• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.3-30
• /
• 2011

According to the Article 86 of the United Nations on the Law of the Sea(UNCLOS) the provisions of high seas apply to all parts of the sea that are not included in the exclusive economic zone, in the territorial sea or in the internal waters of a State, or in the archipelagic waters of an archipelagic State. Article 87 also stipulates the freedom of the high seas. International laws on the flight over the high seas are found as follows; Firstly, as far as the nationality of the aircraft is concerned, its legal status is quite different from the ship where the flags of convenience can be applied practically. There is no flags of convenience of the aircraft. Secondly, according to the Article 95 of UNCLOS warships on the high seas have complete immunity from the jurisdiction of any State other than the flag State. We can suppose that the military(or state) aircraft over the high seas have also complete immunity from the jurisdiction of any State other than the flag State. Thirdly, according to the Article 101 of UNCLOS piracy consists of any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft. We can conclude that piracy can de done by a pirate aircraft as well as a pirate ship. Fourthly, according to the Article 111 (5) of UNCLOS the right of hot pursuit may be exercised only by warships or military aircraft, or other ships or aircraft clearly marked and identifiable as being on government service and authorized to that effect. We can conclude that the right of hot pursuit may be exercised only military aircraft, or aircraft clearly marked and identifiable as being on government service and authorized to that effect. Fifthly, according to the Article 110 of UNCLOS a warship which encounters on the high seas a foreign ship, is not justified in boarding it unless there is reasonable ground for suspecting that: (a) the ship is engaged in piracy, (b) the ship is engaged in the slave trade, (c) the ship is engaged in an authorized broadcasting and the flag State of the warship has jurisdiction under article 109, (d) the ship is without nationality, or (e) though flying a foreign flag or refusing to show its flag, the ship is, in reality, of the same nationality as the warship. These provisions apply mutatis mutandis to military aircraft. Sixthly, according to the Article 1 (5)(dumping), 212(pollution from or through the atmosphere), 222(enforcement with respect to pollution from or through the atmosphere) of UNCLOS aircraft as well as ship is very much related to marine pollution. Seventhly, as far as the crime on board aircraft over the high seas is concerned 1963 Convention on the Offences and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft(Tokyo Convention) will be applied, and as for the hijacking over the high seas 1970 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft(Hague Convention) and as for the sabotage over the high seas 1971 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Civil Aviation(Montreal Convention) will be applied respectively. These three conventions recognize the flag state jurisdiction over the crimes on board aircraft over the high seas. Eightly, as far as reconnaissance by foreign aircraft in the high seas toward the coastal States is concerned it is not illegal in terms of international law because its act is done in the high seas. Ninthly as for Air Defence Identification Zone(ADIZ) there are no articles dealing with it in the 1944 Chicago Convention. The legal status of the foreign aircraft over this sea zone might be restricted to the regulations of the coastal states whether this zone is legitimate or illegal. Lastly, the Arctic Sea is the frozen ocean. So the flight over that ocean is the same over the high seas. Because of the climate change the Arctic Sea is getting melted. If the coastal states of the Arctic Sea will proclaim the Exclusive Economic Zone(EEZ) as the ocean is getting melted, the freedom of flight over that ocean will also be restricted to the regulations of the coastal states.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment & Safety
• /
• v.7 no.2
• /
• pp.89-103
• /
• 2001

Korea Maritime Police Agency(KMPA) has been pressed by some environmental factors. The changes in the international maritime legal system, such as the entry into force of the UNCLOS in 1994 and the promulgation of the Korea 200-mile EEZ, have radically expanded the mission of the KMPA. In addition, there is, among other nations, no such large size maritime agency, equivalent to the KMPA, except in the cases of USA, Canada, and Japan. And what is more, critics outside the KMPA, including some other government agencies and stakeholders may propose to dismantle the KMPA. In this paper, the author highlights the internal and external issues facing KMPL, and he urges KMPA to change the organizational culture for maintaining its identity and characteristics by adopting the Total Quality Management. And he tries to assess the adoption of TQM on KMPA, by using the Feasibility Assessment Technique.

• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.39 no.1
• /
• pp.115-132
• /
• 2008

This study raises the question about why do many international fisheries organizations or regional fisheries agreements come into existence, sustain, and develop prior to the internationally recognized institution such as United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea(UNCLOS). In oder to solve the problem, I will investigate the characteristics of fisheries as renewable resources and propose the collusion model where it is based on the cost-benefit analysis. Especially, if once a fooall large number of fishing is implemented, they are immediately depleted. Consequently they are extinct and no longer exploitable. Thus each interest nations or participants will be better off if they are cooperative and will be worse off if they are competitive or noncooperative in a resource management. Therefore, many of the internationally recognized fisheries institutions and agreements have been made and developed in these days.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Navigation and Port Research Conference
• /
• 2013.10a
• /
• pp.196-198
• /
• 2013

Navigation of ships is mainly being performed through high sea, but inbound/outbound vessels to a port are characteristic of going via territorial sea of coastal countries. At territorial sea, all ships are under the influence of korea' sovereignty and enjoy innocent passage on the basis of UN Convention on the Law at the Sea(UNCLOS). But in the practical points of view, we want to examine legally on these issues, because we have no clear criteria for reasons about anchor except anchorage and innocent passage at territorial sea prescribed at national laws, moreover it can be used maliciouly.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Navigation and Port Research Conference
• /
• 2015.10a
• /
• pp.347-349
• /
• 2015

마스터플랜 과정의 한 부분으로서, 관리자와 cordlawek가 되기 위한 교육프로그램 IALA WWA의 모델 과정을 기초로 한 교육에 대해 이수가 필요하다. 국제적인 협약 및 조직. 교육 참가자는 항로표지와 관련해서 IMO, IALA, SOLAS Chapter 5와 UNCLOS 82, 그리고 이 기준들을 유지하기위한 법적인 의무를 이해하는 국제 협약 및 조직과 직접적으로 친밀해져야 한다. 항해환경. 교육 참가자는 e-Navigation과 관련된 이슈들을 이해하는데 노력해야한다. 항로표지 서비스 제공의 관리. 교육 참가자는 항로표지 서비스 관리와 역사적인 항로표지 시설의 보존에 높은 경쟁력을 가져야 한다. 기술적인 이슈 워크숍. 교육 참가자는 직업에서 발생할 수 있는 기술적인 이슈에 관한 토의에 참석해야 한다.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Navigation and Port Research Conference
• /
• v.1
• /
• pp.81-87
• /
• 2006

해상교총관제는 해상운송에서의 운영적 ${\cdot}$ 환경적 위험을 강소시키기 위한 수단으로써 전 세계 여러 주요 항만과 수역에서 이용되고 있다. 현재 각 국에서는 자국연안에서의 선박통제제도를 적극적으로 실시하고 있으며, 해운의 활성화와 더불어 항만의 안전성 확보를 위하여 각국은 VTS에 관한 국내법을 제정하여 이를 시행하고 있다. 우리나라도 VTS와 관련하여 여러 규정들을 두고 있으나 각 개별입법 내에 산재해 있는 실정이며, VTS를 운영하는 관제요원의 책임과 권한을 명확하게 규정하고 있지 아니하다. 이에 향후 VTS 운영과 관련한 법제의 정비에 관한 논의를 촉진시키는 선행연구로써 현행 VTS 운영과 관련한 법적 문제점을 지적하고 개선방향을 제시한다. 우선 VTS 관제범위에 관한 논의는 국제법적 측면의 법리 정토가 필요하리라 생각되며, VTS 관제요원의 권한과 책임에 있어 적극적 관제에 대한 개념의 정립과 더불어 관제요원의 재인책임과 중과실 경과실에 대한 해상고유의 특성을 반영한 해석이 되어야 할 것으로 생각된다.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.32 no.1
• /
• pp.201-224
• /
• 2017

The main subject of this article focused on the legal status of the military aircraft in the high seas. For this the legal status of the military aircraft, the freedom of overflight, the right of hot pursuit, the right of visit and Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) were dealt. The 1944 Chicago Convention neither explicitly nor implicitly negated the customary norms affecting the legal status of military aircraft as initially codified within the 1919 Paris Convention. So the status of military aircraft was not redefined with the Chicago Convention and remains, as stated in the 1919 Paris Convention, as a norm of customary international law. The analyses on the legal status of the military aircraft in the high seas are found as follows; According to the Article 95 of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) warships on the high seas have complete immunity from the jurisdiction of any State other than the flag State. We can suppose that the military aircraft in the high seas have also complete immunity from the jurisdiction of any State other than the flag State. According to the Article 111 (5) of the UNCLOS the right of hot pursuit may be exercised only by warships or military aircraft, or other ships or aircraft clearly marked and identifiable as being on government service and authorized to that effect. We can conclude that the right of hot pursuit may be exercised by military aircraft. According to the Article 110 of the UNCLOS a warship which encounters on the high seas a foreign ship, is not justified in boarding it unless there is reasonable ground for suspecting that: (a) the ship is engaged in piracy, (b) the ship is engaged in the slave trade, (c) the ship is engaged in an unauthorized broadcasting and the flag State of the warship has jurisdiction under article 109, (d) the ship is without nationality, or (e) though flying a foreign flag or refusing to show its flag, the ship is, in reality, of the same nationality as the warship. These provisions apply mutatis mutandis to military aircraft. As for Air Defence Identification Zone (ADIZ) it is established and declared unilaterally by the air force of a state for the national security. However, there are no articles dealing with it in the 1944 Chicago Convention and there are no international standards to recognize or prohibit the establishment of ADIZs. ADIZ is not interpreted as the expansion of territorial airspace.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment & Safety
• /
• v.27 no.7
• /
• pp.987-994
• /
• 2021

The Yellow sea, as described in article 123 of UNCLOS, is semi-enclosed sea surrounded by the Republic of Korea, the People's Republic of China and North Korea. In addition, the Yellow Sea is one of the 66 large marine ecosystems as it contains large amounts of marine resources. According to article 194 of UNCLOS, states should be aware of rights and duties with respect to the protection and preservation of the marine environment to be engaged with countries directly as regional entity or indirectly. Therefore, the legal blank is urgent in terms of trans-boundary environmental pollutant issues. The UNDP has conducted a project called Yellow Sea Large Marine Ecosystem (YSLME) which has reached the 2^nd phase. The project has some notable achievements, namely performing joint activities on analysis of diagnostic trans-boundary issues in collaboration with China and South Korea, developing a strategic action plan based on TDA, and establishing regional strategic action plan. However, on the other hand, the project could not reflect the full participation of North Korea as a state party. As a result, the project has a limitation on effective implementation of RSAP. Therefore, this study focuses on the suggestion of a legally-binding trilateral treaty as a blue print for the next, 3^rd phase of the project. By analyzing the best practice of the Wadden Sea Trilateral Treaty case, the study verifies the validity of legislative measures on establishing and managing a legally-binding trilateral YSLME Commission. By suggesting a three phase treaty, incorporating a joint declaration by establishing the commission, the signing of the treaty, and formulating an umbrella convention and implementation arrangement, the study expects to guarantee the consistency and sustainability of the trilateral treaty regardless of political issues pertaining to North Korea.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment & Safety
• /
• v.18 no.3
• /
• pp.227-233
• /
• 2012

The oceans are the largest body of water geographical unit in the earth. In accordance with the general said of the international law, countries on the international law must have four elements: 1) settled residents; 2) determined territory; 3) a certain degree of government organizations; 4) the sovereignty. The country's basic rights are: 1) the right to independence; 2) the right to equal; 3) the right to jurisdiction; 4) the right to self-protection. UNCLOS as the only one of the "Constitution of the Earth" on the earth, the implementation of its entry into force make about 1/3 of the world's oceans should be assigned to the coastal states, in the use and management of ocean gave the coastal states the center jurisdiction, the coastal states' jurisdiction sphere had been expanded, the power comparison among all countries in the world had new changes. The ocean territory, like the land territory, is the most major material condition of a country. The ocean's strategic status is extremely important, is the important stage of the international political, economic and military struggle, there are many disputes about the rights and interests, resources and the development and utilization on the oceans. To resolve these disputes is bound to depend on a strong comprehensive national strength, including politics, economy, science and technology, as well as the powerful marine force, in which maritime police plays an important role.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.38
• /
• pp.287-320
• /
• 2015

On October 27, 2015, USS Lassen(DDG82), a 9,200 ton class Aegis destroyer of the United States Navy, began its operations within 12 nautical miles of Subi Reef, one of the seven artificial islands that China has built and claimed sovereignty over. The maneuver was joined by anti-submarine patrol airplanes such as P-8A and P-3. The White House press secretary mentioned that the President of the United States approved the operation. In response, China announced that it warned the US Navy ship about the 'illegal violation' by sending two destroyers(PLAN Lanzhou and Taizhou). This event represents a close call case where tension between the United States and China in the South China Sea might have been elevated to a conflict between the two navies. Moreover, considering that this happened only one month after Chinese president Xi's state visit to the United States, the event shows that the positions of the two countries have become starkly different to the extent that they are so hard to be reconciled. The United States' position is different from those of Vietnam and the Philippines. Countries like Vietnam and the Philippines have been directly involved in disputes with regard to sovereignty claims across the waters in the South China sea. As for the United States, being a third party in the disputes, it still cannot be a by-stander watching the whole waters in the region fall under the influence of China. Accordingly, the United States maintains that all countries bear the rights of innocent passage and military operations in the Exclusive Economic Zones(EEZ) as stipulated by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea(UNCLOS). In contrast, China claims that, historically, the South China sea has been part of China's territorial waters, and that foreign countries are not allowed to conduct military operations within the waters. It strongly accuses that such military operations are illegal. Against this background, this paper tracks the different positions of the United States and China on the issues regarding the South China sea. It also carefully looks at the possibility that, in the process of dealing with the issues, the two countries may get into an armed conflict as the phrase 'Thucydides Trap' predicts.