CYIL vol. 8 (2017)

CYIL 8 ȍ2017Ȏ THE ISSUES OF SOVEREIGNTY AND OWNERSHIP IN RESPECT TO THE SEAǧBED … from the Area, however, may only be alienated in accordance with this Part and the rules, regulations and procedures of the Authority. The proclamation of the sea-bed as “common heritage of mankind” is necessary in relation to natural resources because these resources do not exist on the sea-bed by themselves but are an integral part of the surface or subsurface. To separate these would therefore not be reasonable. The idea that “common heritage of mankind” shall refer both to the space and to the resource of the sea-bed was expressed already in the Maltese Memorandum of 1967. The existence of “common heritage of mankind” which covers both the sea-bed and its resources makes Děkanozov 22 come to the conclusion that “common heritage of mankind” is composed of two elements: “space” and “resources”. The regulation contained in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea is a treaty law. Western states basically asserted the freedom of exploitation of natural resources of the sea- bed. At the end of the Third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III) this position was held, for example, by the USA, Germany and Italy. These states noted that most of the regulation of Part XI of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and the related annexes do not present a general international law but are of a contractual character and obligatory for the states parties to the Convention. According to the USA, 23 extraction from the sea-bed continues as legal exploitation of the high seas within the framework of the traditional freedom of the high seas . The USA as well as about thirty other countries are States parties to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982. The regulation in the Convention which refers to the sea bed and ocean floor beyond the states’ jurisdictions is not considered general international law. The assumption is that even if it was, states like the USA would not accept such regulation and insist on their right to exploit the sea-bed according to the current general international law rules of the law of the high seas 24 (that is freedoms of the high seas). The USA in this respect passed the Act on the deep sea mineral resources exploitation in 1980, which was supplemented in 2002 (Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act). 2. Exploration and exploitation of mineral resources of the sea-bed beyond the national jurisdiction on the basis of the UN Convention As far as the sea-bed beyond the boundaries of national jurisdiction is concerned, unlike the high seas, where there is freedom of fishing and other exploitation (states and individuals can freely appropriate the benefits of the sea and conduct their activities), the activity on the sea-bed and the division of the mineral resources of the Area are regulated. States and other bodies cannot appropriate the sea-bed resources freely. Concerning the resources, Article 133 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea understands under this term all solid, liquid or gaseous mineral resources in situ in the Area at or beneath the seabed, 22 DĚKANOZOV, R. V., Concept of the common heritage of mankind. Soviet Yearbook of International Law , Moscow 1981, p. 145. 23 The Law of the Sea (Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind), Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea Office of Legal Affairs, United Nations. New York 1996, p. 11. 24 GROVES, S., The U. S. Can Mine the Deep Seabed Without Joing the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea. In: Backgrounder [online]. 4. 12. 2012 [3. 10. 2016]. Accessible at:

385