8/3/2019 The Danube River Protection Convention Forms the Overall Legal Instrument for Co

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-danube-river-protection-convention-forms-the-overall-legal-instrument-for 1/13

The Danube River Protection Convention forms the overall legal instrument for co-

operation on trans boundary water management in the Danube River Basin. The

Convention was signed on June 29 1994 in Sofia (Bulgaria) and came into force in 1998.

It aims to ensure that surface waters and groundwater within the Danube River Basin are

managed and used sustainably and equitably.

The Convention on Co-operation for the Protection and Sustainable Use of the River

Danube (Danube River Protection Convention) forms the overall legal instrument for co-

operation and transboundary water management in the Danube River Basin.

The Convention was signed on June 29 1994, in Sofia, Bulgaria, by eleven of the Danube

Riparian States  –  Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary,

Moldova, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine  – and the European Community, and

duly came into force in October1998, when it was ratified by the ninth signatory.

The main objective of the Danube River Protection Convention (DRPC) is to ensure that

surface waters and groundwater within the Danube River Basin are managed and used

sustainably and equitably.

This involves:

  the conservation, improvement and rational use of surface waters and groundwater

  preventive measures to control hazards originating from accidents involving floods, ice

or hazardous substances

  measures to reduce the pollution loads entering the Black Sea from sources in the

Danube River Basin

The signatories to the DRPC have agreed to co-operate on fundamental water managementissues by taking "all appropriate legal, administrative and technical measures to at least

maintain and where possible improve the current water quality and environmental

conditions of the Danube river and of the waters in its catchment area, and to prevent and

reduce as far as possible adverse impacts and changes occurring or likely to be caused."

8/3/2019 The Danube River Protection Convention Forms the Overall Legal Instrument for Co

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-danube-river-protection-convention-forms-the-overall-legal-instrument-for 2/13

8/3/2019 The Danube River Protection Convention Forms the Overall Legal Instrument for Co

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-danube-river-protection-convention-forms-the-overall-legal-instrument-for 3/13

The lower section of the Danube, he continued, was "more than an internationalized river"

because the CED wielded independent administrative powers.[1]:1154

He concluded that thecommission:

falls short of being a bona fide member of the family of nations because its existence is largely

de facto and not de jure. . . . It is safe to predict that the need for protecting the integrity of thecommission will some day lift it out of the twilight of statehood and accord it full membership in

the League of Nations.[1]:1154

 

To the contrary, Joseph L. Kunz, a professor of  international law at the University of Toledo in

Ohio, wrote in 1945 that international river commissions were organized on the collegiateprinciple, composed of "persons appointed by the contracting states, representing them and

having to act in conformity with the instructions of their states." They were, he concluded,

objects, not subjects, of international law.[2]

 

Stanford University history professor Edward Krehbiel suggested in 1918 that other

"international administrative agents" like the Danube Commission would eventually be createdto handle specific problems. Their activities would "develop a whole body of rules which will in

effect be the foundation of the super-state itself."[3]:55 The commission, he said:

offers an organ through which nations can approach one another on the basis of common or

united action, instead of as rivals, as is the case in an ambassadorial conference .[3]:48

 

In regard to the CED, he noted that the tariffs were to be settled by a majority vote of the

commissioners and that "Majority rule results in making law for the minority, and . . . it therefore

represents a truly profound abasement of  national sovereignty."[3]:52

 

The establishments of the CED were guaranteed to be neutral (promulgated in 1865) and free of the restraints of the territorial authorities. It owned and operated a hospital for seamen of allcountries, and it flew a flag ("composed of five parallel strips . . . arranged in the following order

of colour:  —  red, white, blue, white, and red, the blue strip having a height double that of each of 

the other strips, and bearing in white the letters 'C.E.D.' ")[4]

 

8/3/2019 The Danube River Protection Convention Forms the Overall Legal Instrument for Co

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-danube-river-protection-convention-forms-the-overall-legal-instrument-for 4/13

 

Modern map of the Danube. Click  here for a larger version of the map.

[edit] Organizing

The CED began its work by fixing the seat of the commission in the port of  Galatz and orderingtemporary improvements of the Sulina. Under the chairmanship of Sir John Stokes, Crimean

War hero of the British Royal Engineers, the commission hastened to get the job done within the

two years originally alloted by the treaty. It was under a mandate to:

designate and to cause to be executed the Works necessary below Isatcha, to clear the mouths of 

the Danube, as well as the neighbouring parts of the Sea, from the sands and other impediments

which obstruct them, in order to put that part of the River and the said parts of the Sea in the bestpossible state for Navigation....[5] It is understood that the European Commission shall have

completed its task . . . within the period of two years.[6]

 

At the end of the two years, the powers that signed the treaty were to "pronounce the dissolution

of the European Commission", and the so-called "permanent", upstream, IDC was then to extend

its supervision to the Lower Danube. The latter commission was supposed to consist of  Austria-Hungary, Bavaria, the Sublime Porte (Turkey), Württemberg and the two Danubian principalities 

(Moldavia and Wallachia). The IDC did draw up an Upper Danubian Navigation Act in

November 1857, but it was not accepted multilaterally because of opposition of all the powers

except Austria.[7]:52

It was, however, applied to parts of the river by conventions betweenAustria, Bavaria, and Württemberg. The river-bordering states, Krehbiel stressed in his 1918

article, "were eager to get control of the river into their own hands", but the non-riparian states

were "loath to lose control." As a result, the CED was constantly strengthened, and the IDCnever came into power, but "was presently abandoned."[8] 

8/3/2019 The Danube River Protection Convention Forms the Overall Legal Instrument for Co

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-danube-river-protection-convention-forms-the-overall-legal-instrument-for 5/13

 

Modern photo of the meandering Danube at Schlögener Schlinge in Austria (outside the

 jurisdiction of the CED)

The CED gradually extended its power until it became an international entity glimmering in what

Blackburn called "the twilight of statehood." It expanded its functions until it was ranked s "the

most successful" such agency until the League of Nations. At the start, though, it had no funds,

"it had no basis for an opinion as to the best way to attack the river problem; it found river trafficparalyzed."[3]:55 At the end of the two years, Sir Charles Hartley, war comrade of Stokes, had

been appointed chief engineer (a post he was to hold for forty-nine years) but large-draft vessels

were unable to sail unimpeded up the meandering river. These meager results led the powers toextend the life of the commission for another two years, over the objection of Austria .[9] 

[edit] Finance

Funds were borrowed from Turkey to pay for improvements, but they came irregularly.

Sometimes the CED had to contract short-term, high-rate loans. By 1860, though, traffic hadincreased enough so the commission could fix a tariff and get a good amount of money. There

was no opposition from the vessels, thanks to a provision in the Treaty of Paris that each of thepowers had "the right to station, at all times, Two Light Vessels at the Mouths of the Danube. "

[10] 

What resulted was the establishment of the CED as "an international financial agent withconsiderable independence . . . the novel prerogative was that it could go into the money market

and contract loans."[3]:53

 

In 1866, the commission found itself in financial trouble because of the just-ended Austro-

Prussian War. But it secured money by issuing bonds, offering the river tolls as security. "To be

sure, the rate of 10 per cent was high, but the significant fact is that the joint agent of the nationswas developing a real identity and personality. Its venturesomeness was rewarded with complete

solvency.[3]:53 

[edit] Public Act of 1865

8/3/2019 The Danube River Protection Convention Forms the Overall Legal Instrument for Co

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-danube-river-protection-convention-forms-the-overall-legal-instrument-for 6/13

 

The Palace of the Danube Commission in Sulina, Tulcea County, Romania, from 1868 to 1921

On November 2, 1865, a public act signed by Austria, Britain, France, Italy, Prussia, Russia, and

Turkey placed the CED, its officers, works and establishments "under the protection of international law" (Article I). Two annexes were appended  — one on navigation regulations and

the other on a tariff of "navigation dues to be levied at the mouth of the Danube." The new tariff,

principally the work of John Stokes, established a Danubian rule or Danube rule of measurement.[11] 

The unique provision of the 1865 act was that either of the two annexes could be changed by amajority vote of the commission but the changes would be automatically binding on the member

nations, without need for additional consent. Duties of the officers were spelled out, neutrality of 

the buildings, records, and funds was ordered, and certain portions of Turkish territory were

reserved for exclusive use of the CED. Its life was extended for another five years, but Russia

protested that this "should be the outside limit not to be exceeded in any case."[3]:46

 

[edit] London Conference of 1871

In 1871 at a conference in London, Russia agreed with Austria-Hungary, Britain, Germany, Italy,

and Turkey to extend the commission's term for another twelve years, which coincided with theredemption period of a large loan floated in 1865.[12] The conference also:

1.  Rejected Britain's suggestion to extend the commission's jurisdiction farther up theriver.[13] 

2.  Agreed to a "reassembling of the Riverain Commission"  — but at no set time.

3.  Gave Austria the authority to set up a toll-collecting agency at the dangerous Iron Gates 

section to pay for improvements there.4.  Extended the neutrality spelled out in the Treaty of 1865 to the staff of the CED, as well

as the buildings and works.

[edit] Treaty of Berlin of 1878

8/3/2019 The Danube River Protection Convention Forms the Overall Legal Instrument for Co

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-danube-river-protection-convention-forms-the-overall-legal-instrument-for 7/13

In 1878, Romania, which had been an autonomous principality within the Ottoman Empire since

1861, was admitted to an expanded CED as a free country as a result of the Treaty of Berlin(1878). It replaced Turkey as the sovereign power on the delta and was given a seat on the CED.

Turkey remained a member of the body.

Russia was the winner of the Russo-Turkish War, and she took over an old strip of Bessarabiadetached from her in 1856. This placed Russia again on the banks of the Danube. The other

Danubian arrangements were:

1.  The jurisdiction of the CED was extended from Isatcha to Galatz. 

2.  The powers agreed that regulations would be formulated for the upriver stretch fromGalatz to the Iron Gates by a "mixed" European commission, "assisted by Delegates of 

the Riverain States, and placed in harmony with those which have been or may be issued

for the portion of the river below Galatz." In the end, a new scheme was adopted for the

IDC  — Austria, Romania, Serbia, and Bulgaria would each have a representative on theIDC, and each of the members of the other commission, the CED, would serve

alternating terms on the IDC for six months at a time. Austria would be chair, but with notie-breaking vote.[14]:268

 

Southeastern Europe after the Congress of Berlin

[edit] Additional Public Act of 1881

8/3/2019 The Danube River Protection Convention Forms the Overall Legal Instrument for Co

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-danube-river-protection-convention-forms-the-overall-legal-instrument-for 8/13

In 1881, the interested countries gathered at Galatz to promulgate another treaty, or, as it was

termed, a public act, that spelled out details of the CED's relations with Romania, which wasstriving for more authority. It was then that Russia withdrew her territory from the EDC's

 jurisdiction  —  the left bank of the Kilia, over which the CED had so far not exercised its right of 

control.[14]:268

Russia's action was a last-minute affair, done through a reservation to the treaty.

[edit] Treaty of London of 1883

In 1883, Austria, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Russia, and Turkey were represented at

another conference, this time in London. A majority decided to admit Romania and Serbia in a

consultative capacity only and that Bulgaria could be represented only through Turkey, the

nominal suzerain. Serbia accepted, but Romania and Bulgaria protested, taking no part in theconference.[15]:257 

After a month of discussion, the delegates decided to:

1.  Extend the jurisdiction of the CED from Galatz some twenty miles upstream to Ibraila[nowadays known as Brăila].

2.  Authorize the establishment of the reorganized "mixed" commission (the IDC), with the

hope that Romania and Bulgaria would agree.

3.  Prolong the term of the CED for twenty-one years, after which it would continue forthree-year periods, unless changes were proposed by one of the major powers.

4.  Accede to Russia's request regarding the Kilia  —  that is, allow that country and Romania

 joint control over the branch, provided the CED reviewed any plans for

improvement.[15]:257

 

Detailed and liberal rules drawn up in this convention for the Danube between Ibraila upstream

to the Iron Gate were never applied. Romania did not agree, "and the stretch of the Danube wasadministered by each riparian state, with due regard, however, to the principle of free

navigation."[7]:51

 

As conditions in the delta improved, shipping increased and more funds were received by the

CED. Conditions improved: There were 111 shipwrecks of seagoing vessels between 1861 and

1881, but only five wrecks between 1909 and 1929[1]:1154

 

[edit] World War I

The European Commission of the Danube, the CED, continued functioning during at least thefirst two years of the war. For a long time the Allied and enemy delegates actually sat on it

together.[16]:293

When Germany attacked Romania in 1916, the Central Powers (Germany,

Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, and Turkey) kept the commission in operation for a short time  — butwithout the British and the French.

Indeed, the Germans attempted to legalize a commission that would have perpetually excluded

the Allied powers. on May 7, 1918, they concluded a separate peace with the Romanians,

8/3/2019 The Danube River Protection Convention Forms the Overall Legal Instrument for Co

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-danube-river-protection-convention-forms-the-overall-legal-instrument-for 9/13

changing the EDC into a Commission of the Mouth of the Danube; its competence was

maintained, but membership was restricted only to Danubian or Black Sea countries;[7]:52

aboveBraila control was "to be in the hands of the countries bordering the river", that is, Romania,

Bulgarian, Serbia, Austria, and Germany.[3]:47

Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, Turkey, and

Rumania obtained the right to keep warships on the river; this led, as a reaction, to

internationalization of the river between Ulm and the Black Sea after the war.

[16]:294

The samestipulations were included in the peace treaty between Germany and Russia in 1918.

These treaties were negated upon Allied victory. In November 1918 the victors established a

Commandement de la Navigation du Danube, with Sir Ernest Trowbridge as commander. The

Allies' Supreme Committee decided on May 22, 1919, that "despite the existing uncertaintyconcerning the frontiers and the ownership of the floating material, normal conditions of traffic

on the Danube should be established as soon as possible." An Inter-Allied Danube Commission

was formed under Trowbridge. Later in the year, non-enemy states were admitted in equality

with the great powers; the group met with some success in reopening the river, despite thedifficulties.[17]:241 

Peace treaties imposed by the Allies set up new regulations for the river: The old EuropeanCommission resumed its power over the mouths of the river, but its membership was

"temporarily" limited to Britain, France, Italy, and Romania (excluding, then, Russia and

Turkey). In addition, an International Commission was thenceforth to regulate traffic on theUpper Danube from Ulm to Braila. A general conference was planned for the future .[7]:53 

[edit] Reorganizing

The conference convened in Paris in September 1920 to draw up a definitive statute for the river.

Represented were Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, France, Germany, Great Britain,

Greece, Hungary, Italy, Romania, and Yugoslavia, Absent from a full-dress Danubianconference for the first time were Russia, then in the first years of rule by the Bolsheviks, and

Turkey. It took six months, but on July 23, 1921, the basic convention was signed. It followed to

a large extent the temporary framework built just after the war. The European Commission of theDanube was re-established, and all the old treaties and regulations were confirmed.

The International Danube Commission (upriver) was finally given a permanent status, made asubject of international law like the EDC, and provided with regulations that gave it life. It,

however, had no law courts of its own; it was obliged to surrender transgressors to the territorial

authorities for trial and punishment. Members included all the riparian states, as well as Great

Britain, France, Italy, and Romania.

Otto Popper of Bratislava, secretary of the IDC in 1920-29, said this about the statute when

viewing it twenty years later:

Unfortunately this fundamental document was drafted during a period when much of the originalspirit of [President Woodrow] Wilson's Fourteen Points was beginning to fade. As it stands the

Statute is a somewhat unsatisfactory compromise between broad conceptions and narrow-

mindedness. Its text gave rise to varying interpretations[,] and some of its important stipulations

8/3/2019 The Danube River Protection Convention Forms the Overall Legal Instrument for Co

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-danube-river-protection-convention-forms-the-overall-legal-instrument-for 10/13

were therefore not applied, as had been hoped, in the best interests of the river and of its

navigation.[17]:244

 

John C. Campbell, Eastern European specialist with the U.S. State Department, wrote in 1949

that just as the Paris conference in 1856, had strived to block "Russian domination" in

Southeastern Europe after the Crimean War, so the 1921 convention "stood for an effort to block the resurgence of German or Russian power."[18]

 

[edit] Reconstruction

The European Commission, again ensconced in its quarters at Galatz, found things very badindeed at the mouths of the Danube after the war. Silt had choked the channel again, and it

seemed as though attempts to improve the situation was continually going awry.[17]:244 

Economic affairs along the entire river were so bad that the League of Nations instituted in 1922an inquiry by a special committee, headed by an American, Walker D. Hines (Wilson's wartime

chief of railroads). His report was issued in August 1925, stating that the river fleet carried 25percent more tonnage than before the war, but traffic was only 56 percent of normal. Thisreduction was largely due to an economic depression but also by the breakup of Austria-

Hungary's large duty-free area. Hines scored the "petty attitudes" of the multitude of free

governments and complained of the frontier formalities and the exclusion of non-nationals frominternational trade.[19] Despite the existence of the EDC and the IDC, the situation had "changed

but little since the end of the war."[20]

 

This report led the Commercial and Financial Chronicle of New York City to suggest, in

particular, the reduction of "dues which it [the EDC] has imposed."[21]

 British interests since

1918 had turned the Danube into a virtual European Thames. Before the war, reported Clair

Price of the New York Times, 

the Danube was in the hands of riverain [river-bordering] groups, but since then Furness, Withyand Co., large United Kingdom shipholders, have obtained a virtual monopoly. . . . It operates a

steamer service from British ports to the Levant [Eastern Mediterranean], the Black Sea and to

Sulina, Galatz and Braila, where British tonnage has long been preponderant.[22]

 

The company had obtained this monopoly by refinancing the war-stricken prewar firms, most of 

which were owned by Austrian or Hungarian interests (the losers in the war). A holding

company, the Danube Navigation Co., was organized, and astute financial maneuvering gave toFurness, Withy "the practical control of the traffic of the navigable length of the Danube."[16]:300 

[edit] Romania's struggle for control

8/3/2019 The Danube River Protection Convention Forms the Overall Legal Instrument for Co

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-danube-river-protection-convention-forms-the-overall-legal-instrument-for 11/13

 

Carol I of Romania

Meanwhile, Romania desired the outright abolition of the CED, having made the suggestion forthe first time in 1881, when King Carol said he would insist on the mouths being "exclusively

controlled by Rumanian officials."[16]:300 This statement led to a break with Austria-Hungary, andCarol was forced late in the year to dispatch a message of " 'deep regret' for the offense that hadbeen given to Austria."[14]:268 

The country renewed its demands in 1919 at the Paris Peace Conference and in 1921 at theDanube conference. On both instances, it was overruled. Romania changed tactics, but not

motives, at the Conference of Lausanne in 1923, when affairs of  the Middle East were discussed.

On this occasion, Romania suggested that the powers of the CED should be expanded; it would

also be given control over the Bosporus and the Dardanelles. 

Of course the acceptance of this proposal would have meant the end of effective control of the

Danube, for the Commission, far from the mouths of the Danube and charged with new tasks,would have hardly been able to fulfill its primary tasks, and the actual control of the Lower

Danube would have devolved upon Rumania.

wrote Joseph D. Somogyi in 1948.[7]:56

 

A 2004 photo of the Sulina Channel of the Danube River, leading to the Black Sea

8/3/2019 The Danube River Protection Convention Forms the Overall Legal Instrument for Co

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-danube-river-protection-convention-forms-the-overall-legal-instrument-for 12/13

In 1924, Romania suggested that the activities of the commission be limited; that country would

be charged with trial and punishment of shipping violators, similar to the method used by thenewer, upriver International Danube Commission. This suggestion also was rejected by the other

powers. Balked internationally, the Romanian government began an internal propaganda

campaign in 1926 to nationalize the Sulina channel, even without the concurrence of the other

nations. Spokesmen claimed the CED had failed to keep the channel clear, resulting in a situationwhere only empty boats could cross it; the commission replied that the silt had piled up during

the war when Romania had full control.[23]

 

Meanwhile, Romania resorted to a lawsuit to assert its jurisdiction over an upriver stretch. It

noted that the jurisdiction of the CED had been extended up the river from Galatz to Ibraila bythe Treaty of London of 1883, in the framing and signing of which Romania had not participated.

In 1921 two vessels collided in the disputed sector, and the CED's inspector assumed police and

 jurisdictional powers over Romania's protest. The case was taken to the League of Nations,

which in 1926 sent the matter to the Permanent Court of International Justice at the request of Britain, France, Italy, and Romania. The latter country lost on all counts. The court decided the

CED's powers "extend over the whole of the maritime Danube."

[1]:1157 – 58

 

[edit] End of the prewar commissions

See main articles  Nazi rule over the Danube River (1938 – 1945) and   Danube Commission (after 

1945) 

In 1938, a committee of experts inspected the Sulina and found it was almost impassable by that

time.[24]

 And in August of that same year, the regime of the two commissions was swept away byrise of German power on the river. A series of treaties put control in the hands of the Germans,

who maintained it until the Nazi retreat in 1944 and ultimate defeat in 1945. In 1948 a Danube

river conference was held, and a new treaty was adopted, putting governance of the river undercommissions composed only of the riparian powers, ending more than four decades of  Western

European presence in the control of the important waterway.[25] 

[edit] References and notes

8/3/2019 The Danube River Protection Convention Forms the Overall Legal Instrument for Co

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-danube-river-protection-convention-forms-the-overall-legal-instrument-for 13/13

Summary History of the Commissions of the River Danube 1856 - 1948 

· 1856 Treaty of Paris: European Commission of the Danube established; Russian boundary withdrawn 20km north of the Danube 

· 1857 Riparian states meet in Vienna to regulate whole river from Ulm to Braila - largely unsuccessful due to

the dominance of Austria-Hungary 

· 1870 Sulina declared a freeport - therefore cargo could pass up the river without formality 

· 1878 Treaty of Berlin: European Commission's rights and privileges extended; lower Danube neutralised;

Romania becomes full member of the Commission following her independence; Russia again a Danubian

country after war with Turkey in 1877 

· 1895-99 Blasting and canal construction along the Iron Gates section of the river somewhat improves

navigation 

· 1902 Final Sulina arm cut-off completed, thus shortening the river by 11 nautical miles 

· 1919 Treaty of Versailles grants four rivers including the Danube "international" status 

· 1921 European Commission of the Danube resumes operations; new International Commission of the

Danube set up for the "fluvial" river from Ulm to Braila 

· 1939-44/5 Danube under German control 

· 1948 Treaty of Belgrade: new Danube Commission is established to regulate whole navigable river,

composed only of riparian states, except for Germany (or Austria, at first)