227
The present chapter will focus, instead, on the merits of the dispute, and specifically its maritime aspects.
8
In doing so, it will explore, on the one hand, various
issues concerning the law of maritime delimitation and, on the other, the problem of
the legal nature and regime of Slovenia’s “junction” to the high seas. These issues
are of particular interests due to, among other things, the fact that Croatia has apparently accepted at least “a large part” of the Final Award, while still insisting on the
resumption of bilateral negotiations.
9
The chapter argues that, whatever path the two
States will choose to follow in the next months, the Final Award should, and most
likely will, provide the basis for the final resolution of the dispute.
This chapter will be structured as follows. First, an overview will be given of the
dispute and of previous, bilateral attempts to resolve it (Sect. 2). This will be followed by an examination of the Final Award of 29 June 2017 and the issue of maritime boundary delimitation, first with regard to the Bay of Piran (Sect. 3) and then
with regard to the waters outside the Bay, in the southeastern part of the Gulf of
Trieste (Sect. 4). Section 5 will then consider how the Arbitral Tribunal resolved the
issue of what the Arbitration Agreement called “Slovenia’s junction to the High
Sea” (Sect. 5). The Arbitral Tribunal’s interpretation and coordination of the relevant provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS),
rules of customary law and other principles, in its attempt to resolve questions characterized by the uncertainty of the applicable international regime, on the one hand,
and, on the other, by relatively unprecedented aspects or by the unique geographical
features of the area, will also be discussed. The chapter will close with some concluding observations.
2 Overview of the Dispute and Previous Attempts
at Resolution
Following the dissolution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY), a
series of territorial and maritime disputes have emerged between the Adriatic States
that were once a part of the Yugoslav Federation.
10
Given the particular configuration of the northern and eastern Adriatic coastlines (the former including the Gulf of
Trieste, while the latter is riddled with bays, inlets, islands and promontories at the
borders between the various States in question), it is not surprising that the maritime
8 No reference will be made here to the solution reached by the Arbitral Tribunal’s in respect of the
course of the land boundary in the lower Dragonja river Region (i.e., an area of approximately
6.2 km
2 , in which the four disputed villages of Škrile, Veliki Mlin, Bužin and Škudelin are located),
despite its close connection with the Tribunal’s determinations concerning the course of the maritime boundary in the Bay of Piran. See Croatia/Slovenia, paras 738–770.
9 The Croatian Prime Minister has apparently declared that the 90% of the Award is acceptable for
Croatia: http://www.rtvslo.si/news-in-english/erjavec-croatia-s-partial-acceptance-of-the-awardis-not-acceptable/442750.
10 For a general overview of the different claims made by the successor States of the former
Yugoslavia, see Blake and Topalovic (1996).
The Law of Maritime Delimitation in the Croatia/Slovenia Final Award
The present chapter will focus, instead, on the merits of the dispute, and specifically its maritime aspects.
8
In doing so, it will explore, on the one hand, various
issues concerning the law of maritime delimitation and, on the other, the problem of
the legal nature and regime of Slovenia’s “junction” to the high seas. These issues
are of particular interests due to, among other things, the fact that Croatia has apparently accepted at least “a large part” of the Final Award, while still insisting on the
resumption of bilateral negotiations.
9
The chapter argues that, whatever path the two
States will choose to follow in the next months, the Final Award should, and most
likely will, provide the basis for the final resolution of the dispute.
This chapter will be structured as follows. First, an overview will be given of the
dispute and of previous, bilateral attempts to resolve it (Sect. 2). This will be followed by an examination of the Final Award of 29 June 2017 and the issue of maritime boundary delimitation, first with regard to the Bay of Piran (Sect. 3) and then
with regard to the waters outside the Bay, in the southeastern part of the Gulf of
Trieste (Sect. 4). Section 5 will then consider how the Arbitral Tribunal resolved the
issue of what the Arbitration Agreement called “Slovenia’s junction to the High
Sea” (Sect. 5). The Arbitral Tribunal’s interpretation and coordination of the relevant provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS),
rules of customary law and other principles, in its attempt to resolve questions characterized by the uncertainty of the applicable international regime, on the one hand,
and, on the other, by relatively unprecedented aspects or by the unique geographical
features of the area, will also be discussed. The chapter will close with some concluding observations.
2 Overview of the Dispute and Previous Attempts
at Resolution
Following the dissolution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY), a
series of territorial and maritime disputes have emerged between the Adriatic States
that were once a part of the Yugoslav Federation.
10
Given the particular configuration of the northern and eastern Adriatic coastlines (the former including the Gulf of
Trieste, while the latter is riddled with bays, inlets, islands and promontories at the
borders between the various States in question), it is not surprising that the maritime
8 No reference will be made here to the solution reached by the Arbitral Tribunal’s in respect of the
course of the land boundary in the lower Dragonja river Region (i.e., an area of approximately
6.2 km
2 , in which the four disputed villages of Škrile, Veliki Mlin, Bužin and Škudelin are located),
despite its close connection with the Tribunal’s determinations concerning the course of the maritime boundary in the Bay of Piran. See Croatia/Slovenia, paras 738–770.
9 The Croatian Prime Minister has apparently declared that the 90% of the Award is acceptable for
Croatia: http://www.rtvslo.si/news-in-english/erjavec-croatia-s-partial-acceptance-of-the-awardis-not-acceptable/442750.
10 For a general overview of the different claims made by the successor States of the former
Yugoslavia, see Blake and Topalovic (1996).
The Law of Maritime Delimitation in the Croatia/Slovenia Final Award