th
9
SPC HOF Meeting
(Noumea, 6-12 March 2015)
Regional overview of maritime boundaries
in the Pacific
Geoscience Division: Pacific Islands Maritime Boundaries Unit
Jens Kruger – Head of Ocean & Coastal Geoscience, GSD
Andrick Lal – Project Officer (Surveying)
Emily Artack – Maritime Boundaries Technical Officer (Cartographer)
Outline
• Brief overview of the Regional Maritime Boundaries
Project at Geoscience Division (formerly known as
SOPAC)
• Technical & Legal Component of activities of the Project
Unit and its partners
• Update on recent negotiations and endorsement of 13
treaties by PICs in the last 3 years (2012 – 2015)
• Implementation of Article 76 of UNCLOS for PICs with
the support from the Project and its partners
• Issues faced by Project
• Policy (regional scale)
• Way forward for this Project
UNCLOS and Maritime Boundaries
• 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea - the
fundamental “constitution for the oceans”.
• One of the major features of UNCLOS is the definition of a
number of jurisdictional zones which refer to an area of ocean in
which the coastal state has specific rights relating to the seabed,
the subsoil, airspace and the water column.
Maritime Boundaries and Extended Continental
Shelf
Territorial
sea limit
Contiguous
Zone limit
EEZ limit
There are a number of criteria which determine if a coastal state has
potential and the claims are subject to a technical review by the UN
Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf
Baseline development
• Article 5
• Normal baseline
• Except where otherwise provided in this
Convention, the normal baseline for measuring
the breadth of the territorial sea is the lowwater line along the coast as marked on largescale charts officially recognized by the coastal
State.
Baseline development
• Article 6
• Reefs
• In the case of islands situated on atolls or of
islands having fringing reefs, the baseline for
measuring the breadth of the territorial sea is
the seaward low-water line of the reef, as
shown by the appropriate symbol on charts
officially recognized by the coastal State.
Example of an island – developing the
normal baseline
NIUE
KIRIBATI
Archipelagic baselines (Article 47)
State parties obligation under UNCLOS
• Article 16 (para.1&2): Charts and lists of geographical
coordinates for the baseline which draws the territorial sea
to be shown on charts, or alternatively in a list of
coordinates and this is to be given due publicity and deposit
a copy with the UN.
• Article 47 (para.8&9): Charts and lists of geographical
coordinates for the archipelagic baselines to be shown on
charts, or alternatively in a list of coordinates and this is to
be given due publicity and deposit a copy with the UN.
• Article 75 (para.1&2): : Charts and lists of geographical
coordinates which show the outer limits of the EEZ and
lines of delimitation to be shown on charts, or alternatively
in a list of coordinates and this is to be given due publicity
and deposit a copy with the UN.
Status of Maritime Boundaries for “SOPAC” member
countries (i.e. 14 project countries) in the Pacific region: 2002
1.
2.
3.
4.
3 PICs have declared their outer 200
nautical mile zones (EEZs);
5 have declared their archipelagic
baselines.
Approximately 37 % of the
boundaries are subject to a treaty (18
of 48).
None of the 14 SOPAC member
countries had made submission to
the UN for claims of additional
seabed territories beyond the EEZs.
Maritime Boundaries Unit Activities (2002 to date)
Baseline/Maritime zones
development
Extended Continental Shelf
activities (ECS)
Overview of Maritime Boundaries Unit tasks
1.
2.
3.
4.
Baseline development – definition of “low water
line” along edge of reef, or outer most edge of
outlying islands and drying reefs of an archipelago
using best available datasets.
Maritime Zones development – calculating the
zones of the 12 nautical miles (Territorial Sea), 24
nautical miles (Contiguous Zone) and the 200
nautical miles (Exclusive Economic Zone).
Technical solutions prepared with PICs
for
shared/overlapping EEZs
Extended Continental Shelf activities (ECS) –
extending the seabed territory beyond the 200
nautical miles (EEZ).
Maritime Boundaries
TECHNICAL & LEGAL COMPONENT
Baseline/Maritime zones development
1.
2.
3.
Global Positioning Systems (GPS) Field Surveys
(PNG, Fiji, Kiribati) from period 2007-2011
High resolution Satellite Imagery (Geoeye 1 with
spatial resolution of 50 cm)
Large scale topographic maps and nautical charts,
where available for some PICs
Lack of legal capacity within the Project
• A critical gap in the drafting new legislation (and
replacing out-dated maritime spaces legislations) to
allow the use of latest and more accurate
technical/geodetic datasets in the development of
PIC maritime boundaries work.
• Given this lack of legal capacity within the Unit, the
Geoscience Division sought legal advice and support
from the Australian Attorney General’s Department
under the Government of Australia grants in early
2011, and also with the Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA)
and the Commonwealth Secretariat.
In-country visits to stakeholders
The Project team and the legal advisor from the
Government of Australia’s Attorney General’s
Department visited the following countries to conduct
meetings with national stakeholders:
•
•
•
•
2011 - Niue & Tuvalu
2012 - Kiribati
2013 - Marshall Islands
2014 - Solomon Islands (organised by FFA)
Outputs
Baseline coordinates ready for Declarations/Public Orders
Outputs
Baseline coordinates ready
for Declarations/Public
Orders
National Declaration - http://www.tuvalu-legislation.tv/
Updated Maritime Legislation in 2012
National Declaration - http://www.tuvalu-legislation.tv/
Tuvalu’s Maritime Legislation deposited with the UN in 2013
International Declaration http://www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/STATEFILES/TUV.htm
Niue’s Maritime Legislation deposited with the UN in 2014
International Declaration http://www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/STATEFILES/NIU.htm
Cook Is deposited its EEZ and MB Treaties with the UN in July
2014
International Declaration http://www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/STATEFILES/COK.htm
Updated Maritime Legislation for Kiribati deposited with the
UN in December 2014
International Declaration http://www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/STATEFILES/KIR.htm
Status of Maritime Boundaries in Project countries
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
7 PICs have declared their outer 200 nautical
mile zones (EEZs);
7 PIC have declared their archipelagic
baselines.
Nauru, Kiribati, Tuvalu, Niue have declared its
baselines, and other maritime zones
(Territorial Seas, Contiguous Zone)
Approximately 70 % of the boundaries are
subject to a treaty (34 of 48).
10 PICs made submission to the UN for claims
of additional seabed territories beyond the
EEZs.
Technical support for Negotiations and
Development of Maritime Boundary
Treaties
Baseline important for negotiations :
Case study: Niue and Cook Islands treaty development in
2011 & 2012
NZ Chart (published by Land
Information New Zealand – LINZ
– 2011)
Baseline important for negotiations :
Baseline –Niue verification process
• High resolution satellite imagery
• Ground collection of GPS points in
Niue
Baseline important for negotiations :
Baseline – Cook Islands verification process
Baseline important for negotiations :
Baseline – Cook Islands (Palmerston) verification process
Hydrographic chart
Baseline important for negotiations :
Baseline – Cook Islands (Palmerston) verification process
Quick check-Google Earth
Baseline important for negotiations :
Baseline – Cook Islands (Palmerston) verification process
Geo-eye 1 – Imagery - 2011
Baseline important for negotiations :
Baselines used to construct median line in specialised
software, “MarZone”
Development of the Maritime Boundary Treaty between
Niue and the Cook Islands
Series of technical/legal meeting for
negotiations
• The technical and legal officers from Pacific island
countries were supported by:
– Geoscience Division Maritime Boundaries team
– Forum Fisheries Agency Legal Advisor
– Govt of Australia Attorney General’s Office Legal Advisor
• Purpose: to draft Treaty documents with the Illustrative
Charts agreed at officials level which were then taken to
respective Capitals for official endorsements
Treaty Development
• Recent treaty development is an excellent example of
partnerships and a willingness to pool resources and
testament to the excellent relationships between Pacific
Island neighbours.
Treaty Development
Marshall Islands, Kiribati and Nauru meeting
This trilateral meeting was funded by the Forum Fisheries Agency
(FFA) and held at the Geoscience Division of SPC in April 2012
Signing of the 7 Bilateral Maritime Boundaries treaties
and 1 trilateral treaty at the Pacific Islands Forum
Meeting in 2012
NIUE & COOK IS
KIRIBATI & NAURU
KIRIBATI & COOK IS
KIRIBATI & TUVALU
NAURU & MARSHALL IS
KIRIBATI –NAURU-MARSHALL IS
KIRIBATI & TOKELAU
KIRIBATI & MARSHALL IS
USA – Kiribati Maritime Boundary (2013)
Technical and legal meeting hosted at the Geoscience
Division of SPC in May 2013
This bilateral meeting was funded by the Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA)
who also provided legal advice to the Kiribati team, and technical advice
provided by SPC to both teams.
USA – Kiribati Maritime Boundary (2013)
Final Agreement – 3 maps
Signing of the USA treaty with Kiribati –
at the Pacific Islands Forum Meeting in
Marshall Islands in September 2013
USA – FSM Maritime Boundary negotiations
(2014)
Technical and legal meeting hosted by the US in Hawaii in
April 2014 (FSM team officials travel costs were supported
by the Forum Fisheries Agency)
Signing of the USA treaty with Federated States
of Micronesia – at the Pacific Islands Forum
Meeting in Palau in August 2014
Fiji-Tuvalu Maritime Boundary
In October 2014, the PMs of Fiji and Tuvalu settled and signed a maritime
boundary agreement between both countries with the technical support
from the Regional Maritime Boundaries Project.
Fiji-France-Tuvalu Maritime Boundary
• In December 2014, the senior technical and legal officers from Fiji,
Tuvalu and France (concerning Wallis & Futuna) discussed and agreed
in principle to settle their respective maritime boundaries with the
technical and legal support from the Regional Maritime Boundaries
Project and its partners.
• FFA provided funding support for the technical and legal teams from Fiji
and Tuvalu to this meeting which was hosted at the Commonwealth
Secretariat office in London, UK.
Status of Maritime Boundaries in Project countries
1
2
1_TRIPT
3
16
5
4
6
7
15
10
11
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
7 PICs have declared their outer 200 nautical
mile zones (EEZs);
7 PIC have declared their archipelagic
baselines.
Nauru, Kiribati, Tuvalu, Niue have declared its
baselines, and other maritime zones
(Territorial Seas, Contiguous Zone)
Approximately 70 % of the boundaries are
subject to a treaty (34 of 48).
10 PICs made submission to the UN for claims
of additional seabed territories beyond the
EEZs.
8 9
12
13
2_TRIPT
14
Implementation of Article 76 of UNCLOS for the project countries
Since July 2007, the Pacific Islands Maritime Boundaries Unit has been working with country teams,
Geoscience Australia & other technical partners in a series of ECS claims development workshop – more
than 100 days of face to face training with PICs. The Government of Australia grants and the good will of
many people and institutions have been instrumental facilitating these workshops – however there is still
a long way to go.
Claims of Extended Continental Shelf
Submitting PIC
Date of Submission
Status
Cook Islands – concerning the
Manihiki Plateau
16th April 2009
Submission being examined by the Sub Commission
of the UNCLCS
Fiji
20th April 2009
Submission in the queue, not yet examined by the
UNCLCS
Joint
Submission
by
the
FSM/SI/PNG – concerning the
Ontong Java Plateau
5th May 2009
Submission being examined by the Sub Commission
of the UNCLCS
Palau
8th May 2009
Submission in the queue, not yet examined by the
UNCLCS
Tonga
11th May 2009
Submission in the queue, not yet examined by the
UNCLCS
Joint Submission by Tuvalu, France
and New Zealand – respect to the
area of the Robbie Ridge
7th December 2012
Submission in the queue, not yet examined by the
UNCLCS
Kiribati
24th December 2012
Submission in the queue, not yet examined by the
UNCLCS
FSM – in respect to Eauripik Rise
30th August 2013
Submission in the queue, not yet examined by the
UNCLCS
Tonga – western part of the LauColville Ridge
23rd April 2014
Submission in the queue, not yet examined by the
UNCLCS
Status of Maritime Boundaries in Project countries
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
7 PICs have declared their outer 200 nautical
mile zones (EEZs);
7 PIC have declared their archipelagic
baselines.
Nauru, Kiribati, Tuvalu, Niue have declared its
baselines, and other maritime zones
(Territorial Seas, Contiguous Zone)
Approximately 70 % of the boundaries are
subject to a treaty (34 of 48).
10 PICs made submission to the UN for claims
of additional seabed territories beyond the
EEZs.
Overall Regional progress
2002
2015
UN Division for Ocean Affairs presentation to PICs at the
recent 13th PIC Regional MB Workshop held in February
2015
Reported 66 coastal states out of 163 have fully or partially deposited their maritime
boundaries information fulfilling their deposit obligations. The Pacific progressing well
compared to other regions around the world.
• 34 of 48 treaties formally endorsed,
• 7 of 14 PICs EEZs (high seas borders) legally developed and deposited with the UN
• 4 of 14 PICs deposited complete solutions, i.e. baselines, and all of its maritime
zones
Issues
• Requires the political will and support of National Governments
(ground work has taken the past 10 years of this project)
• There are certain technical and legal capacity constraints within
the project teams (trained staff get promoted internally)
• Sovereign issue but it is heavily dependent on regional support
and assistance (cost of field surveys to collect data, purchase of
satellite imagery, etc.)
• National Maritime Laws and Legislation needs to be reviewed
and updated to reflect the technical datasets being used to
develop the baselines and maritime zones
• The 10 project countries who have submitted their claims for
Extended Continental Shelf (under Article 76 of UNCLOS) are
facing capacity constraints in the process of the defence of the
these claims to the UN.
Status of efforts at regional scale as compared to
efforts at the national scale
Why is it important?
The clear definition of the limits of the maritime jurisdiction is
important as it provides the legal framework for the governance of
maritime space and the management of the valuable marine
resources within the country’s national jurisdiction areas:
• Fisheries management
• Research
• Deep sea minerals development
• Transport
• Security
• Vessel monitoring
• Biodiversity
• Conservation
Deep Sea Minerals Development
Deep sea minerals development – “The Area”
POLICY (at regional level)
• Pacific Oceanscape Framework (2010)- to protect, manage
and sustain the cultural and natural integrity of the ocean
for present and future generations and for the broader
global community.
• 6 strategic priorities identified for the implementation:
– establishing ‘jurisdictional rights and responsibilities’,
– fostering ‘good ocean governance’,
– supporting ‘sustainable development, management and
conservation’,
– promoting ‘listening, learning, liaising and leading’,
– sustaining action, and
– facilitating adaptation to a rapidly changing environment.
POLICY (at regional level)
• The Palau Declaration “The Ocean: Life & Future” Charting
a Course to Sustainability (2014)
– Annex B
10. “We call for strengthened regional efforts to fix baselines
and maritime boundaries to ensure that the impact of climate
change and sea level rise does not result in reduced
jurisdiction.”
• Register of PI Forum Members’ Ocean-related Initiatives
associated with the Palau Ocean Declaration on Ocean: Life
and Future – July 2014
Future Challenges
• Increasing reports of IUU fishing activities in the region
– Leaders need to formally establish their maritime boundaries
(including signed treaties for overlapping EEZs) in a legal
manner and deposit this information with the UN.
– Critical issue given the high economic value of the fish
captured from PICs EEZs, as well as in the High Seas in this
region
• Deep Sea Mining Implications
– Application and approval of mining leases for seabed
exploration and exploitation within a country’s EEZ and also in
“the Area”
• Declaration of marine reserves, or protected areas
– Important to define the coordinates of the outer limits of the
coastal state’s EEZs
Way forward for this Project
• Build on a common platform to share legal MB, Treaties (GIS
layers) with other stakeholders (FFA –VMS, etc.)
• Current funding mechanism (via the Enhancing Pacific
Ocean Governance – EPOG) from Government of Australia
for the regional workshops ceases in 2016
– Further discussions on possible extension of funding support
• Currently, SPC and FFA (leading agency) are working
together to include this important project as part of the
concept note under the EDF 11 Project for next 5 years
• In particular, to maintain the regional technical support
(position of MB Technical Officer employed full-time) to
provide advice and support to the maritime boundaries
teams within the PICs for on-going negotiations
Recommendations
• note the priority placed on the delimitation and declaration of maritime
zones in the region and their importance for ocean management and
securing interests such as fisheries rights to access, conservation and
management of marine areas, the exploration and mining of minerals,
conservation of biological diversity, and navigation and security;
• note that the majority of maritime boundaries (EEZ) in the Pacific have been
negotiated and declared; and the comprehensive technical and legal support
that SPC and partners continue to provide to enable PICs to delimit, publicise
and deposit the remaining maritime zones;
• recognise that some PICs still have significant technical and legal work to
complete before they can declare their baselines and maritime zones, whilst
others are in a position to move ahead with negotiations, and that the overall
process under UNCLOS is country-driven and that progress depends largely
on high-level national engagement; and
• support SPC and particularly the work of the Maritime Boundaries Unit and
consortium of partners as an appropriate and extremely effective mechanism
to facilitate national efforts to finalise their maritime zones.
SPC’s Project partners
• PICs technical teams
• Government of Australia, New Zealand for funding Project
Unit activities within SPC to achieve its successful outcomes
at the national levels.
• Australian Government Attorney General’s Department &
Forum Fisheries Agency - legal & drafting support for
legislations & treaties development
• Geoscience Australia & GRID Arendal – technical support
• Commonwealth Secretariat - purchase of high resolution
satellite imagery for baseline development, negotiations and
ECS submissions support to the UN
Thank you