Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Bangladesh proposal on the Scope of MGRs “Marine genetic resources of the area beyond the outer limits of the continental shelf beyond 200nm or of the area beyond national jurisdiction including waters superjacent to the seabed and of the ocean floor and of the subsoil thereof”. Bangladesh proposal on Common heritage of mankind In case of EEZ Art 56 (1) (a), natural resources means whether living or non living resources both in the water column and in the seabed and subsoil. In the UNCLOS Art. 77 (4) relating to continental shelf beyond 200nm, natural resources consist of the mineral and other non living resources of the seabed and subsoil together with living organisms belonging to sedentary species. Here the definition of sedentary species is designed for only harvesting and is inappropriate to be applied for MGRs. Many MGRS are partially mobile and at different stages in their life, forms may be permanently or temporarily attached to rocks or may be free swimming or floating in the water column. So both vertical and horizontal scopes should be addressed in the IA and an agreement for sedentary species would miss the vast majority of deep sea MGRS. In the UNCLOS Art 136- “The AREA and its resources are the common heritage of mankind”. What that clearly means is Area beyond national jurisdiction itself is the common heritage of mankind as much as its resources are also the common heritage of mankind. This is plain and simple English as both the words- Area and resources are separated by the word “and” Art 140 Activities in the Area shall be carried out for the benefit of mankind as a whole. So any activities in the Area relating to the MGR which are attached to the seabed, ocean floor and subsoil forms part of common heritage of mankind as they are meant for the benefit of the mankind. It can be considered that, in contrast to the ABS regime established under Part XI of the UNCLOS, which is limited to non-living resources, the benefit sharing regime related to marine scientific research also applies to genetic resources. The scope of Part XIII of the UNCLOS is not limited to any type of resource, and the „general‟ limitation of Part XI of the UNCLOS does not apply to scientific research in the Area. Art. 256 also deal with marine scientific research in the Area and art. 257 deals with marine scientific research in the water column beyond the limits of the exclusive economic zone. The latter becomes clear when looking at the exact formulations used in Article 143.1 and 143.3 UNCLOS: Referring to ‘scientific research in the Area’ instead of ‘scientific research concerning the Area and its resources’ (emphasis added), which is the formulation used in art 15 of the CBD. Article 143.2 UNCLOS, implies that these provisions apply to any kind of marine scientific research and not only to research on mineral resources. Since the Area is the common heritage of mankind, any MGR attached to the on the seabed, ocean floor and subsoil thereof forms part of common heritage of mankind. Areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ) are also dealt with in Article 4(b) of CBD. Accordingly, the CBD also applies to processes and activities taking place in ABNJ, provided that such processes or activities are carried out under the jurisdiction or control of a state. By express distinction to Article 4(a) CBD, Article 4(b) CBD defines the scope of the CBD by referring to types of activities rather than the place of activities. Option for closing the legal gap to include the MGRs of the water column superjacent to the seabed and of the ocean floor and subsoil would be to expand the mandate of the International Seabed Authority so that it manages ABS related to marine genetic resources in ABNJ and that needs to be discussed for inclusion in the IA. Number of countries argued that because marine genetic resources are not specifically defined in the Convention, they fall outside the scope of the Convention’s regulation. As far as this argument relating to the definition provided in the art 133 (a) “resources” means all solid, liquid or gaseous mineral resources in situ in the Area at or beneath the seabed, including polymetallic nodules” is concerned; it must be pointed out that all state parties having not at all mentioned in the Art 133/definition or any where in the UNCLOS, already accepted the exploration regulations relating to the polymetallic sulphides and ferro manganese crusts. And although the shape, size and location of these resources are quite distinct and different than polymetallic nodules, exploration licenses have been signed with the ISA without raising any question. Moreover, in the preamble of the “ REGULATIONS ON PROSPECTING AND EXPLORATION FOR POLYMETALLIC NODULES” It is written that “in accordance with the UNCLOS, the seabed and ocean floor and the subsoil thereof beyond the limits of national jurisdiction, as well as its resources are the common heritage of mankind--------“ justifies clearly that the word “Area” which denotes its seabed, ocean floor and subsoil as mentioned also forms the common heritage of mankind in addition to its resources. For this, the scope of Part XI of UNCLOS could be changed by defining ‘resources’ under Article 133 UNCLOS not only as mineral resources but to include MGRS floating in the water column or all living and non-living resources in the Area‟. As a consequence, all resources of the Area, including marine genetic resources, would need to be explored and exploited for the benefit of mankind as a whole, irrespective of the geographical location of states (Preamble as well as Articles 137.2 and 140.1 UNCLOS). The ISA would be obliged to provide for the equitable sharing of financial and other economic benefits derived from activities in the Area (Articles 137.2 and 140.2 UNCLOS).