The Limits of Maritime Jurisdiction, edited by Clive Schofield, Seokwoo Lee, and Moon-Sang Kwon, comprises 36 chapters by leading oceans scholars and practitioners devoted to both the definition of maritime limits and boundaries spatially and the limits of jurisdictional rights within claimed maritime zones. Contributions address conflicting maritime claims and boundary disputes, access to valuable marine resources, protecting the marine environment, maritime security and combating piracy, concerns over expanding activities and jurisdiction in Polar waters and the impact of climate change on the oceans, including the potential impact of sea level rise on the scope of claims to maritime zones. The volume therefore offers critical analysis on a range of important and frequently increasingly pressing contemporary law of the sea issues.

This book is open access under a CC BY-NC 4.0 license. It explores the diverse phenomena which are challenging the international law of the sea today, using the unique perspective of a simultaneous analysis of the national, individual and common interests at stake. This perspective, which all the contributors bear in mind when treating their own topic, also constitutes a useful element in the effort to bring today’s legal complexity and fragmentation to a homogenous vision of the sustainable use of the marine environment and of its resources, and also of the international and national response to maritime crimes.The volume analyzes the relevant legal frameworks and recent developments, focusing on the competing interests which have influenced State jurisdiction and other regulatory processes. An analysis of the competing interests and their developments allows us to identify actors and relevant legal and institutional contexts, retracing how and when these elements have changed over time.

This title is designed for law of the sea and maritime law specialists. The coverage includes current affairs in martime law such as submarine cables, polar areas, environmental protection, sovereign immunity and sunken ships, and maritime law enforcement.

Climate change is modifying, in varying measure, the coastal geography of States. The phenomenon is not temporary but is expected to carry on during the 21st century and beyond. A distinctive feature of modern international law is the concept of maritime zones. Each maritime area is subject to an intricate scheme of States’ rights and obligations. Coastal geography is a fundamental component of a long-standing method, developed and agreed upon between States, to establish the outward limits of these areas. A feature of this method is the baseline. In international law it is the only reference line from where the outward limits of maritime zones are measured. There are clear rules on how this is established along a coast. There is a concern amongst a number of States that rising sea water levels as a result of climate change may compel them to shift their baselines inward thus affecting the outward limits of their maritime zones. It is clear that the stability of maritime boundaries is put into question and this may bring about serious political, legal and economic repercussions. This concern may also affect the outcome of dispute settlement procedures before a competent international court or tribunal the purpose of which is to resolve overlapping maritime claims. Key questions emerge. What is the role played by coastal geography in the legal regime determining the outward limits of maritime zones? What are the consequences of changes to coastal geography? To what extent are dispute settlement procedures before a Court or Tribunal immune from this concern? Is international law able to address this? If so, in what way and what are its limits? What can be done to resolve this?

Until the mid-1950s nearly all the waters lying between the far-flung islands of the Indonesian archipelago were as open to the ships of all nations as the waters of the great oceans. In order to enhance its failing sovereign grasp over the nation, as well as to deter perceived external threats to Indonesia’s national integrity, in 1957 the Indonesian government declared that it had “absolute sovereignty” over all the waters lying within straight baselines drawn between the outermost islands of Indonesia. At a single step, Indonesia had asserted its dominion over a vast swathe of what had hitherto been seas open to all, and made its lands and the seas it now claimed a single unified entity for the first time. International outrage and alarm ensued, expressed especially by the great maritime nations. Nevertheless, despite its low international profile, its relative poverty, and its often frail state capacity, Indonesia eventually succeeded in gaining international recognition for its claim when, in 1982, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea formally recognized the existence of a new category of states known as “archipelagic states” and declared that these states had sovereignty over their “archipelagic waters”. Sovereignty and the Sea explains how Indonesia succeeded in its extraordinary claim. At the heart of Indonesia’s archipelagic campaign was a small group of Indonesian diplomats. Largely because of their dogged persistence, negotiating skills, and willingness to make difficult compromises Indonesia became the greatest archipelagic state in the world.