Seline Trevisanut

The Principle of Non-Refoulement and the De-Territorialization of Border Control at Sea

In dealing with this human tragedy, destination states have adopted comparable policies aimed at preventing the arrival of irregular migrants by performing border control outside their territory. States of destination have commonly used measures such as (joint) patrolling, interception of irregular migrants on the high seas and in the territorial waters of third states , redirection of intercepted migrants to the coasts of third states, etc. This practice consists in a “de-territorialized border control”. This detachment of regulatory authority from a specific territory has consequences on the applicable legal framework, in particular in relation to the safeguards the individuals submitted to the control activities are entitled to, such as the principle of non-refoulement.The starting point of this paper is that a new approach to police activities at sea is much needed in relation to irregular migration. In fact, to migrate is not an illicit activity. The smugglers of the migrants are the ones carrying out an illicit activity at sea . Migrants perpetrate an illicit act once they irregularly trespass or attempt to trespass an international border. Consequently, the measures coastal states take at sea in order to prevent and control migrants’ arrival qualify as border control actions and the relevant legal framework then applies.The principle of non refoulement is an important element of the legal regime applicable to states’ border management and is a fundamental yardstick for the de-territorialization of border control.

Climate Change and Energy in the Arctic—The Role of the European Union

The effects of global warming in the Arctic region present a particular challenge for the European Union ( EU ), which seeks to profile itself as a leader in responding to climate change. Although the EU strives to prioritize climate protection, the Arctic region remains one of the EU ’s major suppliers of energy, particularly oil and gas. The EU must thus strike a balance between climate change mitigation and adaptation, and energy security. The present article analyses the developments of the EU position in this field, particularly in light of the COP 21 negotiations, and the more recent 2016 Integrated European Union Policy for the Arctic. In doing so it seeks to explore to what extent the EU truly is fulfilling its own leadership aspirations in the field of climate change and energy in the Arctic.

Twenty Years of Prompt Release of Vessels: Admissibility, Jurisdiction, and Recent Trends

ABSTRACT The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) has a residual compulsory jurisdiction regarding the prompt release of seized vessels. This procedure is one of the novelties introduced in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and is unique in the international judicial universe because of both its procedural characteristics and its functions. This article highlights how prompt release cases do not necessarily stem from a dispute. This has a direct consequence for those whose interests the procedure protects and who can submit an application. The last part of this article discusses the recent trend where the release of vessels and crews has been requested in the context of provisional measures applications.

Energy from the Sea: Introduction

One of the main challenges of our time is to be able to guarantee energy supply at a reasonable price. Policy makers, international institutions and the private sector increasingly look to the oceans as a significant source of energy. Consequently, activities at sea multiply and sometimes become riskier. For example, the oil and gas industry is reaching out towards deeper waters and more remote exploration targets. Moreover, energy security and efficiency imperatives, coupled with climate change mitigation mechanisms, push the development of marine renewable energy technologies. These changes may have a significant impact on the marine environment and also on the continuity of traditional maritime uses, such as navigation and fishing. Several studies have tackled energy issues in recent years, mainly from the viewpoint of international trade and investment law,1 or within the framework of the climate change regime in relation to the promotion of renewable energy technologies and the control of greenhouse gas emissions.2 Little has been done so far to put together these different perspectives and to frame the discussion within general international law. This is of particular relevance in relation to energy projects in marine areas, whose planning and operation are subject to the international law of the sea. The law of the sea provides the legal framework

The Role of Private Actors in Offshore Energy: Shifting Models of Participation

The role of private actors in the offshore energy industry has expanded with regard to both the law-making processes and the implementation of the relevant legal framework. This article critically examines the role private actors are playing in the offshore energy sector in order to delineate some trends in the ways in which private actors act and interact at the international level. It focuses in particular on instances where there is a delegation of regulatory powers or the implementation duties from the international and supranational level to the private actors. The article ultimately strives to identify which model(s) of participation by private actors the offshore energy sector is developing.

The Exercise of Administrative Functions by ITLOS: A Comment on Prompt Release Case Law

ITLOS has residual compulsory jurisdiction in cases of prompt release of vessels. This procedure is one of the novelties introduced by UNCLOS and is unique in the international judicial universe because of both its procedural characteristics and its functions. This paper analyzes the prompt release case law of ITLOS in order to sketch the nature of the functions exercised by the Tribunal in this very peculiar procedure. It highlights the administrative nature of ITLOS’ functions in this specific context.

Intellectual Property Rights Beyond National Jurisdiction: Outlining a Regime for Patenting Products Based on Marine Genetic Resources of the Deep-Sea Bed and High Seas

This paper examines both the legal status of marine genetic resources located on the deep-sea bed (MGRs) in international law and the legal regime of intellectual property rights (IPRs), specifically drawing attention to patents on inventions that may derive from MGRs’ exploitation. In this endeavor, it analyses the legal status of MGRs at the juncture of three overlapping legal regimes: the Law of the Sea Convention, the TRIPs Agreement, and the Convention of Biological Diversity (including the recently adopted Nagoya Protocol). Against the backdrop of this analysis, the article concludes with the suggestion for an ad hoc regime that manages MGRs and guarantees intellectual property rights.