Points to Remember:

 “Land dominates the sea” and “Seas cannot be owned”.

 Selden-Grotius Debate Regarding the Law of the Seas

 Earlier, the sea was divided into three parts: Territorial Sea, Contiguous Zone and
High Seas. This was the settled position till about 19th century.
 Confusion started from 1909 onwards when Russia claimed the territorial sea upto 12
miles and other states up to 4 miles (earlier it was 3).
 1930 Hague Codification Conference made an attempt to resolve the issue, but in
vain.
 A lot of the development of this branch of law has centred around the breadth of the
territorial sea. First there was Bynkershoek’s cannon shot rule, but later replaced by
the 3 nm rule. Scandinavian countries though claimed 4nm.
 Trueman Declaration, 1945.
 Some states claimed territorial sea upto 200nm.
 First United Nations Conference, 1958:
 Four Conventions were adopted: Convention on Territorial Sea and
Contiguous Zone, Convention on High Seas, Convention on Fishing and
Conservation of Living Resources & the Convention on Continental Shelf.
 But the breadth of the territorial sea remained unresolved.
 Hence Second Conference called.
 Second Conference, 1960
 Failed to resolve the issues again due to differing claims.
 It was realised that the laws formulated under Geneva were insufficient in
view of the vast mineral and gas deposits and the increased capacity of States
to exploit them.
 Arvid Pardo Principle, 1967:
o Representative of Malta to the UN
o Sea bed and the ocean floor should be treated as “common heritage of
mankind”
 Arvid Pardo Principle adopted by the UNGA vide Res 2749 (XXV) of Dec, 1970:
Declaration on Principles Governing the Sea-Bed and the Ocean Floor Beyond the
Limits of the National Jurisdiction.
  Third UNCLOS was also called, first in 1973.
 After ten sessions, in the 11th session, the outcome was written in a draft, which was
adopted by an overwhelming majority of states.

Internal waters
 Internal waters are deemed to be such parts of the seas as are not either the high seas
or relevant zones or the territorial sea, and are accordingly classed as appertaining to
the land territory of the coastal state.
 Internal waters, whether harbours, lakes or rivers, are such waters as are to be found
on the landward side of the baselines from which the width of the territorial and other
zones is measured, and are assimilated with the territory of the state.
 They differ from the territorial sea primarily in that there does not exist any right of
innocent passage from which the shipping of other states may benefit.
 In general, a coastal state may exercise its jurisdiction over foreign ships within its
internal waters to enforce its laws, although the judicial authorities of the flag state
(i.e. the state whose flag the particular ship flies) may also act where crimes have
occurred on board ship. This concurrent jurisdiction may be seen in two cases.
 In R v. Anderson1, in 1868, the Court of Criminal Appeal in the UK declared that an
American national who had committed manslaughter on board a British vessel in
French internal waters was subject to the jurisdiction of the British courts, even
though he was also within the sovereignty of French justice (and American justice by
reason of his nationality), and thus could be correctly convicted under English law.
 The US Supreme Court held in Wildenhus case2 that the American courts had
jurisdiction to try a crew member of a Belgian vessel for the murder of another
Belgian national when the ship was docked in the port of Jersey City in New York.
 A merchant ship in a foreign port or in foreign internal waters is automatically subject
to the local jurisdiction (unless there is an express agreement to the contrary),
although where purely disciplinarian issues related to the ship's crew are involved,
which do not concern the maintenance of peace within the territory of the coastal
state, then such matters would by courtesy be left to the authorities of the flag ship to
regulate.

1
1 Cox's Criminal Cases 198
2
120 US 1 (1887).
 However, a completely different situation operates where the foreign vessel involved
is a warship. In such cases, the authorisation of the captain or of the flag state is
necessary before the coastal state may exercise its jurisdiction over the ship and its
crew. This is due to the status of the warship as a direct arm of the sovereign of the
flag state.

Baselines
 The width of the territorial sea is defined from the low-water mark around the coasts
of the state.
 This is the traditional principle under customary international law and was reiterated
in article 3 of the Geneva Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone
in 1958 and article 5 of the 1982 Convention, and the low-water line along the coast is
defined 'as marked on large-scale charts officially recognised by the coastal State. In
the majority of cases, it will not be very difficult to locate the low- water line which is
to act as the baseline for measuring the width of the territorial sea.
 By virtue of the 1958 Convention on the Territorial Sea and the 1982 Law of the Sea
Convention, the low-water line of a low-tide elevation may now be used as a baseline
for measuring the breadth of the territorial sea.