The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is a comprehensive UN legal policy document demarcating areas of the sea under the jurisdiction of member states as well as legal clauses for human maritime activity in a comprehensive manner.
The UNCLOS aims to demarcate and scrutinize the legal ramifications in the fullest possible scope of different jurisdictional and geographical areas of the sea as well as for human maritime activity.
The sections for maritime zones that were defined in the UNCLOS include the exclusive economic zone (EEZ), the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the continental shelf, archipelagic waters, the international sea-bed areas and the high seas.
The sections for maritime activities are numerous and intricate, and some examples include clauses for shipping routes, marine conservation, resource exploitation, and for scientific research.
Formulation of the UNCLOS
The UNCLOS replaces the earlier concept of areas of the sea belonging to states coupled with international waters and developed due to conflicts between states over areas of the sea. The area of the coastal sea that states could control through history had generally been that area that states could control through its navy. Thus the areas extending over a 3 mile area from the coasts of nations over time came to represent the areas of coastal sea that states could administer.
The areas of the sea not coming under the jurisdiction of states i.e. international waters, later would form various sub-categories under the UNCLOS. These areas that since the 18th Century were generally understood as territories of the sea legally belonging to states were very troublesome, especially in case of overlapping of territories or encroachment and detention. The ambiguities created during the Second World War led to an international churning for the UN’s International Law Commission to establish a proper codification system for these disputes over the world’s oceans.
The UN’s International Law Commission began working on this issue and prepared the 4 draft conventions by 1949. Between February 24 and April 29, 1958, international negotiations and meetings ensued for the first UN Conference on the Law of the Sea – UNCLOS I. The basic form of the 4 draft conventions were adopted in UNCLOS I, and these are known as the 1958 Geneva Conventions. However, the limits established by this round of meetings did not prove adequate, although it established certain outlines of the sections that the UNCLOS would address.
The UNCLOS II held in 1960 led to similar disagreements over the finer contents of the draft, especially over the breadth of the territorial seas and over rights concerning fishing activities. The third conference held between 1973 to 1982 – UNCLOS III – would prove to the final such conference, and was finally passed on November 14, 1994 including the participation of 160 states (GRID-Arendal, 2014).
A Brief Overview of the UNCLOS in Practice
The UNCLOS may be comprehensive in defining the scope of human intervention over the seas, but as a legal instrument it is at the most a framework convention that works in conjunction with national laws, international treaties, organizations and other conventions (S.O. Williams, 2014). However, the advantage offered by the UNCLOS is the comprehensive enumeration of maritime zones and the rules for operations wherein – a combination that is the first of its kind. The UNCLOS also offers legal instruments for assessing and responding to maritime threats many of which were previously not clearly defined.
However, since the UNCLOS is subject to the behaviour of individual states, many a time its rules have been flouted in a global system that tends to favour the United States in terms of international law, geopolitics, etc. An example is China’s behaviour in the South China Sea. China claims historical rights over about 90 per cent of the waters of the South China Sea, which became an issue since the Philippines challenged this with a lawsuit under international law.
China on its part refused to acknowledge a ruling by an international tribunal under the UNCLOS to cede its claim. This dispute was accompanied with Chinese military activities in the South China Sea that faced global opposition led by the United States, which is usually the chief arbiter of international dispute resolution.
This is also curious due to the fact that the United States has military bases in numerous locations all over the world close to marine habitats, giving it rapid access to geopolitical zones in international waters worldwide. Resistance by many states to UNCLOS clauses comes with a need to assert their autonomy in a global regime led by the US and its allies, other than geopolitical considerations towards other member states.
India’s position in this particular dispute has been one of diplomatic negotiations over the lawful and peaceful negotiation of the dispute under the UNCLOS. India follows much of the rest of the world in that the UNCLOS is a widely accepted legal document in state practice all over the world, such that many observers point towards the UNCLOS being a proxy customary international maritime law. The Act places between 2.2 to 2.8 million square km of sea under India’s jurisdiction, the boundaries are not clearly demarcated, such as the critical one between Indian and Pakistani waters, that includes the Sir Creek area.
India has a special need for the UNCLOS, as the medium of transit for 90 per cent of India’s trade is through the seas and oceans. Also 65 per cent of the known oil reserves globally are located in the Indian Ocean region, with 40 per cent of global offshore reserves with countries having coasts by the Indian Ocean (P.A. Jayan, 2013). An international legal regime becomes even more important thus given the piracy and business practices involved in these regions. The Indian Express (2017) reports that the year 2011 alone witnessed 237 attacks by pirates in the Indian Ocean region, making international legal co-operation even more necessary.
Although the UNCLOS for India is a very valuable document to protect trade and resource exploitation in the region, it can also provide an effective legal framework to protect marine species and environments from anthropogenic activities.
Part XII of the UNCLOS is titled ‘Protection and Preservation of the Marine Environment’ which obliges states to protect the environment, along with comprehensive clauses throughout the agreement for the protection of marine life.
Given India’s diminishing fishing stock and commercial poaching and illegal trade in marine goods that have for example wiped out large populations of species such as sea cucumbers and sea horses off India’s coasts, India must utilize the treaty for environmentally sustainable use of its areas specified under the UNCLOS as well, and not subject the Convention merely to utilitarian use.
The Convention represents a great opportunity for India to co-operate internationally on conservation matters on a legal basis, and thereby achieving sustainable use of the surrounding seas can potentially reap great benefits.
Recent Posts
- In the Large States category (overall), Chhattisgarh ranks 1st, followed by Odisha and Telangana, whereas, towards the bottom are Maharashtra at 16th, Assam at 17th and Gujarat at 18th. Gujarat is one State that has seen startling performance ranking 5th in the PAI 2021 Index outperforming traditionally good performing States like Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, but ranks last in terms of Delta
- In the Small States category (overall), Nagaland tops, followed by Mizoram and Tripura. Towards the tail end of the overall Delta ranking is Uttarakhand (9th), Arunachal Pradesh (10th) and Meghalaya (11th). Nagaland despite being a poor performer in the PAI 2021 Index has come out to be the top performer in Delta, similarly, Mizoram’s performance in Delta is also reflected in it’s ranking in the PAI 2021 Index
- In terms of Equity, in the Large States category, Chhattisgarh has the best Delta rate on Equity indicators, this is also reflected in the performance of Chhattisgarh in the Equity Pillar where it ranks 4th. Following Chhattisgarh is Odisha ranking 2nd in Delta-Equity ranking, but ranks 17th in the Equity Pillar of PAI 2021. Telangana ranks 3rd in Delta-Equity ranking even though it is not a top performer in this Pillar in the overall PAI 2021 Index. Jharkhand (16th), Uttar Pradesh (17th) and Assam (18th) rank at the bottom with Uttar Pradesh’s performance in line with the PAI 2021 Index
- Odisha and Nagaland have shown the best year-on-year improvement under 12 Key Development indicators.
- In the 60:40 division States, the top three performers are Kerala, Goa and Tamil Nadu and, the bottom three performers are Uttar Pradesh, Jharkhand and Bihar.
- In the 90:10 division States, the top three performers were Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim and Mizoram; and, the bottom three performers are Manipur, Assam and Meghalaya.
- Among the 60:40 division States, Orissa, Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh are the top three performers and Tamil Nadu, Telangana and Delhi appear as the bottom three performers.
- Among the 90:10 division States, the top three performers are Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh and Nagaland; and, the bottom three performers are Jammu and Kashmir, Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh
- Among the 60:40 division States, Goa, West Bengal and Delhi appear as the top three performers and Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Bihar appear as the bottom three performers.
- Among the 90:10 division States, Mizoram, Himachal Pradesh and Tripura were the top three performers and Jammu & Kashmir, Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh were the bottom three performers
- West Bengal, Bihar and Tamil Nadu were the top three States amongst the 60:40 division States; while Haryana, Punjab and Rajasthan appeared as the bottom three performers
- In the case of 90:10 division States, Mizoram, Assam and Tripura were the top three performers and Nagaland, Jammu & Kashmir and Uttarakhand featured as the bottom three
- Among the 60:40 division States, the top three performers are Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and Orissa and the bottom three performers are Madhya Pradesh, Jharkhand and Goa
- In the 90:10 division States, the top three performers are Mizoram, Sikkim and Nagaland and the bottom three performers are Manipur and Assam
In a diverse country like India, where each State is socially, culturally, economically, and politically distinct, measuring Governance becomes increasingly tricky. The Public Affairs Index (PAI 2021) is a scientifically rigorous, data-based framework that measures the quality of governance at the Sub-national level and ranks the States and Union Territories (UTs) of India on a Composite Index (CI).
States are classified into two categories – Large and Small – using population as the criteria.
In PAI 2021, PAC defined three significant pillars that embody Governance – Growth, Equity, and Sustainability. Each of the three Pillars is circumscribed by five governance praxis Themes.
The themes include – Voice and Accountability, Government Effectiveness, Rule of Law, Regulatory Quality and Control of Corruption.
At the bottom of the pyramid, 43 component indicators are mapped to 14 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that are relevant to the States and UTs.
This forms the foundation of the conceptual framework of PAI 2021. The choice of the 43 indicators that go into the calculation of the CI were dictated by the objective of uncovering the complexity and multidimensional character of development governance
The Equity Principle
The Equity Pillar of the PAI 2021 Index analyses the inclusiveness impact at the Sub-national level in the country; inclusiveness in terms of the welfare of a society that depends primarily on establishing that all people feel that they have a say in the governance and are not excluded from the mainstream policy framework.
This requires all individuals and communities, but particularly the most vulnerable, to have an opportunity to improve or maintain their wellbeing. This chapter of PAI 2021 reflects the performance of States and UTs during the pandemic and questions the governance infrastructure in the country, analysing the effectiveness of schemes and the general livelihood of the people in terms of Equity.
Growth and its Discontents
Growth in its multidimensional form encompasses the essence of access to and the availability and optimal utilisation of resources. By resources, PAI 2021 refer to human resources, infrastructure and the budgetary allocations. Capacity building of an economy cannot take place if all the key players of growth do not drive development. The multiplier effects of better health care, improved educational outcomes, increased capital accumulation and lower unemployment levels contribute magnificently in the growth and development of the States.
The Pursuit Of Sustainability
The Sustainability Pillar analyses the access to and usage of resources that has an impact on environment, economy and humankind. The Pillar subsumes two themes and uses seven indicators to measure the effectiveness of government efforts with regards to Sustainability.
The Curious Case Of The Delta
The Delta Analysis presents the results on the State performance on year-on-year improvement. The rankings are measured as the Delta value over the last five to 10 years of data available for 12 Key Development Indicators (KDI). In PAI 2021, 12 indicators across the three Pillars of Equity (five indicators), Growth (five indicators) and Sustainability (two indicators). These KDIs are the outcome indicators crucial to assess Human Development. The Performance in the Delta Analysis is then compared to the Overall PAI 2021 Index.
Key Findings:-
In the Scheme of Things
The Scheme Analysis adds an additional dimension to ranking of the States on their governance. It attempts to complement the Governance Model by trying to understand the developmental activities undertaken by State Governments in the form of schemes. It also tries to understand whether better performance of States in schemes reflect in better governance.
The Centrally Sponsored schemes that were analysed are National Health Mission (NHM), Umbrella Integrated Child Development Services scheme (ICDS), Mahatma Gandh National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS), Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan (SmSA) and MidDay Meal Scheme (MDMS).
National Health Mission (NHM)
INTEGRATED CHILD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES (ICDS)
MID- DAY MEAL SCHEME (MDMS)
SAMAGRA SHIKSHA ABHIYAN (SMSA)
MAHATMA GANDHI NATIONAL RURAL EMPLOYMENT GUARANTEE SCHEME (MGNREGS)