consent”.
81 The Act also comprises enforcement measures of the New Zealander
state, such as enforcement orders,
82 as well as civil and criminal liability for a
number of offenses related to the process of authorization for drilling in the EEZ
and the continental shelf—it even comprises a provision for a term of imprisonment
of up to 2 years for specific breaches, given the sensitivity of environmental
degradation in those zones.
83 It applies to the owners and persons in charge of
offshore installations within the EEZ.
In New Zealand, thus, specific legislation has been approved to regulate the uses
and management of different maritime spaces. Whereas in Brazil a general Ocean
Act confirmed several UNCLOS provisions, without dwelling into details, and
adapting the national rules to the Brazilian interpretation of some UNCLOS sections,
New Zealand drafted different Acts for different maritime spaces, covering different
kinds of activities. One could call it a “zone-oriented regulation”, whereas Brazil has
opted for a “activity-oriented regulation”.
Overall, it could be said that New Zealand has achieved an integrated regime,
with three different acts regulating every possible use of the maritime spaces under
New Zealander jurisdiction, in a demonstration of how a simplified legal framework
could be drafted. Whether it has led to increased effectiveness, that is another
question and remains to be seen. Taken individually though, the EEZ Act is proof
of pioneerism in marine environmental protection efforts and the mirror of a country
concerned with the principled management (conservation and exploitation) of the
marine environment under national jurisdiction. In short, it is a streamlined and
robust regulatory framework, which could perhaps offer valuable inputs to Brazilian
authorities and decision-makers in ocean affairs.
Now that the Brazilian general norms regulating the continental shelf and their
consistency with international law of the sea have been evaluated, time has come for
the analysis of specific legislation. The rules assessed below relate, to some degree,
to the right-duty to manage the continental shelf and are structured in line with the
three dimensions of environmental conservation referred to in previous chapters:
(i) conservation of living resources; (ii) prevention, reduction and control of marine
pollution; and (iii) the conduction of marine scientific research. Such a step should
provide a detailed picture of the domestic legal framework determining the Brazilian
environmental jurisdiction on the continental shelf, both within and beyond 200 nm,
so as to permit the assessment on whether there is margin for the country’s domestic
legislation to (i) enter in greater consistency with UNCLOS; (ii) to legally adapt to
the “new” reality of the country having to manage an extended continental shelf; and
(iii) display increased coherence/cohesion while regulating the multiple uses of the
continental shelf.
81 Id. section 38.
82 Id. sections 115 to 124.
83 Id. section 134, on offences in relation to discharge of harmful substances.
326
10 Brazilian Legal Framework Applicable to the Blue Amazon’s...
81 The Act also comprises enforcement measures of the New Zealander
state, such as enforcement orders,
82 as well as civil and criminal liability for a
number of offenses related to the process of authorization for drilling in the EEZ
and the continental shelf—it even comprises a provision for a term of imprisonment
of up to 2 years for specific breaches, given the sensitivity of environmental
degradation in those zones.
83 It applies to the owners and persons in charge of
offshore installations within the EEZ.
In New Zealand, thus, specific legislation has been approved to regulate the uses
and management of different maritime spaces. Whereas in Brazil a general Ocean
Act confirmed several UNCLOS provisions, without dwelling into details, and
adapting the national rules to the Brazilian interpretation of some UNCLOS sections,
New Zealand drafted different Acts for different maritime spaces, covering different
kinds of activities. One could call it a “zone-oriented regulation”, whereas Brazil has
opted for a “activity-oriented regulation”.
Overall, it could be said that New Zealand has achieved an integrated regime,
with three different acts regulating every possible use of the maritime spaces under
New Zealander jurisdiction, in a demonstration of how a simplified legal framework
could be drafted. Whether it has led to increased effectiveness, that is another
question and remains to be seen. Taken individually though, the EEZ Act is proof
of pioneerism in marine environmental protection efforts and the mirror of a country
concerned with the principled management (conservation and exploitation) of the
marine environment under national jurisdiction. In short, it is a streamlined and
robust regulatory framework, which could perhaps offer valuable inputs to Brazilian
authorities and decision-makers in ocean affairs.
Now that the Brazilian general norms regulating the continental shelf and their
consistency with international law of the sea have been evaluated, time has come for
the analysis of specific legislation. The rules assessed below relate, to some degree,
to the right-duty to manage the continental shelf and are structured in line with the
three dimensions of environmental conservation referred to in previous chapters:
(i) conservation of living resources; (ii) prevention, reduction and control of marine
pollution; and (iii) the conduction of marine scientific research. Such a step should
provide a detailed picture of the domestic legal framework determining the Brazilian
environmental jurisdiction on the continental shelf, both within and beyond 200 nm,
so as to permit the assessment on whether there is margin for the country’s domestic
legislation to (i) enter in greater consistency with UNCLOS; (ii) to legally adapt to
the “new” reality of the country having to manage an extended continental shelf; and
(iii) display increased coherence/cohesion while regulating the multiple uses of the
continental shelf.
81 Id. section 38.
82 Id. sections 115 to 124.
83 Id. section 134, on offences in relation to discharge of harmful substances.
326
10 Brazilian Legal Framework Applicable to the Blue Amazon’s...