Delimitation of Continental Shelf

Generally continental shelf is the shallow part of sea bottom adjacent to land. Geologically,
continental shelf may be defined as The zone around the continent extending from the low
water line to the depth at which there is usually a marked increase of declivity to greater depth

Definition of continental shelf

Under Article 1 of Geneva convention on law of sea the continental shelf is the sea bed and sub
soil of the submarine areas adjacent to the coast, but outside the area of territorial sea, to a depth
of 200 meters or beyond the limit, to where the depth of 200 meters or beyond that limit, to
where the depth of the superjacent waters admit of the exploitation of natural resources of the
said area

Criticism
This definition was criticized on the ground that
It has not fix any outer limit of continental shelf
It gave room to the States to interpret the area of continental shelf according to their own
convenience.

This definition was revised in UN conference of law of sea 1982. Paragraph 1 of article 76 of the
convention on law of sea,1982 defines continental shelf as the seabed and sub soil of the areas
that extend beyond its territorial sea throughout the natural prolongation of its land territory to
the outer edge of the continental margin, or to a distance of 200 nautical miles from baselines
from which the breath of the territorial sea is measured where the outer edge of the continental
margin does not extend up to that distances .Paragraph 4(a) of Article 76 of united nation
convention on law of sea provides that if the continental margin extends beyond 200 nautical
miles, the coastal state can exercise jurisdiction up to 350 nautical miles or shall not exceed 100
nautical miles from the 2500 meters isolates, which is the line connection the depth of 2500
meters.

Emergence of doctrine of continental shelf: On September 28, 1945 a proclamation was issued
by the U.S president Harry s.Truman which stated natural resources of the subsoil and seabed of
the continental shelf beneath the high sea of us is under the control of US. This proclamation by
the U.S was the root cause for the emergence of doctrine of continental shelf. Followed by U.S
many states claimed their rights in the continental shelf. In 1958 first convention on continental
shelf was held in Geneva.

Analysis of principle involved in delimitation process of continental shelf

Delimitation process begins with the legal entitlement of coastal States both to their continental
shelf and to their EEZ source of these entitlements proceeds from basic rule that land dominates
the sea. Starting point of any delimitation is the entitlement of a State to a given maritime area.
North Sea Continental Shelf Cases
The Court then suggested three factors to be taken into account in arriving at an equitable result:
(a) the general configuration of the coasts, as well as the presence of any special or unusual
features; (b) The physical and geological structure, as well as the natural resources, of the
continental shelf concerned; and (c) proportionality. The ICJ concluded that the application of
the equidistance method was not obligatory in all given cases, pointing out as part of its main
reasoning that such a method could produce an inequitable result. The Court implied that the
application of equitable principles should be carried out by taking all the circumstances into
account.

When the continental shelf was beyond maritime the area of the territorial sea, such entitlement
found its basis in the concept of natural prolongation

After the emergence of exclusive economic zone, new approach emerged in delimitation.
Distance from the coast. Distance from the coast and natural prolongation mostly become
intertwined.

Libya v Malta I.C.J. Reports 1985, p. 13).

It was held in this case that continental shelf and exclusive economic zone co existed and they
are complimentary. Exclusive economic zone did not observe the continental shelf.

Role of equity must act within the law and must not be beyond the law.
At first because there was a natural reluctance on the part of courts and tribunals to give
preference to those elements more closely connected to the continental shelf over those more
closely related to the EEZ, or vice versa. The quest for neutral criteria of a geographical
character prevailed in the end over area-specific criteria such as geomorphologic aspects or
resources-specific criteria such as the distribution of fish stocks, with a very few exceptions
(notably Jan Mayen)

Jan mayen case it was held that: Equidistance Special Circumstances rule formulated in Article 6
of the 1958

Convention on the Continental Shelf is not materially different from the Equitable
The principle that delimitation should avoid the encroachment by one party on the natural
prolongation of the other or its equivalent in respect of the EEZ the avoidance to the extent
possible of the interruption of the maritime projection of the relevant coastlines and
considerations ensuring that a disproportionate outcome should be corrected are the criteria that
have emerged

According to Article 74(1) and 83(1) of United Nations Convention on law of Sea delimitation
of the continental shelf and exclusive economic zone must be effected by agreement valid under
International law in order to achieve equitable solution. The determination of the line of
delimitation normally follows a two-step approach

First, a provisional line of equidistance is posited as a hypothesis and a practical starting point.
While a convenient starting point, equidistance alone will in many circumstances not ensure an
equitable result in the light of peculiarities of each specific case

The second step accordingly requires the examination of this provisional line in the light of
relevant circumstances, which are specific, so as to determine whether it is necessary to adjust
the provisional equidistance line in order to achieve an equitable result.

The ICJ stated that The equidistance/special circumstances rule, which is applicable in
particular to the delimitation of the territorial sea, and the equitable principles/relevant
circumstances rule, as it has been developed since 1958 in case-law and State practice with
regard to the delimitation of the continental shelf and the exclusive economic zone, are closely
interrelated. Name of the rule called the Equidistance-Special Circumstances rule for a long time
has been changed into the EquidistanceRelevant Circumstances rule since the 2002 Land and
Maritime Boundary (Cameroon/Nigeria) case.

BLACK SEA CASE 2009

2 steps are modified into 3 steps. They are as follows:
First court will establish a provisional equidistance line
Second, it will consider whether there are factors calling of adjustments of the provisional
equidistance line in order to achieve an equitable result.
Third, it will see that line does not lead to inequitable result

Bangladesh v Myanmar 14th march 2012

This is first dispute relating to maritime delimitation decided by the international tribunal for law
of sea (ITLOS).The dispute is related to delimitation of territorial sea, continental shelf and
exclusive economic zone. This is the first case which involved delimitation of continental shelf
beyond 200 nautical miles. The tribunal decided that for delimitation of territorial sea it drew
equidistance line accepted by the two states. The tribunal decided in respect of delimitation of
continental shelf and exclusive economic zone, a provisional equidistance line to be drawn and it
must be adjusted taking in to account the concavity of Bangladesh coast. The process involved in
delimitation of continental shelf and exclusive economic zone within 200 nautical miles, the
same will be applied for delimitation beyond 200 nautical miles so far as the rights of the third
states is not affected. Throughout the judgment the tribunal stressed that the goal of maritime
delimitation was an equitable solution.

Conclusion
From the above analysis of various case laws and from article 74(1) and 83(1), it is clear that
delimitation of continental shelf must take place with the goal in achieving equitable solution.
While applying the equitable method relevant factors must be considered .each case is unique
principle of delimitation will be applied depending upon facts of each case. While delimiting it
must be seen that it does not lead to inequitable result to none. Therefore it is clear that
equidistance method is one of the means in achieving the end i.e. equitable solution.

Reference