Page 217 - Economia Azul - versão: inglês

transformation in the relationship of States in its agendas. Then, in 1956, a text by the Exclusive Economic Zone) has not been es- are, and will continue to be, the legacy of all
with maritime spaces and the exploitation UN International Law Commission - ILC - tablished. Still, the imprecision in the delim- human beings” (BERNAERTS, 2006).
of natural resources, living and non-living. was approved, calling for a Conference itation of the Continental Shelf constitutes In 1967, the Ambassador of Malta to
(SLOUKA, 1968). The proclamation iden- on the Law of the Sea scheduled for 1958 another failure of the Conference. the United Nations, Arvid Pardo, during the
tifies and originates two areas that did not (O’CORNNELL, 1982, p. 22). In view of the unsuccessful results of the XXII session of the General Assembly, high-
exist until then: the Continental Shelf and The First Conference on the Law of the First Conference, it was established a new lighted the need to regulate the exploration
the Fishing Zone (currently called the Exclu- Sea took place in Geneva in 1958 and result- meeting to take place to solve these prob- and exploitation of sea and ocean beds
sive Economic Zone). The argument for the ed in four conventions dealing with the Terri- lems, taking place in 1960, with the Second beyond the limits of national jurisdiction
creation of the continental shelf was based torial Sea and the Contiguous Zone; the High United Nations Conference on the Law of (PARDO, 1968). As a result, the General As-
on the scientific recognition of the fact that Seas; the Continental Shelf; and the Conven- the Sea (DEAN, 1960). Once the work was sembly, through Resolution 2,340, created
the North American mainland does not end tion on Fisheries and the Conservation of Bio- started, it was noticed that the position of the Seabed Commission, which, in 1973,
at the maritime boundary but extends into logical Resources on the High Seas. the States remained very varied, as the short presented a draft of an international treaty
the sea in a natural extension of the coast. In relation to the Convention on Fishing time between the two conferences was not to regulate the use of the seas.
Thus, the US claimed that the soil and sub- and Conservation of Biological Resources enough to significantly change the overview After 11 sessions and numerous de-
soil of the American coast were part of the of the High Seas , the text represented a of the first conference (GUEDES, Op. Cit., p. bates and amendments, on December 10,
10
country’s land extension and, therefore, had milestone in the attempt to universalize in- 48-49). For this reason, the Second United 1982 in the city of Montego Bay, Jamaica,
jurisdictional rights over them . As for fish- ternational norms referring to the rational Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea the United Nations Convention on the Law
8
ing zones, Truman argued that a coastal management of marine natural resources was unable to produce any binding docu- of the Sea (UNCLOS) was finally signed,
State should have some jurisdiction over the (BASTOS, 2005, p. 173). This Convention ment regulating the seas. with 130 votes in favor, 4 votes against and
11
natural resources of the adjacent High Seas establishes general principles for the regula- Although the Geneva Conventions 17 abstentions. Despite almost a decade
13
for the purpose of exploiting and controlling tion and preservation of fisheries and other were fundamentals at the time, in the fol- of discussions, some disagreements in the
these, in particular fisheries . natural resources, in addition to making it lowing years they began to be the subject regulation of the exploitation of the seabed,
9
The importance of this declaration is possible for coastal States to adopt unilater- of numerous criticisms, mainly due to their of non-living resources of the soil and sub-
based on the non-contestation by interna- al measures in order to conserve biological failure to delimit the breadth of the terri- soil beyond the spaces under national juris-
tional society. This was perhaps due to the resources and to fish in the high seas adja- torial sea and establish more precise rules diction, the so-called Area, made even the
US hegemony at the time and/or due to cent to their territorial sea (Article 7). for the Continental Shelf. The use of the countries that signed the Convention delay
these claims not restricting or harming the In summary, it can be said that the 1958 seas was advancing at an accelerated rate in ratify it or not. Its entry into force would
activities of other countries (BUSTAMAN- Geneva Conference on the Law of the Sea and conventions could not discipline the only occur one year after the 60th ratifica-
TE, 1949). The years following the Truman had the great merit of universally regulating new realities that emerged (BASTOS, Op. tion, which occurred with the deposit of
proclamation were marked by a notable legal issues related to the sea. The four texts Cit., p. 189) 12 Guyana accession in November 1993, with

evolution in the regulation of the seas. adopted can be considered landmarks of in- The issue of the Continental Shelf and the the UN General Assembly, that is, almost 11
Several other States began, as in the afore- ternational law, as they achieved significant seabed has become the newest topic of de- years after its signature in Montego Bay. 14
mentioned proclamation, to declare the success and managed to unify and clarify bate on the international stage. The origin of The importance of UNCLOS for the reg-
existence of their continental shelves and historical themes. Despite all this progress, the Third United Nations Conference on the ulation of the seas – and for all internation-
fishing zones (GUEDES, Op. Cit., p. .38). it was not possible to delimit the extent of Law of the Sea is related, above all, to the al law – is revealed not only in the size of
In this sense, the United Nations made the territorial sea. Furthermore, the problem exploitation of the seabed. A major interna- the text produced, but in the fact that it has
a great effort to unify and universalize the of fisheries remained unresolved since the tional concern arose in the 1960s regarding managed to achieve its main and ambitious
various unilateral state acts and, from 1949 convention was not able to define precisely this space, its delimitation and legal nature. objectives: to transform a wide range of top-
onwards, the General Assembly began to the limits and state powers on the subject. In 1966, US President Lyndon Johnson even ics to be deliberated – by number of par-
include issues on the regulation of the seas A fishing zone (or as it is currently called, an stated that “deep waters and ocean floors ticipating States – in a single internationally

214 BLUE ECONOMY The Regulation of the Sea: Consolidation and Perspectives 215