CYIL vol. 15 (2024)

CYIL 15 ȍ2024Ȏ THIRTY YEARS SINCE THE ENTRY INTO FORCE OF THE UN CONVENTION … [T]he information on the limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured shall be submitted by the coastal State to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf set up under Annex II on the basis of equitable geographical representation. The Commission makes recommendations to coastal states in regard to all matters relating to the determination of the outer limits of their continental shelf. The shelf limits established by the coastal State with regard to these recommendations are f inal and binding. In practice, it turns out that although the maximum width of the continental shelf is set, there are also certain exceptions, in which the continental shelf can exceed 350 nautical miles. The problem is connected with the concepts of submarine elevations or submarine ridges. These questions are important in delineating the continental shelf in the Arctic Ocean. As stated by T. H. Heidar, 37 it is not easy to distinguish between submarine elevations and submarine ridges, because the Convention on the Law of the Sea does not contain its definition. The limitation of 350 nautical miles, which is contained in the first sentence of this paragraph, shall not apply 38 to the submarine elevations. Points on these submarine elevations beyond 350 nautical miles should be included in the continental shelf and there should apply the rule in regard to the 100 nautical mile rule beyond 2,500 m depth. 39 Since there exists no precise definition of submarine elevations and submarine ridges , there arises a question of how to characterize the Lomonosov Ridge and Mendeleev Ridge in the Arctic Ocean. According to R. Wolfrum, 40 if the ridge is a submarine elevation, which is a part of a natural component of the continental margin, then the outer continental shelf of Russia, Canada, etc. can extend beyond 350 nautical miles, which shall be demonstrated by the Commission on the Continental Shelf. The delimitation of the continental shelf beyond the limit of 200 nautical miles causes some disputes between states (especially in the Arctic Ocean), these disputes are connected with the fact that some concepts are not precisely defined, and the delimitation of the continental shelf is rather complicated. However, the definition of the continental shelf in Article 76(1) of the Convention on the Law of the Sea, according to the International Court of Justice in the Territorial and Maritime Dispute case, 41 forms part of customary international law. 37 HEIDAR, T. H. The Legal Regime of the Arctic Ocean. Zeitschrift fur auslandisches offentliches Recht und Volkerrecht, 2009, 69/3, p. 637. 38 BENITAH, M. Russia’s Claim in the Arctic and the Vexing Issue of Ridges in UNCLOS. ASIL (American Society of International Law) Insights , 2007, Volume 8. www.asil.org/insights (accessed on 10. 7. 2013). Similar opinion has WOLFRUM, R. The Arctic in the Context of International Law. Zeitschrift fur auslandisches offentliches Recht und Volkerrecht , 2009, 69/3, p. 538. 39 Ibid. 40 WOLFRUM, R. The Arctic in the Context of International Law. Zeitschrift fur auslandisches offentliches Recht und Volkerrecht, 2009, 69/3, p. 538. 41 International Court of Justice. Territorial and Maritime Dispute ( Nicaragua v. Colombia ). Judgement, 2012, para 118.

15