The legal framework governing the protection and preservation of the marine environment represents one of the most sophisticated aspects of modern maritime law. Under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the traditional absolute freedom of the high seas is curtailed by the necessity of environmental stewardship. Central to this regime is the concept of pollution jurisdiction, which defines the extent to which a coastal state can regulate, investigate, and penalize foreign vessels to prevent environmental degradation within its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).
1. Sovereignty and Stewardship in the EEZ
In the EEZ, which extends up to 200 nautical miles from the baselines, a coastal state exercises sovereign rights over natural resources but only limited pollution jurisdiction over foreign vessels. According to UNCLOS, coastal states have the right to adopt laws and regulations for the prevention, reduction, and control of marine pollution. However, a crucial legal caveat remains: such domestic laws must conform to “generally accepted international rules and standards” (GAIRAS), primarily those established under the MARPOL Convention.
2. Graduated Enforcement Powers
When a violation occurs within the EEZ, the exercise of pollution jurisdiction follows a graduated approach based on the severity of the incident:
- Information Inquiry: If there are clear grounds for believing that a vessel has violated environmental laws, the coastal state may require the vessel to provide information regarding its identity, port of registry, and previous/next ports of call.
- Physical Inspection: If the vessel refuses to provide information, or if the information provided is manifestly at odds with the evident factual situation, the coastal state may conduct a physical inspection of the vessel, provided the violation has resulted in a substantial discharge causing significant pollution.
- Detention and Prosecution: In cases where the discharge causes or threatens to cause “major damage” to the coastline or the related interests of the coastal state (such as fisheries), the state may exercise full pollution jurisdiction by instituting legal proceedings, including the detention of the vessel.
3. The Revolutionary Role of Port State Jurisdiction
Perhaps the most significant advancement in pollution jurisdiction is found in Article 218 of UNCLOS, which establishes “Port State Jurisdiction.”
When a vessel is voluntarily within a port of a state, that state may undertake investigations and institute proceedings in respect of any discharge from that vessel outside that state’s internal waters, archipelagic waters, territorial sea, or EEZ in violation of applicable international rules.
This means a Port State can prosecute a vessel for pollution that occurred on the High Seas or even in another state’s waters (upon request), ensuring that “vessels of convenience” cannot escape liability by simply leaving the zone where the crime was committed.
4. Safeguards and Flag State Pre-emption
To prevent the abuse of pollution jurisdiction and to maintain the fluidity of international trade, the law provides for “Flag State Pre-emption” (Article 228). If a coastal state initiates criminal proceedings for a pollution violation, the Flag State may “pre-empt” the case by instituting its own proceedings within six months.
- Exception: The coastal state is not required to suspend proceedings if the case involves “major damage” to the coastal state or if the Flag State has repeatedly disregarded its obligations to enforce international rules.
5. Monetary Penalties and Monetary Security
In accordance with Article 230, unless a willful and serious act of pollution is committed within the territorial sea, the exercise of pollution jurisdiction is limited to monetary penalties only. Imprisonment of foreign seafarers for EEZ pollution is generally prohibited under international law. Furthermore, vessels must be released promptly upon the posting of “reasonable security,” such as a Bank Guarantee or a P&I Letter of Undertaking (LOU).
Conclusion
The regime of pollution jurisdiction creates a global network of accountability. By balancing the rights of the coastal state with the protections afforded to the flag state, international law ensures that the marine environment is protected without compromising the essential freedom of navigation. The “Port State” mechanism, in particular, serves as a powerful deterrent, signaling that there is no safe harbor for those who pollute the world’s oceans.
Yanıt yok