Unclos 1994 Implementation Agreement

On 1 February 2011, the Seabed Disputes Chamber of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ICJ) issued an opinion on the legal responsibilities and obligations of States parties to the Convention with regard to the promotion of activities in the area in accordance with Part XI of the Convention and the 1994 Convention. [21] The opinion was issued following a formal request from the International Seabed Authority following two previous requests from the Authority`s Legal and Technical Commission by the Republics of Nauru and Tonga regarding the proposed activities (a work plan for the study of polymetalate nodules) that were submitted in the area by two State-subsidized contractors – Nauru Ocean Resources Inc. (sponsored by the Republic of Nauru) and Tonga Offshore Mining Ltd (sponsored) 1994, 1995, 1 by the Kingdom of Tonga). The expert opinion set out the international responsibilities and obligations of the carrier States and the Authority to ensure that sponsored activities do not adversely affect the marine environment, in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Convention, Part XI, the provisions of the Authority, icj jurisprudence, other international environmental agreements and principle 15 of the Rio Declaration. [22] The last meeting of the Secretary-General`s consultations was held from 31 May to 3 June 1994. The main objective of this last round of consultations was the harmonization of the text into the different language versions of the draft resolution and the draft agreement on the implementation of Part XI of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The meeting was held on the draft resolution and draft agreement of 15 April 1994, which was revised on the basis of discussions during the previous round of consultations and a correction of the document of 23 May 1994. Two documents (SG/LOS/CRP.1 and SG/LOS/CRP.2) containing proposals for amendments prepared by the secretariat were also presented at the meeting in order to facilitate the harmonization of the language versions of the text. [MYTHOS]: The problems identified by President Reagan in 1983 were not solved by the 1994 agreement on deep-water mining.24 Among other things, the 1994 agreement: consultations indicated that Member States wished to convene, from 27 to 29 July 1994, a forty-eighth session taken up by the United Nations General Assembly to adopt the resolution. They also called for the agreement to be launched immediately upon signature after the adoption of the resolution. (ii) an interpretative convention consisting of agreements on the interpretation and application of the convention; In 1960, the United Nations held the Second Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCS II); However, the Geneva conference, which was held for six weeks, did not result in any new agreement. [12] In general, developing and third world countries participated only as clients, allies or members of the United States or the Soviet Union, with no significant separate voice.

[14] During the first phase of this phase, consultations identified nine problematic issues: costs to States Parties; the company; decision-making; the Review Conference; technology transfer; limitation of production; compensation fund; the financial terms of the contract; and environmental aspects….