Port State jurisdiction is gaining traction as a means to overcome the regulatory limitations of flag state jurisdiction. Seen from the perspective of the international legal theory of jurisdiction, port state jurisdiction can be explained as a combination of the exercise of extraterritorial prescriptive jurisdiction or extended territorial prescriptive jurisdiction on matters that take place on ships on the high seas, and the exercise of enforcement jurisdiction when that ship enters the internal waters of that port State. Despite the apparent usefulness of the concept in empowering States in regulating actions that threaten the environmental sustainability of the high seas, this concept bears many uncertainties when it is subjected to close examination from the perspective of the international law of jurisdiction. This paper aims to examine this uncertainty in light of recent international jurisprudence on the matter, the M/V Norstar Case and the Enrica Lexie case, and proposes research on alternative theoretical frameworks to explain the phenomenon of port state jurisdiction.
Ⅰ. 서 론
Ⅱ. 공해에서 의 선박 또는 그 선박상의 행위에 대한 항만국 관할권 행사에 대한 이론적 쟁점
Ⅲ. 공해의 자유와 항만국 관할권의 한계: M/V Norstar호 사건과 Enrica Lexie호 사건을 중심으로
Ⅳ. 결론: 항만국 관할권에 대한 새로운 정당화 근거를 향하여