|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comments
RSS: Comments
| Anonymous @ 2008-11-06 05:36:29 | |
 |
The island is actually called The Snakes Island, or The White Island and belongs to Romania. A bulgarian church never existed, but a greek temple dedicated to Ahile. |
| gamma @ 2008-12-07 14:00:17 | |
 |
http://images.google.nl/imgres?imgurl=http://www.panoramio.com/photos/original/213911.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.panoramio.com/photo/213911&usg=__YyaC0A3Rs28rnpEq7Ct6-t2f2No=&h=1536&w=2048&sz=763&hl=nl&start=55&sig2=-d1gzopAzoyHveDCXwxmuQ&um=1&tbnid=_tVt_biImzCxgM:&tbnh=113&tbnw=150&ei=r0U8Sc7sG4rB-QajnIzPBg&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dsnake%2Bisland%26start%3D54%26ndsp%3D18%26um%3D1%26hl%3Dnl%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:nl:official%26sa%3DN Maritime Delimitation http://www.mlahanas.de/Greeks/Cities/SnakeIsland.html Due to the isle's geographic position, its possession dramatically affects the maritime frontier line between the two countries. If Snake Island is not an island, but a cliff, then in accordance with international law the maritime boundary between Romania and Ukraine should be drawn without taking into consideration the isle location. If Snake Island is an island, then continental shelf around Snake Island should be considered as Ukrainian water. The Romanian side claims that Ukraine is developing the isle in order to prove it's island status (as contrary to a cliff). Romanians also claims that this is a violation of the Romanian-Ukrainian Treaty of 1997, which stipulated that the island should remain uninhabited. On 16 September 2004 the Romanian side brought a case against Ukraine to the International Court of Justice in a dispute concerning the maritime boundary between the two States in the Black Sea, claiming that the island has no socio-economic significance [1]. Ukraine has to respond by 19 May 2006 [2] Recently, oil (10 million tonnes) and gas deposits (1 billion m³) were discovered under the seabed nearby. The natural resources are not significant though, as they can be exhausted in 2-3 year of development. BP and Royal Dutch/Shell signed prospect contracts with Ukraine, while Total with Romania. Austrian OMV (the owner of Romania's largest oil company, Petrom) also signed a contract with Naftogaz Ukrainy and Chornomornaftogaz to jointly participate to an auction for a concession of the area. Presuming that the ICJ finds its jurisdiction in this dispute, the following picture may arise. In general, the islands are “special” or “relevant” circumstances to be considered in each act of delimitation effected either by states themselves or with the help of a third party, such as the ICJ, and depending on the peculiarity of a given situation, considerations of equity may lead to giving islands full, partial or even no effect in determining entitlement to maritime areas. However, in the practice of states even rocks are often given effect during maritime delimitation, leaving alone fully-fledged islands. For example, Aves Island was given full effect in the US/Venezuela Maritime Boundary Agreement despite its very small size and lack of habitation . Furthermore, most states do not distinct the islands from LOSC Art. 121(3) “rocks” and claim the shelf and the EEZ for all their rocks and islands . Examples would include the UK (with regard to Rockall Island) , Japan (with regard to Okinotorishima), the US (with regard to Hawaiian and many other uninhabited islands along the equator), France (with regard to Clipperton and other islands), Norway (with regard to Jan Mayen), Yemen, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka etc . The practice of international courts, tribunals and other third-party dispute settlement bodies is less uniform. On the one hand, even alleged Art.121(3) “rocks” are taken into account in delimiting the maritime boundaries . On the other hand, even though the islands are not Art.121(3) “rocks”, they may well be either ignored or substantially discounted (enclaved or eliminated) if their use would have an inequitable distorting effect in light of their size and location . Even if such islands are not discounted their actual influence on the delimitation is often minimal. All these decisions cannot, however, be said to have reached that level of uniformity in order to become a rule of law. Although there have as well been some other instances where the issue, similar to that between Ukraine and Romania, was directly or implicitly involved , there has not been so far any direct third-party international review of whether a particular feature is LOSC Art.121(3) “rock” or is Art.121(2) “island” . Therefore, the Romanian-Ukrainian dispute may be the first case where the question of whether or not the island constitutes a “rock” with all the following implications under LOSC Art. 121(3) after its adoption will be examined by the main international adjudicative forum . The decision of the ICJ in this case is not, therefore, that easy to predict. On the one hand, it seems obvious that the Serpents’ Island is the fully-fledged island under LOSC Art.121(2), it has the capacity to generate all maritime zones and may affect the maritime delimitation to the full extent. On the other hand, in delimiting the maritime zones, the ICJ may take into account “special” or “relevant” circumstances (the fact that the Black Sea is the “enclosed or semi-enclosed sea” which would make the maritime delimitation more difficult , the presence of the Serpents’ island, its location, significance etc.) and give the Serpents’ Island either full, or some, or none effect at all. It is absolutely vague in any event if the international adjudication will be cheaper and faster in delimiting the maritime zones of both countries and drawing the single maritime boundary between them, than the bilateral negotiations on the same point are. It is not a secret that the ICJ tends to protract its maritime delimitation disputes, especially taking into account the time-frames set for the proceedings. Only the first phase of the Court’s procedure (written proceedings) in the Romania v. Ukraine case may encompass almost three years. |
|
Post a Comment:
(Policies)
Please log in if you don't want to post anonymously (anonymous users cannot post links) |