・ the Legal Committee in considering whether any archipelagic sea lanes proposal meets the requirements of UNCLOS as outlined in paragraph 18; and

・ the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) in considering environmental issues arising from any proposal.

20 The complexity of the issues require involvement of several IMO bodies in considering aspects of an archipelagic sea lanes proposal. This suggests that the Assembly may see itself as the appropriate final forum for consideration of the Committees' recommendations and adoption of the sea lanes proposal itself.

Conclusion

21 Australia considers that the adoption process for archipelagic sea lanes proposals needs to take into account other issues in addition to the safety of navigation, such as the number and location of sea lanes. Legal and environmental issues also need to be considered. This may entail discussions in the appropriate IMO committees such as the Maritime Safety Committee, the Legal Committee and the Marine Environment Protection Committee. In order for IMO to arrive at an outcome which is consistent with the provisions of Article 53 of UNCLOS, Australia also suggests that it may be necessary for the proposal to be put to the Assembly for adoption after resolution of the issues by the various IMO committees.

22 IMO has been identified by the United Nations Office of Legal Affairs as the competent international organization to consider the adoption of archipelagic sea lanes proposals. Indonesia's archipelagic sea lanes proposal is the precedent case for IMO and UNCLOS. As UNCLOS provides little guidance on the adoption process per se Australia considers it critical that IMO assesses the proposal in such a way that the needs and interests of all Member States are accommodated within a reasonable time-frame.

Action requested of the Committee

23 The Committee is invited to take the above views into account when considering procedures for the adoption of archipelagic sea lanes.

前ページ　　　目次へ　　　次ページ