Advisory Opinions of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: Article 138 of the Rules of the Tribunal, Revisited

Abstract This article looks into the question of the legal basis and status of Article 138(1) of the Rules of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, which provides that an international agreement related to the purposes of the Law of the Sea Convention may specifically give to the Tribunal the authority to give an advisory opinion on a legal question. Keywords: advisory opinionInternational Court of Justice (ICJ)ICJ StatuteInternational Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS)Rules of the ITLOS Notes 1. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Article 191, 1833 U.N.T.S. 3. 2. Statute of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, Annex VI to the LOS Convention, supra note 1, Articles 35–40. 3. Philippe Gautier, "The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: Activities in 2005," 5 Chinese Journal of International Law 381, 392 (2006). 4. See José Luis Jesus, "Article 138," in The Rules of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: A Commentary 393, 393 (P. Chandrasekhara Rao and P. Gautier eds., 2006). 5. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, "Rules of the Tribunal," Article 138, ITLOS Doc. ITLOS/8 (2005), in ITLOS, Basic Texts 15 (2005). 6. Tullio Treves, "Advisory Opinions Under the Law of the Sea Convention," in Current Marine Environmental Issues and the International Tribunal for the Law of The Sea 81, 92 (M. H. Nordquist and J. N. Moore eds., 2001) and Shabtai Rosenne, "International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: 1996–97 Survey," 13 International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 487, 507 (1998). 7. Louis B. Sohn, "Advisory Opinions by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea or Its Seabed Disputes Chamber," in Oceans Policy: New Institutions, Challenges and Opportunities 61, 68–69 (M. H. Nordquist and J. N. Moore eds., 1999). See also Gudmundur Eiriksson, The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea 143 (2000) and Jesus, supra note 4, at 393–394. 8. See, e.g., Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article IX, 78 U.N.T.S. 277 and International Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, Article 22, 660 U.N.T.S. 195. 9. LOS Convention, supra note 1, Articles 286–296. 10. Interpretation of Peace Treaties, Advisory Opinion, [1950] ICJ Reports, at 71. On the nature of the advisory opinion of the International Court, see Roberto Ago, "'Binding' Advisory Opinions of the International Court of Justice," 85 American Journal of International Law 439 (1991). 11. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, "Statement by Mr Rüdiger Wolfrum, President of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea on the Report of the Tribunal at the Sixteenth Meeting of States Parties to the Convention on the Law of the Sea, 19 June 2006," at para. 18, News—Statements of the President, available at www.itlos.org/start2_en.html (accessed on 2 August 2007). See also Rosenne, supra note 6, at 507; Jesus, supra note 4, at 394; and P. Chandrasekhara Rao, "ITLOS: The First Six Years," 6 Max Planck Yearbook of International Law 183, 211 (2002). 12. "Memorandum by the President of the Conference on document A/CONF.62/WP.9," Document A/CONF.62/WP.9/Add.1, in Official Records of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, Vol. V, 122, 124. The President of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea explained that "[t]he general procedures for the functioning of the [ITLOS] and its powers are on the lines of the Statute of the [ICJ] and other international judicial tribunals;" Myron H. Nordquist, United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982: A Commentary, Vol. V, 378 (1989). 13. Statute of the International Court of Justice, Article 36(1): The jurisdiction of the Court comprises all cases which the parties refer to it and all matters specially provided for in the Charter of the United Nations or in treaties and conventions in force. 14. It should be noted that no treaty or agreement is relevant unless it is "in force between the parties when the proceedings are instituted." Shabtai Rosenne, The Law and Practice of the International Court, 1920–1996, 661 (1997). 15. Ibid., at 659. Rosenne noted that "[Article 36 (1)] provides the statutory basis for all the Court's contentious jurisdiction." 16. Jillaine Seymour, "The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: A Great Mistake?" 13 Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies 1, 6 (2006). 17. See Eiriksson, supra note 7, at 112–113. 18. Alan E. Boyle, "Dispute Settlement and the Law of the Sea Convention: Problems of Fragmentation and Jurisdiction," 46 International and Comparative Law Quarterly 37, 47–50 (1997). 19. But see ibid., at 49. 20. Seymour, supra note 16, at 6. 21. Boyle, supra note 18, at 48–49. 22. ITLOS Statute, supra note 2, Article 38. 23. See Statement of Rüdiger Wolfrum, President, ITLOS, UN General Assembly, 28 November 2005, UN Doc. A/60/PV. 55 (2005), at 27. 24. See, e.g., "Statement By Mr L. Dolliver M. Nelson, President of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, on the Report of the Tribunal at the Fifteenth Meeting of the States Parties to the Law of the Sea Convention, New York, 16 June 2005," 2005 Yearbook of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea 187, 191, and Wolfrum's Statement of 19 June 2006, supra note 11, at para. 18. 25. ITLOS, Doc. ITLOS/Press 101 (2005), at 3. 26. At the Fifty-second Session of the UN General Assembly in 1997, the delegates from the Republic of Korea and Croatia noted with satisfaction the adoption of the ITLOS Rules, while not specifically mentioning the idea of the advisory function of the ITLOS. UN Doc. A/52/PV. 57 (1997), at 6, 13. 27. "Highlights: Malaysian, Singapore Press 30 May 07," World News Connection (Newswire), May 30, 2007, available at Westlaw, International News (accessed on 31 July 2007). 28. "States Parties to Law of Sea Convention Hear Reports From Heads of Main Organs As Sixteenth Meeting Begins at U.N. Headquarters," US Federal News, June 19, 2006, available at Westlaw, International News (accessed on 10 August 2007). In connection with this statement by the Argentinean delegate, it should be noted that "the report" was actually meant to be Mr. Wolfrum's Statement of 19 June 2006, supra note 11, at para. 18. 29. Statement of Iceland, UN General Assembly, 28 November 2005, UN Doc. A/60/PV. 54 (2005), at 27. 30. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Article 31, 1155 U.N.T.S. 331. 31. Rosenne, supra note 14, at 86. 32. In the case of the International Court, see ibid., at 1073. 33. In the case of the International Court, see ibid., at 86. 34. Treves, supra note 6, at 91. 35. Gautier, supra note 3, at 392. 36. Jesus, supra note 4, at 394. 37. Wolfrum's Statement of 19 June 2006, supra note 11, at para. 18. 38. Treves, supra note 6, at 92. See also Rosenne, supra note 6, at 507. 39. Treves, supra note 6, at 92. 40. Rao, supra note 11, at 211–212. 41. Rosenne, supra note 6, at 488. 42. Gautier, supra note 3, at 393. 43. See, e.g., Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, Article VIII, 1 U.N.T.S. 15; Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies, Article IX, 33 U.N.T.S. 261; Agreement on the Privileges and Immunities of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Article X, 374 U.N.T.S. 147; Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties Between States and International Organizations or Between International Organizations, Article 66(2), UN Doc. A/CONF.129/15 (1986), reprinted in 25 I.L.M. 543 (1986); United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, Article 32(3). UN Doc. E/CONF.82/15 (1988), reprinted in 28 I.L.M. 493 (1989). 44. Treves, supra note 6, at 92. 45. Ibid., at 91. 46. Gautier, supra note 3, at 392. 47. Treves, supra note 6, at 91. 48. Rosenne, supra note 14, at 999–1012. 49. Jesus, supra note 4, at 394. 50. Treves, supra note 6, at 91. 51. Rosenne, supra note 14, at 988. 52. Ibid., at 988–989. 53. Ibid., at 989. 54. Id. 55. Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, [1996] ICJ Reports, at 236. 56. Jesus, supra note 4, at 394. 57. Rosenne, supra note 14, at 989. 58. Treves, supra note 6, at 92. 59. Rosenne, supra note 14, at 724–725. 60. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, "Statement of Judge Rüdiger Wolfrum, President of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, on the occasion of the ceremony to commemorate the Tenth Anniversary of the Tribunal, 29 September 2006," at 4, News—Statements of the President, available at www.itlos.org/start2_en.html (accessed on 2 August 2007), at 4–5.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.