루마니아와 우크라이나 사이의 흑해 해양경계 사건

Abstract

The International Court of Justice determined the single maritime boundary between the respective EEZs and continental shelves of Romania and Ukraine in a unanimous decision. The Court clarified its methodology for delimiting the EEZ/ continental shelf, following a three-stage process. First, it drew a provisional equidistance line between appropriate basepoints on the two coasts ; secondly, it confirmed whether this line required adjustment considering relevant circumstances; and finally, it verified that the line did not lead to an inequitable result in accordance with proportionality. The Judgment contains important interpretations of several articles in the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, notably Articles 74 and 83. Without rules on maritime boundary delimitation in marine areas where the jurisdiction of coastal states overlaps, the legal and legitimate uses of these areas cannot be enjoyed effectively. In this sense, the international law of maritime boundary delimitation is of central importance. There is no doubt that international courts and tribunals play an important role in developing the international law of maritime boundary delimitation. Hence it is important to analyze the development of case law in this field. This commentary examines the maritime delimitation between Romania and Ukraine in the Black Sea before the International Court of Justice. After reviewing summary of the decision and the claims of both parties in the Romania/Ukraine case, this commentary addresses several principal issues: methodology of maritime delimitations as well as relevant circumstances, disproportion between lengths of coasts, enclosed nature of the Black Sea and the delimitations already effected in the region, conduct of the parties, security considerations of the Parties, and concluding remarks. As the significance of maritime delimitation in the enclosed or semi- enclosed seas ultimately lies in the establishment of a rational maritime order through the efficient allocation of jurisdiction or maritime resources, close examination of this case is of great help in the process of maritime boundary delimitation in Northeast Asia. The seas around the Korean peninsular, like the Black sea, come under the provision on the enclosed or semi-enclosed sea in article 122 of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Any way, this case could be of great help for the preparation of maritime delimitation around the Korean peninsular.