Libya v Malta
-
Upload
bambi-gumban -
Category
Documents
-
view
366 -
download
17
Transcript of Libya v Malta
CASE CONCERNING THE CONTINENTAL SHELFLIBYAN ARAB JAMAHIRAYA / MALTA
Vanessa J. GumbanPublic International Law
Facts
Parties: Libya Malta
Dispute on the delimitation of their respective continental shelf areas Rules and principles Actual delimitation
Summary of Arguments
LIBYA MALTAApplicable source of law
Customary International Law Customary International Law
Basis of title
Principle of Natural Prolongation
• Natural prolongation in the physical sense
• Rift-zone argument
• The continental shelf not absorbed by concept of exclusive economic zone
• Equidistance method is not obligatory
Distance Principle• Natural prolongation is a spatial
concept
• Concept of exclusive economic zone confirms the primacy of the equidistance method
• Distance criterion: physical factors are irrelevant within 200 miles from coast
• Distance principle confers primacy on the equidistance method
Delimitation
Equitable principles Equitable principles
Reasonable degree of proportionality (length of coast line vis-à-vis continental shelf area)
Applicable Source of Law
Customary international law Actual practice of states Opinio juris Multilateral conventions
1982 UNCLOS Not yet in force but both Libya and Malta are
parties Adopted by overwhelming majority May constitute an expression of customary
international law
Basis of Title
Continental shelf and exclusive economic zone are linked together in modern law. Hence, the exclusive economic zone is a relevant
circumstance in delimiting continental shelf areas. Institution of the exclusive economic zone, by
state practice, is part of customary international law. Thus, distance criterion in concept of exclusive
economic zone applies to continental shelf Within 200 miles from shore, natural prolongation is
defined by distance; irrespective of the physical nature of the sea-bed and subsoil.
However, the idea of natural prolongation is not superseded by that of distance. They are complementary and are both essential
elements of the juridical concept of the continental shelf.
Basis of Title
Libya’s rift-zone argument REJECTED Distance of coasts between parties less
than 400 miles Distance criterion applies Natural prolongation in the physical sense
irrelevant
Basis of Title
Malta’s argument on the primacy of equidistance method REJECTED Equidistance method is not obligaory
No state practice Equitable principles may require other
methods
Delimitation
Provisional median line Continental shelf area between opposite coasts
can only be delimited by a median line (North Sea)
Provisional because if it were final, the equidistance method would be conferred a compulsory status
Adjust to achieve equitable result Malta is a small-feature on a semi-enclosed sea Disparity in length of coasts (Libya’s 192 miles
vis-a-vis Malta’s 24 miles) justifies attribution of larger shelf to Libya
Provisional Median Line
Back
Provisional Median Line
Adjusted Line
Back