97
6 International Law and Its Evolution
“No State shall claim or exercise sovereignty or sovereign rights over any part of
the Area or its resources, nor shall any State or natural or juridical person appropriate any part thereof. No such claim or exercise of sovereignty or sovereign
rights nor such appropriation shall be recognized.”
The same article, at paragraph 3, clarifies the legal regime, which extends beyond resources alone, as it states that: “No State or natural or juridical person shall
claim, acquire or exercise rights with respect to the minerals recovered from the
Area except in accordance with this Part. Otherwise, no such claim, acquisition or
exercise of such rights shall be recognized.”
The Convention therefore makes a two-fold exemption for the Area: in relation
to national jurisdiction and in relation to the high seas. This exemption results in the
creation of a legal regime subjecting access to mineral resources to a more elaborate
authorisation regime combined with assured control.
The appearance of the Area within the typology of marine zones is an indicator
of the changes which will lastingly affect the perception that States and operators
have of access to natural seabed resources.
Part XI of the Convention, completed by an agreement relating to its implementation which entered into force in 1994 (intended to facilitate the United States’
adhesion which was believed to be imminent), introduces a legal regime whose
details may have frightened off certain countries tempted by the possibility of deepsea mining, but not at the expense of the establishment of a supervisory authority
considered an excessively bureaucratic and pernickety measure. This is the unique
reason for the United States’ vote against the adoption of the 1982 Convention and
the US has still not ratified this text.
Where European countries abstained and were heavily criticised (Germany, for
instance), France was very quick to declare that it was in favour of the Convention,
given its significant, long-standing investment in research with the ultimate goal of
marine mining activities. Ifremer was registered as a pioneer investor and, thanks to
this title, was granted the protection of investments already made for polymetallic
nodules. It should be noted that this also stretched beyond financial protection, as
the conditions of negotiations resulted in the choice of an area considered to be of
great interest.
The Area and activities conducted therein are governed by a newly formed international organisation for the management of this zone and its resources, established by the Convention. The International Seabed Authority, or ISA, which has its
headquarters in Kingston, Jamaica, is a truly international organisation with a legal
personality and all the attributes of such an organisation: a Secretariat, an Assembly
and a Council. All States party to the Convention are members of the ISA: to date,
162 States, including France since its ratification in 1996 as well as the States of
the European Union, the EU itself, having joined the Convention, are members of
the ISA.
The Assembly is qualified as the authority’s “supreme organ”, but it is the Council
of 36 members that constitutes the authority’s “executive organ” (i.e. decisionmaking body); the role of the Assembly is rather to ratify the council’s decisions.
6 International Law and Its Evolution
“No State shall claim or exercise sovereignty or sovereign rights over any part of
the Area or its resources, nor shall any State or natural or juridical person appropriate any part thereof. No such claim or exercise of sovereignty or sovereign
rights nor such appropriation shall be recognized.”
The same article, at paragraph 3, clarifies the legal regime, which extends beyond resources alone, as it states that: “No State or natural or juridical person shall
claim, acquire or exercise rights with respect to the minerals recovered from the
Area except in accordance with this Part. Otherwise, no such claim, acquisition or
exercise of such rights shall be recognized.”
The Convention therefore makes a two-fold exemption for the Area: in relation
to national jurisdiction and in relation to the high seas. This exemption results in the
creation of a legal regime subjecting access to mineral resources to a more elaborate
authorisation regime combined with assured control.
The appearance of the Area within the typology of marine zones is an indicator
of the changes which will lastingly affect the perception that States and operators
have of access to natural seabed resources.
Part XI of the Convention, completed by an agreement relating to its implementation which entered into force in 1994 (intended to facilitate the United States’
adhesion which was believed to be imminent), introduces a legal regime whose
details may have frightened off certain countries tempted by the possibility of deepsea mining, but not at the expense of the establishment of a supervisory authority
considered an excessively bureaucratic and pernickety measure. This is the unique
reason for the United States’ vote against the adoption of the 1982 Convention and
the US has still not ratified this text.
Where European countries abstained and were heavily criticised (Germany, for
instance), France was very quick to declare that it was in favour of the Convention,
given its significant, long-standing investment in research with the ultimate goal of
marine mining activities. Ifremer was registered as a pioneer investor and, thanks to
this title, was granted the protection of investments already made for polymetallic
nodules. It should be noted that this also stretched beyond financial protection, as
the conditions of negotiations resulted in the choice of an area considered to be of
great interest.
The Area and activities conducted therein are governed by a newly formed international organisation for the management of this zone and its resources, established by the Convention. The International Seabed Authority, or ISA, which has its
headquarters in Kingston, Jamaica, is a truly international organisation with a legal
personality and all the attributes of such an organisation: a Secretariat, an Assembly
and a Council. All States party to the Convention are members of the ISA: to date,
162 States, including France since its ratification in 1996 as well as the States of
the European Union, the EU itself, having joined the Convention, are members of
the ISA.
The Assembly is qualified as the authority’s “supreme organ”, but it is the Council
of 36 members that constitutes the authority’s “executive organ” (i.e. decisionmaking body); the role of the Assembly is rather to ratify the council’s decisions.