自然延伸概念在200海里外大陆架划界中的作用研究
|
摘要
1982年《联合国海洋法公约》(以下简称《公约》)为解决有关海洋空间使用的问题建立了一个综合性的框架体系。它不但体现了国际习惯法的编纂,更重要的是体现了新的法律规则与自然科学技术的结合。《公约》包括17个部分,320个条款,9个附件和1个最终法令。本论文主要关注《公约》中与大陆架有关的条款,包括第七十六条至第八十五条、附件二(关于大陆架界限委员会)和最终法令的附件二(包含关于在特殊情况下确立大陆边外缘所使用的具体方法的谅解声明)。其中,在第七十六条第一款中,“自然延伸”这一明确具有地质属性的概念作为海洋划界条款的首要条件被提出,成为了划界条款的核心要素,而如何考量和运用它,怎样处理不同地质背景下自然延伸的法律与自然属性问题,在国际社会上引起了很大争议。因此,本文从“自然延伸”这一概念的法律渊源与演化入手,通过剖析这一概念的形成、建立到被提出,探讨了它所包含的不可缺少的地理与地质要素,通过整理、收集、分类分析已提出的各国海洋划界案建立自然延伸的不同模型,研究在不同地质背景下,自然延伸的不同作用与意义;进一步充分论证了自然延伸不仅具有双重属性(法律属性与地质属性),同时在海洋权益与海洋划界两个方面都不可忽视。本论文主要取得了以下研究进展与认识成果：
1.论证了自然延伸的法律演化背景为划界过程中地质要素的探讨提供了合理依据。
自然延伸是海洋法演化史中一个关键概念。通过了解与探究它在海洋法中形成、演化与修订过程,可以充分论证,在处理海洋划界与边界争端事务过程中,这一概念不能被忽略或回避。在海洋法的法制史中,包括三个重要阶段：
(1)在1969年北海大陆架划界案以前,所有有关大陆架权利的主张(包括1945年杜鲁门宣言)旨在扩张沿海国家海洋管辖权,并论证海洋领域的相关争议需要一个新的制度—即大陆架制度。进而,1950年国际法委员会第69次会议明确建立了这一制度。1958年《大陆架公约》为这一阶段画上了完美句号,它通过水深条款与当时技术可达到的开发性条款规定赋予了法律框架下大陆架一个崭新概念。
(2)1969年北海大陆架划界案标志着第二阶段的开始。针对这一系列的划界案,国际法院明确提出了一条重要的参考意见,即：对于海洋边界划定,等距离原则并不是唯一的基本要素。事实上,如果仅依靠这一准则解决划界争端,往往会出现不公平的结果。因此,为了寻求公平的解决方案,根据1958年《大陆架公约》,越来越多的沿海国家开始在“特殊背景”这一概念上寻找突破口。在这一阶段,何种地质背景属于特殊背景,又应在大陆架划界过程中做如何考量等问题并没规范化,因此,它仅是“自然延伸”这一概念的萌芽。
(3)在1969年-1985年间的海洋划界案例开启了第三阶段的发展。各沿海国不约而同的将注意力集中在大陆架的各种地质要素上,比如各种脊与海底高地的延伸形态,海沟的深度与规模大小对陆架延伸的影响程度等。在《公约》中,“自然延伸”作为关键性要素在第七十六条第一款中被明确提出。
相较于1958年《大陆架公约》,《公约》不仅直接提出了“自然延伸”这一概念,并将其用作定义法律意义大陆架的关键性要素(article76.1-2).在海洋法框架下的大陆架是可以根据距海岸线的距离分为两个部分：
(1)第一部分为从领海基线起算向海延伸200海里的海底区域。《公约》赋予沿海国对这一领域拥有陆架管辖权,即这一区域的陆架管辖权与各种地质要素无关。因此,在这一区域,即从领海起算向海188海里的区域,自然延伸概念对赋予沿海国陆架权利没有任何影响。但由于这一区域的上覆水域属于沿海国的专属经济区,因此,实际上这一区域重叠覆盖了两种不同的制度：专属经济区制度(《公约》第五章)与大陆架制度(《公约》第六章)。对于已有的典型划界案例分析,本文充分证明在这一重叠区域划定海域边界时,国际法庭对专属经济区制度赋予了更多权利,而弱化了大陆架制度与地质特征对海域边界的影响。而实际上,根据《公约》规定,这两种制度应具有同等地位与权利。
(2)第二部分为外大陆架部分,即从200海里线起算,根据海床和底土的地质特征、向海自然延伸的区域。正因为这一法则,用于定义法律大陆架的自然延伸概念将法则与地球科学紧密的结合在一起。根据《公约》第六部分,法律大陆架概念包含诸多地质要素,并且对于200海里外的大陆架区域,沿海国权利的赋予必须以“自然延伸”为首要条件。除了确定“自然延伸”概念与陆架权利的关系外,本文前三章还在《公约》的基础上,提出三种基本模型用以阐述自然延伸与不同地质背景下相邻沿海国的边界划定的关系。
2.从科学属性方面探讨并论证了自然延伸概念是《公约》第76条中前六条基本法则的核心与首要条件。
目前对于“自然延伸”出现在《公约》第76条第一款中的意义,其中一种多为西方学者支持的观点：它仅为一种法律名词指代,而不具有任何地质地貌要素。本文通过对第76条1-6款法则的定义与《大陆架外部界限一科学与法律的交汇》中的科学问题分析,认为：第76条第一款为一原则性条款,是随后五条法则的基石,也是海洋权利与海域划定必须遵循的准则。根据第76条第2-6款,实际将大陆架区域分为两种地质背景：(a)理想的简单地质背景,即由陆架、陆坡至陆基的大陆边的自然延伸(Article76.3);(b)由于复杂的地质演化过程引起的特殊地质背景(Article76.6)。
3.针对自然延伸在海洋权利与海域划界中的不同影响分别进行分析并得出结论。
根据划界案例分析,对于自然延伸在海洋权利中的作用,包括：(1)对200海里内区域无影响。这一区域沿海国的陆架权利是固有的；(2)对于200海里外的大陆架区域,自然延伸作为一基本原则,通过限制地质属性从而限定了大陆架外缘界限。通过案例统计分析和国际法庭与大陆架界限委员会提供的参考意见,它不仅包括地形地貌上的延伸,还包括多种其他地质要素。在这一权利确定过程中,海底重要地质特征作为重点参考要素,用以确定延伸的不同属性。对于自然延伸在海域划界中的作用,首先需要确定的是,法律意义上的大陆架,无论是否超过200海里的海域,都是一个完整的、不可分割的。并且,正如之前论述,大陆架制度与专属经济区制度是同等重要的法律条款,因此,在确定海域边界时,尤其是200海里内的重叠区域,专属经济区制度中的参考要素(主要为水域表面的要素,如沿海国海岸线形态与长度、国家主要经济来源特征等)和大陆架制度中提及的参考要素(如地貌与地质属性的延伸性,海沟等天然隔断的存在)应当具有同等参考价值,结合考虑进而对边界临时线做出适当调整。而事实上,在目前的许多划界案中,参考专属经济区制度的比重远远超过了大陆架制度。
4.根据地理和地质要素对自然延伸与邻国海域划界结果的影响,本论文将与脊或脊状物相关的划界案分为四种类型。
在已提交的67个沿海国家提交的划界案中,有关洋脊或者海底高地区域的案例已占到总数的一半以上,相关的外大陆架区域主张面积已超过200,000km2。本文按照不同的地质要素对划界结果的影响程度,将这种划界案分成了四种类型：
(1)属于大陆边的自然组成,合理的延伸了沿海国的外大陆架,比如澳大利亚和新西兰划界案。比如,在澳大利亚划界案中,尤其是Kerguelen Plateau、Macquarie Ridge上的200海里以外大陆架界限,避开了对洋脊类型的讨论,而是以海岛为中心赋予了更多的外大陆架权利；(2)结合其他制度中的考量要素的洋脊岛屿上的独立划界案,包括渔业、经济要素,比如冰岛划界案和库克群岛划界案,这种结合使得划界主张的提出更加合理;(3)涉及具体地质属性,比如地壳性质的脊类划界案。以毛里求斯和塞舌尔联合划界案为例,两个沿海国通过说明Mascarene海底高原具有大陆地壳性质,进而将其视为大陆架的自然构成部分的海底高地；(4)借以脊的延伸试图从沿海国大陆进行蛙跳划界,旨在侵占邻国的大陆架区域,比如日本划界案中,日本企图忽略小笠原海台与伊豆-小笠原-马里亚纳海脊地质与地貌的间断性和深度达到4000米的海沟,歪曲自然延伸的真实概念而主张更多大陆架区域。关于这类延伸问题,曾在国际法庭关于相邻国家的海域划界判例中提及--650米深度的挪威海槽已被认为是自然延伸的终断要素。因此,如果说对于前三种类型的脊或脊状物对大陆架划界的影响还存在定性与定量的争议空间,那么最后一种类型的划界案则属于明显违背了《公约》第76条首要条款中自然延伸的基本属性,为主张更多海域而违背国际法准则与科学事实。
5.以孟加拉湾区域为主要研究对象,分析了海底扇作为沉积物延伸的一种特殊地形对海洋划界的潜在分析。
根据《公约》规定,沉积物的厚度与陆坡坡度的变化是影响大陆架划界的重要要素,而现代海底扇通常能够改变大陆边区域内的这两点特征。因此,作为一个独立的海底地质体,海底扇对海洋划界的潜在影响不可忽视,比如孟加拉扇、印度扇与亚马逊扇。关于《谅解备忘录》是否可以用于其余沿海国主张划界区域还值得探讨,但根据本文对海底扇模型的分析,上扇与中扇的过渡区域对确定陆坡坡脚点具有显著影响。另外,虽然沉积物物源已被国际法庭视为不会影响划界结果的要素,但对于其地质背景演化及构造特征仍存在众多争议,其影响效力未定。
6.根据上述结论,围绕自然延伸核心概念,根据《公约》与存在的各种地质背景,对大陆架划界的程序进行了重新梳理,提出了些许对大陆架界限委员会处理过程的思考。
The1982United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (hereinafter:the1982Convention) establishes a comprehensive framework for addressing the issues implicated in the uses of ocean space. It represents both a codification of the international law and the combination with the natural scientific technology and legal principles. The1982Convention contains17parts,320articles,9annexes and a Finial Act. The focus of this thesis is on the part of continental shelf, including article76to article85, annex Ⅱ (regarding the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf) and annex Ⅱ of the Final Act (which contains a statement of understanding concerning a specific method to be used in establishing the outer edge of the continental margin in very unusual circumstances). Specifically, in article76.1, the definition of natural prolongation is put forward as the vital factor of marine entitlement and marine delimitation, which includes various geological properties obviously. It has been controversial in the international society on how to weigh it, as well as the geological influence under different geological contexts. Therefore, this thesis finds out how the conception of natural prolongation is built and what kinds of geological factors are necessary to be considered through focusing on the historical evolution of the international law and then the marine law. Furthermore, this thesis makes sure the different roles of natural prolongation under different geological backgrounds on marine entitlement and marine delimitation through the collection and analysis of submitted delimitation cases. As a conclusion, it can be proved that natural prolongation has dual properties (legal nature and geological nature), meanwhile, cannot be ignored in marine entitlement and marine delimitation.
The main achievements of this thesis are in following:
1. Sufficient evidence on the necessity of the geological factors on marine delimitation through the historical evolution of natural prolongation under the codification of the marine law.
Natural Prolongation is a vital conception with a long historical evolution of marine law. It cannot be ignored or rounded in the process of marine delineation. In this historical evolution, there are three stages:(ⅰ) before the North Sea Continental Shelf cases, all assertions to continental shelf rights, especially the Truman Proclamation, focused on a new expansion in coastal State maritime jurisdictions and created a requirement for the continental shelf regime. This legal regime was established at the69th meeting in1950by the International Law Commission. Ultimately, as the end of the first stage the1958Convention on the Continental Shelf defined the term continental shelf by depth and exploitability criteria;(ⅱ) North Sea Continental Shelf cases marks the second stage for the outer continental shelf right. As an essentially advisory opinion, the International Court of Juristic comments considered that the equidistance principle was not appropriate as the only basis for maritime delimitation, which would lead to an inequitable result. In order to achieve an equitable result, many States began to focus on special circumstances, which had not been systematic and classified at that time;(ⅲ) the cases between1969and1985demonstrated the inquiry of geophysical appurtenance of the continental shelf as the starting point in the third stage of the continental shelf development. There were varieties of geological factors in these cases, such as various kinds of ridges, the scale and depth of faults and submarine troughs. As a significant progress on the definition of the continental shelf in the1982Convention, natural prolongation, as a principal conception in Article76(1) in the chart of continental shelf. Compared to the1958Convention, the1982Convention directly raised the concept of the natural prolongation, which is based on the definition of the continental shelf in the legal sense in paragraph1-2in Article76. As the term in the legal sense, the continental shelf is divided into two parts.
The first part is within200nm from the baseline and the1982Convention recognizes the application of distance rule and removes the geophysical components in the definition of the continental shelf. In fact, there is no necessary attribute of the natural prolongation for the entitlement in this area and the actual distance of the so-called inner continental shelf is188nm from territory sea seaward to the200nm line from baseline and overlapping with the EEZ. There are two different regimes in overlapping areas actually and they are the exclusive economic zone regime (in Chapter Five of the1982Convention) and the continental shelf regime (in Chapter Six of the1982Convention). What has been proved in this thesis is that in many submitted cases, the EEZ regime overweighed the continental shelf even in opinion of the International Court of Juristic and the Commission. Actually, by contrast, they should be treated equally according to the1982Convention.
The second part is the outer continental shelf beyond200nm which is based upon the physical characteristics of the seabed and subsoil and depends on natural prolongation. After putting forward natural prolongation in definition of continental shelf, there is new relationship between legal provisions and geo-science. According to the provisions in the1982Convention, there are both geomorphologic and geological features for this definition; for instance, one of them is the plate nature. Definitely, the entitlement depends on the natural prolongation, namely that the outer continental shelf depends on it. In order to elaborate the relationship with the natural prolongation with the boundary delimitation, there are three maps with hypothetic-geographical settings, which are supposed to be representative of the majority coastal States delimitation.
2. Natural prolongation has been proved to be a prerequisite and vital conception in article76.1to article76.6in the1982Convention from the scientific respect. There is a main view on the meaning of natural prolongation in article76.1in the1982Convention among the western researchers, namely only a substitute without any potential related factors. In this thesis, it can be proved that article76.1is the vital and essential principle in Chapter Six and also the basis of the following five articles. Meanwhile, natural prolongation is a concentrated limitation where marine entitlement and delimitation are facing different submarine geological contexts in the book named'continental shelf limits-the scientific and legal interface.'According to article76.2to article76.6, there are two main geological backgrounds: the ordinary (ideal) submarine topography (Article76(3)-(5)) and special ones (Article76(6)).
3. The conclusion has been expected on different influence and analysis of natural prolongation on marine entitlement and delimitation. According to the cases discussed, concerning the role of natural prolongation on entitlement, each coastal State has the inherent right for200M continental shelf. As a legal term, natural prolongation is a basic concept for limiting the physical description beyond200M. It can be considered not only with the geomorphic prolongation, but also geological features. In this process of entitlement, submarine prominent features should be considered in order to clarify the prolongation categories. Concerning the process of marine delimitation, the prerequisite is that the legal continental shelf is the whole and integrated, no matter whether it extends beyond200M. Meanwhile, both the regimes of the EEZ and the continental shelf are equally important, which own the overlapping area within200M from the coastal State. That is, the water surface features, such as the coast configuration, the length of coastline and the economic interest cannot be ignored for the EEZ, as well as submarine features, for instance, the trench which has broken the natural prolongation for the State. However, in many delimitation cases, the factors of the EEZ have overweighed the ones of the continental shelf. Actually, both of them should be considered carefully in the process of adjustment for the provisional line as a national boundary.
4. Four types of submitted delimitation cases related to the ridge and ridge-like features classified according to the consideration of the natural prolongation and influence of the marine delimitation. There are67submissions by coast States to the Commission and the proportion of cases involved ridges has reached beyond50%. The cases which claim the area of the outer continental shelf more than200,000km2all involve the ridge issues. According to these cases, there are four types of ridges/ridge-like features cases:(1) obviously, natural components of continental margin and reasonable to be entitled the outer continental shelf, such as Australia and New Zealand.(2) Independent claim for the island combined with other related factors, such as fishers and economic interests, which would make these claims more reasonable, for instance, the cases by Iceland and Cook Island.(3) Claim of ridges stands by the nature of continental crust, such as case by Republic of Seychelles and Republic of Mauritius concerning the Mascarene Plateau. Two coastal States use the geological processes to illustrate the formation of the Mascarene Plateau with continental crust in order to get the outer continental shelf.(4) Ridge Jumping from the Landmass for invading and occupying neighboring State's continental shelf area, for instance, cases by Japan. For example simply, the OGP area is considered as a prolongation from the landmass by Japan. But, actually, it is a significant break along the SN trend between two areas with the average depth of more than4000meters. Concerning to this kind of prolongation background, according to the words of the International Court in the North Sea Continental Shelf Cases mentioned on marine delimitation in the first chart, the Norwegian Trough was referred, a650meters deep break that fringed the southern and south-western coasts of Norway. Instead of pronouncing the role of this geological body, the Court stated that this trough divided the shelf area into two parts. Therefore, the underwater shelf cannot be considered to be adjacent to the Norwegian coast, nor be its natural prolongation. The trench in Japan case is much deeper than Norwegian Trough, and there is no any reason to be explained as a natural prolongation. All of these situations are named by jumping circumstances in this thesis, as improper prolongations on marine delimitation. Therefore, if there would be space for some controversies because of the indefinite principles on submarine highs and ridges in three former types, the last one has been proved for no reasonableness and obviously to be contrary to the basic principle--natural prolongation.
5. Potential analysis of submarine fan as a special submarine body of sedimentary prolongation on marine delimitation, for instance, in the area named Bay of Bengal. According to the1982Convention, the depth of sediment and the trend of the slope are essential factors to be considered, which each modern submarine fan generally can change within the continental margin. Therefore, a modern submarine fan, as an independent submarine geological body is reasonable to be furthered by the scientists and jurists on marine delineation and even delimitation and some have been proved (or will be proved) to have the effect on the delineation of the outer edge of the continental margin, such as Bengal Fan, India Fan and Amazon Fan. There is still some space to consider that whether this Statement could be applied in other areas where the similar submarine geological/geomorphologic context exists. According to the analysis of three parts of a submarine fan, the gradient from the continental shelf to the continental base mostly depends on the configuration of the upper fan and the middle fan. Meanwhile, although the effect of the sediment geological origin has been refused by the Tribunal directly, there are still legal issues in geological contexts.
6. According to the1982Convention, a renewed process of marine delimitation steps are proposed in this thesis and some thoughts exist compared with the approaches of the Commission.
1.论证了自然延伸的法律演化背景为划界过程中地质要素的探讨提供了合理依据。
自然延伸是海洋法演化史中一个关键概念。通过了解与探究它在海洋法中形成、演化与修订过程,可以充分论证,在处理海洋划界与边界争端事务过程中,这一概念不能被忽略或回避。在海洋法的法制史中,包括三个重要阶段：
(1)在1969年北海大陆架划界案以前,所有有关大陆架权利的主张(包括1945年杜鲁门宣言)旨在扩张沿海国家海洋管辖权,并论证海洋领域的相关争议需要一个新的制度—即大陆架制度。进而,1950年国际法委员会第69次会议明确建立了这一制度。1958年《大陆架公约》为这一阶段画上了完美句号,它通过水深条款与当时技术可达到的开发性条款规定赋予了法律框架下大陆架一个崭新概念。
(2)1969年北海大陆架划界案标志着第二阶段的开始。针对这一系列的划界案,国际法院明确提出了一条重要的参考意见,即：对于海洋边界划定,等距离原则并不是唯一的基本要素。事实上,如果仅依靠这一准则解决划界争端,往往会出现不公平的结果。因此,为了寻求公平的解决方案,根据1958年《大陆架公约》,越来越多的沿海国家开始在“特殊背景”这一概念上寻找突破口。在这一阶段,何种地质背景属于特殊背景,又应在大陆架划界过程中做如何考量等问题并没规范化,因此,它仅是“自然延伸”这一概念的萌芽。
(3)在1969年-1985年间的海洋划界案例开启了第三阶段的发展。各沿海国不约而同的将注意力集中在大陆架的各种地质要素上,比如各种脊与海底高地的延伸形态,海沟的深度与规模大小对陆架延伸的影响程度等。在《公约》中,“自然延伸”作为关键性要素在第七十六条第一款中被明确提出。
相较于1958年《大陆架公约》,《公约》不仅直接提出了“自然延伸”这一概念,并将其用作定义法律意义大陆架的关键性要素(article76.1-2).在海洋法框架下的大陆架是可以根据距海岸线的距离分为两个部分：
(1)第一部分为从领海基线起算向海延伸200海里的海底区域。《公约》赋予沿海国对这一领域拥有陆架管辖权,即这一区域的陆架管辖权与各种地质要素无关。因此,在这一区域,即从领海起算向海188海里的区域,自然延伸概念对赋予沿海国陆架权利没有任何影响。但由于这一区域的上覆水域属于沿海国的专属经济区,因此,实际上这一区域重叠覆盖了两种不同的制度：专属经济区制度(《公约》第五章)与大陆架制度(《公约》第六章)。对于已有的典型划界案例分析,本文充分证明在这一重叠区域划定海域边界时,国际法庭对专属经济区制度赋予了更多权利,而弱化了大陆架制度与地质特征对海域边界的影响。而实际上,根据《公约》规定,这两种制度应具有同等地位与权利。
(2)第二部分为外大陆架部分,即从200海里线起算,根据海床和底土的地质特征、向海自然延伸的区域。正因为这一法则,用于定义法律大陆架的自然延伸概念将法则与地球科学紧密的结合在一起。根据《公约》第六部分,法律大陆架概念包含诸多地质要素,并且对于200海里外的大陆架区域,沿海国权利的赋予必须以“自然延伸”为首要条件。除了确定“自然延伸”概念与陆架权利的关系外,本文前三章还在《公约》的基础上,提出三种基本模型用以阐述自然延伸与不同地质背景下相邻沿海国的边界划定的关系。
2.从科学属性方面探讨并论证了自然延伸概念是《公约》第76条中前六条基本法则的核心与首要条件。
目前对于“自然延伸”出现在《公约》第76条第一款中的意义,其中一种多为西方学者支持的观点：它仅为一种法律名词指代,而不具有任何地质地貌要素。本文通过对第76条1-6款法则的定义与《大陆架外部界限一科学与法律的交汇》中的科学问题分析,认为：第76条第一款为一原则性条款,是随后五条法则的基石,也是海洋权利与海域划定必须遵循的准则。根据第76条第2-6款,实际将大陆架区域分为两种地质背景：(a)理想的简单地质背景,即由陆架、陆坡至陆基的大陆边的自然延伸(Article76.3);(b)由于复杂的地质演化过程引起的特殊地质背景(Article76.6)。
3.针对自然延伸在海洋权利与海域划界中的不同影响分别进行分析并得出结论。
根据划界案例分析,对于自然延伸在海洋权利中的作用,包括：(1)对200海里内区域无影响。这一区域沿海国的陆架权利是固有的；(2)对于200海里外的大陆架区域,自然延伸作为一基本原则,通过限制地质属性从而限定了大陆架外缘界限。通过案例统计分析和国际法庭与大陆架界限委员会提供的参考意见,它不仅包括地形地貌上的延伸,还包括多种其他地质要素。在这一权利确定过程中,海底重要地质特征作为重点参考要素,用以确定延伸的不同属性。对于自然延伸在海域划界中的作用,首先需要确定的是,法律意义上的大陆架,无论是否超过200海里的海域,都是一个完整的、不可分割的。并且,正如之前论述,大陆架制度与专属经济区制度是同等重要的法律条款,因此,在确定海域边界时,尤其是200海里内的重叠区域,专属经济区制度中的参考要素(主要为水域表面的要素,如沿海国海岸线形态与长度、国家主要经济来源特征等)和大陆架制度中提及的参考要素(如地貌与地质属性的延伸性,海沟等天然隔断的存在)应当具有同等参考价值,结合考虑进而对边界临时线做出适当调整。而事实上,在目前的许多划界案中,参考专属经济区制度的比重远远超过了大陆架制度。
4.根据地理和地质要素对自然延伸与邻国海域划界结果的影响,本论文将与脊或脊状物相关的划界案分为四种类型。
在已提交的67个沿海国家提交的划界案中,有关洋脊或者海底高地区域的案例已占到总数的一半以上,相关的外大陆架区域主张面积已超过200,000km2。本文按照不同的地质要素对划界结果的影响程度,将这种划界案分成了四种类型：
(1)属于大陆边的自然组成,合理的延伸了沿海国的外大陆架,比如澳大利亚和新西兰划界案。比如,在澳大利亚划界案中,尤其是Kerguelen Plateau、Macquarie Ridge上的200海里以外大陆架界限,避开了对洋脊类型的讨论,而是以海岛为中心赋予了更多的外大陆架权利；(2)结合其他制度中的考量要素的洋脊岛屿上的独立划界案,包括渔业、经济要素,比如冰岛划界案和库克群岛划界案,这种结合使得划界主张的提出更加合理;(3)涉及具体地质属性,比如地壳性质的脊类划界案。以毛里求斯和塞舌尔联合划界案为例,两个沿海国通过说明Mascarene海底高原具有大陆地壳性质,进而将其视为大陆架的自然构成部分的海底高地；(4)借以脊的延伸试图从沿海国大陆进行蛙跳划界,旨在侵占邻国的大陆架区域,比如日本划界案中,日本企图忽略小笠原海台与伊豆-小笠原-马里亚纳海脊地质与地貌的间断性和深度达到4000米的海沟,歪曲自然延伸的真实概念而主张更多大陆架区域。关于这类延伸问题,曾在国际法庭关于相邻国家的海域划界判例中提及--650米深度的挪威海槽已被认为是自然延伸的终断要素。因此,如果说对于前三种类型的脊或脊状物对大陆架划界的影响还存在定性与定量的争议空间,那么最后一种类型的划界案则属于明显违背了《公约》第76条首要条款中自然延伸的基本属性,为主张更多海域而违背国际法准则与科学事实。
5.以孟加拉湾区域为主要研究对象,分析了海底扇作为沉积物延伸的一种特殊地形对海洋划界的潜在分析。
根据《公约》规定,沉积物的厚度与陆坡坡度的变化是影响大陆架划界的重要要素,而现代海底扇通常能够改变大陆边区域内的这两点特征。因此,作为一个独立的海底地质体,海底扇对海洋划界的潜在影响不可忽视,比如孟加拉扇、印度扇与亚马逊扇。关于《谅解备忘录》是否可以用于其余沿海国主张划界区域还值得探讨,但根据本文对海底扇模型的分析,上扇与中扇的过渡区域对确定陆坡坡脚点具有显著影响。另外,虽然沉积物物源已被国际法庭视为不会影响划界结果的要素,但对于其地质背景演化及构造特征仍存在众多争议,其影响效力未定。
6.根据上述结论,围绕自然延伸核心概念,根据《公约》与存在的各种地质背景,对大陆架划界的程序进行了重新梳理,提出了些许对大陆架界限委员会处理过程的思考。
The1982United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (hereinafter:the1982Convention) establishes a comprehensive framework for addressing the issues implicated in the uses of ocean space. It represents both a codification of the international law and the combination with the natural scientific technology and legal principles. The1982Convention contains17parts,320articles,9annexes and a Finial Act. The focus of this thesis is on the part of continental shelf, including article76to article85, annex Ⅱ (regarding the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf) and annex Ⅱ of the Final Act (which contains a statement of understanding concerning a specific method to be used in establishing the outer edge of the continental margin in very unusual circumstances). Specifically, in article76.1, the definition of natural prolongation is put forward as the vital factor of marine entitlement and marine delimitation, which includes various geological properties obviously. It has been controversial in the international society on how to weigh it, as well as the geological influence under different geological contexts. Therefore, this thesis finds out how the conception of natural prolongation is built and what kinds of geological factors are necessary to be considered through focusing on the historical evolution of the international law and then the marine law. Furthermore, this thesis makes sure the different roles of natural prolongation under different geological backgrounds on marine entitlement and marine delimitation through the collection and analysis of submitted delimitation cases. As a conclusion, it can be proved that natural prolongation has dual properties (legal nature and geological nature), meanwhile, cannot be ignored in marine entitlement and marine delimitation.
The main achievements of this thesis are in following:
1. Sufficient evidence on the necessity of the geological factors on marine delimitation through the historical evolution of natural prolongation under the codification of the marine law.
Natural Prolongation is a vital conception with a long historical evolution of marine law. It cannot be ignored or rounded in the process of marine delineation. In this historical evolution, there are three stages:(ⅰ) before the North Sea Continental Shelf cases, all assertions to continental shelf rights, especially the Truman Proclamation, focused on a new expansion in coastal State maritime jurisdictions and created a requirement for the continental shelf regime. This legal regime was established at the69th meeting in1950by the International Law Commission. Ultimately, as the end of the first stage the1958Convention on the Continental Shelf defined the term continental shelf by depth and exploitability criteria;(ⅱ) North Sea Continental Shelf cases marks the second stage for the outer continental shelf right. As an essentially advisory opinion, the International Court of Juristic comments considered that the equidistance principle was not appropriate as the only basis for maritime delimitation, which would lead to an inequitable result. In order to achieve an equitable result, many States began to focus on special circumstances, which had not been systematic and classified at that time;(ⅲ) the cases between1969and1985demonstrated the inquiry of geophysical appurtenance of the continental shelf as the starting point in the third stage of the continental shelf development. There were varieties of geological factors in these cases, such as various kinds of ridges, the scale and depth of faults and submarine troughs. As a significant progress on the definition of the continental shelf in the1982Convention, natural prolongation, as a principal conception in Article76(1) in the chart of continental shelf. Compared to the1958Convention, the1982Convention directly raised the concept of the natural prolongation, which is based on the definition of the continental shelf in the legal sense in paragraph1-2in Article76. As the term in the legal sense, the continental shelf is divided into two parts.
The first part is within200nm from the baseline and the1982Convention recognizes the application of distance rule and removes the geophysical components in the definition of the continental shelf. In fact, there is no necessary attribute of the natural prolongation for the entitlement in this area and the actual distance of the so-called inner continental shelf is188nm from territory sea seaward to the200nm line from baseline and overlapping with the EEZ. There are two different regimes in overlapping areas actually and they are the exclusive economic zone regime (in Chapter Five of the1982Convention) and the continental shelf regime (in Chapter Six of the1982Convention). What has been proved in this thesis is that in many submitted cases, the EEZ regime overweighed the continental shelf even in opinion of the International Court of Juristic and the Commission. Actually, by contrast, they should be treated equally according to the1982Convention.
The second part is the outer continental shelf beyond200nm which is based upon the physical characteristics of the seabed and subsoil and depends on natural prolongation. After putting forward natural prolongation in definition of continental shelf, there is new relationship between legal provisions and geo-science. According to the provisions in the1982Convention, there are both geomorphologic and geological features for this definition; for instance, one of them is the plate nature. Definitely, the entitlement depends on the natural prolongation, namely that the outer continental shelf depends on it. In order to elaborate the relationship with the natural prolongation with the boundary delimitation, there are three maps with hypothetic-geographical settings, which are supposed to be representative of the majority coastal States delimitation.
2. Natural prolongation has been proved to be a prerequisite and vital conception in article76.1to article76.6in the1982Convention from the scientific respect. There is a main view on the meaning of natural prolongation in article76.1in the1982Convention among the western researchers, namely only a substitute without any potential related factors. In this thesis, it can be proved that article76.1is the vital and essential principle in Chapter Six and also the basis of the following five articles. Meanwhile, natural prolongation is a concentrated limitation where marine entitlement and delimitation are facing different submarine geological contexts in the book named'continental shelf limits-the scientific and legal interface.'According to article76.2to article76.6, there are two main geological backgrounds: the ordinary (ideal) submarine topography (Article76(3)-(5)) and special ones (Article76(6)).
3. The conclusion has been expected on different influence and analysis of natural prolongation on marine entitlement and delimitation. According to the cases discussed, concerning the role of natural prolongation on entitlement, each coastal State has the inherent right for200M continental shelf. As a legal term, natural prolongation is a basic concept for limiting the physical description beyond200M. It can be considered not only with the geomorphic prolongation, but also geological features. In this process of entitlement, submarine prominent features should be considered in order to clarify the prolongation categories. Concerning the process of marine delimitation, the prerequisite is that the legal continental shelf is the whole and integrated, no matter whether it extends beyond200M. Meanwhile, both the regimes of the EEZ and the continental shelf are equally important, which own the overlapping area within200M from the coastal State. That is, the water surface features, such as the coast configuration, the length of coastline and the economic interest cannot be ignored for the EEZ, as well as submarine features, for instance, the trench which has broken the natural prolongation for the State. However, in many delimitation cases, the factors of the EEZ have overweighed the ones of the continental shelf. Actually, both of them should be considered carefully in the process of adjustment for the provisional line as a national boundary.
4. Four types of submitted delimitation cases related to the ridge and ridge-like features classified according to the consideration of the natural prolongation and influence of the marine delimitation. There are67submissions by coast States to the Commission and the proportion of cases involved ridges has reached beyond50%. The cases which claim the area of the outer continental shelf more than200,000km2all involve the ridge issues. According to these cases, there are four types of ridges/ridge-like features cases:(1) obviously, natural components of continental margin and reasonable to be entitled the outer continental shelf, such as Australia and New Zealand.(2) Independent claim for the island combined with other related factors, such as fishers and economic interests, which would make these claims more reasonable, for instance, the cases by Iceland and Cook Island.(3) Claim of ridges stands by the nature of continental crust, such as case by Republic of Seychelles and Republic of Mauritius concerning the Mascarene Plateau. Two coastal States use the geological processes to illustrate the formation of the Mascarene Plateau with continental crust in order to get the outer continental shelf.(4) Ridge Jumping from the Landmass for invading and occupying neighboring State's continental shelf area, for instance, cases by Japan. For example simply, the OGP area is considered as a prolongation from the landmass by Japan. But, actually, it is a significant break along the SN trend between two areas with the average depth of more than4000meters. Concerning to this kind of prolongation background, according to the words of the International Court in the North Sea Continental Shelf Cases mentioned on marine delimitation in the first chart, the Norwegian Trough was referred, a650meters deep break that fringed the southern and south-western coasts of Norway. Instead of pronouncing the role of this geological body, the Court stated that this trough divided the shelf area into two parts. Therefore, the underwater shelf cannot be considered to be adjacent to the Norwegian coast, nor be its natural prolongation. The trench in Japan case is much deeper than Norwegian Trough, and there is no any reason to be explained as a natural prolongation. All of these situations are named by jumping circumstances in this thesis, as improper prolongations on marine delimitation. Therefore, if there would be space for some controversies because of the indefinite principles on submarine highs and ridges in three former types, the last one has been proved for no reasonableness and obviously to be contrary to the basic principle--natural prolongation.
5. Potential analysis of submarine fan as a special submarine body of sedimentary prolongation on marine delimitation, for instance, in the area named Bay of Bengal. According to the1982Convention, the depth of sediment and the trend of the slope are essential factors to be considered, which each modern submarine fan generally can change within the continental margin. Therefore, a modern submarine fan, as an independent submarine geological body is reasonable to be furthered by the scientists and jurists on marine delineation and even delimitation and some have been proved (or will be proved) to have the effect on the delineation of the outer edge of the continental margin, such as Bengal Fan, India Fan and Amazon Fan. There is still some space to consider that whether this Statement could be applied in other areas where the similar submarine geological/geomorphologic context exists. According to the analysis of three parts of a submarine fan, the gradient from the continental shelf to the continental base mostly depends on the configuration of the upper fan and the middle fan. Meanwhile, although the effect of the sediment geological origin has been refused by the Tribunal directly, there are still legal issues in geological contexts.
6. According to the1982Convention, a renewed process of marine delimitation steps are proposed in this thesis and some thoughts exist compared with the approaches of the Commission.
引文
[1]United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (1982), United Nations, New York,1997. Article 76(3):The continental margin comprises the submerged prolongation of the land mass of the coastal State, and consists of the seabed and subsoil of the shelf, the slope and the rise. It does not include the deep ocean floor with its oceanic ridges or the subsoil thereof; Article 76(6):...This paragraph does not apply to submarine elevations that are natural components of the continental margin, such as its plateau, rises, caps, banks and spurs
[2]It was aptly described by Ambassador Tommy Koh of Singapore, seen in Website://http://www.un.org/en/index.shtml, "A Constitution for the Oceans", Remarks by Tommy T. B. Koh, of Singapore President of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, Adapted from statements by the President on 6 and 11 December 1982 at the final session of the Conference at Montego Bay
[3]Website:http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_conventi on.htm
[4]1982 Convention Preamble; Also seen in:Christian Reichert., Determination of the outer continental shelf limits and the role of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 24(2009), at:387
[5]The evolution of the legal regime of the continental shelf, Part II, M. L. Jewett, The Canadian Yearbook of International Law,1982
[6]United Nations Legislative Series., Laws and Regulations on the Regime of the High Seas, Vol. Ⅰ, at 13,1981
[7]North Sea Continental Shelf cases, Judgment,1969,I. C. J. Rep.3, at:32
[8]Keith Highet, The use of Geophysical Factors in the delimitation of maritime boundaries, International Maritime Boundaries,1993
[9]United States, Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior,1945
[10]United Kingdom, Parliamentary Debates (Hansard),5th series, vol.459,1948, at 230
[11]United Nations Legislative Series, supra note 23, at 32
[12]United Nations Legislative Series, Laws and Regulations on the Regime of the High Seas, 1981, Vol. Ⅰ, at:13
[13]Ibid, at:15
[14]Ibid., at:6
[15]Ibid., at:15
[16]Ibid., at:9
[17]The evolution of the legal regime of the continental shelf,1982, Part Ⅱ, M. L. Jewett, The Canadian Yearbook of International Law
[18]Yearbook of the International Law Commission,1951, cited hereafter as I. L. C. Yb, vol. II, at:100
[19]The evolution of the legal regime of the continental shelf, Part II, M. L. Jewett, The Canadian Yearbook of International Law,1982, at:164
[20]I. L. C. Yb.,1950, vol. Ⅰ, at:165
[21]I. L. C. Yb.,1950, vol. Ⅰ, at:212
[22]I. L. C. Yb.,1950, vol. Ⅰ, at:234
[23]I. L. C. Yb.,1950, vol. Ⅱ, at:142
[24]United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, Summary Records of the Fourth Committee,1958. Argentina, at 3; Philippines, at 8; Yugoslavia, at:11; Ceylon, at:13; Mexico, at: 14; Portugal, at:15; Chile, at:16; Israel, at:16-17; United State, at:19; USSR, at:20; Cuba, at: 25; Venezuela, at:21; Australia, at:28, hereinafter the 1958 Convention
[25]I. L. C. Yb.,1951, vol. Ⅱ, at:169
[26]United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea,1958, Summary Records of the Fourth Committee
[27]Keith H, The use of geophysical factors in the delimitation of maritime boundaries,1993, International Maritime Boundaries, at:163-202:"Article 1 (a) to 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; (b) to the seabed and subsoil of similar submarine areas adjacent to the coasts of island
[28]United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea,1958, Report of the Fourth Committee, at: 74-75. The proposal was adopted by 41 votes to 7, with 12 abstentions
[29]United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea,1958, Report of the Fourth Committee, at: 74
[30]Keith H, The use of geophysical factors in the delimitation of maritime boundaries,1993, International Maritime Boundaries, at:163-202
[31]Lauterpacht K, Sovereignty over Submarine Areas,1950, Br. Yb. at:376
[32]Flourt, Plataforma Submarina,1952, United Nations
[33]Azcarraga, La Plataforma Submarina Derecho Internacional,1952
[34]Ferron, L'Evolution du regime juridique en haute mer,1951
[35]North Sea Continental Shelf Cases (Den/FRG; Neth./FRG),1969 I.C.J. REPS.3. See Friedmann, The North Sea Continental Shelf Cases-A Critique,64 AM. J. INT'L L.229-40 (1970); Jennings, the Limit of Continental Shelf Jurisdiction:Some Possible Implications of the North Sea Case Judgment 18 INT'L COMP. L.Q.819-32(1969)
[36]The special agreement among the parties spoke in terms of a high level of generality, asking the Court to decide the following question:'What principles and rules of international law are applicable to the delimitation as between the Parties of the areas of the continental shelf in the North Sea which appertain to each of them...?'
[37]Keith H, Whatever Became of Natural Prolongation,1995, Rights to oceanic resources, at: 87
[38]Ibid., at:76
[39]Agreements between Danmark and the Federal Republic of Germany Concerning the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf Between the two countries in the North Sea,1965, National Legislative Series, UN Doc. No.ST/LEG/SER. B/15, P.777(1970); I Canadian Annex113(1983); II Libyan Annex No.10,1983
[40]Agreements between the Federal Republic of Germany and The Netherlands Concerning the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf Between the two countries in the North Sea,1962, National Legislative Series, UN Doc. No. ST/LEG/SER.B/15,775(1970); Limits in the Seas No.10 Revised(1974); I Canadian Annex 95(1983)
[41]The North Sea Continental Shelf Cases,1970, International Relations, at:526
[42]I.C.J.,1969, Rep. at:22
[43]Keith H, The use of geophysical factors in the delimitation of maritime boundaries,1993, International Maritime Boundaries, at:166
[44]I. C. J.,1969, REPS.51, at:95
[45]Keith H, The use of geophysical factors in the delimitation of maritime boundaries,1993, International Maritime Boundaries, at:170
[46]Ibid., at:166
[47]Ibid., at:181
[48]UK-France Arbitration of 1976:Arbitration between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the French Republic on the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf (Decisions of the Court of Arbitration dated 30 June 1977 and 14 March 1978, Cmdg.7438, No. 15, at:63
[49]North Sea Continental Shelf Cases,1969 I.C.J. REPS.3 at:31
[50]Report and Recommendations to the Governments of Iceland and Norway of the Conciliation Commission on the Continental Shelf Area between Iceland and Jan Mayen,1981,I. L. M. at:797
[51]Ibid., at:803
[52]Keith H, The use of geophysical factors in the delimitation of maritime boundaries,1993, International Maritime Boundaries, at:173
[53]Case Concerning the Continental Shelf-Tunisia/Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,1982,I.C.J. REPS, at:18
[54]Agreement between the Great Libyan Arab Socialist People's Jamahariya and the Republic of Tunisia to Implement the Judgement of the International Court of Justice in the Tunisia-Libya Continental Shelf Case,1982,I.C.J. REPS, at:1673
[55]Keith H, The use of geophysical factors in the delimitation of maritime boundaries,1993, International Maritime Boundaries, at:173
[56]Ibid., at:174
[57]Ibid., at:176
[58]Treaty between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America to Submit to Binding Dispute Settlement the Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Gulf of Maine Area,1991, International Maritime Boundaries, at:401-406
[59]Ibid., at:407
[60]Award of the Arbitral Tribunal in the Third Party Settlement of the Maritime Boundary between Guinea and Guinea-Bissau,1991, International Maritime Boundaries, at:857
[61]Agreement between the Republic of Malta and the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahariya implementing article Ⅲ of the special agreement and the judgment of the International Court of Justice,1991, International Maritime Boundaries, at:1650
[62]Keith H, The use of geophysical factors in the delimitation of maritime boundaries,1993, International Maritime Boundaries, at:176
[63]Ibid., at:1656
[64]Keith H, Whatever became of natural prolongation, Rights to Oceanic Resources,2001
[65]Website:http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_convent ion.htm
[66]Website://http://www.itlos.org/index.php?id=2
[67]Website://http://www.isa.org.jm/en/home
[68]Website://http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/clcs_home.htm
[69]On 15 October 1971, the United Nations General Assembly voted to recognize the People's Republic of China (PRC) as the official representative of China. This paved the way for China to expand its role in the international negotiations on issues about which it had previously had little, if any, say. For example, China had not participated in either the first or second United Nations Conferences on the Law of the Sea held respectively in 1958 and 1960
[70]Declaration on the baseline of the Territorial Sea of the People's Republic of China,15 May 1996, Office of Ocean Affairs, at:9-10
[71]Gao Z G, China and the LOS Convention,1991, Marine Policy, at:199
[72]Zou K Y, China's exclusive economic zone and continental shelf:developments,2001, problems and prospects, Marine Policy, at:71-81
[73]Gao Z G., Jia Y., Zhang H W, The research on the international law of the sea,2011, China Maritime Press, at:45-49
[74]Seen from website: http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention agreements/convention overview convention.htm
[75]Levy J P, The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Part Ⅰ in Continental Shelf Limit-The Scientific and Legal Interface,2000, Oxford University Press, at:8
[76]Ibid., at:9
[77]Alex G O, Article 76 of the LOSC on the definition of the continental shelf:Questions concerning its interpretation from a legal perspective,2006, The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law,21(3), at:269-272
[78]The 1958 Convention, Article 1
[79]Levy J P, The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Part Ⅰ in Continental Shelf Limit-The Scientific and Legal Interface,2000, Oxford University Press, at:11; Also seen from United Nations Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea,1993, The Law of the Sea: Definition of the Continental Shelf, New York
[80]The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Article 76(1)
[81]Levy J P, The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Part I in Continental Shelf Limit-The Scientific and Legal Interface,2000, Oxford University Press, at:22; Also seen from United Nations Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea,1993, The Law of the Sea: Definition of the Continental Shelf, New York
[82]Ibid., at:23
[83]The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Article 83
[84]Lewis M A, The delimitation of maritime boundaries, Political Geography Quarterly,1986, Vol.5, at:19
[85]Lewis M A, The delimitation of maritime boundaries, Political Geography Quarterly,1986, Vol.5, at:20
[86]Statute of the International Court of Justice, signed at San Francisco on June 26,1945, Article 38
[87]North Sea Continental Shelf cases, Judgment,1969,I. C. J. Rep3
[88]United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, opened for signature December.10,1982, 1833 UNTS 397, reprinted in UNITED NATIONS, OFFICIAL TEXT OF THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA WITH ANNEXES AND INDEX, U.N Sales No. E.83.V.5
[89]Keith H, The use of geophysical factors in the delimitation of maritime boundaries,1993, International Maritime Boundaries, at:177
[90]1982 Convention, Article 76, paral-2
[91]Jogern L J., Milan T, The role of Natural Prolongation in relation to shelf delimitation beyond 200 Nautical Miles,1995, Nordic Journal of International Law,64, at:624
[92]Ibid., at:632
[93]Ibid., at:634
[94]Ibid., at:638
[95]Philip A S., Olav E, Characteristics of Continental Margins, Part 4 in Continental Shelf Limits of the Scientific and Legal Interface,2000, Oxford University Press, at:25
[96]Ibid., at:28
[97]Kennett J P, Marine Geology,1982, Englewood Cliffs
[98]Johnson D H, The North Sea Continental Shelf Cases,1970, International Relations, at: 522-540
[99]O'Connell D P, The International Law of the Sea,1982, Oxford UK, vol.1
[100]Prescott V, National Rights to Hydrocarbon Resource of the Continental Margin beyond 200 Nautical Miles,1998, Boundaries and Energy:Problems and Prospects, at:51-82
[101]Johnson D H, The North Sea Continental Shelf Cases,1970, International Relations, at: 522-540
[102]Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, Provisional Scientific and Technical Guidelines of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf,1998
[103]Philip A S., Olav E, Characteristics of Continental Margins, Part 4 in Continental Shelf Limits of the Scientific and Legal Interface,2000, Oxford University Press, at:27-28
[104]Hedberg H D, Ocean Boundaries and Petroleum Resources,1976, Science, at:1009-1018
[105]Ibid., at:1011
[106]Hedberg H D, Geomorphic Basis for National-International Boundaries on Ocean Floor, 1978, American Association of Petroleum Geologists, at:441-464
[107]Suess E., Das A,1885, v.1, Prague
[108]Philip A S., Olav E, Characteristics of Continental Margins, Part 4 in Continental Shelf Limits of the Scientific and Legal Interface,2000, Oxford University Press, at:32
[109]Einsele G, Sedimentary Basins-Evolution,1992, Facies and Sediment Budget
[110]Philip A S., Olav E, Characteristics of Continental Margins, Part 4 in Continental Shelf Limits of the Scientific and Legal Interface,2000, Oxford University Press, at:52
[111]Prescott V, National Rights to Hydrocarbon Resource of the Continental Margin beyond 200 Nautical Miles,1998, Boundaries and Energy:Problems and Prospects, at:53
[112]Inter-government Oceanographic Commission., Summary Report of the IOC/OSNLR ad Hoc Expert Consultation on UNCLOS,1995, IOC/INF in Paris
[113]Symonds P A., Willcox J B, Definition of the Continental Margin using U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (Article 76),1988, Bureau of Mineral Resources
[114]Antunes N.M., Pimentel F.M, Reflecting on the legal-technical interface of Article 76 of the LOSC:Tentative thoughts on practical implementation,2000, The Committee on the Legal Issues of the Outer Continental Shelf of the International Law Association, at:15-33
[115]DOALOS, namely Division of Ocean Affairs and Law of the Sea, The Law of the Sea, Definition of the Continental Shelf:An Examination of the Relevant Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea,1993, United Nations Publication Sales No.E.93. V16, United Nations, New York
[116]International Hydrographic Organization, Hydrographic Dictionary,1990, Special Publication no.32, International Hydrographic Bureau
[117]Nandan S N., Rosenne S, United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea a Commentary, 1995, Center for Oceans and Policy, University of Virginia School of Law, London
[118]Bates R L., Jackson J A, Glossary of Geology,1987, Alexandria, Virginia
[119]Geoscience Australia Record, Geomorphic Features of the Continental Margin of Australian,2003, Petroleum and Marine Division, Geoscience Australia
[120]Coffin M F., Eldholm O, Large Igneous Provinces:Crustal Structure, Dimensions and External Consequences,1994, Review of Geophysics, at:1-36
[121]Philip A S., Coffin M F, Ridge Issues, Part 18 in Continental Shelf Limits of the Scientific and Legal Interface,2000, Oxford University Press, at:299
[122]Summary of the Recommendation of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf in regard to the Submission made by Australia on 15 November,2004; Summary of the Recommendation of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf in regard to the Submission made by New Zealand on 19 April,2006
[123]Additional Protocol to the Agreement of 28 May 1980 Between Norway and Iceland concerning Fishery and Continental Shelf Questions and the Agreement derived from 22 October 1981 on the Continental Shelf between Jan Mayen and Iceland,11 November 1997
[124]The Icelandic Continental Shelf, Partial Submission to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf pursuant to article 76, Paragraph 8 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in respect of the Egir Basin area and Reykianes Ridge
[125]Submission by the Cook Islands to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf concerning the Manihiki Plateau by April 2009
[126]Joint Submission to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf concerning the Mascarene Plateau region by Republic of Seychelles and Republic of Mauritius in December, 2008
[127]Japan's Submission to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental'Shelf pursuant to Article 76, paragraph 8 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in 2008
[128]A partial Submission of data and information on the Outer Limits of the Continental Shelf of the Continental Shelf of the Republic of the Philippines pursuant to Article 76(8) of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in 2009
[129]Tomasz G, A Note on Submarine Ridges and Elevations with Special Reference to the Russian Federation and the Arctic Ridges,2009, Ocean Development and International Law, at: 51-60
[130]Harald B., Symonds P A, Submarine Ridges and Elevations of Article 76 in Light of Published Summaries of Recommendations of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf,2011, Ocean Development and International Law, at:289-303
[131]The Astoria Fan lies on an active subduction zone along the coastline of Canada, while receives sufficient sediment from the Astoria submarine canyon. See in:Piper J W., Normark W R, Sandy fans-from Amazon to Hueneme and beyond,2000, The American Association of Petroleum Geologists, at:1426
[132]The Delgada fan is an irregularly shaped turbidite deposit extending more than 350 km offshore from northern California with two large valley-units fed, seen in:William R N., Christina E G,1983, Delgada Fan:Preliminary interpretation of channel development. Geo-Marine Letters (3), at:79-83
[133]Shanmugam G., Moiola R J, Submarine fans:Characteristics, models, classification, and reservoir potential,1988, Earth-Science Reviews,24 at:385
[134]Piper J W., Normark W R, Sandy fans-from Amazon to Hueneme and beyond,2000, The American Association of Petroleum Geologists, at:1409
[135]Normark W R., Submarine canyons and fan valleys affecting growth patterns of deep sea fans,1974, Modern and Ancient Geosynclinals Sedimentation,19 at:56-68
[136]Mutti E., Johns D R, The role of sedimentary by passing in the genesis of fan fringe and basin plain turbidities in the Hecho Group system (south-central Pyrenees),1978, Memorie Societal Geologica Italian,18 at:15-22
[137]Normark W R., Growth patterns of deep sea fans,1970, Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull,54 at: 2170-2195; Mutti E., Ricci L T, Turbidites of the Northern Apennines:Introduction to facies analysis (English translation by Nilsen T H,1978),1972, Int. Geol. Rev,20, at:125-166
[138]The Quaternary Period is the most recent of the Cenozoic Era in the geologic time scale. It follows the Neogene Period and spans from 2.588±0.005 million years ago to the present; see Web site:http://zh.wikipedia.org
[139]The "stratum" is a geological term, namely the geological layer
[140]Mattern F, Ancient sand-rich submarine fans:depositional systems, models, identification and analysis,2005, Earth-Science Reviews,70, at:179-181
[141]Ibid., at:167-202
[142]Article 76(4) (a) of the 1982 Convention:(i) a line delineated in accordance with paragraph 7 by reference to the outermost fixed points at each of which the thickness of sedimentary rocks is at least 1 per cent of the shortest distance from such point to the foot of the continental slope; or (ii) a line delineated in accordance with paragraph 7 by reference to fixed points not more than 60 nautical miles from the foot of the continental slope
[143]Shanmgam G., Moiola R J, Submarine fans:characteristics, models, classification and reservoir potential,1988, Earth-Science Reviews,24 at:383-428; Shanmugam G., Moiola R J, Comparison of turbidite facies associations in modern passive-margin Mississippi Fan with ancient active-margin fans,1988, Sedimentary Geology,58, at:63-77
[144]In geology, the term "sedimentary facies" is a body of rock with specified characteristics. A facies is a distinctive rock unit that forms under certain conditions of sedimentation, reflecting a particular process or environment in ancient times. See Web site: http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia
[145]Shanmgam G., Moiola R J, Submarine fans:characteristics, models, classification and reservoir potential,1988, Earth-Science Reviews,24, at:393; Lv B Q, Survey of marine geology, 2008, Tong Ji University
[146]Bouma A H., Normark W R., Barnes N E, Submarine fans and related turbidite systems, 1985, Springer-Verlag, at:351
[147]There are two main kinds of the continental margin in geology:the active continental margin and the passive continental margin. Earthquakes and volcanic eruptions are common on the active continental margin with narrow shelves. In contrast, most passive continental margins have broad continental shelves and rare earthquakes. In addition, the active continental margin is near plate boundary whereas the passive continental margin is further away from the plate boundary
[148]Einsele G L., Wetzel R A, The Himalaya Bengal Fan Denudation-accumulation System during the Past 20 Ma,1996, J. Geol,104, at:163-184
[149]Bouma A H, Coarse-grained and fine-grained turbidite systems as end member models: applicability and dangers,2000, Mar. Pet. Geol,17, at:137-143
[150]Mattern F, Ancient sand-rich submarine fans:depositional systems, models, identification and analysis,2004, Earth-Science Reviews, at:178
[151]Liu L., Cao L., Xu K Z, Formation types of turbidity current systems and the relationship with sea-level (In Chinese),1995, World Geology,4, at:8-12
[152]BoumaA H, Coarse-grained and fine-grained turbidite systems as end member models: applicability and dangers,2000, Pet. Geol,17, at:137-143.
[153]Schwalbach J R., Edwards B E., Gorsline D S, Contemporary channel-levee systems in active borderland basin plains, California Continental Borderland,1996, Sediment. Geology,104, at:53-72
[154]The Hueneme Fan is located in the tectonically active, transpressional Santa Monica Basin of the California continental borderland. See in:Piper J W., Normark W R, Sandy fans-fro Amazon to Hueneme and beyond,2001, AAPG Bulletin,85(8), at:1410
[155]Normark W R., Piper D J., Hiscott R N, Sea level controls on the textural characteristics and depositional architecture of the Hueneme and associated submarine fan systems, Santa Monica Basin,1998,California Sedimentology,45, at:53-70
[156]Mattern F, Ancient sand-rich submarine fans:depositional systems, models, identification and analysis,2004, Earth-Science Reviews,70, at:176-177
[157]Normark W R., Piper D J., Hiscott R N, Sea level controls on the textural characteristics and depositional architecture of the Hueneme and associated submarine fan systems, Santa Monica Basin,1998, California Sedimentology,45, at:53-70
[158]The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, Scientific and Technical Guideline of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, Adopted by the Commission on 13 May 1999 at its fifth session
[159]Curray J R., Emmel F J., Moore D G, The Bengal Fan:morphology, geometry, stratigraphy, history and processes,2003, Marine and Petroleum Geology,19, at:1193
[160]Richards M., Bowman M., Reading M H,1998, Submarine-fan systems Ⅰ:characterization and stratigraphi prediction. Marine and Petroleum Geology,15, at:689-690
[161]Curray J R., Moore D J, Growth of the Bengal Deep-Sea Fan and denudation in the Himalayas,1971, Bulletin of the Geological Society of America,82, at:563-572; Curray J R., Moore D J, Sedimentary and tectonic processes in the Bengal Deep-Sea Fan and geosynclines, 1974, Geology of the Continental Margins, in G. A. Burke, and C. L. Drake, (eds.), New York, at: 617-627
[162]Haq B U, The Destruction of the Tethys and Paleoceanog raphic Development of the Indian Ocean,1985, Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission, UN-ESCO Workshop Report,37, at:55-79
[163]Curray J R., Emmel F J., Moore D G, The Bengal Fan:morphology, geometry, stratigraphy, history and processes,2003, Marine and Petroleum Geology,19, at:1191-1192
[164]Ibid., at:1196
[165]Prins M A., Postma G., Clveringa J, Controls on terrigenous sediment supply to the Arabian Sea during the late Quaternary:the Indus Fan,2000, Marine Geology, at:169; Data Sources from GeoMapApp Web site
[166]International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea YEAR 2012, Dispute concerning delimitation of the maritime boundary between Bangladesh and Myanmar in the Bay of Bengal (Judgment)
[167]International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea Year 2012, Judgment of dispute concerning delimitation of the maritime boundary between Bangladesh and Myanmar in the Bay of Bengal (Judgment),2012, at:Para 322
[168]Ibid., para 397
[169]Ibid., para 322
[170]Ibid., para 324-325
[171]Ibid., para 455-456
[172]Final Act of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, from Scientific and Technical Guidelines of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf,1999, The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. Sixth Session, New York
[173]Annex II of Statement to Understanding Concerning a Special Method to be used in establishing the Outer Edge of the Continental Margin,1999, Final Act of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, Sixth Session, New York
[174]Part 19, namely Deep Sea Fan Issues, Continental Shelf Limit, The Scientific and Legal Interface,2000, Peter J C and Chris M C (eds).at:308-311
[175]Data Sources from Geo Map App Web site:http://www.geomapapp.org/
[176]Data is from the Submission by The Peoples'Republic of Bangladesh, Executive Summary, February,2011; Continental Shelf Submission of Union of Myanmar, Executive Summary, December,2008
[177]Continental Shelf Submission of Sri Lanka, at:12
[178]International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea YEAR 2012, Dispute concerning delimitation of the maritime boundary between Bangladesh and Myanmar in the Bay of Bengal(Judgment),at:447:The Tribunal observes that the text of Article 76 of the Convention does not support the view that the geographic origin of the sedimentary rocks of the continental margin is of relevance to the question of entitlement to the continental shelf or constitutes a controlling criterion for determining whether a State is entitled to a continental shelf
[179]McHargue T R., Webb J E, Internal geometry, seismic facies, and petroleum potential of canyons and inner fan channels of the inner Indus Submarine Fan,1986, Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geolbull,70, at:162-180
[180]Executive Summary of the Indian Continental Shelf, V. Relevant Maritime Delimitations, 2009; Submission by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan for Establishment of the Outer Limits of the Continental Shelf of Pakistan, Part 2:the Outer Limits of the Extended Continental Shelf of Pakistan in the Arabian Sea,2009
[2]It was aptly described by Ambassador Tommy Koh of Singapore, seen in Website://http://www.un.org/en/index.shtml, "A Constitution for the Oceans", Remarks by Tommy T. B. Koh, of Singapore President of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, Adapted from statements by the President on 6 and 11 December 1982 at the final session of the Conference at Montego Bay
[3]Website:http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_conventi on.htm
[4]1982 Convention Preamble; Also seen in:Christian Reichert., Determination of the outer continental shelf limits and the role of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 24(2009), at:387
[5]The evolution of the legal regime of the continental shelf, Part II, M. L. Jewett, The Canadian Yearbook of International Law,1982
[6]United Nations Legislative Series., Laws and Regulations on the Regime of the High Seas, Vol. Ⅰ, at 13,1981
[7]North Sea Continental Shelf cases, Judgment,1969,I. C. J. Rep.3, at:32
[8]Keith Highet, The use of Geophysical Factors in the delimitation of maritime boundaries, International Maritime Boundaries,1993
[9]United States, Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior,1945
[10]United Kingdom, Parliamentary Debates (Hansard),5th series, vol.459,1948, at 230
[11]United Nations Legislative Series, supra note 23, at 32
[12]United Nations Legislative Series, Laws and Regulations on the Regime of the High Seas, 1981, Vol. Ⅰ, at:13
[13]Ibid, at:15
[14]Ibid., at:6
[15]Ibid., at:15
[16]Ibid., at:9
[17]The evolution of the legal regime of the continental shelf,1982, Part Ⅱ, M. L. Jewett, The Canadian Yearbook of International Law
[18]Yearbook of the International Law Commission,1951, cited hereafter as I. L. C. Yb, vol. II, at:100
[19]The evolution of the legal regime of the continental shelf, Part II, M. L. Jewett, The Canadian Yearbook of International Law,1982, at:164
[20]I. L. C. Yb.,1950, vol. Ⅰ, at:165
[21]I. L. C. Yb.,1950, vol. Ⅰ, at:212
[22]I. L. C. Yb.,1950, vol. Ⅰ, at:234
[23]I. L. C. Yb.,1950, vol. Ⅱ, at:142
[24]United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, Summary Records of the Fourth Committee,1958. Argentina, at 3; Philippines, at 8; Yugoslavia, at:11; Ceylon, at:13; Mexico, at: 14; Portugal, at:15; Chile, at:16; Israel, at:16-17; United State, at:19; USSR, at:20; Cuba, at: 25; Venezuela, at:21; Australia, at:28, hereinafter the 1958 Convention
[25]I. L. C. Yb.,1951, vol. Ⅱ, at:169
[26]United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea,1958, Summary Records of the Fourth Committee
[27]Keith H, The use of geophysical factors in the delimitation of maritime boundaries,1993, International Maritime Boundaries, at:163-202:"Article 1 (a) to 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; (b) to the seabed and subsoil of similar submarine areas adjacent to the coasts of island
[28]United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea,1958, Report of the Fourth Committee, at: 74-75. The proposal was adopted by 41 votes to 7, with 12 abstentions
[29]United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea,1958, Report of the Fourth Committee, at: 74
[30]Keith H, The use of geophysical factors in the delimitation of maritime boundaries,1993, International Maritime Boundaries, at:163-202
[31]Lauterpacht K, Sovereignty over Submarine Areas,1950, Br. Yb. at:376
[32]Flourt, Plataforma Submarina,1952, United Nations
[33]Azcarraga, La Plataforma Submarina Derecho Internacional,1952
[34]Ferron, L'Evolution du regime juridique en haute mer,1951
[35]North Sea Continental Shelf Cases (Den/FRG; Neth./FRG),1969 I.C.J. REPS.3. See Friedmann, The North Sea Continental Shelf Cases-A Critique,64 AM. J. INT'L L.229-40 (1970); Jennings, the Limit of Continental Shelf Jurisdiction:Some Possible Implications of the North Sea Case Judgment 18 INT'L COMP. L.Q.819-32(1969)
[36]The special agreement among the parties spoke in terms of a high level of generality, asking the Court to decide the following question:'What principles and rules of international law are applicable to the delimitation as between the Parties of the areas of the continental shelf in the North Sea which appertain to each of them...?'
[37]Keith H, Whatever Became of Natural Prolongation,1995, Rights to oceanic resources, at: 87
[38]Ibid., at:76
[39]Agreements between Danmark and the Federal Republic of Germany Concerning the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf Between the two countries in the North Sea,1965, National Legislative Series, UN Doc. No.ST/LEG/SER. B/15, P.777(1970); I Canadian Annex113(1983); II Libyan Annex No.10,1983
[40]Agreements between the Federal Republic of Germany and The Netherlands Concerning the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf Between the two countries in the North Sea,1962, National Legislative Series, UN Doc. No. ST/LEG/SER.B/15,775(1970); Limits in the Seas No.10 Revised(1974); I Canadian Annex 95(1983)
[41]The North Sea Continental Shelf Cases,1970, International Relations, at:526
[42]I.C.J.,1969, Rep. at:22
[43]Keith H, The use of geophysical factors in the delimitation of maritime boundaries,1993, International Maritime Boundaries, at:166
[44]I. C. J.,1969, REPS.51, at:95
[45]Keith H, The use of geophysical factors in the delimitation of maritime boundaries,1993, International Maritime Boundaries, at:170
[46]Ibid., at:166
[47]Ibid., at:181
[48]UK-France Arbitration of 1976:Arbitration between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the French Republic on the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf (Decisions of the Court of Arbitration dated 30 June 1977 and 14 March 1978, Cmdg.7438, No. 15, at:63
[49]North Sea Continental Shelf Cases,1969 I.C.J. REPS.3 at:31
[50]Report and Recommendations to the Governments of Iceland and Norway of the Conciliation Commission on the Continental Shelf Area between Iceland and Jan Mayen,1981,I. L. M. at:797
[51]Ibid., at:803
[52]Keith H, The use of geophysical factors in the delimitation of maritime boundaries,1993, International Maritime Boundaries, at:173
[53]Case Concerning the Continental Shelf-Tunisia/Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,1982,I.C.J. REPS, at:18
[54]Agreement between the Great Libyan Arab Socialist People's Jamahariya and the Republic of Tunisia to Implement the Judgement of the International Court of Justice in the Tunisia-Libya Continental Shelf Case,1982,I.C.J. REPS, at:1673
[55]Keith H, The use of geophysical factors in the delimitation of maritime boundaries,1993, International Maritime Boundaries, at:173
[56]Ibid., at:174
[57]Ibid., at:176
[58]Treaty between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America to Submit to Binding Dispute Settlement the Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Gulf of Maine Area,1991, International Maritime Boundaries, at:401-406
[59]Ibid., at:407
[60]Award of the Arbitral Tribunal in the Third Party Settlement of the Maritime Boundary between Guinea and Guinea-Bissau,1991, International Maritime Boundaries, at:857
[61]Agreement between the Republic of Malta and the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahariya implementing article Ⅲ of the special agreement and the judgment of the International Court of Justice,1991, International Maritime Boundaries, at:1650
[62]Keith H, The use of geophysical factors in the delimitation of maritime boundaries,1993, International Maritime Boundaries, at:176
[63]Ibid., at:1656
[64]Keith H, Whatever became of natural prolongation, Rights to Oceanic Resources,2001
[65]Website:http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_convent ion.htm
[66]Website://http://www.itlos.org/index.php?id=2
[67]Website://http://www.isa.org.jm/en/home
[68]Website://http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/clcs_home.htm
[69]On 15 October 1971, the United Nations General Assembly voted to recognize the People's Republic of China (PRC) as the official representative of China. This paved the way for China to expand its role in the international negotiations on issues about which it had previously had little, if any, say. For example, China had not participated in either the first or second United Nations Conferences on the Law of the Sea held respectively in 1958 and 1960
[70]Declaration on the baseline of the Territorial Sea of the People's Republic of China,15 May 1996, Office of Ocean Affairs, at:9-10
[71]Gao Z G, China and the LOS Convention,1991, Marine Policy, at:199
[72]Zou K Y, China's exclusive economic zone and continental shelf:developments,2001, problems and prospects, Marine Policy, at:71-81
[73]Gao Z G., Jia Y., Zhang H W, The research on the international law of the sea,2011, China Maritime Press, at:45-49
[74]Seen from website: http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention agreements/convention overview convention.htm
[75]Levy J P, The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Part Ⅰ in Continental Shelf Limit-The Scientific and Legal Interface,2000, Oxford University Press, at:8
[76]Ibid., at:9
[77]Alex G O, Article 76 of the LOSC on the definition of the continental shelf:Questions concerning its interpretation from a legal perspective,2006, The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law,21(3), at:269-272
[78]The 1958 Convention, Article 1
[79]Levy J P, The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Part Ⅰ in Continental Shelf Limit-The Scientific and Legal Interface,2000, Oxford University Press, at:11; Also seen from United Nations Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea,1993, The Law of the Sea: Definition of the Continental Shelf, New York
[80]The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Article 76(1)
[81]Levy J P, The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Part I in Continental Shelf Limit-The Scientific and Legal Interface,2000, Oxford University Press, at:22; Also seen from United Nations Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea,1993, The Law of the Sea: Definition of the Continental Shelf, New York
[82]Ibid., at:23
[83]The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Article 83
[84]Lewis M A, The delimitation of maritime boundaries, Political Geography Quarterly,1986, Vol.5, at:19
[85]Lewis M A, The delimitation of maritime boundaries, Political Geography Quarterly,1986, Vol.5, at:20
[86]Statute of the International Court of Justice, signed at San Francisco on June 26,1945, Article 38
[87]North Sea Continental Shelf cases, Judgment,1969,I. C. J. Rep3
[88]United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, opened for signature December.10,1982, 1833 UNTS 397, reprinted in UNITED NATIONS, OFFICIAL TEXT OF THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA WITH ANNEXES AND INDEX, U.N Sales No. E.83.V.5
[89]Keith H, The use of geophysical factors in the delimitation of maritime boundaries,1993, International Maritime Boundaries, at:177
[90]1982 Convention, Article 76, paral-2
[91]Jogern L J., Milan T, The role of Natural Prolongation in relation to shelf delimitation beyond 200 Nautical Miles,1995, Nordic Journal of International Law,64, at:624
[92]Ibid., at:632
[93]Ibid., at:634
[94]Ibid., at:638
[95]Philip A S., Olav E, Characteristics of Continental Margins, Part 4 in Continental Shelf Limits of the Scientific and Legal Interface,2000, Oxford University Press, at:25
[96]Ibid., at:28
[97]Kennett J P, Marine Geology,1982, Englewood Cliffs
[98]Johnson D H, The North Sea Continental Shelf Cases,1970, International Relations, at: 522-540
[99]O'Connell D P, The International Law of the Sea,1982, Oxford UK, vol.1
[100]Prescott V, National Rights to Hydrocarbon Resource of the Continental Margin beyond 200 Nautical Miles,1998, Boundaries and Energy:Problems and Prospects, at:51-82
[101]Johnson D H, The North Sea Continental Shelf Cases,1970, International Relations, at: 522-540
[102]Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, Provisional Scientific and Technical Guidelines of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf,1998
[103]Philip A S., Olav E, Characteristics of Continental Margins, Part 4 in Continental Shelf Limits of the Scientific and Legal Interface,2000, Oxford University Press, at:27-28
[104]Hedberg H D, Ocean Boundaries and Petroleum Resources,1976, Science, at:1009-1018
[105]Ibid., at:1011
[106]Hedberg H D, Geomorphic Basis for National-International Boundaries on Ocean Floor, 1978, American Association of Petroleum Geologists, at:441-464
[107]Suess E., Das A,1885, v.1, Prague
[108]Philip A S., Olav E, Characteristics of Continental Margins, Part 4 in Continental Shelf Limits of the Scientific and Legal Interface,2000, Oxford University Press, at:32
[109]Einsele G, Sedimentary Basins-Evolution,1992, Facies and Sediment Budget
[110]Philip A S., Olav E, Characteristics of Continental Margins, Part 4 in Continental Shelf Limits of the Scientific and Legal Interface,2000, Oxford University Press, at:52
[111]Prescott V, National Rights to Hydrocarbon Resource of the Continental Margin beyond 200 Nautical Miles,1998, Boundaries and Energy:Problems and Prospects, at:53
[112]Inter-government Oceanographic Commission., Summary Report of the IOC/OSNLR ad Hoc Expert Consultation on UNCLOS,1995, IOC/INF in Paris
[113]Symonds P A., Willcox J B, Definition of the Continental Margin using U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (Article 76),1988, Bureau of Mineral Resources
[114]Antunes N.M., Pimentel F.M, Reflecting on the legal-technical interface of Article 76 of the LOSC:Tentative thoughts on practical implementation,2000, The Committee on the Legal Issues of the Outer Continental Shelf of the International Law Association, at:15-33
[115]DOALOS, namely Division of Ocean Affairs and Law of the Sea, The Law of the Sea, Definition of the Continental Shelf:An Examination of the Relevant Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea,1993, United Nations Publication Sales No.E.93. V16, United Nations, New York
[116]International Hydrographic Organization, Hydrographic Dictionary,1990, Special Publication no.32, International Hydrographic Bureau
[117]Nandan S N., Rosenne S, United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea a Commentary, 1995, Center for Oceans and Policy, University of Virginia School of Law, London
[118]Bates R L., Jackson J A, Glossary of Geology,1987, Alexandria, Virginia
[119]Geoscience Australia Record, Geomorphic Features of the Continental Margin of Australian,2003, Petroleum and Marine Division, Geoscience Australia
[120]Coffin M F., Eldholm O, Large Igneous Provinces:Crustal Structure, Dimensions and External Consequences,1994, Review of Geophysics, at:1-36
[121]Philip A S., Coffin M F, Ridge Issues, Part 18 in Continental Shelf Limits of the Scientific and Legal Interface,2000, Oxford University Press, at:299
[122]Summary of the Recommendation of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf in regard to the Submission made by Australia on 15 November,2004; Summary of the Recommendation of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf in regard to the Submission made by New Zealand on 19 April,2006
[123]Additional Protocol to the Agreement of 28 May 1980 Between Norway and Iceland concerning Fishery and Continental Shelf Questions and the Agreement derived from 22 October 1981 on the Continental Shelf between Jan Mayen and Iceland,11 November 1997
[124]The Icelandic Continental Shelf, Partial Submission to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf pursuant to article 76, Paragraph 8 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in respect of the Egir Basin area and Reykianes Ridge
[125]Submission by the Cook Islands to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf concerning the Manihiki Plateau by April 2009
[126]Joint Submission to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf concerning the Mascarene Plateau region by Republic of Seychelles and Republic of Mauritius in December, 2008
[127]Japan's Submission to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental'Shelf pursuant to Article 76, paragraph 8 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in 2008
[128]A partial Submission of data and information on the Outer Limits of the Continental Shelf of the Continental Shelf of the Republic of the Philippines pursuant to Article 76(8) of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in 2009
[129]Tomasz G, A Note on Submarine Ridges and Elevations with Special Reference to the Russian Federation and the Arctic Ridges,2009, Ocean Development and International Law, at: 51-60
[130]Harald B., Symonds P A, Submarine Ridges and Elevations of Article 76 in Light of Published Summaries of Recommendations of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf,2011, Ocean Development and International Law, at:289-303
[131]The Astoria Fan lies on an active subduction zone along the coastline of Canada, while receives sufficient sediment from the Astoria submarine canyon. See in:Piper J W., Normark W R, Sandy fans-from Amazon to Hueneme and beyond,2000, The American Association of Petroleum Geologists, at:1426
[132]The Delgada fan is an irregularly shaped turbidite deposit extending more than 350 km offshore from northern California with two large valley-units fed, seen in:William R N., Christina E G,1983, Delgada Fan:Preliminary interpretation of channel development. Geo-Marine Letters (3), at:79-83
[133]Shanmugam G., Moiola R J, Submarine fans:Characteristics, models, classification, and reservoir potential,1988, Earth-Science Reviews,24 at:385
[134]Piper J W., Normark W R, Sandy fans-from Amazon to Hueneme and beyond,2000, The American Association of Petroleum Geologists, at:1409
[135]Normark W R., Submarine canyons and fan valleys affecting growth patterns of deep sea fans,1974, Modern and Ancient Geosynclinals Sedimentation,19 at:56-68
[136]Mutti E., Johns D R, The role of sedimentary by passing in the genesis of fan fringe and basin plain turbidities in the Hecho Group system (south-central Pyrenees),1978, Memorie Societal Geologica Italian,18 at:15-22
[137]Normark W R., Growth patterns of deep sea fans,1970, Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull,54 at: 2170-2195; Mutti E., Ricci L T, Turbidites of the Northern Apennines:Introduction to facies analysis (English translation by Nilsen T H,1978),1972, Int. Geol. Rev,20, at:125-166
[138]The Quaternary Period is the most recent of the Cenozoic Era in the geologic time scale. It follows the Neogene Period and spans from 2.588±0.005 million years ago to the present; see Web site:http://zh.wikipedia.org
[139]The "stratum" is a geological term, namely the geological layer
[140]Mattern F, Ancient sand-rich submarine fans:depositional systems, models, identification and analysis,2005, Earth-Science Reviews,70, at:179-181
[141]Ibid., at:167-202
[142]Article 76(4) (a) of the 1982 Convention:(i) a line delineated in accordance with paragraph 7 by reference to the outermost fixed points at each of which the thickness of sedimentary rocks is at least 1 per cent of the shortest distance from such point to the foot of the continental slope; or (ii) a line delineated in accordance with paragraph 7 by reference to fixed points not more than 60 nautical miles from the foot of the continental slope
[143]Shanmgam G., Moiola R J, Submarine fans:characteristics, models, classification and reservoir potential,1988, Earth-Science Reviews,24 at:383-428; Shanmugam G., Moiola R J, Comparison of turbidite facies associations in modern passive-margin Mississippi Fan with ancient active-margin fans,1988, Sedimentary Geology,58, at:63-77
[144]In geology, the term "sedimentary facies" is a body of rock with specified characteristics. A facies is a distinctive rock unit that forms under certain conditions of sedimentation, reflecting a particular process or environment in ancient times. See Web site: http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia
[145]Shanmgam G., Moiola R J, Submarine fans:characteristics, models, classification and reservoir potential,1988, Earth-Science Reviews,24, at:393; Lv B Q, Survey of marine geology, 2008, Tong Ji University
[146]Bouma A H., Normark W R., Barnes N E, Submarine fans and related turbidite systems, 1985, Springer-Verlag, at:351
[147]There are two main kinds of the continental margin in geology:the active continental margin and the passive continental margin. Earthquakes and volcanic eruptions are common on the active continental margin with narrow shelves. In contrast, most passive continental margins have broad continental shelves and rare earthquakes. In addition, the active continental margin is near plate boundary whereas the passive continental margin is further away from the plate boundary
[148]Einsele G L., Wetzel R A, The Himalaya Bengal Fan Denudation-accumulation System during the Past 20 Ma,1996, J. Geol,104, at:163-184
[149]Bouma A H, Coarse-grained and fine-grained turbidite systems as end member models: applicability and dangers,2000, Mar. Pet. Geol,17, at:137-143
[150]Mattern F, Ancient sand-rich submarine fans:depositional systems, models, identification and analysis,2004, Earth-Science Reviews, at:178
[151]Liu L., Cao L., Xu K Z, Formation types of turbidity current systems and the relationship with sea-level (In Chinese),1995, World Geology,4, at:8-12
[152]BoumaA H, Coarse-grained and fine-grained turbidite systems as end member models: applicability and dangers,2000, Pet. Geol,17, at:137-143.
[153]Schwalbach J R., Edwards B E., Gorsline D S, Contemporary channel-levee systems in active borderland basin plains, California Continental Borderland,1996, Sediment. Geology,104, at:53-72
[154]The Hueneme Fan is located in the tectonically active, transpressional Santa Monica Basin of the California continental borderland. See in:Piper J W., Normark W R, Sandy fans-fro Amazon to Hueneme and beyond,2001, AAPG Bulletin,85(8), at:1410
[155]Normark W R., Piper D J., Hiscott R N, Sea level controls on the textural characteristics and depositional architecture of the Hueneme and associated submarine fan systems, Santa Monica Basin,1998,California Sedimentology,45, at:53-70
[156]Mattern F, Ancient sand-rich submarine fans:depositional systems, models, identification and analysis,2004, Earth-Science Reviews,70, at:176-177
[157]Normark W R., Piper D J., Hiscott R N, Sea level controls on the textural characteristics and depositional architecture of the Hueneme and associated submarine fan systems, Santa Monica Basin,1998, California Sedimentology,45, at:53-70
[158]The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, Scientific and Technical Guideline of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, Adopted by the Commission on 13 May 1999 at its fifth session
[159]Curray J R., Emmel F J., Moore D G, The Bengal Fan:morphology, geometry, stratigraphy, history and processes,2003, Marine and Petroleum Geology,19, at:1193
[160]Richards M., Bowman M., Reading M H,1998, Submarine-fan systems Ⅰ:characterization and stratigraphi prediction. Marine and Petroleum Geology,15, at:689-690
[161]Curray J R., Moore D J, Growth of the Bengal Deep-Sea Fan and denudation in the Himalayas,1971, Bulletin of the Geological Society of America,82, at:563-572; Curray J R., Moore D J, Sedimentary and tectonic processes in the Bengal Deep-Sea Fan and geosynclines, 1974, Geology of the Continental Margins, in G. A. Burke, and C. L. Drake, (eds.), New York, at: 617-627
[162]Haq B U, The Destruction of the Tethys and Paleoceanog raphic Development of the Indian Ocean,1985, Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission, UN-ESCO Workshop Report,37, at:55-79
[163]Curray J R., Emmel F J., Moore D G, The Bengal Fan:morphology, geometry, stratigraphy, history and processes,2003, Marine and Petroleum Geology,19, at:1191-1192
[164]Ibid., at:1196
[165]Prins M A., Postma G., Clveringa J, Controls on terrigenous sediment supply to the Arabian Sea during the late Quaternary:the Indus Fan,2000, Marine Geology, at:169; Data Sources from GeoMapApp Web site
[166]International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea YEAR 2012, Dispute concerning delimitation of the maritime boundary between Bangladesh and Myanmar in the Bay of Bengal (Judgment)
[167]International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea Year 2012, Judgment of dispute concerning delimitation of the maritime boundary between Bangladesh and Myanmar in the Bay of Bengal (Judgment),2012, at:Para 322
[168]Ibid., para 397
[169]Ibid., para 322
[170]Ibid., para 324-325
[171]Ibid., para 455-456
[172]Final Act of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, from Scientific and Technical Guidelines of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf,1999, The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. Sixth Session, New York
[173]Annex II of Statement to Understanding Concerning a Special Method to be used in establishing the Outer Edge of the Continental Margin,1999, Final Act of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, Sixth Session, New York
[174]Part 19, namely Deep Sea Fan Issues, Continental Shelf Limit, The Scientific and Legal Interface,2000, Peter J C and Chris M C (eds).at:308-311
[175]Data Sources from Geo Map App Web site:http://www.geomapapp.org/
[176]Data is from the Submission by The Peoples'Republic of Bangladesh, Executive Summary, February,2011; Continental Shelf Submission of Union of Myanmar, Executive Summary, December,2008
[177]Continental Shelf Submission of Sri Lanka, at:12
[178]International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea YEAR 2012, Dispute concerning delimitation of the maritime boundary between Bangladesh and Myanmar in the Bay of Bengal(Judgment),at:447:The Tribunal observes that the text of Article 76 of the Convention does not support the view that the geographic origin of the sedimentary rocks of the continental margin is of relevance to the question of entitlement to the continental shelf or constitutes a controlling criterion for determining whether a State is entitled to a continental shelf
[179]McHargue T R., Webb J E, Internal geometry, seismic facies, and petroleum potential of canyons and inner fan channels of the inner Indus Submarine Fan,1986, Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geolbull,70, at:162-180
[180]Executive Summary of the Indian Continental Shelf, V. Relevant Maritime Delimitations, 2009; Submission by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan for Establishment of the Outer Limits of the Continental Shelf of Pakistan, Part 2:the Outer Limits of the Extended Continental Shelf of Pakistan in the Arabian Sea,2009