Select Page

The document on amendments to the draft agreement in document A/CONF.232/2019/6 makes oceanic NBNJs more accessible to human activities that affect biodiversity in a way that was not anticipated at the time of the development of CNNUlos in 1982. The Maritime Law Agreement has set out a framework for the recognition of the rights of public authorities (subject to restrictions) for scientific research at sea, environmental protection, natural resources and certain activities up to 200 NM (exclusive economic zones) and the limitation of the continental shelf. A framework has also been set for the high seas and the “zone” of ABNJ. Subsequent agreements will lead to a variety of NJBN activities, such as fishing.B. B. the 1995 UNCLOS Implementation Agreement on the Conservation and Management of Straddling And Large Migratory Fish Stocks, and the Exploitation of the Seabed (e.g. B the 1994 convention on the implementation of Part XI of unbedS). However, the UNCLOS framework still presents significant gaps for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in the NJJA, including the absence of modern conservation principles (such as the ecosystem approach and precautionary principle), conservation instruments (such as strategic environmental assessments and marine space planning) and rules on unregulated activities that affect biodiversity (such as bioprospecting and deep-sea aquaculture) [5]. In the third round of negotiations [14], there was general support for the obligation to resolve disputes relating to the interpretation or application of the agreement by peaceful means and the inclusion of dispute resolution procedures [V.20]. However, there was no agreement on the application of the procedure in Part XV of the UNCLOS and on whether non-parties should be taken into account in order to promote universal participation in ILBI [V.20]. The resolution of disputes under ILBI is an issue that is receiving increasing attention.

Shi (this edition) is considering the procedures that would be required to resolve disputes and is considering options for ILBI. As Shi explains, a dispute is a specific disagreement on a question of fact, law or policy – and can arise because of different interpretations or applications. Shi presents the latest proposals for dispute resolution under ILBI. It proposes four criteria for the evaluation of dispute resolution mechanisms: the integration of the principle of consent into international law; Ensure cost-effectiveness not to compromise relevant frameworks, instruments and devices; and maintaining a balance of interests between states. Shi then identifies six types of proposals to resolve the dispute and analyzes these proposals on the basis of the criteria. Mr. Shi noted that few states had expressed their views on this issue, but argued that the analysis presented provided a useful framework for discussions on this issue. Nature rights laws are created around the world as approaches to environmental protection and preservation.

The draft preamble to the text of the BBNJ Convention conveys the wish of states “to act as administrators of the ocean in areas outside national jurisdiction, on behalf of present and future generations” [10]. Harden-Davies et al. (this edition) are studying how perspectives from the laws of “nature rights” could lead to the achievement of this goal of the Treuhandschaft in the ABNJ Ocean. An overview of existing natural rights provides examples of laws that recognize natural rights in different legal systems, such as Ecuador. B, and laws that confer legal rights on certain ecosystems or natural institutions, such as the Whanganui River in New Zealand. Four characteristics are identified: (i) rights; (ii) connectivity; (iii) reciprocity; and (iv) representation and implementation. These characteristics provide an analysis of how natural rights could be applied in the NJBN to ensure the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity.