Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Territory-Law of The Sea
Territory-Law of The Sea
Territory-Law of The Sea
The importance of the seas flows from two factors: first, they There is no fixed norm for determining the “low water mark”
are a medium of communication, and second, they contain but the Anglo-Norwegian Fisheries Case (U.K. v. Norway ICJ
vast natural resources. In the 17th century, the Portuguese 1951) has suggested that “for the purpose of measuring the
proclaimed vast areas of sea as belonging to itself. But it was breadth of the territorial sea, it is the low-water mark as
Grotius who elaborated the doctrine of the open seas which opposed to the high-water mark, or the mean between the two
considers the high seas as res communis accessible to all. tides, which has generally been adopted in the practice of
The doctrine, however, recognized as permissible the States. This criterion is the most favorable to the coastal State
delineation of a maritime belt by littoral states as an indivisible and clearly shows the character of territorial waters as
part of its domain. This belt is the territorial sea. appurtenant to the land territory.”
Much of the history of the law of the sea has centered around Archipelagic states, however, instead of drawing “normal
the extent of the territorial sea. But over the years, other baselines,” have drawn “straight baselines.” Instead of
jurisdictional issues have occurred and today the prevailing law following the curvatures of the coast, straight lines are drawn
on maritime domain is the Convention on the Law of the Sea connecting selected points on the coast without appreciable
of 1982 (LOS). Many of the provisions of the 1982 Law of the departure from the general shape of the coast. This method of
Sea are a repetition of earlier convention law or a codification drawing lines was first upheld in the Anglo-Norwegian
of customary law. Fisheries Case which upheld the straight baseline unilaterally
adopted by Norway. Likewise, R.A. No. 3046 and R.A. No.
The basic statement of the extent of a state’s sovereignty over 5446 have drawn “straight baselines” around the Philippines.
waters is set down in Article 2 of the 1982 Law of the Sea:
The decision in the Fisheries Case upholding the “straight
Article 2. Legal status of the territorial sea, of the air space baseline method” eventually became part of convention law.
over the territorial sea and of its bed and subsoil. Article 7(1) of the Convention on the Law of the Sea says: “In
1. The sovereignty of a coastal State extends, beyond its localities where the coastline is deeply indented and cut into,
land territory and internal waters and, in the case of or if there is a fringe of islands along the coast in its immediate
an archipelagic State, its archipelagic waters, to an vicinity, the method of straight baselines joining appropriate
adjacent belt of sea, described as the territorial sea. points may be employed in drawing the baseline from which
2. This sovereignty extends to the air space over the the breadth of the territorial sea is measured.”
territorial sea as well as to its bed and subsoil.
3. The sovereignty over the territorial sea is exercised Article 47 of the Convention on the Law of the Sea allows the
subject to this Convention and to other rules of use of the “straight baseline method” for archipelagic states
international law. with certain limitations. The article in full reads:
Settlement of Disputes
Peaceful settlement of disputes is compulsory. Under Part XV
of the 1982 Convention States are required to settle peacefully
disputes concerning the Convention. If a bilateral settlement
fails, Article 285 requires submission of the dispute for
compulsory settlement in one of the tribunals clothed with
jurisdiction. The alternatives are the International Tribunal for
the Law of the Sea, the ICJ, or an arbitral tribunal constituted
under the Convention.