and over 160 nations participated. The convention came into force on November 16, 1994, one year after the sixtieth state, Guyana, signed it.
o The most significant issues covered were setting limits, navigation, archipelagic status and transit regimes, _____________________ (EEZ), continental shelf jurisdiction, deep seabed mining, the exploitation regime, protection of the marine environment, scientific research, and settlement of disputes.
o The convention set the limit of various areas, measured from a carefully defined baseline, as follows:

Internal waters
Covers all water and waterways on the landward side of the baseline. The coastal nation is free to set laws, regulate any use, and use any resource. Foreign vessels have no right of passage within internal waters.


Territorial waters
______________________ from the baseline, the coastal state is free to set laws, regulate any use, and use any resource. Vessels were given the right of "innocent passage" through any territorial waters, with strategic straits allowing the passage of military craft as "transit passage", in that naval vessels are allowed to maintain postures that would be illegal in territorial waters. "Innocent Passage" is defined by the convention as passing through waters in expeditious and continuous manner, which is not “prejudicial to the peace, good order or the security” of the coastal state. Fishing, polluting, weapons practice, spying are not “innocent.” Nations can also temporarily suspend innocent passage in specific areas of their territorial seas, if doing so is essential for the protection of its security.

Contiguous zone
Beyond the 12 nautical mile limit there was ___________ ___________________________from the territorial sea baselines limit, the contiguous zone", in which area a state could continue to enforce laws regarding activities such as smuggling or illegal immigration.

Exclusive economic zones (EEZ)
Extends ___________________ from the baseline. Within this area, the coastal nation has sole exploitation rights over all natural resources. The EEZ were introduced to halt the increasingly heated clashes over fishing rights, although oil was also becoming important. The success of an offshore oil platform in the Gulf of Mexico in 1947 was soon repeated elsewhere in the world, by 1970 it was technically feasible to operate in waters 4000 metres deep. Foreign nations have the freedom of navigation and overflight, subject to the regulation of the coastal states. Foreign states may also lay submarine pipes and cables.

Archipelagic waters
The convention set the definition of Archipelagic States in Part IV, which also define how the state can draw its territorial borders. A baseline is drawn between the outermost points of the outermost islands, subject to these points being sufficiently close to one another.


Continental Shelf
Continental shelf is defined as natural prolongation of the land territory to the continental margin’s outer edge, or 200 nautical miles from the coastal state’s baseline, whichever is greater.

Landlocked states are given a right of access to and from the sea, ____________________________________.

3. PART XI

• Part XI of the Convention provides for a regime relating to minerals on the seabed outside any states territorial waters or EEZ. It establishes an International Seabed Authority (ISA) to authorize seabed exploration and mining and collect and distribute the seabed mining royalty.
• The United States strongly objected to the provisions of Part XI of the treaty, on several grounds. The US felt that the provisions of the treaty were not free market friendly and were designed to favor the economic systems of the Communist states. The US felt that the provisions could potentially result in the ISA receiving large revenues from seabed mining, and that there was insufficient controls over what these revenues could be used for. The US was particularly concerned that these revenues could be given to causes which the US opposed, such as the PLO. It was also concerned that the ISA would become a bloated and expensive bureaucracy even if seabed mining never proved to be economically feasible.
• Due to Part XI, the US refused to sign the UNCLOS, although they expressed their agreement with the remaining provisions of the treaty. They also expressed the view that even as not a party, it considered many of the remaining provisions as binding upon the United States as a statement of customary international law which it had accepted.
• It became clear that the US would not accept the treaty as it stood. It was felt that the treaty would not be successful with such strong opposition from the US. In addition, the fall of the Communism in the late 1980s had removed much of the support for some of the more contentious Part XI provisions. As a result, the United Nations resolved to negotiate an amendment to the treaty to meet the United States' concerns. As a result, the Agreement relating to Part XI was negotiated and agreed upon by the parties to the treaty and the United States. This modified Part XI to remove or soften most of the provisions the US was opposed to. In particular, it limited the size of the ISA bureaucracy and gave the US an effective veto over the dispersal of ISA funds.
4. CRITICISMS OF THE TREATY

The USA’s arguments fell into a few major categories:

• ___________________________________
• ___________________________________
• Navigation rights not threatened: One of the treaty's main selling points, legally recognized navigation rights on, over, and under straits, is unnecessary because these rights are not currently threatened by law or by any military capable of opposing the US.
• Redistribution of wealth: The treaty would force the US to pay taxes to the United Nations, further increasing the UN's power.
• Redistribution of technology: The treaty would force US businesses to turn over economically and militarily relevant technology to other countries.
• Undesirable precedent:
• Harm to de-militarizing operations:
• Internationalizing domestic law: Some of the treaty's conservation provisions would provide new avenues for non-U.S. environmental organizations to attempt to influence domestic U.S. environmental policies by pursuing legal action in both U.S. and international court.

Taken from: http://www.un.org/Depts/los/index.htm

5. LAWS AGAINST TERRORISM

• International conventions on terrorism set out obligations of states in respect to defining international counter terrorist offences, prosecuting individuals suspected of such offences, extraditing such persons upon request, and providing mutual legal assistance upon request.
• There are now a number of important United Nations Security Council and General Assembly Resolutions on international terrorism, including UN Security Council Resolution 1373 and three important Security Council resolutions dealing with Libya's conduct in connection with the sabotage of Pan Am Flight 103 on December 21, 1988, which includes UN Security Council Resolutions 731 (January 21, 1992); 748 (March 31, 1992) and 883 (November 11, 1993).
• ____________________________: These are international treaties agreed under the auspices of particular regional organisations, and generally the Conventions are only open to be ratified by members states of those regional organisations. However some of those organisations permit other countries to ratify the conventions concerned. The International Criminal Court and Terrorism.
• During the negotiations on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, many states supported adding a specific offence of "terrorism" to the list of crimes over which the court would have jurisdiction. This proposal was not adopted. However, the Statute provides for a review conference to be held seven years after the entry into force of the Statute. This review will consider (among other things) an extension of the court's jurisdiction to include terrorism.
• Despite the exclusion from the Court's jurisdiction of a specifically defined international crime of "terrorism" , certain acts carried out by "terrorists" may fall within the Court's jurisdiction because those acts fullfil the criteria of other offences which fall within the Court's purview. Thus acts of terrorism carried out by parties to an armed conflict constitute "war crimes" as prohibited by various articles in the Geneva Conventions, and will fall within the Court's jurisdiction where they constitute "grave" breaches of the Conventions. Furthermore some "terrorist" acts will constitute a "crime against humanity" which is an international crime which also falls within the ICC's jurisdiction. Article 7 of the ICC Statute defines a "Crime Against Humanity" as various acts, including murder, extermination, persecution of various groups, when "committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack.”

6. "Terrorists" and Laws of War/International Humanitarian Law

• The obligations which the international and regional conventions impose, as described in sections 1, 2, 3 and 4 above, apply for the most part in situations where there is not an ongoing "armed conflict" [i.e"war"]. When there is "armed conflict", in the sense in which that term is understood under the laws of war/__________________________________(IHL), then the laws of War/IHL apply. Under those laws combatants ("belligerents") are subject to certain prohibitions. However an attack carried out on an enemy which results in death and/or injury is lawful, so long as it meets various tests of necessity and proportionalty.
• Whether or not persons/groups which might be characterised by some as "terrorist" are entitled to the privileges accorded to participants in an "armed conflict" depends upon whether in the circumstances they are "combatants", within the meaning of that term under the laws of War/IHL. The categorisation of any particular group as a "terrorist" or "combatant" is a matter which often divides opinion. A state/government which is in conflict with such a group is likely never to accord them the status of combatant, and in most cases the acts of such groups will in any event constitute criminal acts under the domestic law provisions in the jurisdiction concerned. However this is a different question to whether person/groups are entitled to the status of "combatants" under International Law. If they are so entitled their acts will not constitute crimes in international law, and as a matter of international law they are entitled to be treated in certain ways by their enemies [e.g. prisoner of war status if captured].
• However under the __________________________________, a person is eligible for prisoner of war status only if they "carry arms openly" and "respect the laws and customs of war". It also requires that members of militias and other irregular groups have "a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance." In so far as "terrorists" who are parties to an "armed conflict" fail to adhere to those rules, any claims which they may make to special status will be difficult to sustain. In such circumstances there is some debate as to whether they are to be categorised as (a)civilians who have committed crimes; or (b) a species of wrongdoer who, whilst not entitled to be treated as prisoner of war, may nonetheless be dealth with outside of the ordinary civilian processes for prosecuting crimes.
• Matters are further complicated by the 1979 Optional Additional Protocol 1 (Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts) which applies in "armed conflicts in which peoples are fighting against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist regimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination"(Article 1:3) and furthermore the following clause appears to give guerrilla fighters in such conflicts lawful combatant and POW status, even if not wearing uniform, as long as they carry weapons openly during attacks:

o "In order to promote the protection of the civilian population from the effects of hostilities, combatants are obliged to distinguish themselves from the civilian population while they are engaged in an attack or in a military operation preparatory to an attack. Recognizing, however, that there are situations in armed conflicts where, owing to the nature of the hostilities an armed combatant cannot so distinguish himself, he shall retain his status as a combatant, provided that, in such situations, he carries his arms openly: (a) During each military engagement, and (b) During such time as he is visible to the adversary while he is engaged in a military deployment preceding the launching of an attack in which he is to participate."(Article 44:3)”

• Optional Additional Protocol 2 (Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts) may also apply in many "insurgencies", "terrorist campaigns" or "civil wars". However this convention does not give non-government militants lawful combatant status or POW status, although Article 6(5) does recommend "broadest possible amnesty to persons who have participated in the armed conflict" after the end of hostilities. It also specifies minimum standards for those detained or interned ("persons whose liberty has been restricted"). The covention prohibits war crimes, "acts of terrorism" and extra-judicial execution and sets standards for fair trials--although it does not prohibit internment.



7. International conventions related to terrorism and counter-terrorism cases

• Terrorism has been on the international agenda since 1934, when the League of Nations, predecessor of the United Nations founded during the June 1945 San Francisco Conference, took the first major step towards discussing a draft convention for the prevention and punishment of terrorism. Although the Convention was eventually adopted in 1937, it never came into force. There are today thirteen international conventions in force, opened to ratification. They were developed under the auspices of the United Nations and its specialized agencies and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). A 14th international convention is currently under negotiations. The UN General Assembly adopted on 8 September 2006 a "Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy".
• Conventions which are open to ratification by all states:
o The following list identifies the major terrorism conventions open to ratification by all states. A brief summary is provided in each case of the princicpal provisions in each instrument. In addition to the provisions summarized below, most of these conventions provide that parties must establish criminal jurisdiction over offenders (e.g., the state(s) where the offense takes place, or in some cases the state of nationality of the perpetrator or victim).
 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations
 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations

1. __________________________________________________ ___________________________ (Tokyo Convention, agreed 9/63—safety of aviation):
a. applies to acts affecting in-flight safety;
b. authorizes aircraft commanders to impose reasonable measures, including restraint, on any person they have reason to believe has committed or is about to commit such an act, when necessary to protect the safety of the aircraft and for related reasons; requires contracting states to take custody of offenders and to return control of the aircraft to the lawful commander.

2. Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft (Hague Convention, agreed 12/70—aircraft hijackings):
a. makes it an offense for any person on board an aircraft in flight [to] "unlawfully, by force or threat thereof, or any other form of intimidation, [to] seize or exercise control of that aircraft" or to attempt to do so
b. requires parties to the convention to make hijackings punishable by "severe penalties;”
c. requires parties to either extradite the offender or submit the case for prosecution;
d. requires parties to assist each other in connection with criminal proceedings brought under the convention.

3. Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Civil Aviation (Montreal Convention, agreed 9/71—applies to acts of aviation sabotage such as bombings aboard aircraft in flight):
a. makes it an offense for any person unlawfully and intentionally to perform an act of violence against a person on board an aircraft in flight, if that act is likely to endanger the safety of that aircraft; explosives etc;
b. make offenses punishable by "severe penalties;”
c. extradite the offender or submit the case for prosecution;
d. requires parties to assist each other.

4. Convention on the __________________________________ __________________________________________ (agreed 12/73—protects senior government officials and diplomats):
a. defines internationally protected person as a Head of State, a Minister for Foreign Affairs, a representative or official of a state or of an international organization who is entitled to special protection from attack under international law.

5. Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material (Nuclear Materials Convention, agreed 10/79—combats unlawful taking and use of nuclear material):
a. criminalizes the unlawful possession, use, transfer, etc., of nuclear material, the theft of nuclear material, and threats to use nuclear material;
b. requires parties to extradite the offender or submit the case for prosecution;
c. requires parties to assist each other.

6. International Convention (Hostages Convention, agreed 12/79):
a. provides that "any person who seizes or detains and threatens to kill, to injure, or to continue to detain another person in order to compel a third party, namely, a State, an international intergovernmental organization, a natural or juridical person, or a group of persons, to do or abstain from doing any act as an explicit or implicit condition for the release of the hostage commits the offense of taking of hostages within the meaning of this Convention;”
b. requires parties to either extradite the offender or submit the case for prosecution; and assist each other.

7. Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts of Violence at Airports Serving International Civil Aviation (agreed 2/88—extends and supplements Montreal Convention):
a. extends the provisions of the Montreal Convention (see No. 3 above) to encompass terrorist acts at airports serving international civil aviation.

8. Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation, (agreed 3/88—applies to terrorist activities on ships):
a. establishes a legal regime applicable to acts against international maritime navigation that is similar to the regimes established against international aviation
b. makes it an offense for a person unlawfully and intentionally to seize or exercise control over a ship by force, threat, or intimidation; to perform an act of violence against a person on board a ship if that act is likely to endanger the safe navigation of the ship; to place a destructive device or substance aboard a ship; and other acts against the safety of ships;
c. requires parties to either extradite the offender or submit the case for prosecution; and assist each other;
d. Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Fixed Platforms Located on the Continental Shelf (agreed 3/88—applies to terrorist activities on fixed offshore platforms);
e. establishes a legal regime applicable to acts against fixed platforms on the continental shelf that is similar to the regimes established against international aviation.

9. Convention on the Marking of Plastic Explosives for the Purpose of Identification (agreed 3/91—provides for chemical marking to facilitate detection of plastic explosives, e.g., to combat aircraft sabotage). Consists of two parts: the Convention itself, and a Technical Annex which is an integral part of the Convention.
a. designed to control and limit the used of unmarked and undetectable plastic explosives (negotiated in the aftermath of the Pan Am 103 bombing);
b. generally speaking, each party must, among other things: take necessary and effective measures to prohibit and prevent the manufacture of unmarked plastic explosives; take necessary and effective measures to prevent the movement of unmarked plastic explosives into or out of its territory; take necessary measures to exercise strict and effective control over possession and transfer of unmarked explosives made or imported prior to the entry-into-force of the convention.

10. International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombing (agreed 12/97—expands the legal framework for international cooperation in the investigation, prosecution, and extradition of persons who engage in terrorist bombings).
a. creates a regime of universal jurisdiction over the unlawful and intentional use of explosives and other lethal devices in, into, or against various defined public places with intent to kill or cause serious bodily injury;
b. requires parties to either extradite the offender or submit the case for prosecution; and assist each other.

11. International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Financing 1999
a. requires parties to take steps to prevent and counteract the financing of terrorists, whether direct or indirect, though groups claiming to have charitable, social or cultural goals or which also engage in such illicit activities as drug trafficking or gun running;
b. commits states to hold those who finance terrorism criminally, civilly or administratively liable for such acts;
c. provides for the identification, freezing and seizure of funds allocated for terrorist activities, as well as for the sharing of the forfeited funds with other states on a case-by-case basis. Bank secrecy will no longer be justification for refusing to cooperate.

12. International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism 2005 [not yet in force feb 2006]

8. CONCLUSION
a. September 28, 2001 _____________________________________ ____________________________measure adopted September 28, 2001 following the September 11 terrorist attacks on the United States.The resolution was adopted under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, and is therefore binding on all UN member states.
b. The resolution aimed to place barriers on the movement, organization and fund-raising activities of terrorist groups. UN member states were encouraged to share their intelligence on terrorist groups in order to assist in combating international terrorism. The resolution also calls on all states to adjust their national laws so that they can ratify all of the existing International conventions on terrorism.
c. The resolution established the Security Council's Counter Terrorism Committee [CTC]to monitor state compliance with is provisions.
d. However, the resolution failed to define 'Terrorism', and the working group initially only added Al-Qaida and the Taliban regime of Afghanistan on the sanctions list. This also entailed the danger that authoritarian regimes could label even non-violent activities as terrorist acts, hurting thus basic human rights.
e. The absence of any specific reference to human rights considerations was remedied in part by Resolution 1456 (2003)which declared that "States must ensure that any measure taken to combat terrorism comply with all their obligations under international law, and should adopt such measures in accordance with international law, in particular international human rights, refugee, and humanitarian law.”
f. UN Security Council Resolution 1566 picked up loose ends from 1373 by actually spelling out what the Security Council sees as terrorism:
i. "criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury, or taking of hostages, with the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public or in a group of persons or particular persons, intimidate a population or compel a government or an international organization to do or to abstain from doing any act.”
g. Although this definition has operative effect for the purposes of Security Council action, it does not represent a definition of "terrorism" which binds all states in international law. That is a task which would could only be achieved by way of agreeing an international treaty under the auspices of the UN General Assembly. Negotiations towards agreeing such are ongoing, and a Comprehensive Convention exists in draft form, however agreement its exact terms, most particularly the definition of "terrorism", remains elusive.
h. Resolution 1566 also called for the creation of a working group that will expand the list of terrorist entities under sanction beyond the Taliban and Al-Qaida.