But even before we look at SOLAS, MARPOL, COLREGS, etc. from the
perspective of MASS, a more significant question that merits an answer or at least
some clarity is the legal status of MASS in international law. In particular, there is
not yet resolution on two key issues: can such systems be considered “ships”
(“vessels”); and if so, which MASS further qualify as warships—a term of art
which has legal significance attached to it.
Are the ships without master and crew onboard still called ships? The rules are
similar for both manned and unmanned ships. Unmanned ships enjoy the same
passage rights as other ships. Ships cannot possibly be refused access to coastal
states’ waters on that ground that they are not crewed. By extrapolation, MASS
would enjoy similar rights of innocent passage as conventional ships.
111
The United States has been looking at the varied aspects associated with operations of autonomous ships for a number of years. The U.S. doctrine on unmanned
maritime systems, as they refer to these ships, appears to be emanating from an
integrated roadmap that runs from the year 2011 until 2036 and supplemented by
two masterplans, one each for the unmanned undersea and surface vehicles.
112
Maritime scholars believe that the position taken by the U.S. with regard to navigational rights of unmanned maritime systems, although vague in its manner, is rather
assertive. The impression so gathered is based on the reading of the U.S. Navy
Warfare Publication (NWP). Section 2.5.2.5 of the NWP states as follows
113
:
Customary international law as reflected in the 1982 LOS Convention gives vessels of all
nations the right to engage in innocent passage as well as transit passage and archipelagic sea
lane passage. The size, purpose, or type of cargo is irrelevant. The same rules apply to USV
and UUV transit and navigation. USVs and UUVs retain independent navigation rights.
8 Bridges as Barriers to Innocent Passage
Last, but not the least, a bridge across an international strait is also a spatial
dimension which could be an impediment to the exercise of right of innocent
passage, perhaps. Borrowing from the work of Spadi, the bridge across the Great
Belt between Finland and Denmark and the once proposed bridge in the Mediterranean Sea connecting the island of Sicily to mainland Italy could be cited as
examples.
114
111 Eronen (2018).
112 More specifically, following are the three documents—The Unmanned Systems Integrated
Roadmap FY2011-2036; The Navy Unmanned Undersea Vehicle Master Plan (2004); and The
Navy Unmanned Surface Vehicle Master Plan (2007).
113 Norris (2013).
114 Spadi (2001), pp. 411–419.
250
A. Hebbar
perspective of MASS, a more significant question that merits an answer or at least
some clarity is the legal status of MASS in international law. In particular, there is
not yet resolution on two key issues: can such systems be considered “ships”
(“vessels”); and if so, which MASS further qualify as warships—a term of art
which has legal significance attached to it.
Are the ships without master and crew onboard still called ships? The rules are
similar for both manned and unmanned ships. Unmanned ships enjoy the same
passage rights as other ships. Ships cannot possibly be refused access to coastal
states’ waters on that ground that they are not crewed. By extrapolation, MASS
would enjoy similar rights of innocent passage as conventional ships.
111
The United States has been looking at the varied aspects associated with operations of autonomous ships for a number of years. The U.S. doctrine on unmanned
maritime systems, as they refer to these ships, appears to be emanating from an
integrated roadmap that runs from the year 2011 until 2036 and supplemented by
two masterplans, one each for the unmanned undersea and surface vehicles.
112
Maritime scholars believe that the position taken by the U.S. with regard to navigational rights of unmanned maritime systems, although vague in its manner, is rather
assertive. The impression so gathered is based on the reading of the U.S. Navy
Warfare Publication (NWP). Section 2.5.2.5 of the NWP states as follows
113
:
Customary international law as reflected in the 1982 LOS Convention gives vessels of all
nations the right to engage in innocent passage as well as transit passage and archipelagic sea
lane passage. The size, purpose, or type of cargo is irrelevant. The same rules apply to USV
and UUV transit and navigation. USVs and UUVs retain independent navigation rights.
8 Bridges as Barriers to Innocent Passage
Last, but not the least, a bridge across an international strait is also a spatial
dimension which could be an impediment to the exercise of right of innocent
passage, perhaps. Borrowing from the work of Spadi, the bridge across the Great
Belt between Finland and Denmark and the once proposed bridge in the Mediterranean Sea connecting the island of Sicily to mainland Italy could be cited as
examples.
114
111 Eronen (2018).
112 More specifically, following are the three documents—The Unmanned Systems Integrated
Roadmap FY2011-2036; The Navy Unmanned Undersea Vehicle Master Plan (2004); and The
Navy Unmanned Surface Vehicle Master Plan (2007).
113 Norris (2013).
114 Spadi (2001), pp. 411–419.
250
A. Hebbar