• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.34 no.1
• /
• pp.69-85
• /
• 2003

The primary objective of this thesis is to study, case by case, the international disputes for fishing rights between fishing nations and costal states never imagined till the introduction of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea adopted in 1982 and came into effect in November 16, 1994, which governs the high seas and EEZ in a new manner. Such a study is to provide help in the understanding on this new marine system and how to deal with. This is addressed by the perspectives of disputes (a) in the high seas between fishing nations having traditionally enjoyed the principle of the freedom of the high seas and costal states, (b) in the EEZ between fishing nations and costal states possessing the exclusive jurisdiction over living marine resources and sovereign rights for determining allowable catch and the surplus in its EEZ. The article can be divided into four main parts. First, both the general principles of the settlement of international disputes, and the nature and procedures described in the UNCLOS are introduced. Second, it gives cases of tuna long-liner, North Pacific trawler and squid jigger occurred in the coastal states EEZ, and analyses the problem in both terms of its background and final judgment. It further describes the possible issues in case it depends on the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea for its settlement. Third, closely tied to above, important points such as the right of hot pursuit, prompt release of vessel and crew, and the limits of cooperation with costal states inspector on board fishing vessels are considered mostly based on the UNCLOS, Bilateral Agreement and UNIA. Finally, the article concludes as follows ; The need for broad analyses on the nature of international suits and legal system for the settlement, to win the case before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea or coastal states court, is really acknowledged. However, considering the lack of previous studies about it, it is preferably recommended that governmental efforts for making legal standards to cover the judicial costs, for helping industry out of becoming bankrupt.

• Journal of Legislation Research
• /
• no.55
• /
• pp.167-191
• /
• 2018

Despite international cooperation, piracy has not yet been eradicated in major waters around the world. From the perspective of South Korea, which is absolutely dependent on exporting and importing, it's a lifeline for us to secure safe maritime traffic so it is a situation we have to be vigilant about maritime safety and security. However, criminal law on punishment of piracy is still insufficient and legislative consideration is needed. Since pirates are regarded as enemies of humankind, all nations can punish pirates regardless of their damage. The international community has done its best in cooperation from hundreds of years ago to secure maritime trade through this universal jurisdiction and marine transportation in international waters which is an essential space for military activities, particularly in the Gulf of Aden, the advanced nations have dispatched fleets to combat maritime security threats through joint operations to crack down on Somali pirates. Even if universal jurisdiction is allowed for piracy in accordance with the International Convention on Human Rights and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, it is difficult to effectively deal with piracy if it not fully complied with a domestic legal system for this purpose or is stipulated as different from international regulations. In other words, universal jurisdiction corresponding to international norms and constitution of piracy should be defined in criminal law in accordance with criminal statutory law. If the punishment of pirates by unreasonably applying our criminal law without prejudice to such work can lead to diplomatic disputes in violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights or other international norms. In South Korea, there is no provision to explicitly prescribe piracy as a crime, but punish similar acts like piracy in criminal law and maritime safety law. However, there is a limit to effective piracy punishment because we are not fully involved in internationally accepted piracy. In this study, we critically examine the proposals of the constitutional elements of piracy, propose the legislative direction, and insist on the introduction of globalism to pirate sins.

• Maritime Security
• /
• v.3 no.1
• /
• pp.115-140
• /
• 2021

The South China Sea is a significant maritime shipping route with abundant submarine and fishing resources. Over 40,000 ships pass through the South China Sea every year, constituting around 50% of global shipping and 66% of crude oil. In particular, 30% of Korea's import cargo and 90% of energy imports pass through this body of water. The US and China realized the significance of this sea area from early on and are embodying national interest through maritime security at the national strategic level by implementing the 'Indo-Pacific' and 'One Belt One Road' strategies, respectively. Such geopolitical conflicts are manifested in the 'freedom of navigation operations' by the US in the South China Sea. Despite its significance, there is a lack of studies in Korea on the freedom of navigation operations, and most previous studies only focus on analyzing international law and agreements. This article examines the origin and background of the strategic perception of the freedom of navigation operations and derives implications for the peace and security of the Korean Peninsula as the strategic competition between the US and China continues.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment & Safety
• /
• v.20 no.5
• /
• pp.571-578
• /
• 2014

The boundaries of ROK maritime jurisdictional area remains unclear as two Koreas failed to draw clear maritime boundaries at the armistice agreement and there are no clear maritime boundaries with China and Japan. After the Korean War, the United Nations Command established the northern limit line(NLL) as well as the area of operations(AO) to enforce the DPRK's compliance with the armistice agreement and has been controlling all of the maritime and air activities in the region. ROK also has been controlling the passage of DPRK vessels in the area. Within the AO, third nation vessels have freedom of navigation, Yet, due to the division followed by the Korean War, ROK classifies DPRK as a hostile state and unique controling system is applied to DPRK vessels. Since the establishment of the AO, many changes have been occurring such as adoption of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea(UNCLOS) and two Koreas' joining the UN. Also, there are continuous inter-Korean conflicts. Therefore, the geographical span of the AO needs to be reconsidered. Furthermore, a legal measure which ensures ROKN vessel's functional capability of controling DPRK vessels must be introduced. This thesis examines post-Korean War DPRK vessel control system in the Korean peninsula as well as how it should be improved.

• Journal of Fisheries and Marine Sciences Education
• /
• v.17 no.3
• /
• pp.281-292
• /
• 2005

Information on maritime boundaries is essential to manage ocean and fisheries effectively in the era of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. With various information regarding to maritime boundaries analysed and reviewed, maritime boundaries are mainly divided into two categories such as international and domestic boundaries and also sub-divided into two aspects such as administrative and other boundaries. After clarification of boundary information, the geographical natures of boundaries, for instance datum, projection, line types, are reviewed. The Geographic Information Systems (GIS) is used for the establishment, management and utilization of boundary information due to its strong function in database, analysis, visualization, etc.

• Ocean and Polar Research
• /
• v.32 no.4
• /
• pp.427-437
• /
• 2010

The Korean Government is trying to construct an ocean research station in Dokdo's water. The station would be the third ocean research station following the Ieodo station and the Gageocho station. Although the new station would served as a scientific research base for peaceful and academic purposes, the construction of the station will almost certainly lead to a diplomatic dispute between Japan and Korea in the near future due to the disputed ownership of the island. In light of the diplomatic protests against the construction of the Ieodo station by the Chinese Government, various domestic and international legal issues which could be raised regarding the construction of the Dokdo station need to be reviewed. Therefore, this article reviews the international legal status of the station and the rights and duties pertaining to its construction, investigates the domestic legal grounds relating to the construction and operation of the marine scientific installation, evaluates the international legal impacts of the construction on the expansion of maritime jurisdiction, the effective control on Dokdo and the negotiations on maritime boundary delimitation, and finally draws conclusions on the future activities of the Korean Government for the construction and operation of the Dokdo Ocean Research Station.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.187-210
• /
• 2009

Space law(or outer space law) and the law of the sea are branches of international law dealing with activities in geographical ares which do not or do only in part come under national sovereignty. Legal rules pertaining to the outer space and sea began to develop once activities emerged in those areas: amongst others, activities dealing with transportation, research, exploration, defense and exploitation. Naturally the law of the sea developed first, followed, early in the twentieth century, by air law, and later in the century by space law. Obviously the law of the sea, of the air and of outer space influence each other. Ideas have been borrowed from one field and applied to another. This article examines some analogies and differences between the outer space law and the law of the sea, especially from the perspective of the legal status, the exploration and exploitation of the natural resources and environment. As far as the comparisons of the legal status between the outer space and high seas are concerned the two areas are res extra commercium. The latter is res extra commercium based on both the customary international law and treaty, however, the former is different respectively according to the customary law and treaty. Under international customary law, whilst outer space constitutes res extra commercium, celestial bodies are res nullius. However as among contracting States of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, both outer space and celestial bodies are declared res extra commercium. As for the comparisons of the exploration and exploitation of natural resources between the Moon including other celestial bodies in 1979 Moon Agreement and the deep sea bed in the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the both areas are the common heritage of mankind. The latter gives us very systematic models such as International Sea-bed Authority, however, the international regime for the former will be established as the exploitation of the natural resources of the celestial bodies other than the Earth is about to become feasible. Thus Moon Agreement could not impose a moratorium, but would merely permit orderly attempts to establish that such exploitation was in fact feasible and practicable, by allowing experimental beginnings and thereafter pilot operations. As Professor Carl Christol said until the parties of the Moon Agreement were able to put into operation the legal regime for the equitable sharing of benefits, they would remain free to disregard the Common Heritage of Mankind principle. Parties to one or both of the agreements would retain jurisdiction over national space activities. In so far as the comparisons of the protection of the environment between the outer space and sea is concerned the legal instruments for the latter are more systematically developed than the former. In the case of the former there are growing tendencies of concerning the environmental threats arising from space activities these days. There is no separate legal instrument to deal with those problems.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Marine Environment & Energy
• /
• v.11 no.3
• /
• pp.138-149
• /
• 2008

Rapid accumulation of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere for the past century leads to acidify the surface ocean and contributes to the global warming as it forms acid in the ocean and it is a green house gas. In order to curb the green house gas emissions, in particular carbon dioxide, various multilateral agreements and programs have been established including UN Convention of Climate Change and its Kyoto Protocol for the last decades. Also a number of geo-engineering projects to manipulate the radiation balance of the earth have been proposed both from the science and industrial community worldwide. One of them is ocean fertilization to sequester carbon dioxide from the atmosphere through the photosynthesis of phytoplankton in the sea. Deliberate fertilization of the ocean with iron or nitrogen to large areas of the ocean has been proposed by commercial sector recently. Unfortunately the environmental consequences of the large scale ocean iron fertilization are not known and the current scientific information is still not sufcient to predict. In 2007, the joint meeting of parties of the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, 1972 and 1996 Protocol (London Convention/Protocol) has started considering the purposes and circumstances of proposed large-scale ocean iron fertilization operations and examined whether these activities are compatible with the aims of the Convention and Protocol and explore the need, and the potential mechanisms for regulation of such operations. The aim of this paper is to review the current development on the commercial ocean fertilization activities and management regimes in the potential ocean fertilization activities in the territorial sea, exclusive economic zone, and high seas, respectively, and further to have a view on the emerging international management regime to be London Convention/Protocol in conjunction with a support from the United Nations General Assembly through The United Nations Open-ended Informal Consultative Process on Oceans and the Law of the Sea.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.273-302
• /
• 2015

The term "peaceful uses of outer space" in the 1967 Outer Space Treaty appears in official government statements and multilateral outer space related treaties. However, the examination of the state practice leads to the conclusion that this term is still without an authoritative definition. As far as the meaning of 'peaceful use' in international law is concerned the same phrases in the UN Charter, the 1963 Treaty of Banning Nuclear Weapons Tests in the Atmosphere in Outer Space and Under Water, the 1956 Statute of IAEA, the 1959 Antarctic Treaty, the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the 1972 United Nations Conference of the Human Environment were analysed As far as the meaning of 'peaceful uses of outer space' is concerned the same phrases the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, the 1979 Moon Treaty and the 1977 Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques(ENMOD) were studied. According to Article IV of the 1967 Outer Space treaty, states shall not place in orbit around the earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kind of weapons of mass destruction, install such weapons on celestial bodies, or station such weapons in outer space in any other manner. The 1979 Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies repeats in Article III much of the Outer Space Treaty. This article prohibits the threat or use of force or any other hostile act on the moon and the use of the moon to commit such an act in relation to the earth or to space objects. This adds IN principle nothing to the provisions of the Outer Space Treaty relating to military space activities. The 1977 ENMOD refers to peaceful purposes in the preamble and in Article III. As far as the UN Resolutions are concerned, the 1963 Declaration of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exp1oration and Use of Outer Space, the 1992 Principles Relevant to the Use of Nuclear Power Sources in Outer Space(NPS) were studied. And as far the Soft Laws are concerned the 2008 Draft Treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapon in Outer Space and of the Threat or Use of Force against Outer Space Objects(PPWT), the 2002 Hague Code of Conduct against Ballistic Missile Prolifiration(HCoC) and 2012 Draft International Code of Conduct for Outer Space Activities(ICoC) were studied.

• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.30 no.2
• /
• pp.1-23
• /
• 1999

In the Northeast Asian region fisheries agreements of the past regarding high seas as an agreement area were transformed or new agreements were introduced in order to conform to the EEZ regime. However, the existing joint regulatory zone which “open” status is somewhat similar to the high sea not only disappear, but also two new systems were established. To begin with, parties of the agreement claimed their EEZs to be from the territorial sea baselines to the extent set forth, problem of the fishery access of the other party under the agreement is to be solved on the principle of reciprocity and on recognizing of the catch results achieved in the past. In regards to the overlapping zones like neutral zone of the East Sea of Korea(Sea of Japan) and neutral zone to the south of the Cheju Island, provisional measures zones in the Yellow Sea and in the East China Sea, and transitional zone of the Yellow Sea special fisheries management systems reflecting the legal character of the zone involved are applied. Moreover, as fisheries agreements defining open sea as an agreement zone are not able to conform to the EEZ regime, so new fisheries agreements must be taken out from old systems and conceptions, and must be understood and enforced from the new point view. Therefore, countermeasures needed to do so should be developed, and their basic structure is as follows. Firstly, the basic concept of the EEZ regime requires that the coastal states have sovereign rights on their sea zones' natural resources and bear responsibilities appropriate to their allowed jurisdiction. Each Northeast Asian state should adjust the structure of fishing industries and employ advanced fisheries management system, and should make efforts toward such issues of the state policy as increasing fishery resources and preserving ocean environment. Secondly, measures should be developed to solve the international fisheries disputes which are to occur under enforcement of the new fisheries agreements system. In regards to the acts of violation the fisheries laws in the foreign EEZ the principle of jail sentence prohibition is established by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, and every fisheries agreement reflects this principle. Therefore, the present question is to consider concrete measures to enable the easy release of the seamen, who violated fisheries laws slightly and well-intently, through establishment and management of the guarantee fund needed to make collateral reasonable. Thirdly, Korean-Russian and Russian-Japanese fisheries relations were formed on the basis of the EEZ regime, since 1992 and 1977 respectively, and are expected to maintain mutually beneficial cooperative character. As for Korean-Chinese-Japanese fisheries relations, the operational problems of overlapping zones, and problem of the permits for EEZ mutual access should be solved on the basis of the principle of reciprocity and equity rather than unilaterally from any side.