UNCLOS Pros And Cons

The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS or the ‘Convention’) took twelve years to negotiate, and another twelve years to enter into force, but is now a universally accepted convention governing almost all uses of the oceans. One of the unique features of UNCLOS which distinguishes it from other international conventions is that its dispute settlement provisions are mandatory. The dispute settlement provisions are incorporated into the Convention instead of any additional instrument and moreover it is prohibited by the Convention to make reservations, so State parties cannot exclude the dispute settlement provisions by making reservations. In other words, when States become parties to the convention, they must accept

Article 297 of UNCLOS excludes certain categories of disputes from the system of compulsory procedures entailing binding decisions. These are discretionary decisions of coastal States regarding requests to conduct marine scientific research in its exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and disputes concerning the sovereign right of coastal states to exploit the living resources in its EEZ or the exercise by the coastal State of such rights.

Arbitration cases under Annex VII of UNCLOS
Since UNCLOS entered into force in November 1994 fifteen cases have been initiated between States under Annex VII arbitration. There are some points to be made about these cases. First of all, only six cases were initiated in the first ten years. However, later on considerably more cases were initiated, for instance during one year from October 2012 to October 2013 five cases were initiated. This implicates that States are founding arbitration under Annex VII of UNCLOS as a matter of dispute settlement more and more comfortable. Second, in three cases the parties agreed after the proceedings had been initiated to refer the case to ITLOS rather than proceed to arbitration.
Third, in only one case did the arbitral tribunal find that it had no