Robin Churchill

Autonomous institutional arrangements in multilateral environmental agreements: a little-noticed phenomenon in international law

Since the early 1970s a considerable number of multilateral agreements have been concluded in the environmental field that establish a common pattern of institutional arrangements. The purpose of these arrangements is to develop the normative content of the regulatory regime established by each agreement1 and to supervise the states parties’ implementation of and compliance with that regime. These institutional arrangements usually comprise a conference or meeting of the parties (COP, MOP) with decision-making powers, a secretariat, and one or more specialist subsidiary bodies. Such arrangements, because of their ad hoc nature, are not intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) in the traditional sense. On the other hand, as the creatures of treaties, such conferences and meetings of the parties, with their secretariats and subsidiary bodies, add up to more than just diplomatic conferences. Because such arrangements do not constitute traditional IGOs and yet are freestanding and distinct both from the states parties to a particular agreement and from existing IGOs, we have chosen to describe them as “autonomous.” They are also autonomous in the sense that they have their own lawmaking powers and compliance mechanisms.

The EC Common Fisheries Policy

The Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) is one of the longest established and more controversial of the common policies of the EC. It deals principally with the management of fishery resources, relations between the EC and third States in fisheries matters, the marketing of and trade in fishery products, financial assistance to the fisheries sector, and aquaculture. However, the CFP is not just a matter for those with an economic interest in fisheries. It also raises many issues of more general concern, such as the capacity of the EC and its Member States to manage important natural resources sustainably, the impact of fishing on the wider marine environment, and relations between developed and developing States. This book addresses the CFP from a legal perspective. It provides a detailed account of the very large body of EC law comprising the CFP, and draws on the European Commissions associated documents to aid interpretation and add context. As a result, the book will be of value to anyone wanting knowledge of the law of the CFP. Although not addressing the Commissions 2009 Green Paper on reform of the CFP, the book should provide a useful reference point against which to view the reform of parts of the CFP that is anticipated to take place over the next few years.

EC fisheries and an EZ—easy!

Abstract Since 1977 all European Community (EC) member states outside the Mediterranean have had a 200‐mile zone of fisheries jurisdiction (which in the case of three member states is in the form of an EEZ). Although the competence to claim an EEZ and other maritime zones rests with the member states, the competence to regulate fisheries within such zones (including relations with third states) belongs primarily to the EC. Since 1983 the EC has adopted a considerable number of measures to regulate and manage fisheries in the waters of its member states. This practice is in accordance with the provisions of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea concerning the rights and duties of a coastal state in respect of fisheries in its EEZ. It therefore follows that if all EC member states were to claim an EEZ, this would make little difference and raise no real problems as far as fisheries are concerned.

Dispute Settlement under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea: Survey for 2004

This is the first of a projected series of annual surveys reviewing dispute settlement under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea generally, rather than focusing purely on the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. The main developments during 2004 were the referral of two maritime boundary disputes in the Caribbean area to arbitration under Annex VII and a prompt release of vessel judgment by the ITLOS in the Juno Trader case.

The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: Survey for 2002

This instalment of the Survey considers the decision in the Volga case, and notes administrative and organisational developments within the ITLOS during the year 2002.

The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: Survey for 2001

This instalment of the Survey considers the decisions in the Grand Prince and MOX Plant cases, and notes administrative and organisational developments within ITLOS during the year 2001.

International Environmental Law and the United Kingdom

Some environmental issues are purely national in scope. Many others, however, have an international dimension. Thus, to the extent that law has a role to play in dealing with environmental issues, international law as well as national law is required. The aim of this paper to look at the development and implementation of a number of selected areas of international environmental law in relation to the United Kingdom (UK). The UKs international legal obligations are an important factor, although only one of several factors, in shaping the domestic environmental policy and legislation of the UK. At the same time domestic policy considerations also affect the degree to which the UK is prepared to assume international legal obligations and, as we shall see, the assumption of such obligations is almost entirely voluntary. The paper thus has a double focus looking both at the contribution the UK has made and is making to the development of international environmental law and at the impact of international environmental law on domestic environmental policy and law in the UK. The remainder of this introductory section will explain, particularly for the benefit of readers without any knowledge of international law, how international environmental law (a branch of international law) is developed, and then list the areas of international environmental law which have been chosen for examination and explain the reasons for this choice. The rest of this paper will then examine the areas chosen from the point of view of the double focus just referred to.

Dispute Settlement in the Law of the Sea: Survey for 2013

This is the latest in a series of annual surveys reviewing dispute settlement in the law of the sea, both under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and outside the framework of the Convention. The main developments during 2013 were the delivery of a judgment by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) finding that it lacked jurisdiction in the Louisa case; an order of provisional measures by the ITLOS in the Arctic Sunrise case; and the initiation of a record 10 new cases. These and other developments are reviewed in detail.

The Persisting Problem of Non-compliance with the Law of the Sea Convention: Disorder in the Oceans

AbstractThere is widespread and persisting non-compliance in relation to many of the provisions of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. This is a matter of serious concern because it undermines the integrity and legitimacy of the Convention, causes disputes and harms the marine environment. To remedy the situation, more use should be made of existing mechanisms to induce compliance, especially the possibilities of compulsory dispute settlement under Part XV of the Convention, retorsion and counter-measures, and by developing compliance mechanisms for other treaties that indirectly help to promote compliance with the Convention. In some cases assistance in capacity building may also be desirable.

The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: Survey for 2003

This instalment of the Survey considers the order for provisional measures made in the Land Reclamation case, and notes administrative and organizational developments within the ITLOS during the year 2003.