OceanLaw On-Line Paper
No. 16, March 2003
The Australia and New Zealand v. Japan
Southern Bluefin Tuna (Jurisdiction and Admissibility) Award of the First
LOSC Annex VII Arbitral Tribunal
Barbara Kwiatkowska
Professor of International Law
Deputy Director, Netherlands Institute for the Law of the Sea (NILOS)
Abstract
The
Southern Bluefin Tuna (Jurisdiction and
Admissibility) Award of 4 August 2000 marked the first instance of
application of compulsory arbitration under Part XV, Section 2 of the 1982 UN
Law of the Sea Convention and of exercising by the Annex VII Tribunal of la compétence
de la compétence pursuant to Article 288(4) over the merits of the instant
dispute.
The 72-paragraph Award is
a decision of pronounced procedural complexity and significant multifaceted
impacts of which appreciation requires an in-depth acquaintance with procedural
issues of peaceful settlement of disputes in general and the
law-of-the-sea-related disputes in particular. Therefore, the article surveys
first the establishment of and the course of proceedings before the Five-Member
Annex VII Arbitral Tribunal, presided over by the immediate former ICJ
President, Judge Stephen M. Schwebel, and also comprising Judges Keith, Yamada,
Feliciano and Tresselt. Subsequently, the wide range of specific paramount
questions and the answers of the Tribunal are scrutinized against the background
of arguments advanced by the applicants (Australia and New Zealand) and
respondent (Japan) during both written and oral pleadings, including in reliance
on the extensive ICJ jurisprudence and treaty practice concerned.
On
this basis, the article turns to appraisal of impacts of the Arbitral Tribunal's
paramount holdings and its resultant dismissal of jurisdiction with the
scrupulous regard for the fundamental principle of consensuality. Amongst such
direct impacts as between the parties to the instant case, the inducements
provided by the Award to reach a successful settlement (as ultimately effected
in May 2001) are of particular importance. The Award's indirect impacts concern
exposition of the paramount doctrine of parallelism between the umbrella UN
Convention and many compatible special (fisheries, environmental and other)
treaties, as well as of multifaceted, both substantial and procedural effects of
that parallelism. All those contributions will importantly guide other courts
and tribunals seized in the future under the Convention's Part XV, Section 2.
Comments
See also on this issue the comments on the earlier
version of this paper by New Zealand Special Legal Adviser William
Mansfield at: www.mft.govt.nz/support/legal/seapol.html
This
paper is based on earlier work, published at www.law.uu.nl/english/isep/nilos/paper.asp
and in (2001) 16 International Journal of Marine and
Coastal Law 239 and is updated and revised as of March 2003.