1 / 14

ANGLO-NORWEGIAN FISHERIES CASE 1951

ANGLO-NORWEGIAN FISHERIES CASE 1951. Norway vs. British. KASUS POSISI. Norwegian Government’s Decree 12 th July 1935: Delimit its northern Artic’s Circle and reserved its resources for Norway’s nationals.

rupert
Download Presentation

ANGLO-NORWEGIAN FISHERIES CASE 1951

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ANGLO-NORWEGIAN FISHERIES CASE 1951 Norway vs. British

  2. KASUS POSISI • Norwegian Government’s Decree 12th July 1935: Delimit its northern Artic’s Circle and reserved its resources for Norway’s nationals. • Inggris mempertanyakan kepada MI apakah metode delimitasi yang dilakukan oleh Norway bertentangan atau tidak bertentangan dengan Hukum Internasional? – hukum yang mana?

  3. JUDGMENT • Metode delimitasi dan– voting 10 - 2 • Garis batasnya sendiri – voting 8-4 Tidak bertentangan dengan Hukum Internasional

  4. JUDGMENT BACKGROUND • Zonapesisir yang dipermasalahkanmempunyaikonfigurasi yang unik (distinctive) • Panjangnyamelebihi 1,500 km • Skjaergaard n rock rampart • Tidaktelihatjelasgarispemisahantaralautdandaratansebagaimanabiasaditemukanpada negara2 dgnwilayahberpantai • Pantainorwayadalahbatasterluardarikonfigurasitsb • Kayaakanikan – delimitasitsbsbnrnyamrpakan fisheries zona

  5. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND • Nelayan2 Inggrismelakukan fishing diwilayahpantaitsb • Protesdari King of Norway padaabad 17 danselama 300 tahuntidakadanelayanInggris yang melakukan fishing diwilayahtsb. Akantetapi • 1906 nelayan2 Inggriskembalimelakukan fishing diwilayahitulagi • Setelahbeberapa kali terjadi incident, pemerintah Norway mengeluarkan Decree 1935

  6. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND CONTINUES • 1948 dan 1949 kapal2 nelayan Inggris di tangkap • Inggris mengajukan permasalahan tsb. Ke MI.

  7. CASE ANALYSIS • Norway klaim territorial sea 4 mil laut – has nothing to do with the case • Inggrisberpegangangpadainternational customary law (bukanhanyainternational custom) – bedakan! Bahwa baseline was drawn along low-water mark sepanjangpantai (along the coast) • Norway tidakmenolakeksistensiinternational customary law demikiantsb, tapimenganggapbahwahaltsbtidakdapatditerapkanpadasemuanegarapantaidikarenakankondisidankonfigurasi yang berbeda-bedaantaranegarapantai yang satudengannegarapantai yang lain.

  8. CASE ANALYSIS • Para pihaksetujupadakriteria/rules yang ada – low-water line along its coasts • Para pihakberbedamasalahaplikasinya • Relevant line is not main line tetapiskjaergaard, shg baseline tidakselalumengikutigarispantainya (tidakselalualong its coasts) • Kesimpulannya: • Baselines are drawn between appropriate points on this low-water mark, departing from the physical coastline to a reasonable extent, the base-line can only be determined by means of a geometric construction

  9. THE COURT FINDS • Metodedelimitasi yang dilakukanoleh Decree 1935 tidakbertentangandgnHI.Akantetapidelimitasiwilayahlautmerupakanaspekinternasionalkrnmelibatkankepentinganinternasionallebihdari 1 negara. • Pertimbangandasaradalaholehkarenaeksistensi territorial sea sangatbergantungpadadaratanthe base-line must not depart to any appreciable extent from the general direction of the coast; dan it may be necessary to have regard to certain economic interests peculiar to a region when their reality and importance are clearly evidenced by a long usage.

  10. UNCLOS I: 1958 • Salah satu konvensi internasional yang dihasilan adalah Convention on Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone (CTSCZ 1958) • CTSCZ 1958 mengadopsi metode straight baseline sistem ini

  11. PASAL 4 CTSCZ 1958 “Where the coastline is deeply indented or if there is a fringe of islands along the coast in its immediate vicinity, a method of straight baselines joining appropriate points may be employed. The drawing of such baselines must not depart to any appreciable extent from the general direction of the coast and must not be drawn from low tide elevation unless lighthouses or other similar installation permanently above sea level have been built on them, and the sea areas lying within the lines so drawn must be sufficiently clearly linked to the regime of internal waters. For the determination of particular baselines within the straight baseline system, account may be taken of economic interest peculiar to the region concerned, the reality and the importance of which are clearly evidenced by a long usage.”

  12. JURISPRUDENCE • Sumber HI trmsk ptsan pengadilan nasional dan internasional – CTSCZ 1958 • Diadopsi dan dituangkan dalam Pasal 7 UNCLOS 1982 • Dalam hal ini UNCLOS 1982 merupakan Konvensi Internasional affirming hukum kebiasaan internasional yang sudah ada • Archipelago: Coastal Archipelago (Pasal 7) dan Mid-Ocean Archipelago (Bab IV)

  13. THANK YOU

More Related