Thursday | 12 December 2024 | Reg No- 06
বাংলা
   
Thursday | 12 December 2024 | Epaper
BREAKING: ● Four more die, 444 hospitalised with dengue      ● India doesn't want democracy in neighbouring countries      ● ADB approves $600m loan for Bangladesh's economic reforms      ● Govt bans foreign travel of officials      ● Labour unrest in Ashulia demanding 15pc increment       ● US wants Bangladesh, India to resolve differences peacefully      ● 72pc accounts spreading anti-Bangladesh propaganda based in India: Rumor Scanner      

Land-locked states’ rights in the sea  

Published : Saturday, 9 November, 2024 at 12:00 AM  Count : 315
Muhammad Muzahidul Islam
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), was adopted in 1982 and came into force in 1994. It establishes a legal framework for all activities in the oceans. It also governs the use of oceans and their resources. It is called the Law of the Sea Convention or the Law of the Sea Treaty. As an international treaty, it provides the land-locked States with the rights of access to and from the sea and the freedom of transit. Are these rights absolute? What is the factor that is considered, in practice, between the concerned States in the realization or enjoyment of rights provided under the UNCLOS? What conduct or behaviouris expected from the concerned States, particularly the transit States,in the realization of those rights?

I would like to share with you relevant provisions from the UNCLOS. Part X of the UNCLOS provides provisions on the right of access of land-locked States to and from the sea and freedom of transit. Article 124provides that"Use of terms 1. For the purposes of this Convention: (a) "land-locked State" means a State which has no sea-coast; (b) "transit State" means a State, with or without a sea-coast, situated between a land-locked State and the sea, through whose territory traffic in transit passes." 

Article 125 of the UNCLOS provides that "Right of access to and from the sea and freedom of transit 1. Land-locked States shall have the right of access to and from the sea for the purpose of exercising the rights provided for in this Convention including those relating to the freedom of the high seas and the common heritage of mankind. To this end, land-locked States shall enjoy freedom of transit through the territory of transit States by all means of transport. 2. The terms and modalities for exercising freedom of transit shall be agreed between the land-locked States and transit States concerned through bilateral, subregional or regional agreements. 3. Transit States, in the exercise of their full sovereignty over their territory, shall have the right to take all measures necessary to ensure that the rights and facilities provided for in this Part for land-locked States shall in no way infringe their legitimate interests."

As of today, of the 44 land-locked states in the world, 28 have become parties to the UNCLOS. Let me mention the names those States- Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bolivia, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Chad, Czech Republic, Eswatini, Hungary, Lao PDR, Lesotho, Luxembourg, Malawi, Mali, Mongolia, Nepal, Niger, North Macedonia, Paraguay, Republic of Moldova, Serbia, Slovakia, Switzerland, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

Analysing the relevant provisions of the UNCLOS, one can argue that the rights of the land-locked states in the sea that have been mentioned in the convention are general rights and not absolute; these rights are subject to the agreements that may be made between the relevant land-locked and transit states. And in support of this argument, one could quote fromthe Policy Briefing 205, August 2020 (The Law of the Sea and Landlocked States, ErnestaSwanepoel) South African Institute of International Affairs.

According to the executive summary of the policy briefing mentioned above, "Landlocked states need access to the sea by means of transit through one or more neighbouring coastal states. Without this right of access, landlocked states would not be able to exercise their rights in terms of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Landlocked states' right of access to and from the sea is confirmed by the existence of 'freedom of transit through the territory of transit States by all means of transport'. UNCLOS further determines that the states concerned must enter into bilateral, sub-regional or regional agreements on the terms and modalities when exercising their UNCLOS rights. It is important to understand what should be considered and negotiated in these agreements."

The policy briefing mentioned above states that "UNCLOS provides various rights of landlocked states: the right of ships flying the flag of landlocked states to 'enjoy treatment equal to that accorded to other foreign ships in maritime ports', the right of ships flying the flag of landlocked states to innocent passage through the territorial sea, and freedom of navigation in exclusive economic zones (EEZ) and the high seas. UNCLOS also specifies that landlocked states have the same flag-state duties as coastal states.

Without access to the sea, it would be impossible for landlocked states to exercise any of these rights."This Policy briefing further states that "Landlocked states have the right to exploit living resources of the EEZ of coastal states, as outlined in Article 69 of UNCLOS. However, this right is not straightforward and is subject to conformity to specific UNCLOS articles." And it further adds that "This means that this right is subject to the duties of the coastal states with regard to the conservation and utilisation of the living resources in their EEZ."

While the Land-locked States' rights of access to and from the sea and the freedom of transit given under UNCLOS are not absolute and are dependent on and left to agreements to be entered into between the landlocked state and the transit states concerned, they, particularly the transit States, should be 'honest and sincere' in the implementation of those rights given under the UNCLOS; otherwise land-locked states would be deprived of those rights, and thereby they would be unable to contribute to the economy. Consequently, it would have adverse impacts on the achievement of the targets and goals stated in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

The writer is a barrister-at-law, human rights activist and an advocate at the Supreme Court of Bangladesh



LATEST NEWS
MOST READ
Also read
The fall of Assad regime: Will anything change?
RMG industry’s role in our economy 
Dark reality of children’s entertainment in You Tube
Bioremediation can clean our environment naturally
Why gender justice is necessary for national development
Can Europe build itself a rival to Google?
Why Assad’s regime falls
Human rights violation in Bangladesh must stop  
Editor : Iqbal Sobhan Chowdhury
Published by the Editor on behalf of the Observer Ltd. from Globe Printers, 24/A, New Eskaton Road, Ramna, Dhaka.
Editorial, News and Commercial Offices : Aziz Bhaban (2nd floor), 93, Motijheel C/A, Dhaka-1000.
Phone: PABX- 41053001-06; Online: 41053014; Advertisement: 41053012.
E-mail: [email protected], news©dailyobserverbd.com, advertisement©dailyobserverbd.com, For Online Edition: mailobserverbd©gmail.com
🔝
close