The "Arctic Exception" in the law of the sea convention: A contribution to safer navigation in the northwest passage?

Ocean Development and International Law

Volumn 42, Issue 1-2, 2011, Pages 22-52

  Bartenstein, Kristin ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ LAVAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Arctic exception; Canada; Navigation; Northwest passage

Indexed keywords

ICE COVER; LAW OF THE SEA; MARINE ENVIRONMENT; MARINE POLICY; NAVIGATION;

ARCTIC OCEAN; CANADA; CANADIAN ARCTIC; NORTHWEST PASSAGE;

EID: 79952213524     PISSN: 00908320     EISSN: 15210642     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00908320.2011.542104     Document Type: Article

References (173)

1. Regarding climate change in general, see IPCC, Fourth Assessment Report: ClimateChange 2007, available at www.ipcc.ch/publicationsanddata/publicationsanddatareports.htm#1.
2. On the increase in temperature: see, particularly, Working Group I on the Physical Science Basis, chapter 3
3. and, on ice cover, see Working Group I on the Physical Science Basis, chapter 3. As to the latter, data collected by the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center is even more alarming, indicating that they expect ice-free summers in a few decades.
4. See "Arctic Sea Ice Extent Remains Low; 2009 Sees Third-Lowest Mark," press release, 6 October 2009, available at nsidc.org/news/press/20091005minimumpr.html
5. These port state powers have been developed and codified in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 10 December 1982, 1834 U.N.T.S. 3 (hereafter, LOSC).
6. See, generally, S. Lalonde, "Increased Traffic Through Canadian Arctic Waters: Canada's State of Readiness," Revue Juridique Themis 38 (2004): 49-124.
7. For a broad overview over the different problems that Canada faces, see M. Byers and S. Lalonde, "Who Controls the Northwest Passage?" Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 42 (2009): 1133.
8. United States, Presidential Proclamation No. 5030, Federal Register, Vol. 48, 1983, 605 (codified at Code of Federal Rules, Vol. 3, sec. 5030).
9. B. Hoyle, "The United States Government Perspective," in The United States Without the Law of the Sea Treaty: Opportunities and Costs, ed. L. Juda (Wakefield, RI: Times Press, 1983), 139-143.
10. as cited in T. McDorman, Saltwater Neighbors (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), 105.
11. C. Lamson, "Arctic Shipping, Marine Safety and Environmental Protection," Marine Policy 11 (1987): 3-4.
12. S. Rosenne and A. Yankov, United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982: A Commentary, Vol. IV (Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff, 1991), 393.
13. For example, as a consequence of the Torrey Canyon disaster in 1967, the International Convention Relating to Intervention on the High Seas in Cases of Oil Pollution Casualties, 29 November 1969, 970 U.N.T.S. 211, was completed. As a consequence of the Exxon Valdez disaster in 1989, there was adopted the 1992 amendment to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL), 2 November 1973, 1340 U.N.T.S. 184, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 Relating to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 17 February 1978, 1340 U.N.T.S. 61 making the double hull mandatory.
14. E. Franckx, MaritimeClaims in the Arctic:Canadian and Russian Perspectives (Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff, 1993), 76.
15. D. M. McRae, "The Negotiation of Article 234," in Politics of the Northwest Passage, ed. F. Griffiths (Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1987), 98, 102.
16. Franckx, supra note 10, at 75 ff and, particularly, 78.
17. In a decree dated 15 January 1985, the USSR Council of Ministers adopted a list of the geographical coordinates of the points defining the position of the straight baselines in the Arctic Ocean, including major Russian Arctic straits (Novaya Zemlya, Severnaya Zemlya, and Novosibirskiye Ostrova) into Russian internal waters according to the still held position that these straits are national straits subject to full Russian sovereignty. For more information on this issue.
18. see R. D. Brubaker, "Straits in the Russian Arctic," Ocean Development and International Law 32 (2001): 263.
19. and R. D. Brubaker, The Russian Arctic Straits (Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, 2005), 58-60.
20. See letter dated 17 December 1973 and written by the Bureau of Legal Affairs, reproduced in E. G. Lee, "Canadian Practice in International Law During 1973 as Reflected Mainly in Public Correspondence and Statements of the Department of External Affairs," Canadian Yearbook of International Law 13 (1974): 272, 277, 279.
21. D. Pharand, "The Arctic Waters and the Northwest Passage: A Final Revisit," Ocean Development and International Law 38 (2007): 3, 11, referred to this letter as the "first official Canadian claim of internal waters."
22. Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act, S.C. 1970, c. 47 (currently, R.S., 1985, c. A-12) (hereafter AWPPA).
23. See United States, "Department of State Statement on Government of Canada's Bills on Limits of the Territorial Sea, Fisheries and Pollution," International Legal Materials 9 (1970): 605, 605-606.
24. The main concern of the United States was that the Canadian initiative could be viewed as a precedent for other states' assertion of jurisdiction threatening the freedom of the seas. Yet, the United States shared the Canadian desire to prevent the pollution of the Arctic, even though it advocated the multilateral way and thus condemned the Canadian unilateral measure with strong words.
25. That the Canadian government was uncertain of the consistency of its new law with international law can be deduced from statements made by then prime minister Trudeau who asserted the "Parliament's authority" to ensure pollution prevention in the Arctic by underlining the necessity of and Canada's contribution to the "development" of the international law in the field of protecting areas beyond national sovereignty. This development of international law can only be meant to ensure that the international law allows states, in the future, to take preventivemeasures even though they infringe on the freedom of the sea.
26. See, for the verbatim records, "Transcript of Prime Minister Trudeau's Remarks to the Press Following the Introduction of Legislation on Arctic Pollution, Territorial Sea and Fishing Zones in the Canadian House of Commons," 8 April 1970, International Legal Materials 9 (1970): 600.
27. On the Canadian functionalim and its rationale, see R. Huebert, "Article 234 and Marine Pollution Jurisdiction in the Arctic," in The Law of the Sea and Polar Maritime Delimitation and Jurisdiction, ed. A. G. Oude Elferink and D. R. Rothwell (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 2001), 249, 251.
28. Canada, "Declaration Recognizing as Compulsory the Jurisdiction of the Court," 7 April 1970, International Legal Materials 9 (1970): 598-599.
29. I. Brownlie, "Survey of International Customary Rules of Environmental Protection," Natural Resources Journal 13 (1973): 179, 185.
30. United States Proclamation No. 2667, 28 September 1945, 10 Federal Register 12305, 2 October 1945.
31. McRae, supra note 11, at 105.
32. M. H. Nordquist, United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982: A Commentary, Vol. I (Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff, 1985), 70.
33. McRae, supra note 11, at 103.
34. Brownlie, supra note 20, at 185.
35. McRae, supra note 11, at 108.
36. Hubert, supra note 18, at 255.
37. McRae, supra note 11, at 111.
38. McDorman, supra note 6, at 97.
39. See discussion of this question below in the Article 233 subsection.
40. For an excellent review of the U.S. and Canadian views on the issue of the legal status of the Northwest Passage.
41. see McDorman, supra note 6, at 225-254.
42. McRae, supra note 11, at 110.
43. L. Legault, "Protecting the Marine Environment," in Canada and the New Internationalism, ed. J. Holmes and J. Kirton (Toronto: Center for International Studies, University of Toronto, 1988), 99, 107.
44. See McRae, supra note 11, at 113
45. Rosenne and Yankov, supra note 8, at 398.
46. Legault, supra note 32, at 107.
47. See "Commentary-The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the Agreement on Implementation of Part XI," reproduced from U.S. Department of State Dispatch Supplement, Volume 6, Supplement No. 1 (February 1995) as United States, "President's Transmittal of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the Agreement Relating to the Implementation of Part XI to the US Senate with Commentary," International Legal Materials 34 (1995): 1393, 1419.
48. For an instructive analysis of the compatibility of Russian state practice with Article 234.
49. see Brubaker, Russian Arctic Straits, supra note 13, at 79-109.
50. Guidelines for Ships Operating in Arctic Ice-covered Waters, 23 December 2002, MSC/Cir.1056/MEPC/Circ. 399.
51. Brubaker, "Straits," supra note 13, at 227.
52. Pharand, supra note 14, at 47.
53. Legault, supra note 32, at 107.
54. AWPPA, supra note 15, in 1970 s. 3 read
55. B. Oxman, "Legal Regimes of the Arctic," American Society of International Law Proceedings 40 (1988): 315, 333-334.
56. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 23 May 1969, 1155 U.N.T.S. 331, art. 31, para. 1.
57. Ibid., art. 31, para. 4.
58. Ibid., art.32.
59. Rosenne and Yankov, supra note 8, at 397.
60. LOSC, supra note 2, arts. 7, 142, 145, 211, 220, and 221.
61. D. McRae and D. J. Goundrey, "Environmental Jurisdiction in Arctic Waters: The Extent of Article 234," University of British Columbia Law Review 16 (1982): 197, 221.
62. Brubaker, "Straits," supra note 13, at 227.
63. McRae, supra note 11, at 108 and 109.
64. E. McKean, The New Oxford American Dictionary, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 1912: "relative adverb used in reference to a place."
65. M. Moliner, Diccionario de uso del espanol, 2nd ed. (Madrid: Gredos, 2001), 1035: "expresa una relacíon de lugar."
66. M.-È. de Villers, Multidictionnaire, 4th ed. (Montreal: Éditions Québec Amérique, 2003), 881: "Cette conjunction marque la simultanéité de deux actions."
67. For an instructive discussion of these two possibilities, see McRae and Goundrey, supra note 48, at 216 et seq.
68. LOSC, supra note 2, art. 211(6(a)).
69. Subsection on the Rights Granted to the Coastal State by Article 234.
70. Rosenne and Yankov, supra note 8, at 397.
71. Canada Shipping Act, 2001, S.C., 2001, chap. 26.
72. Brubaker, Russian Arctic Straits, supra note 13, at 55.
73. LOSC, supra note 2, art. 92.
74. Ibid., arts. 32, 95, and 96.
75. Rosenne and Yankov, supra note 8, at 396.
76. Ibid., at 393.
77. See infra, subsection on the Autonomous Unilateral Adoption.
78. See Canada, House of Commons, Standing Committee on External Affairs and National Defense, Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence, 29 April 1970, No. 25, 18.
79. Canada, Territorial Sea Geographical Coordinates (Area 7) Order, S.O.R./85-872.
80. Canada, House of Commons, Debates, Vol. 5, 1985 (10 September 1985), at 6463 (Right Hon. Joe Clark, secretary of state for external affairs).
81. The actual extent of this blow is, given the ambiguous expression mutatis mutandis, far from being clear.
82. See Rosenne and Yankov, supra note 8, at 391.
83. McRae, supra note 11, at 105.
84. LOSC, supra note 2, art. 37.
85. Pharand, The Northwest Passage Arctic Straits (Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff, 1984), 119.
86. McRae, supra note 11, at 110.
87. Pharand, supra note 72, at 118-120.
88. McRae, supra note 11, at 110.
89. See note 67 and accompanying text.
90. Clark, supra note 68, at 6463.
91. Fisheries Case (United Kingdom v. Norway), [1951] I.C.J. Rep. 116.
92. LOSC supra note 2, art. 8, para. 1.
93. Ibid., art. 2, para. 1.
94. Canada became a party to the LOSC on 7 December 2003.
95. The only exception to this principle is laid down in Article 8, paragraph 2, of the LOSC which reads: "Where the establishment of a straight baseline in accordance with themethod set forth in article 7 has the effect of enclosing as internal waters areas which had not previously been considered as such, a right of innocent passage as provided in this Convention shall exist in those waters." It is not clear if this rule applies also to internal waters resulting from customary straight baselines.
96. See T. L. McDorman, "In the Wake of the Polar Sea-Canadian Jurisdiction and the Northwest Passage," Cahiers de droit 27 (1986): 623, 631.
97. McDorman, supra note 6, at 235
98. Pharand, supra note 14, at 9-13.
99. State Department File No. P86 0019-8641, quoted in U.S. Department of State, Limits in the Seas, United States Responses to Excessive National Maritime Claims, No. 112 (9 March 1992), 29.
100. British High Commission Note No. 90/86 of 9 July 1986, quoted in ibid., 29-30.
101. In this sense, see also Pharand, supra note 14, at 12.
102. Among other authors, see J. C. Kraska, "The Law of the Sea Convention and the Northwest Passage," International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 22 (2007): 275, who defends the U.S. position.
103. The Canadian position is supported by among others, Pharand, supra note 14.
104. D. R. Rothwell, "The Canadian-U.S. Northwest Passage Dispute: A Reassessment," Cornell International Law Journal 26 (1993): 331.
105. and D. M. McRae, "Arctic Sovereignty? What Is at Stake?" Behind the Headlines 64 (2007): 1.
106. See Pharand, supra note 14, at 13.
107. and McRae, supra note 88, at 13.
108. A. Proelß and T. Müller, "The Legal Regime of the Arctic Ocean," Zeitschrift für ausländisches ̈offentliches Recht und V̈olkerrecht 68 (2008): 651, 660.
109. Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone, 29 April 1958, 516 U.N.T.S. 205, art. 5(2).
110. Proelß and Müller, supra note 90.
111. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, supra note 42, art. 28.
112. The establishment of a "different intention" allowing for a retroactive application of the LOSC seems unlikely.
113. LOSC, supra note 2, art. 21.
114. Ibid., art. 22, para. 3(a).
115. Ibid., art. 41, para. 4.
116. Ibid., art. 211, para. 5.
117. Ibid., art.211, para. 6(a)
118. Ibid., art. 211, para. 6(c).
119. McRae, supra note 11, at 108-109.
120. Ibid., at 108.
121. D. M. McRae, "Arctic Waters and Canadian Sovereignty," International Journal 38 (1983): 476, 479-480.
122. A. Blanco-Bazán, "Specific Regulations for Shipping and Environmental Protection in the Arctic: The Work of the International Maritime Organization," International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 24 (2009): 381, 383.
123. LOSC, supra note 2, art. 21, para. 2 (in the territorial sea). and art. 211, para. 6(c) (in a special area in the EEZ).
124. Ibid., arts. 42 and 44 (in an international strait).
125. AWPPA, supra note 15, s. 12, para. 1(b).
126. Arctic Shipping Pollution Prevention Regulations, C.R.C., c. 353, s. 26.
127. See U.S. Commentary, supra note 34, at 1419.
128. The impeding effect of the mandatory pilotage regime in the Torres Strait has been denied.
129. see S. Batemen and M. White, "Compulsory Pilotage in the Torres Strait: Overcoming Unacceptable Risks to a Sensitive Marine Environment," Ocean Development and International Law 40 (2009): 184, 195-196.
130. The United States, among others, made it clear, however, during discussions within IMO relating to the proposed pilotage requirement that the resolution to be adopted by IMO on that issue did not provide an international legal basis for a mandatory system of pilotage in the Torres Strait.
131. See Report of the Marine Environment Protection Committee at its 53rd session, MEPC 53/24, 18-22 July 2005, para. 8.33.2.
132. cited in J. Roberts, "Compulsory Pilotage in International Straits: The Torres Strait PSSA Proposal," Ocean Development and International Law 37 (2006): 93, 104.
133. AWPPA, supra note 15, s. 4 to 9.
134. LOSC, supra note 2, for the territorial sea: arts. 21, 22 (prescription) and arts. 24, 25, paras. 1, 2 as well as arts. 27 and 28 (enforcement).
135. for international straits: arts. 41, 42 (prescription) and 44 (enforcement).
136. for the EEZ: arts. 56 (prescription) and 73 (enforcement).
137. with regard to pollution: sec. 5 of part XII (prescription) and sec. 6 of part XII (enforcement).
138. Rosenne and Yankov, supra note 8, at 398.
139. LOSC, supra note 2, art. 61, para. 2.
140. Another difference seems to be referred to by Rosenne and Yankov, supra note 8, at 398.
141. Ibid., at 396.
142. LOSC, supra note 2, arts. 24, 25, 26, 141, 151, 152 et 227.
143. Rosenne and Yankov, supra note 8, at 396.
144. Brubaker, "Straits," supra note 13, at 235.
145. Brubaker, Russian Arctic Straits, supra note 13, at 55-56.
146. This seems to be the underlying rationale of Pharand's reasoning who takes for granted that "permitted regulations may be of a preventive nature and may, therefore, apply to the design, construction, manning, and equipment of foreign ships."
147. Pharand, supra note 72, at 108.
148. LOSC, supra note 2, arts. 17-26 and 45.
149. Ibid., arts. 37-44.
150. Ibid., arts. 58 and 87.
151. Ibid., art. 27, para. 4; art. 56, para. 2; art. 58, para. 3; art. 60, para. 3; art. 66, para. 3(a); art. 79, para. 5; art. 87, para. 2; art. 142, para. 1; art. 148; art. 267.
152. Ibid., arts. 58 and 87.
153. See McRae and Goundrey, supra note 48, at 221.
154. Brubaker, "Straits," supra note 13, at 227.
155. Rosenne and Yankov, supra note 8, at 397.
156. Brubaker, Russian Arctic Straits, supra note 13, at 57, acknowledges the possibility of this interpretation.
157. LOSC, supra note 2, art. 21, para. 1(f).
158. Ibid., art. 21, para. 4.
159. Ibid., art. 19, para. 2(h); art. 25, para. 1.
160. Ibid., art. 21, para. 2.
161. Ibid., art. 42, para. 1(b).
162. Ibid., art. 42, para. 2, to be read together with art. 44.
163. Pharand, supra note 72, at 108.
164. Guidelines, supra note 36.
165. See the draft Polar Code's Preamble with reference to Article 234, noted in Huebert, supra note 18, at 264.
166. J. Øystein, The IMO Guidelines for Ships Operating in Arctic Ice-Covered Waters-From Voluntary to Mandatory Tool for Navigation Safety and Environmental Protection? FNI-rapport 2/2007 (Polhøgda: Fridjof Nansen Institute, 2007), 9-10.
167. Guidelines, supra note 36, at P-1.2. and P-1.3.
168. International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1 November 1974, 1184 U.N.T.S. 277.
169. MARPOL Convention, supra note 9.
170. During its 53rd session, held from 22 to 26 February 2010, the Sub-Committee on Ship Design and Equipment (DE) established a working group "to further develop the draft International Code of safety for ships operating in polar waters (Polar Code)," see at www.imo.org/.
171. Brubaker, Russian Arctic Straits, supra note 13, at 227.
172. LOSC, supra note 2, art. 21, para. 2.
173. See also McRae, supra note 88, at 17.