11
Coastal and Marine Law and Enforcement Peter Wulf Member, Commonwealth Administrative Appeals Tribunal, Barrister and Scientist

Coastal and Marine Law and Enforcement

  • Upload
    semah

  • View
    40

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Coastal and Marine Law and Enforcement. Peter Wulf Member, Commonwealth Administrative Appeals Tribunal, Barrister and Scientist. Overview. Legal Context in relation to: Land Based Pollution Marine Disposal Illegal Fishing and Hot Pursuits. Land Based Pollution. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Coastal and Marine Law and Enforcement

Coastal and Marine Law and Enforcement

Peter WulfMember, Commonwealth Administrative

Appeals Tribunal, Barrister and Scientist

Page 2: Coastal and Marine Law and Enforcement

OverviewLegal Context in relation to:

Land Based PollutionMarine DisposalIllegal Fishing and Hot Pursuits

Page 3: Coastal and Marine Law and Enforcement

Land Based PollutionBiggest single

source of marine and coastal pollution

Transboundary IssuePoint Source and

DiffuseDiffering regulatory

issues

Page 4: Coastal and Marine Law and Enforcement

International ContextUNCLOSArticle 192Article 207Article 213

Montreal Guidelines for the Protection of the Marine Environment against Pollution from Land-based Sources

Diffuse land based pollution is extremely difficult to manage

Page 5: Coastal and Marine Law and Enforcement

Marine Disposal1996 Protocol to the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, 1972, done at London on 7 July 1996

Applications to dump wastes or other matter shall demonstrate that appropriate consideration has been given to the following hierarchy of waste management options, which implies an order of increasing environmental impact: 1. re-use;2. off-site recycling;3. destruction of hazardous constituents;4. treatment to reduce or remove the hazardous

constituents; and5. disposal on land, into air and in water.

Page 6: Coastal and Marine Law and Enforcement

Dumping an old shipNo Ship Action Group Incorporated and Minister for Environment Protection, Heritage and the Arts and the State of New South Wales [2010] AATA 702Australian Government granted the vessel for

sinkinggranted a permit for the scuttling and

placement of the ship as an artificial reefOriginal issue was polychlorinated biphenyls

(PCBs) on the shipSubsequent issue was lead paint

Page 7: Coastal and Marine Law and Enforcement

HMAS Adelaide

Page 8: Coastal and Marine Law and Enforcement

Illegal FishingGlobal estimates suggest a minimum of 20 percent of

seafood worldwide is caught illegallyeconomic losses between $10 to $23 billion11 to 25 million metric tons of fishAsia Pacific region included

Western Indian Ocean (560,000 tonnes - $504 million), Eastern Indian Ocean (970,600 tonnes -$874 million), Western Central Pacific (1,730,000 tonnes - $1,560

million), Eastern Central Pacific (278,000 tonnes - $251 million), Southwest Pacific (32,900 tonnes - $30 million) Southeast Pacific (2,568,000 tonnes - $2,311 million)

Page 9: Coastal and Marine Law and Enforcement

Regional Plan of Action to Promote Responsible Fishing Practices including Combating Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing

Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Timor‐Leste and Vietnam

Australia, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam track illegal fishing

Page 10: Coastal and Marine Law and Enforcement

South Tomi

Page 11: Coastal and Marine Law and Enforcement

Volga – Domestic and International Context Three crew members were charged with the offence A bond of $3 million was set for the vessel and $800,000 for the

three officers. The Australian Government is also holding $1.8 million proceeds

from the sale of the Volga's catch Russian Government took the matter to the ITLOS Russia contested the bond Alleged illegal fishing vessels and crew must be promptly released

upon payment of a "reasonable" bond. Article 73 of UNCLOS envisaged enforcement measures in respect of

violations of the coastal State’s laws and regulations alleged to have been committed.

The ITLOS considered that a “good behaviour bond” to prevent future violations

Article 73 and 292 ITLOS considered that the bond sought by Australia was not

reasonable