XVI. Law of the Sea: Maritime Boundary Delimitation and the Global AngloNorwegian Fisheries Case (U.K. v.
n Fisheries Case (U.K. v. Norway ICJ 1951)
Commons
Chapter 8 Territory: Law of the Sea
Importance of the Sea:
o Medium of communication
o They contain vast natural resources
Grotius - Elaborated the doctrine of the open seas which considers the
high seas as res communis accessible to all.
o The doctrine, however, recognized as permissible the
delineation of a maritime belt by littoral states as an
indivisible part of its domain. This belt is the territorial sea.
N.B. The prevailing law on maritime domain is the Convention on the
Law of the Sea of 1982 (LOS).
The basic statement of the extent of a state’s sovereignty over waters is
set down in Article 2 of the 1982 Law of the Sea:
Article 2. Legal status of the territorial sea, of the air space
over the territorial sea and of its bed and subsoil.
1. The sovereignty of a coastal State extends, beyond its
land territory and internal waters and, in the case of an
archipelagic State, its archipelagic waters, to an
adjacent belt of sea, described as the territorial sea.
2. This sovereignty extends to the air space over the
territorial sea as well as to its bed and subsoil.
3. The sovereignty over the territorial sea is exercised
subject to this Convention and to other rules of
international law.
Territorial Sea
Territorial sea - A belt of sea outwards from the baseline and up to 12
nautical miles beyond.
o The width of this territorial belt of water has been the subject
of much disagreement.
The original rule was the “cannon shot” rule, that is, the width of water
was measured in terms of the range of shore-based artillery. Later this
became the three-mile rule. The three mile rule has now been discarded
in favor of the twelve-mile rule now found in Article 3 of the 1982 LOS.
Article 3. Breadth of the territorial 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.
Baselines: normal" or “straight:
Article 5. Normal baseline.
Except where otherwise provided in this Convention, the
normal baseline for measuring the breadth of the territorial
sea is the low-water line along the coast as marked on large-
scale charts officially recognized by the coastal State.
There are two ways of drawing the baseline:
i. Normal Baseline
o One drawn following “the low-water line along
the coast as marked on large-scale charts officially
recognized by the coastal State.”'
o This line follows the curvatures of the coast and
therefore would normally not consist of straight
lines.
Doctrine: For the purpose of measuring the breadth of the
territorial sea, it is the low-water mark as opposed to the
high-water mark, or the mean between the two tides, which
has generally been adopted in the practice of States.
N.B.This criterion is the most favorable to the coastal State
and clearly shows the character of territorial waters as
appurtenant to the land territory.
Archipelagic states, however, instead of drawing “normal
baselines,” have drawn “straight baselines.”
Instead of following the curvatures of the coast, straight lines
are drawn connecting selected points on the coast without
appreciable departure from the general shape of the coast.
ii. Straight Baseline
o Drawn connecting selected points on the coast without
appreciable departure from the general shape of the coast.
N.B. Most archipelagic states use straight baselines.
This method of drawing lines was first upheld in the Anglo-Nor-
wegian Fisheries Case3 which upheld the straight baseline unilaterally
adopted by Norway. Likewise, R.A. No. 3046 and R.A. No. 5446 have
drawn “straight baselines” around the Philippines.
The decision in the Fisheries Case upholding the “straight baseline
method” eventually became part of convention law. Article 7(1) of the
Convention on the Law of the Sea says:
Article 7 Straight baselines.
1. In localities where the coastline is deeply indented and
cut into, or if there is a fringe of islands along the coast
in its immediate vicinity, the method of straight
baselines joining appropriate points may be employed
in drawing the baseline from which the breadth of the
territorial sea is measured.
2. Where because of the presence of a delta and other
natural conditions the coastline is highly unstable, the
appropriate points may be selected along the furthest
seaward extent of the low-water line and,
notwithstanding subsequent regression of the low-
water line, the straight baselines shall remain effective
until changed by the coastal State in accordance with
this Convention.
3. The drawing of straight baselines must not depart to
any appreciable extent from the general direction of the
coast, and the sea areas lying within the lines must be
sufficiently closely linked to the land domain to be
subject to the regime of internal waters.
4. Straight baselines shall not be drawn to and from low-
tide elevations, unless lighthouses or similar
installations which are permanently above sea level
have been built on them or except in instances where
the drawing of baselines to and from such elevations
has received general international recognition.
5. Where the method of straight baselines is applicable
under paragraph 1, account may be taken, in
determining particular baselines, of economic interests
peculiar to the region concerned, the reality and the
importance of which are clearly evidenced by long
usage.
6. The system of straight baselines may not be applied by
a State in such a manner as to cut off the territorial sea
 of another State from the high seas or an exclusive
economic zone.
Archipelagic Waters
Article 8 Internal waters
2. Where the establishment of a straight baseline in
accordance with the method set forth in article 7 has the
effect of enclosing as internal waters areas which had not
previously been considered as such, a right of innocent
passage as provided in this Convention shall exist in those
waters.
Article 53. Right of archipelagic sea lanes passage.
1. An archipelagic State may designate sea lanes and air
routes thereabove, suitable for the continuous and
expeditious passage of foreign ships and aircraft
through or over its archipelagic waters and the adjacent
territorial sea.
2. All ships and aircraft enjoy the right of archipelagic sea
lanes passage in such sea lanes and air routes.
3. Archipelagic sea lanes passage means the exercise in
accordance with this Convention of the rights of
navigation and overflight in the normal mode solely for
the purpose of continuous, expeditious and
unobstructed transit between one part of the high seas
or an exclusive economic zone and another part of the
high seas or an exclusive economic zone.
4. Such sea lanes and air routes shall traverse the
archipelagic waters and the adjacent territorial sea and
shall include all normal passage routes used as routes
for international navigation or overflight through or
over archipelagic waters and, within such routes, so far
as ships are concerned, all normal navigational
channels, provided that duplication of routes of similar
convenience between the same entry and exit points
shall not be necessary.
5. Such sea lanes and air routes shall be defined by a series
of continuous axis lines from the entry points of passage
routes to the exit points. Ships and aircraft in
archipelagic sea lanes passage shall not deviate more
than 25 nautical miles to either side of such axis lines
during passage, provided that such ships and aircraft
shall not navigate closer to the coasts than 10 per cent of
the distance between the nearest points on islands
bordering the sea lane.
6. An archipelagic State which designates sea lanes under
this article may also prescribe traffic separation schemes
for the safe passage of ships through narrow channels
in such sea lanes.
7. An archipelagic State may, when circumstances require,
after giving due publicity thereto, substitute other sea
lanes or traffic separation schemes for any sea lanes or
traffic separation schemes previously designated or
prescribed by it.
8. Such sea lanes and traffic separation schemes shall
conform to generally accepted international regulations.
9. In designating or substituting sea lanes or prescribing
or substituting traffic separation schemes, an
archipelagic State shall refer proposals to the competent
international organization with a view to their
adoption. The organization may adopt only such sea
lanes and traffic separation schemes as may be agreed
with the archipelagic State, after which the archipelagic
State may designate, prescribe or substitute them.
10. The archipelagic State shall clearly indicate the axis of
the sea lanes and the traffic separation schemes
designated or prescribed by it on charts to which due
publicity shall be given.
11. Ships in archipelagic sea lanes passage shall respect
applicable sea lanes and traffic separation schemes
established in accordance with this article.
12. If an archipelagic State does not designate sea lanes or
air routes, the right of archipelagic sea lanes passage
may be exercised through the routes normally used for
international navigation.
Article 47 of the Convention on the Law of the Sea allows the use of the
“straight baseline method” for archipelagic states with certain
limitations:
Article 47. Archipelagic baselines.
1. An archipelagic State may draw straight archipelagic
baselines joining the outermost points of the outermost
islands and drying reefs of the archipelago provided
that within such baselines are included the main
islands and an area in which the ratio of the area of the
water to the area of the land, including atolls, is
between 1 to 1 and 9 to 1.
2. The length of such baselines shall not exceed 100
nautical miles, except that up to 3 per cent of the total
number of baselines enclosing any archipelago may
exceed that length, up to a maximum length of 125
nautical miles.
3. The drawing of such baselines shall not depart to any
appreciable extent from the general configuration of the
archipelago.
4. Such baselines shall not be drawn to and from low-tide
elevations, unless lighthouses or similar installations
which are permanently above sea level have been built
on them or where a low-tide elevation is situated
wholly or partly at a distance not exceeding the breadth
of the territorial sea from the nearest island.
5. The system of such baselines shall not be applied by an
archipelagic State in such a manner as to cut off from
the high seas or the exclusive economic zone the
territorial sea of another State.
6. If a part of the archipelagic waters of an archipelagic
State lies between two parts of an immediately adjacent
neighbouring State, existing rights and all other
legitimate interests which the latter State has
traditionally exercised in such waters and all rights
stipulated by agreement between those States shall
continue and be respected.
7. For the purpose of computing the ratio of water to land
under paragraph l, land areas may include waters lying
within the fringing reefs of islands and atolls, including
that part of a steep-sided oceanic plateau which is
enclosed or nearly enclosed by a chain of limestone
islands and drying reefs lying on the perimeter of the
plateau.
8. The baselines drawn in accordance with this article
shall be shown on charts of a scale or scales adequate
for ascertaining their position. Alternatively, lists of
geographical coordinates of points, specifying the
geodetic datum, may be substituted.
9. The archipelagic State shall give due publicity to such
 charts or lists of geographical coordinates and shall
deposit a copy of each such chart or list with the
Secretary-General of the United Nations.
Article 14. Combination of methods for determining
baselines.
The coastal State may determine baselines in turn by any of
the methods provided for in the foregoing articles to suit
different conditions.
Bays
o The waters of a bay are considered internal waters of a coastal
state.
Article 10 Bays
1. This article relates only to bays the coasts of which belong
to a single State.
2. For the purposes of this Convention, a bay is a well-
marked indentation whose penetration is in such proportion
to the width of its mouth as to contain land-locked waters
and constitute more than a mere curvature of the coast. An
indentation shall not, however, be regarded as a bay unless
its area is as large as, or larger than, that of the semi-circle
whose diameter is a line drawn across the mouth of that
indentation.
3. For the purpose of measurement, the area of an indentation
is that lying between the low-water mark around the shore of
the indentation and a line joining the low-water mark of its
natural entrance points. Where, because of the presence of
islands, an indentation has more than one mouth, the semi-
circle shall be drawn on a line as long as the sum total of the
lengths of the lines across the different mouths. Islands
within an indentation shall be included as if they were part of
the water area of the indentation.
4. If the distance between the low-water marks of the natural
entrance points of a bay does not exceed 24 nautical miles, a
closing line may be drawn between these two low-water
marks, and the waters enclosed thereby shall be considered
as internal waters.
5. Where the distance between the low-water marks of the
natural entrance points of a bay exceeds 24 nautical miles, a
straight baseline of 24 nautical miles shall be drawn within
the bay in such a manner as to enclose the maximum area of
water that is possible with a line of that length.
6. The foregoing provisions do not apply to so-called
"historic" bays, or in any case where the system of straight
baselines provided for in article 7 is applied.
Historic bays
o Treated by the coastal state as internal waters on the basis of
historic rights acknowledged by other states.
Sovereignty over Territorial Sea
General rule: The sovereignty of the coastal state over its territorial sea
and the airspace above it as well as the seabed under is the same as its
sovereignty over its land territory.
Exception: Right of Innocent Passage
o The sea is subject to the right of innocent passage by other
states. The rule on innocent passage applies to ships and
aircraft. Submarines, moreover, must surface.
Article 18 Meaning of passage.
1. Passage means navigation through the territorial sea for
the purpose
of:
a. traversing that sea without entering internal
waters or calling at a roadstead or port facility
outside internal waters; or
b. proceeding to or from internal waters or a call at
such roadstead or port facility.
2. Passage shall be continuous and expeditious. However,
passage includes stopping and anchoring, but only in so far
as the same are incidental to ordinary navigation or are
rendered necessary by force majeure or distress or for the
purpose of rendering assistance to persons, ships or aircraft
in danger or distress.
Article 45. Innocent passage.
1. The regime of innocent passage, in accordance with Part II,
section 3, shall apply in straits used for international
navigation:
a. excluded from the application of the regime of
transit passage under article 38, paragraph 1; or
b. between a part of the high seas or an exclusive
economic zone and the territorial sea of a foreign
State.
2. There shall be no suspension of innocent passage through
such straits.
N.B. Innocent passage is passage that is not prejudicial to the peace,
good order or security of the coastal state.
Article 19(2) enumerates acts that are not considered innocent passage
thus:
Article 19. Meaning of innocent passage
1. Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the
peace, good order or security of the coastal State. Such
passage shall take place in conformity with this Convention
and with other rules of international law.
2. Passage of a foreign ship shall be considered to be
prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal
State if in the territorial sea it engages in any of the following
activities:
a. any threat or use of force against the sovereignty,
territorial integrity or political independence of
the coastal State, or in any other manner in
violation of the principles of international law
embodied in the Charter of the United Nations;
b. any exercise or practice with weapons of any
kind;
c. any act aimed at collecting information to the
prejudice of the defence or security of the coastal
State;
d. any act of propaganda aimed at affecting the
defence or security of the coastal State;
e. the launching, landing or taking on board of any
aircraft;
f. the launching, landing or taking on board of any
military device;
g. the loading or unloading of any commodity,
currency or person contrary to the customs, fiscal,
immigration or sanitary laws and regulations of
the coastal State;
h. any act of wilful and serious pollution contrary to
this Convention;
 i. any fishing activities;
j. the carrying out of research or survey activities;
k. any act aimed at interfering with any systems of
communication or any other facilities or
installations of the coastal State;
l. any other activity not having a direct bearing on
passage.
N.B. Coastal states have the unilateral right to verify the innocent
character of passage, and it may take the necessary steps to prevent
passage that it determines to be not innocent.
The rule on innocent passage is also applicable to straits:
Corfu Channel Case
Doctrine: It is, in the opinion of the Court, generally
recognized and in accordance with international custom that
States in time of peace have a right to send their warships
through straits used for international navigation between
two parts of the high seas without the previous authorization
of a coastal State, provided that the passage is innocent.
Unless otherwise prescribed in an international convention,
there is no right for a coastal State to prohibit such passage
through straits in time of peace.
Territorial Sea
UNCLOS, art. 121
Internal waters
All waters landwards from the baseline of the territory.
o Sea, rivers, lakes, etc.
N.B. Sovereignty over these waters is the same in extent as sovereignty
over land, and it is not subject to the right of innocent passage.
Saudi Arabia v. Aramco (Arbitration 1963)
The arbitrator said that according to international law —
ports of every state must be open to foreign vessels and can
only be closed when vital interests of the state so requires.
But according to Nicaragua v. US
A coastal state may regulate access to its ports.
Contiguous zone
o Area of water not exceeding 24 nautical miles from the baseline.
It thus extends 12 nautical miles from the edge of the territorial
sea.
o The coastal state exercises authority over that area to the extent
necessary to prevent infringement of its customs, fiscal,
immigration or sanitation authority over its territorial waters or
territory and to punish such infringement.
Article 33 Contiguous zone
1.In a zone contiguous to its territorial sea, described as the
contiguous zone, the coastal State may exercise the control
necessary to:
a. prevent infringement of its customs, fiscal,
immigration or sanitary laws and regulations
within its territory or territorial sea;
b. punish infringement of the above laws and
regulations committed within its territory or
territorial sea.
2. The contiguous zone may not extend beyond 24 nautical
miles from the baselines from which the breadth of the
territorial sea is measured.
N.B. The power of control given to the littoral state does not change the
nature of the waters. Beyond the territorial sea, the waters are high sea
and are not subject to the sovereignty of the coastal state.
Exclusive Economic Zone or “patrimonial sea.”
Article 55 Specific legal regime of the exclusive economic
zone.
The exclusive economic zone is an area beyond and adjacent
to the territorial sea, subject to the specific legal regime
established in this Part, under which the rights and
jurisdiction of the coastal State and the rights and freedoms
of other States are governed by the relevant provisions of this
Convention.
o An area extending not more than 200 nautical miles beyond
the baseline.
o The coastal state has rights over the economic resources of
the sea, seabed and subsoil — but the right does not affect the
right of navigation and overflight of other states.
N.B. This is a compromise between those who wanted a 200-mile
territorial sea and those who wanted to reduce the powers of coastal
states.
Article 56 Rights, jurisdiction and duties of the coastal State
in the exclusive economic zone
1. In the exclusive economic zone, the coastal State has:
a. 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;
b. jurisdiction as provided for in the relevant provisions of
this Convention with regard to:
i. the establishment and use of artificial
islands, installations and structures;
ii. marine scientific research;
iii. the protection and preservation of the
marine environment;
c. other rights and duties provided for in this Convention.
2. In exercising its rights and performing its duties
under this Convention in the exclusive economic zone,
the coastal State shall have due regard to the rights and
duties of other States and shall act in a manner
compatible with the provisions of this Convention.
3. The rights set out in this article with respect to the seabed
and subsoil shall be exercised in accordance with Part VI.
Article 57 Breadth of the exclusive economic zone.
The exclusive economic zone shall not extend beyond 200
nautical miles from the baselines from which the breadth of
the territorial sea is measured.
Two Primary Obligations of Coastal States:
i. They must ensure through proper conservation and
management measures that the living resources of the EEZ
are not subjected to over-exploitation. This includes the duty
to maintain and restore populations of harvested fisheries at
levels which produce a “maximum sustainable yield.”

ii. They must promote the objective of “optimum utilization” of
the living resources. They therefore should determine the
allowable catch of living resources. If the coastal state does
not have the capacity to harvest the allowable catch, it must
grant access to other states.
N.B. The delimitation of the overlapping exclusive economic zone
between adjacent states is determined by agreement.
Continental shelf (Archipelagic) Shelf.
Refers to:
i. The seabed and subsoil of the submarine areas adjacent to the
coastal state but outside the territorial sea, to a depth of two
hundred meters or, beyond that limit, to where the depth
allows exploitation, and
ii. The seabed and subsoil of areas adjacent to islands.
Right of the Coastal State: To explore and exploit its natural resources,
to erect installations needed, and to erect a safety zone over its
installations with a radius of 500 meters. The right does not affect the
right of navigation of others.
Limitation: The right does not extend to non-resource material in the
shelf area such as wrecked ship and their cargoes.
The Deep Seabed: “Common Heritage of Mankind.”
o Areas of the sea-bed and the ocean floor, and their subsoil,
which lie beyond any national jurisdiction.
N.B. These are the common heritage of mankind and may not be
appropriated by any state or person.
Islands
Article 121. Regime of islands
1. An island is a naturally formed area of land, surrounded
by water, which is above water at high tide.
2. Except as provided for in paragraph 3, the territorial sea,
the contiguous zone and the continental shelf of an island are
determined in accordance with the provisions of the
Convention applicable to other land territory.
3. Rocks which cannot sustain human habitation or economic
life of their own shall have no exclusive economic zone or
continental shelf.
Importance of Islands:
o Possibility of exploiting oil and gas resources around them.
o Can have their own territorial sea, exclusive economic zone
and continental shelf.
N.B. However, rocks “which cannot sustain human habitation or
economic life” only have a territorial sea.
Artificial islands or installations are not “islands” in the sense of Article
121. However, coastal states may establish safety zones around artificial
islands and prescribe safety measures around them.
Article 60 Artificial islands, installations and structures in the
exclusive economic zone.
4. The coastal State may, where necessary, establish
reasonable safety zones around such artificial islands,
installations and structures in which it may take appropriate
measures to ensure the safety both of navigation and of the
artificial islands, installations and structures.
5. The breadth of the safety zones shall be determined by the
coastal State, taking into account applicable international
standards. Such zones shall be designed to ensure that they
are reasonably related to the nature and function of the
artificial islands, installations or structures, and shall not
exceed a distance of 500 metres around them, measured from
each point of their outer edge, except as authorized by
generally accepted international standards or as
recommended by the competent international organization.
Due notice shall be given of the extent of safety zones.
High Seas
o All parts of the sea that are not included in the territorial sea
or in the internal waters of a State.
The highs seas are subject to six freedoms:
i. Freedom of navigation;
ii. Freedom of overflight;
iii. Freedom of fishing;
iv. Freedom to lay submarine cables and pipelines;
v. Freedom to construct artificial islands and structures; and
vi. Freedom of scientific research.
The flag state has exclusive jurisdiction over its ships on the high seas to
the extent not limited by agreement. By legal fiction, a ship is a floating
part of the flag state.
Hot Pursuit:
o Article 111 allows hot pursuit of a foreign vessel where there
is good reason to believe that the ship has violated laws or
regulations of a coastal state.
o The pursuit must commence when the foreign vessel is
within the internal waters, the archipelagic waters, the
territorial waters or the contiguous zone of the pursuing
state.
o It may continue into the high seas if the pursuit has not been
interrupted. If the foreign ship is in the contiguous zone, it
may be pursued only for violations of the rights of the coastal
state in the contiguous zone.
Mutatis mutandis
o The right of hot pursuit shall also apply to violations of
applicable laws and regulations of the coastal state in the
exclusive economic zone or the continental shelf including
the safety zones of the shelf.
Limitation:
o Hot pursuit must stop as soon as the ship pursued enters the
territorial waters if its own state or of a third state.
o Hot pursuit may be carried out only by warships or military
aircraft, or any other ship or aircraft properly marked for that
purpose.
The I’m Alone (29 AJIL 326)
Although the pursuit was found to be legitimate, the sinking
of the pursued vessel was found to be “not justified by
anything in the Convention ... [nor] by any principle of
international law.” The Commission ordered the United
States to apologize to the Canadian government and to pay
damages.
Settlement of Disputes

Mode: Peaceful settlement of disputes is compulsory.
Flag State
Article 91 Nationality of ships.
1. Every State shall fix the conditions for the grant of its
nationality to ships, for the registration of ships in its
territory, and for the right to fly its flag. Ships have the
nationality of the State whose flag they are entitled to fly.
There must exist a genuine link between the State and the
ship.
2. Every State shall issue to ships to which it has granted the
right to fly its flag documents to that effect.
Flag of Convenience
Western Philippine Sea
FISHERIES CASE UNITED KINGDOM VS NORWAY
Facts:
o In past centuries British fisherman had made incursions
in the waters near the Norwegian coast. As a result of
com- plaints from the King of Norway, they abstained
from doing so at the beginning of the 17thcentury and
for 300 years. But in 1906 British vessels appeared again.
These: were trawlers equipped with improved and
powerful gear. The local population became perturbed,
and measures were taken by Nor- way with a view to
specifying the limits within which fishing was
prohibited to foreigners. Incidents occurred became
more and more frequent, and on July 12th. 1935the
Norwegian Government delimited the Norwegian
fisheries zone by Decree. Negotiations had been entered
into by the two Governments; they were pursued after
the Decree was enacted, but without success. A
considerable number of British trawlers were arrested
and condemned in 1948 and 1949. It was then that the
United Kingdom Government instituted proceedings
before the Court.
o The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland against Norway brought the Fisheries Case
before the Court.
o By a Decree of July 12th 1935, the Norwegian
Government had, in the northern part of the country
(north of the Arctic Circle) delimited the zone in which
the fisheries were reserved to its own nationals. The
United Kingdom asked the Court to state whether this
delimitation was or was not contrary to international
law. In, its Judgment the Court found that neither the
method employed for the delimitation by the Decree,
nor the lines themselves fixed by the said Decree, are
contrary to international law; the first finding is
adopted by ten votes to two, and the second by eight
votes to four.
Issue: WON the delimitation was contrary to international
law (whether the lines laid down by the 1935 Decree for the
purpose of delimiting the Norwegian fisheries zone have or
have not been drawn in accordance with international law)
Held: No. the Judgment concludes that the method
employed by the Decree of 1935 is not contrary to
international law; and that the base-lines fixed by the Decree
are not contrary to international law either. (These lines,
called "base-lines", are those from which the belt of the
territorial sea is reckoned).
Ratio: The first principle put forward by the United Kingdom
is that the base-line must be low-water mark. This indeed is
the criterion generally adopted in the practice of States. The
par- ties agree as to this criterion, but they differ as to its
application.
Drawn between appropriate points on this low-water mark,
departing from the physical coastline to a reasonable extent,
the base-line can only be determined by means of a geometric
construction. Straight lines will be drawn across well-defined
bays, minor curvatures of the coastline, and sea areas
separating islands, islets and reefs, thus giving a simpler
form to the belt of territorial waters. The drawing of such
lines does not constitute an exception to a rule: it is this
rugged coast, viewed as a whole, that calls for the method of
straight base-lines.
Thus the Court, confining itself to the Conclusions of the
United Kingdom, finds that the 1935 delimitation does not
violate international law. But the delimitation of sea areas has
always an international aspect since it interests States other
than the coastal State; consequently, it cannot be dependent
merely upon the will of the latter. In this connection certain
basic considerations inherent in the nature of the territorial
sea bring to light the following criteria which can provide
guidance to Courts: since the territorial sea is closely
dependent upon the land domain, the base-line must not
depart to any appreciable extent from the general direction
of the coast: certain waters are particularly closely linked to
the land formations which divide or surround them (an
idea which should be liberally applied in the present case, in
view of the configuration of the coast); it may be necessary to
have regard to certain economic interests peculiar to a
region when their reality and importance are clearly
evidenced by a long usage.
Norway puts forward the 1935 Decree as the application of a
traditional system of delimitation in accordance with
international law. In its view, international law takes into
account the diversity of facts and concedes that the
delimitation must be adapted to the special conditions
obtaining in different regions. The Judgment notes that a
Norwegian Decree of 1812, as well as a number of
subsequent texts (Decrees, Reports, diplomatic
correspondence) show that the method of straight lines,
imposed by geography, has been established in the
Norwegian system and consolidated by a constant and
sufficiently long practice. The application of this system
encountered no opposition from other States. Even the
United Kingdom did not contest it for many years: it was
only in 1933 that the United Kingdom made a formal and
definite protest. And yet, concerned with maritime questions,
it could not have been ignorant of the reiterated
manifestations of Norwegian practice, which was so well-
known. The general toleration of the international
community therefore shows that the Norwegian system was
not regarded as contrary to international law.