Jurisdictional Conflicts In Maritime Security Operations: A Doctrinal Analysis Of Coastal State Powers And Flag State Responsibility Under Contemporary International Maritime Law
- IJLLR Journal
- 2 hours ago
- 2 min read
Adv. Sruthi Balachandran, LL.M. (Maritime Law), Bharata Mata School of Legal Studies, Aluva, Kerala, India
ABSTRACT
The recent trend of maritime security activities in the last 20 years has drastically changed the legal and practical environment of the world oceans. The growing cases of piracies, maritime terrorism, transnational trafficking, and illegal, unreported and un-controlled (IUU) fishing has necessitated states to increase surveillance, interdiction and enforcement operations in different maritime areas. Although the need to take such measures has been usually explained by issues of world security and economic stability, it has also created intricate jurisdictional conflicts between flag states and coastal states. The basic structure that has been laid down by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) assigns particular jurisdictional competences depending on maritime areas and the nationality of the vessels. Indeed, these delimits, far too often, are obscure today, due to present day security operation involving the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and on the high seas, where the obligation to take measures in response violations overlaps with an assertion that exclusive flag state protection. A doctrinal analysis of treaty provision, leading judicial decisions, and the development of state practice are explored in this paper to determine the field and boundaries of the enforcement powers of coastal states and the respective responsibilities of flag states. It claims that the difficulties in deciphering the duty of due diligence, the concept of hot pursuit, and the security exception cases are what make cases of jurisdictional tussle recurrent. The paper concludes that even though international law offers an organized division of power, its application in the context of security exposes the absence of norms and inconsistent interpretations of states. This paper, by critically analyzing these tensions, adds to the current scholarship of international law of the sea with a sophisticated framework to interpret the issue in a way that fulfills the goals of sovereignty, navigational freedoms and collective maritime security.
Keywords: Maritime security, jurisdictional conflict, coastal state powers, flag state responsibility, UNCLOS, EEZ enforcement, piracy, IUU fishing, maritime terrorism, doctrinal analysis.
