From this point on, the connotation of continental shelf, when comparing the
legal to the geoscientific interpretations, starts to depart from each other. In fact, in
Latin America, several countries adopted different approaches regarding to the
sovereignty over this maritime space. Chile, on June 1947, declared its sovereignty
and jurisdiction over the sea and continental shelf adjacent to its coasts up to a
distance of 200 nautical miles. Peru, on August 1947 published the Decree N
781 with similar characteristics.
5 On August 1952, Chile, Ecuador and Peru, in the
Santiago Declaration, declared that, “all countries which had no continental shelf
(. . .) claimed sole jurisdiction and sovereignty over the area of sea extending
200 nautical miles from their coast including sovereignty and jurisdiction over the
sea floor and subsoil thereof”.
6 We were no longer close to the geoscientific concept
and a worldwide definition was needed.
The first effort to set up an agreed limit for the continental shelf, in its legal sense,
was completed during the First United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea
(UNCLOS I). From this conference four conventions were adopted, the Territorial
Sea and Contiguous Zone, the Convention on the High Seas, the Convention on
Fishing and Conservation of the Living Resources of the High Seas and the
Convention on the Continental Shelf. The scope of this chapter is only focus in
the latter convention, The Convention on the Continental Shelf
7 (hereinafter designated as Geneva Convention).
Article 1 of the Geneva Convention
8 defines the continental shelf as “the seabed
and subsoil of the submarine areas adjacent to the coast but outside the area of the
territorial sea, to a depth of 200 metres or, beyond that limit, to where the depth of
the superjacent waters admits of the exploitation of the natural resources of the said
areas”. As one can easily depict, in this the Convention, two alternative formulae
were put forward to define the limits of the legal continental shelf. The first one, the
line at which the coastal waters reach a depth of 200 m, is the familiar rule derived
from the geological concept of the average shelf edge, although in some cases the
shelf break may occur at different reference depths. The second alternative formula
seems to fix as a limit the line, at a depth greater than 200 m, beyond which deep
water makes it in fact impossible to exploit the resources of the seabed and subsoil.
9
These two approaches, the (1) depth and the (2) exploitability, which might be closer
in terms of spatial location by the end of the 1950s, started to depart from each other
as marine technology progressed with time.
The exploitability criteria, as formulated in the Geneva Convention, soon
unlocked space for great juridical debates regarding its applicability and scope.
5 IHB (2014), pp. 1–4.
6 Suarez (2008), p. 28.
7 Adopted at Geneva on April 26, 1958.
8 The 1958 Convention was ratified by 58 States. It remains valid for very few of them as most
Member States then ratified the 1982 Convention which between State parties, prevails over the
Geneva Conventions on 1958 the Law of the Sea of 29 April (Suarez 2008, p. 34).
9 Young (1958), p. 52.
11 The Challenges of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf
193
legal to the geoscientific interpretations, starts to depart from each other. In fact, in
Latin America, several countries adopted different approaches regarding to the
sovereignty over this maritime space. Chile, on June 1947, declared its sovereignty
and jurisdiction over the sea and continental shelf adjacent to its coasts up to a
distance of 200 nautical miles. Peru, on August 1947 published the Decree N
781 with similar characteristics.
5 On August 1952, Chile, Ecuador and Peru, in the
Santiago Declaration, declared that, “all countries which had no continental shelf
(. . .) claimed sole jurisdiction and sovereignty over the area of sea extending
200 nautical miles from their coast including sovereignty and jurisdiction over the
sea floor and subsoil thereof”.
6 We were no longer close to the geoscientific concept
and a worldwide definition was needed.
The first effort to set up an agreed limit for the continental shelf, in its legal sense,
was completed during the First United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea
(UNCLOS I). From this conference four conventions were adopted, the Territorial
Sea and Contiguous Zone, the Convention on the High Seas, the Convention on
Fishing and Conservation of the Living Resources of the High Seas and the
Convention on the Continental Shelf. The scope of this chapter is only focus in
the latter convention, The Convention on the Continental Shelf
7 (hereinafter designated as Geneva Convention).
Article 1 of the Geneva Convention
8 defines the continental shelf as “the seabed
and subsoil of the submarine areas adjacent to the coast but outside the area of the
territorial sea, to a depth of 200 metres or, beyond that limit, to where the depth of
the superjacent waters admits of the exploitation of the natural resources of the said
areas”. As one can easily depict, in this the Convention, two alternative formulae
were put forward to define the limits of the legal continental shelf. The first one, the
line at which the coastal waters reach a depth of 200 m, is the familiar rule derived
from the geological concept of the average shelf edge, although in some cases the
shelf break may occur at different reference depths. The second alternative formula
seems to fix as a limit the line, at a depth greater than 200 m, beyond which deep
water makes it in fact impossible to exploit the resources of the seabed and subsoil.
9
These two approaches, the (1) depth and the (2) exploitability, which might be closer
in terms of spatial location by the end of the 1950s, started to depart from each other
as marine technology progressed with time.
The exploitability criteria, as formulated in the Geneva Convention, soon
unlocked space for great juridical debates regarding its applicability and scope.
5 IHB (2014), pp. 1–4.
6 Suarez (2008), p. 28.
7 Adopted at Geneva on April 26, 1958.
8 The 1958 Convention was ratified by 58 States. It remains valid for very few of them as most
Member States then ratified the 1982 Convention which between State parties, prevails over the
Geneva Conventions on 1958 the Law of the Sea of 29 April (Suarez 2008, p. 34).
9 Young (1958), p. 52.
11 The Challenges of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf
193