Abstract
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) include the term of “effective control” in its sponsorship provisions but do not clarify its meaning. To arrive at a consensus on its connotation, the International Seabed Authority (ISA) began discussions on the concept of “effective control” that have been ongoing since 2014 but have still not yielded any definite conclusion. The interpretation and application of this concept tend to be construed as a regulatory standard in current discussion documents and practices of the ISA, where this allow contractors from developed countries to easily use the method of “sponsoring states of convenience” to apply for and obtain contracts to reserved areas. This is inimical to the goals of effective marine environmental protection and the implementation of preferential treatment for developing countries. The international community should pay attention to this issue and correct the unreasonable tendencies of the ISA in this regard.
Reference34 articles.
1. Law of the sea-developing countries’ contribution to the development of the institutional arrangements for the international sea-bed authority;Adede;Brooklyn J. Int. Law,1977
2. Dispute settlement in the law of the sea: Survey for 2011;Churchill;Int. J. Mar. Coast. Law,2012
3. African states and participation in deep seabed mining: Problems and prospects;Egede;Int. J. Mar. Coast. Law,2009
4. The rush to mine the Deep Sea will cause Permenent damage to unique, fragile environments and worsen global inequalities: New report2023
5. From the depths: Rich pickings of principles of sustainable development and general international law on the ocean floor-the seabed disputes chamber's 2011 advisory opinion;French;Int. J. Mar. Coast. Law,2011