Zur Frage, ob politisch abhängige Inseln eine eigenständige Ausschließliche Wirtschaftszone (AWZ) haben

Scroll down for the english version!

Der VIII. Teil der UNCLOS lautet:

Part VIII. Regime of islands

Article 121. Regime of islands

1. An island is a naturally formed area of land, surrounded by water, which is above water at high tide.

2. Except as provided for in paragraph 3, the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf of an island are determined in accordance with the provisions of this Convention applicable to other land territory.

3. Rocks which cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own shall have no exclusive economic zone or continental shelf.

Der zitierte Absatz 1 meint zweifelsfrei alle Inseln. Nichtsdestotrotz hätte der zitierte Absatz 2 entsprechend anders textiert werden müssen, wenn gemeint gewesen wäre, dass die in ihm genannten Zonen und Bereiche analog den, das kontinentale Festland betreffenden, Bestimmungen festgelegt werden sollten. Was also ist gemeint?

Abgesehen somit vom Teil IV UNCLOS, der Archipel-Staaten betrifft, welche zur Gänze (!) aus geologisch miteinander zusammenhängenden Inseln bestehen, erwähnt Artikel 7 Absatz 1 UNCLOS Inseln; er lautet:

In localities where the coastline is deeply indented and cut into, or if there is a fringe of islands along the coast in its immediate vicinity, the method of straight baselines joining appropriate points may be employed in drawing the baseline from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured.

Daraus folgt, dass politisch zum Küstenstaat gehörende Inseln, welche weiter entfernt liegen, nicht zur Bestimmung der Basislinie herangezogen werden. Damit sind solche Inseln vom Regime der Territorialsee (UNCLOS Teil II) ausgeschlossen, denn Artikel 2 Absatz 1 UNCLOS spricht klar (abgesehen vom Archipel-Staat) nur von Küstenstaat und meint damit offenkundig den Festland-Küstenstaat. Dieses Ergebnis wird aber auch nicht vom zitierten Teil VIII. UNCLOS wettgemacht, weil dort ausdrücklich die Rede von der Übereinstimmung mit Regeln ist, welche auf andere Landterritorien, also kontinentale, anwendbar sind, was auf den Abschnitt 2 des Teils II der UNCLOS eben nur rücksichtlich nahe gelegener Inseln zutrifft.

Was den anderen, politisch zugehörigen Inseln eine Territorialsee verschafft, ist demgegenüber einzig ein Umkehrschluss aus Artikel 13 Absatz 2, der da lautet:

Where a low-tide elevation is wholly situated at a distance exceeding the breadth of the territorial sea from the mainland or an island, it has no territorial sea of its own.

Während mit island hier – offenkundig im Gegensatz zum Kontinental-Küstenstaat – Inselstaaten gemeint sind, folgt aus dem hervorgehobenen zweiten Halbsatz, dass politisch zugehörige Inseln, die bei Tidenhochstand über Wasser liegen, eine eigene Territorialsee haben.

Eine analoge Bestimmung rücksichtlich von Inseln und der Ausschließlichen Wirtschaftszone oder des Kontinentalsockels existiert nicht. Daraus folgt, dass die wesentlichen Wirkungen des VIII. Teils bloß für Inselstaaten bestehen.

____________________________________________________________________________

Part VIII of UNCLOS reads:

Part VIII. Regime of islands

Article 121. Regime of islands

1. An island is a naturally formed area of land, surrounded by water, which is above water at high tide.

2. Except as provided for in paragraph 3, the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf of an island are determined in accordance with the provisions of this Convention applicable to other land territory.

3. Rocks which cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own shall have no exclusive economic zone or continental shelf.

The quoted paragraph 1 undoubtedly means all islands. Nevertheless, the quoted paragraph 2 would have had to be reworded accordingly if it had been intended that the zones and areas mentioned in it should be defined by analogy with the provisions concerning the continental mainland. So what is meant?

Thus, except for Part IV of UNCLOS, which concerns archipelagic States consisting entirely (!) of geologically contiguous islands, Article 7 (1) of UNCLOS mentions islands and reads:

In localities where the coastline is deeply indented and cut into, or if there is a fringe of islands along the coast in its immediate vicinity, the method of straight baselines joining appropriate points may be employed in drawing the baseline from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured.

It follows that islands belonging politically to the coastal state which are further away are not used to determine the baseline. Such islands are thus excluded from the regime of the territorial sea (UNCLOS Part II), since Article 2 (1) UNCLOS clearly speaks (apart from the archipelagic State) only of a coastal State and thus obviously refers to the mainland-coastal State. However, this result is also not revised by the cited Part VIII. UNCLOS, because it expressly refers to the conformity with rules which are applicable to other land territories, i.e. continental ones, which applies to Section 2 of Part II of UNCLOS only with regard to nearby islands.

What gives the other politically associated islands a territorial sea, on the other hand, is merely a reverse conclusion of Article 13(2), which states:

Where a low-tide elevation is wholly situated at a distance exceeding the breadth of the territorial sea from the mainland or an island, it has no territorial sea of its own.

While by island here – obviously in contrast to the continental coastal state – island states are meant, it follows from the highlighted second half-sentence that politically associated islands which are above water at high tide have their own territorial sea.

There is no analogous provision with regard to islands and the Exclusive Economic Zone or the continental shelf. It follows from this that the essential effects of Part VIII apply only to island states.

Kommentar verfassen

%d Bloggern gefällt das: