배타적 경제수역 내 해양과학조사를 둘러싼 국제법적 문제에 관한 연구

A Study of the International Legal Issues involved in Marine Scientific Research in the Exclusive Economic Zone

Part 13 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) provides comprehensive information on marine scientific research, but there has been no definition of it. Due to the development of marine science technology. the question of whether marine scientific research regulations that require the consent of coastal states are applicable to other kinds of marine data collection activities, because of the similarity of methods and data collection for marine scientific research and hydrographical survey. For the distinction between the research and survey requires objective criteria for determining the nature and operation method,, and the purpose or motivation to perform these activities are required, but these are not defined within the UNCLOS. Thus, there is a question of how to apply the relevant provisions. On the other hand, military surveys tend to be discussed as a category of military activity rather than a distinction from marine scientific research. The US and the UK and other maritime powers argue that States can freely conduct hydrographic surveys and military surveys as marine scientific research without the consent of coastal states. They can distinguish between ‘research’ and ‘survey’ and both marine data collection activities are subject to the freedom of navigation and “other internationally lawful uses of the sea related to these freedoms” as defined in Article 58 (1) of the UNCLOS. Therefore, survey activities are not considered to be under the jurisdiction of coastal states within the exclusive economic zone. On the other hand, coastal states which are developing countries argue that in their exclusive economic zones, both hydrographic and military surveys, which are investigations of phenomena of the oceans, fall under the category of marine scientific research and are subject to national security in accordance with “other rights and duties provided for in this Convention” in Article 56 (1) (c), where a survey that threatens the coastal area is under the jurisdiction of the coastal state. This is a matter of interpretation that would not have occurred if the definition of marine scientific research was clear, or at least could be the basis for classification. In conclusion, state practices that require consent for hydrographic surveys of other countries in the exclusive economic zone are not as common as to be regarded as international customary law. It may interpret research and survey as separate because drafts of the United Nations Convention on the Law clearly distinguish between the two activities, and there is no indication that they intended a developmental interpretation of surveying. However, since the results of hydrographic surveys are used for economic purposes and “due regard” for the coastal state is required in Article 58 of the UNCLOS, countries are required to seek consent from coastal states rather than claiming an unconditional freedom of navigation. Meanwhile, the military survey is not a defined term in the UNCLOS. Military surveys are a problem that should be discussed as part of military activities, although conducting marine scientific research for “peaceful purposes” in Articles 240 and 246 of the UNCLOS does not prohibit military purposes. Military surveys are part of military activities, and it is possible to declare the exclusion of compulsory jurisdiction in the dispute settlement system within the UNCLOS. There is no piecemeal solution, because the question of military surveying is a question of the interpretation of Article 56, which defines the rights of coastal states in the exclusive economic zone, and Article 58, which defines the rights of other countries. However, each country should strive to build trust and enhance transparency. It requires compliance with bilateral agreements and international norms related to military activities.