ISSUES THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

CATALONIA MODEL UNITED NATIONS ISSUES THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE The North Pole s Future

1.-THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE The International Court of Justice is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations (UN). It was established in June 1945 by Charter of the United Nations and is seated at the Peace Palace in The Hague (Netherlands). The Court s role is to settle, in accordance with international law, legal disputes submitted to it by authorized United Nations organs and specialized agencies. The Court is composed of 15 judges, who are elected for terms of office of nine years by the United Nations General Assembly and the Security Council. It is assisted by a Registry, its administrative organ. Its official languages are English and French. Although the Court generally discharges its duties as a full Court (a quorum of nine judges, excluding judges ad hoc, being sufficient), it may also form permanent or temporary chambers. The Court has the following types of chambers: - The Chamber of Summary Procedure, comprising five judges, including the President and Vice-President; and two substitutes, which the Court is required by article 29 of the Statute to form annually with a view to the speedy despatch of business. Any chamber, comprising at least three judges, that the Court may form pursuant to article 26, paragraph 1, of the Statute to deal with certain categories of cases, such as labour or communications; - any chamber that the Court form pursuant to Article 26, paragraph 2, of the Statute to deal with a particular case, after formally consulting the parties regarding the number of its members - and informally regarding their name- who will then sit in all phases of the case until its final conclusion, even if the meantime the cease to be Members of the Court. 2.-THE NORTH POLE The Arctic is an enormous area, sprawling over one sixth of the earth s landmass; more than 30 million km2 and twenty-four time zones. It has a population of about four million, including over thirty different indigenous peoples and dozens of languages. It is a region of vast natural resources and a very clean environment compared with most areas of the world.

Regarding the climate change problem, the North Pole has a variety of impacts on this issue. First of all, the Arctic could be virtually ice-free by 2030. As the last assessment on glacier melt by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Glacier Monitoring Service (WGMS) says, the average annual melting rate of glaciers doubled after the turn of the millennium. In September 2008, the UNEP published the Global Glacier Changes: Facts and Figures, and the two organizations explained that while excellent data was available for large parts of the world including Europe and North America, the monitoring of glaciers and ice caps in Central Asia, the Tropics and the Polar Regions needed to be urgently stepped up. Also, the last Copenhagen Conference underlined in its final decision the need of stabilizing greenhouse gas concentration in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. Furthermore, recognized the critical impacts of climate change and the potential impacts of response measures on countries particularly vulnerable to its adverse effects and stress the need to establish a comprehensive adaptation programme including international support. On the other hand, and despite the several conventions or treaties related to this matter, the indigenous question is far from being solved. The indigenous rights of the Arctic Besides, the indigenous situation on the Arctic region was discussed on the 8th session of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, celebrated in 21st of May 2009, also included on the ECOSOC Programme. The Permanent Forum explains, as outlined previously, that climate changes reduce sea ice in the region, making the seabed a subject of controversy among competing States, which are focusing their interests on the control of 25 per cent as studies estimate- of the world s undiscovered oil and gas reserves. As a result, the actual economic activity is increasing the environmental degradation. Also, the raising traffic and pollution, along with the influx of new people, will have an impact on the lives of the indigenous peoples of the region. Furthermore, climate change and environmental degradation related to natural resource extraction, such as mining and forestry, constitute great threats to the traditional lifestyles and cultures of indigenous peoples of the Arctic, including hunting, fishing, reindeer husbandry, farming, gathering and food sovereignty, to community health. Giving the situation, the Arctic Council was established by the Ottawa Declaration on 1996 as a high level intergovernmental forum that promotes and coordinates the cooperation and interaction between the Arctic States, with the involvement of the Arctic Indigenous communities and other Arctic inhabitants on

common Arctic issues, in particular issues of sustainable development and environmental protection in the Arctic. Member States of the Arctic Council are Canada, Denmark (including Greenland and the Faroe Islands), Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russian Federation, Sweden, and the United States of America. Besides, the Council has Permanent Participants of the Arctic indigenous representatives with active participation and full consultation: The Aleut International Association (AIA), the Arctic Athabaskan Council, the Gwich in Council International, The Inuit Circumpolar Council (ICC), The Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North (RAIPON), and the Saami Council. Exploiting the Arctic, legal considerations. Three kind of seas: First thing to consider is whether the area to be exploited is inside the limits of a State jurisdiction. As it is established in the Article 3 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, every State has the right to establish the breadth of its territorial sea up to a limit not exceeding 12 nautical miles, measured from baselines determined in accordance with this Convention. Section 2 of the Convention establishes the particularities concerning the territorial sea (bays, ports, reefs, internal waters, mouths of rivers, etc). According to the Convention, beyond and adjacen the area established as territorial sea, the Exclusive Economic Zone begins, an area wich cannot extend 200 nautical miles from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured. This zone is subjected to the specific legal regime of the Fifth Part of the Convention. In the Exclusive Economic Zone the rights, jurisdiction and duties of the Coastal State are established in the Article 56 of the Convention. Among them, it is important to highlight that the Coastal State has sovereign rights for the purpose of exploring and exploiting, conserving and managing the natural resources, whether living or non-living, of the waters superjacent to the seabed and of the seabed and its subsoil, and with regard to other activities for the economic exploitation and exploration of the zone, such as the production of energy from the water, currents and winds. On the other hand, Article 58 of the Convention establishes the Rights and Duties of other States in the Exclusive Economic Zone. It is important to analyse the link between Article 58 and Article 87 of the Convention, which refers to the Freedom of the High Seas. After the Exclusive Economic Zone, we enter the area called High Seas, specifically regulated in the articles comprising Part VII of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. As it is established in Article 87, the High Seas are open to all States, whether coastal or land-locked. In this Part of the Convention all provisions concerning this area are regulated.

Geograpihcal aspects: Due to the geographical nature of the Arctic, it is of paramount importance to take care of the specific treatment of islands in the Convention. Part VII regulates the statute of islands, and even if it leaves a great deal to be desired, is crucial to analyse the statute with detail to have the whole picture on the Arctic. In relation to exploiting the Arctic, the regulation of its Continental Shelf must not be avoided. It is essential to know what is considered to be, in legal terms, the so-named Continental Shelf. Its definition and regulation can be found in the Part VI of the Convention. According to the Article 76, it comprises the sea-bed and subsoil of the submarine areas that extend beyond its territorial sea throughout the natural prolongation of its land territory to the outer edge of the continental margin, or to a distance of 200 nautical miles from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured where the outer edge of the continental margin does not extend up to that distance. In Article 77 the rights of the coastal State over the continental shelf are established. The Area and the Authority: It is extremely interesting how the United Nations Convention of the law of the sea refers so many times to a certain extension called the Area. With this name, the Convention refers to the sea-bed and ocean floor and subsoil thereof beyond the limits of national jurisdiction. The regulation of the Area is established in Part XI of the Convention. Its 2nd section establishes the principles governing the Area. Briefly, the Area cannot be submitted under any State sovereignty. The organization who exercises the power and control in the Area is the Authority. The International Seabed Authority is an autonomous international organization established under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the 1994 Agreement relating to the Implementation of Part XI of the Convention. The Authority is the organization through which States Parties to the Convention shall, in accordance with the regime for the Area, organize and control activities in the sea-bed and ocean floor and subsoil thereof beyond the limits of national jurisdiction, particularly with a view to administering the resources of it. We can find its regulation in the 4th section of Part XI of the United Nations Convention on the law of the sea. Exploiting the Artic, an environmental legal catastrophe? No one can ignore the fact that exploiting the Arctic will undoubtedly have consequences on the environment. The regulation of this issue can be found in Part XII of the Convention. The environmental protection of the ice covered areas is regulated

by Article 234 of the Convention, which gives responsibility to the Coastal States in the ice-covered areas within the limits of the Exclusive Economic Zone. It must be remembered that beyond the Economic Zone begins the Area, which cannot be submitted to any State sovereignty. Conclusions: As it has been stated before, sovereignty has a main role in the Arctic issue due to control or promotion (depending on the policies of the States) of the exploitation and exploration of the resources in this extremely sensible area of the Earth. States are the only responsible for their acts and only they can decide the future of the Arctic, whether it means its salvation or its destruction. Why the Arctic? We have spoken about the importance of preserving the Arctic and its legal basis. However, there is still one question to be answered. Why is the Arctic so important and why is a cause of political and legal international conflicts? The answer lies in its geographical characteristics. Beyond the unique nature and environment, we can find a huge reserve of mineral resources, specially gas and oil. By using a probabilistic geologybased methodology, the United States Geological Survey has assessed the area north of the Arctic Circle and concluded that about 30% of the world s undiscovered gas and 13% of the world s undiscovered oil may be found there, mostly offshore under less than 500 meters of water. Undiscovered natural gas is three times more abundant than oil in the Arctic and is largely concentrated in Russia. Billions of barrels of oil and trillions of cubic feet of gas lie within the Arctic circle, where, until now, permanent ice has prevented drilling. There is another issue that must be considered: the Northwest Passage. The Northwest Passage is a sea route through the Arctic Ocean, along the northern coast of North America via waterways amidst the Canadian Arctic Archipelago, connecting the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Its a route of vital importance for international trade. The State of Canada claims that the waters of the passage are under its sovereignity. Consequently, only Canada could bar the transit of commercial and war ships through the Northwest Passage. However, due to its importance, the United States of America and the European Union claim the Passage should be considered an international one and all nations should be free to use it.

Chronology of facts March 18, 2005: Alaska, United States The Arctic has been one of the greatest protected wilderness. But thanks to a Senate vote, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) was a significant step closer to becoming an industrial wasteland for the oil industry. September 29, 2005: Global warming in the Arctic could be soaring out of control, scientists warned as new figures revealed that melting of sea ice in the region has accelerated to record levels. August 21 st, 2006: Norway was not able to fulfil its whaling quota in what conservation groups claimed to be proof that the government should no longer support the industry. December 13, 2006: The latest scientific modelling, by the US-based National Centre for Atmospheric Research, brought the final melt date of the Polar Arctic Sea ice sheet forward by 40 years. August 2 nd, 2007: Russian explorers planted their country's flag on the seabed 4,200m (14,000ft) below the North Pole to further claims of Russia to the Arctic. August 28, 2007: Nalan Koc, head of the Norwegian Polar Institute s climate change programme said that, for the first time since the records began, the Northwest Passage was open to navigation. The reason for that was the decrease of the ice sheet on the Northern Passage. In 2005 it measured 5 3 million square kilometres whilst in 2007 it had been reduced to 4 9 million square kilometres. September 7, 2007: Scientifics of the Climate Impact Assesment said that the Greenland ice cap is melting so quickly that it was triggering earthquakes as pieces of ice several cubic kilometres in size break off. September 21 st, 2007: Russia intensified the international scramble for control of the Arctic as scientists said that samples from a vast mountain range under the ocean showed that it was part of Russia's continental shelf. November 21 st, 2008: The European Commission of Maritime Affairs showed its interests in the Arctic s energy resources, fisheries, new shipping routes, security concerns and environmental perils. With Denmark, Sweden and Finland as European

Union Member States, the European Union claimed for a place in the Arctic Council with other countries such as Greenland, Norway, Canada or Iceland. January 29, 2009: NATO discussed security prospects in the High North. As it was established at the international meeting in Iceland, a wider access to the Arctic s energy resources could end causing a significant increase of global awareness and competing claims by relevant stakeholders. Consequently, the tension in the Area scaled and an international military presence in the Area was taken into consideration. March 28, 2009: Russia signalled its determination to win the race for the Arctic's mineral wealth by announcing plans to establish military bases along its northern coastline. A new national security strategy included plans to create army units in Russia's Arctic region to guarantee military security in different military-political situations. May 26, 2009: The Governor of Canada, Michaëlle Jean, cut out the heart of a slaughtered seal and ate it raw. She said that she had done it in solidarity with the Inuit people. They claimed that their way of life was threatened by the future European Union ban on seal products. July 17, 2009: Norway s Foreign Minister predicted that a new "north-east passage" for shipping around Russia's Arctic coast and across the North Pole will be opened within a decade as global warming causes a incredible rapidly melting of the ice cap. July 21 st, 2009: Greenpeace led a team of climate scientists on a three-month expedition to Greenland to gather global warming. September 16, 2009: The European Union approved the Regulation (EC) No 1007/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 on trade in seal products. Briefly, the new law blocks imports of all items derived from seals, including meat and skins. October 20, 2009: The Minerals Management Service, part of the Federal Interior Department of the United States of America, gave to Shell the green light to begin exploratory wells off the north coast of Alaska in an Arctic area. October 22, 2009: The Obama Administration bowed to environmental groups and added a layer for protection on polar bear, setting aside 200.000 square miles of Alaskan coastline and waters as their critical habitat.

3.-C MUN 2010 For C MUN 2010, and always referring to the rule of the court (see the first part of this document, International Court of Justice), we have decided to have three judges, due to the fact that the parties have agreed the case should be heard by a chamber composed by three judges, none of them of the nationality of the parties, since they believed that this would be the most impartial way to solve the case. This is the suggested structure of actors views to debate for C MUN 2010: ACTORS 3 JUDGES MAIN ACTORS: CANADA/DENMARK/NORWAY/RUSSIAN FED./UNITED STATES/ ICELAND/ARCTIC COUNCIL/INTERNATIONAL SEABED AUTHORITY UNEP/ GREENPEACE/NATO/ EU With that composition of actors, the participants will debate on the right to claim the sovereignty of the North Pole, as well as the exploitation and use of its resources and trade routes.+