Abstract:
The Arctic Sunrise arbitration highlighted the difficulties inherent in balancing the competing rights of coastal States and flag States in the exclusive economic zone and over the continental shelf. In a comprehensive decision, the Tribunal canvassed the area of law and provided much needed guidance on the enforcement rights of coastal States within these maritime zones. However, this paper argues that the Tribunal’s recognition of enforcement rights places significant limitations on a coastal State’s ability to protect its sovereign rights in the exclusive economic zone and over the continental shelf.
First, this paper addresses the Tribunal’s pragmatic interpretation of the doctrine of hot pursuit, confirming that such an interpretation is consistent with academic commentary and State practice. The second part of this paper looks more critically at the Tribunal’s decision, concluding that the Tribunal’s recognition enforcement rights over the non-living resources in the continental shelf may be too harsh on coastal States.
