DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Role of Geological and Geomorphological Factors in the Delimitation of Maritime Boundaries

해양경계획정에서 지질 및 지형적 요소의 효과에 관한 고찰

  • 양희철 (한국해양연구원 정책연구실) ;
  • 박성욱 (한국해양연구원 정책연구실) ;
  • 정현수 (한국해양연구원 정책연구실) ;
  • 이희일 (한국해양연구원 해양환경연구본부)
  • Published : 2007.03.31

Abstract

A reference to natural prolongation appeared for the first time in the North Sea Judgement. Although it was not suggested that the concept of natural prolongation would automatically allow for the fixing of a continental shelf boundary, that concept encouraged States to request international tribunals to determine continental shelf boundaries on the basis of the geological and geomorphological features of the seabed. In the Libya v. Malta Case, however, the rejection of geological and geomorphological factors was total. Especially, Natural prolongation was the then checkmated as a relevant fact in delimitation between coasts situated less than 400 nm. apart. There can be no doubt that, in several disputed cases, prominent geomorphological variations are simply ignored ; nevertheless, there are also a few agreements where geological and geomorphological characteristics come into play and, to a certain extent, affect maritime boundaries. Physical characteristics of sea-bed are generally given serious consideration in the boundary delimitation such as the final negotiated boundary of the Australia-Indonesia Continental Shelf boundary Agreement(Timor and Arafura seas) which follows the continental slope bordering the Timor Trench.

Keywords

References

  1. 권문상. 1989. 해양경계획정에 관한 연구. 박사학위논문, 경희대학교. 265 p
  2. 馬英九. 1986. 從新海洋法論魚臺列嶼與東海劃界問題. 中正書局, 台北. 266 p
  3. 北京大學法律係國際法敎硏室編. 1974. 海洋法資料匯編. 北京, 人民出版社. 547 p
  4. 梁熙喆. 2006. 從國際海洋劃界原則和實踐論中國EEZ與大陸 架劃界問題. 法學博士學位論文, 國立臺灣大學校. 524 p
  5. 袁古洁. 2001. 國際海洋劃界的理論與實踐. 法律出版社, 北京. 309 p.
  6. Adede, Ao. 1987. The System for Settlement of Disputes under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Martinus Nijhoff. Dordrecht. 285 p
  7. Charney, J.I. and L.M. Alexander. 1993. International Maritime Boundaries, Vol. I. Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht. 549 p
  8. Charney, J.I. and L.M. Alexander. 1993. International Maritime Boundaries, Vol. II. Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht. 551- 1181 p
  9. Evans, M.D. 1989. Relevant Circumstances and Maritime Delimitation. Clarendon Press, Oxford. 257 p
  10. Hollick, A.L. 1981. US Foreign Policy and The Law of the Sea, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton. 496 p
  11. Hsu, R.T.S. 1983. Rational Approach to Marine Delimitation. Ocean Dev. Int. Law, 13, 103-113 https://doi.org/10.1080/00908328309545722
  12. Jagota, S.P. 1985. Maritime Boundary. Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht. 388 p
  13. Koh, Tommy T.B. and Shanmugan Jayakumar. 1985. Negotiating Process of the United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea. p. 68-86. In: United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982: A Commentary. ed. by M.H. Nordquist. Martinus Nijhoff Pub., Dordrecht
  14. Kolb, R. 2003. Case Law on Equitable Maritime Delimitation: Digest and Commentaries. Nijhoff, Hague. 1184 p
  15. Nandan, Satya N. and Shabtai Rosenne. 1993. UN Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982, Vol. II. Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht. 1040 p
  16. O'Connell, D.P. 1982. The International Law of the Sea, Vol. 1. ed. by I.A. Shearer. Clarendon Press, Oxford. 634 p
  17. Tanaka, Y. 2006. Predictability and Flexibility in the Law of Maritime Delimitation. Hart Publishing, Oxford and Portland. 425 p

Cited by

  1. A suggestions of equitable solution on the maritime demarcation between South Korea and China vol.1, pp.46, 2016, https://doi.org/10.17949/jneac.1.46.201603.005
  2. The Role of the Sedimentary Deposits (silt line) from Rivers Flowing into the Sea in the Yellow Sea Maritime Boundary vol.31, pp.1, 2009, https://doi.org/10.4217/OPR.2009.31.1.031