国际海洋法的发展及中国主张

【编者按：2021年4月6日，外交部条法司贾桂德司长出席厦门大学百年校庆系列重要活动之一——“海洋法的发展、挑战与前瞻”国际研讨会，并就国际海洋法的发展及中国主张做主旨演讲。贾桂德司长指出新形势下海洋法的发展主要体现在深海远洋立法深入推进、极地规则制定活跃、海洋可持续发展“软法”影响力加强、新兴海洋问题层出不穷等方面；强调应平衡海洋保护和可持续利用，加强海洋治理机制协同增效，处理好海洋法继承与发展的关系；倡导坚持多边主义，推进海洋可持续发展，携手共建海洋命运共同体。演讲有助于国际法学界及实务界了解国际海洋法的最新发展及我在海洋法领域所做工作。研讨会由厦大法学院举办，联合国海洋事务与海洋法办公室负责人、国际海底管理局秘书长、国际海洋法法庭法官等主要涉海机构及知名国际法学者100余位代表参加研讨会。现将贾桂德司长主旨演讲中英文主要内容摘编刊出，供交流参考。】

国际海洋法的发展及中国主张

——外交部条法司贾桂德司长

在“海洋法发展、挑战与前瞻”国际研讨会上的主旨演讲

各位嘉宾，女士们、先生们：

下午好！

值此厦门大学百年校庆之际，我谨代表外交部条约法律司，向厦门大学的全体师生及海内外厦大校友，表示最热烈的祝贺！

厦门大学的百年，是向海而生、海纳百川的百年。在中华民族身处危难的20世纪初，知名爱国侨领陈嘉庚先生心怀教育兴国信念，一手将厦大打造成为海上花园学府。作为中国东南沿海放眼世界的一扇窗口，厦大充分发挥地处“一带一路”战略支点的优势，坚持“海丝、海峡、海洋”办学特色，广邀海内外专家学者，开创性建设马来西亚分校，建造3000吨级“嘉庚号”科考船，兼收并蓄地开展海洋法研究，成为海洋文明开放包容的最佳写照。在这个春暖花开的时节，我们面朝大海，共庆厦门大学百年华诞，共商国际海洋法发展、挑战与前瞻，意义非凡。

女士们，先生们，

海洋法是国际法最古老的分支，国际法之父格劳秀斯的“海洋自由论”问世已有400余年。在长期国家实践推动下，领海、毗连区、大陆架等制度相继建立。自20世纪30年代起，国际社会持续努力为海洋建章立制。从1958年四个日内瓦海洋法公约订立，到1982年《联合国海洋法公约》出台，再到《公约》两个执行协定相继谈成，现代海洋法框架基本形成。

进入21世纪，我们认知海洋、探索海洋的能力大大提升，海洋活动与日俱增，领域和形式不断拓展。气候变化等全球性问题也对海洋环境产生深刻影响。海洋技术革新和自然环境变化为全球海洋治理提出诸多新课题，导致现有海洋法制度供给相对不足，对海洋法向前发展提出新要求。

新形势下，海洋法发展呈现出一些新特点。在形式上，硬法软法共同驱动，多平台共商海洋治理方案。在内容上，全球海洋秩序“绿色”渐浓，环保规则日渐细化。在领域上，新一轮海洋立法集中在公海和国际海底等全球公域，聚焦海洋基因资源开发利用、深海采矿等新兴领域。在路径上，许多规则制定针对前沿问题，突出理念引领，无先例可循，有别于海洋法在国家实践基础上编纂和逐步发展的传统路径。

新形势下海洋法的发展主要体现在以下几方面：

第一，深海远洋立法持续深入推进。全球新冠肺炎疫情并未使海洋生物多样性协定谈判和国际海底开发规章制定按下“暂停键”，“云会议”“云讨论”持续进行。

针对BBNJ协定谈判，各方态度更加务实，方案更具建设性，对于制度构想更加具体。目前谈判中的重要问题包括如何平衡公海科研自由与规范海洋遗传资源获取及合理分享惠益；如何坚持不损害原则，妥善处理BBNJ协定与现有法律文书和机制的关系；如何合理促进环境影响评价程序的透明度和规范化；如何建立行之有效的能力建设和海洋技术转让机制。各方对上述问题还存在不同看法，第四次政府间大会预计在今年8月举行，各方将就此加强沟通、增进共识。

当前国际海底采矿正在从勘探向开发过渡，制定开发规章是国际海底管理局优先工作事项。开发规章的核心是调整海管局、担保国、承包者之间的权利义务关系，其中关键问题是缴费机制。目前各方已就从价和从利等不同缴纳模式进行了深入研讨，目的是要找到既能保护承包者从事开发的积极性和可持续性，又能确保合理分享深海收益的平衡方案。深海环境保护也是开发规章制定的重要内容。区域环境环境计划的设立和管理备受关注。在各方共同努力下，规章草案已有较为完整的框架，为下步磋商奠定了基础。为推进制定工作，去年海管局成立了“海洋环境的保护和保全”“检查、合规和执行”“机构事项”三个非正式工作组，我们期待工作组在协调各方立场、推动制定满足各方关切的开发规章方面发挥积极作用。

第二，极地新领域规则制定活跃。随着气候变化、冰雪消融以及人类活动能力的提升，南北两极不再遥不可及。这为南北极建章立制提出新任务。

近年来，南极旅游呈快速增长趋势。2019年至2020年期间，南极游客多达7万余人，由此产生的环保、安全和对科考的影响等问题日益突出。南极生物勘探也正在兴起，该问题与经济利益直接相关，还涉及南极生物资源的权属、知识产权保护等复杂问题。南极条约协商国正根据《南极条约》宗旨和精神，就加强规范相关活动进行磋商。目前，南极海洋生物资源养护委员会已建立罗斯海和南奥克尼海洋保护区，若干保护区提案正在委员会讨论。大型公海保护区建设仍处于起始探索阶段，相关成效和可行性有待观察。制定完善保护区科研监测计划，对保护区运作评估至关重要，中国、俄罗斯等正在委员会推动就此进行讨论。

气候变化使北极夏季海冰持续减少，有声音称，“白色北极”将逐渐变为“蓝色北极”，给北极生态环境带来复杂影响，同时推动北极互联互通的自然条件持续改善。国际海事组织出台《极地水域船舶航行安全规则》规范北极航运。北极理事会先后通过有关海空搜救、油污预防、科学合作问题的三个协定。北冰洋中部公海的商业捕鱼虽在近期仍不可行，但本着预防为先，《预防中北冰洋不管制公海渔业协定》已成功订立。相信通过包括北极国家在内的各方共同努力，我们将在北极实现人与自然和谐共存。

第三，海洋可持续发展“软法”影响力加强。全球海洋秩序不仅靠具有法律约束力的“硬法”规范，“软法”辐射力同样深远。

在“联合国可持续发展目标14”的指引下，国际社会正在从减少海洋污染、保护海洋生态、应对海洋酸化、规范渔业捕捞、加强能力建设等诸多方面，积极行动起来，保护和可持续利用海洋和海洋资源。同时，目前各方正在《生物多样性公约》框架下制订更具雄心的目标。

除政治承诺外，联合国及其相关专门机构也在发展海洋领域“软法”上扮演重要角色。联大每年通过“海洋与海洋法”决议和“可持续渔业”决议，引领和指导着全球海洋事务发展。今年是“联合国海洋科学促进可持续发展国际十年”的开局之年，该计划旨在促进国际社会通过科学和技术创新，提升海洋可持续发展的能力。联合国粮农组织作为国际渔业问题的主管部门，通过《负责任渔业行为守则》等多个文件，为全球渔业事务提供行为规范。

第四，新兴海洋问题层出不穷。国际社会共同应对海洋风险挑战的努力从不曾停止。例如，国际法委员会正研究海平面上升可能对海洋法产生的影响，涉及基线、海域外部界限、海洋划界、岛礁地位等多个海洋法领域最为关键、沿海国最为关心的法律问题。联合国环境大会成立专家组，专门研究海洋垃圾和微塑料问题，探讨国际立法、加强协调和采取其他行动的可能。“联合国海洋和海洋法问题不限成员名额非正式协商进程”也作出巨大贡献，近年对气候变化对海洋的影响、海洋垃圾、海洋酸化、水下噪音等多个新兴海洋问题予以关注，相关工作成果为政策制定者提供参考。

女士们，先生们，

我们共同生活的地球家园是一颗蓝色星球，我们要秉持海洋命运共同体理念，坚持多边主义，加强海洋治理机制共商共建共享，一道构建和谐、开放、包容、清洁美丽的海洋。面对全球海洋治理的新形势、新课题，我们要继续准确把握海洋法发展方向，特别是妥善处理以下三方面问题，推动建设公正合理的国际海洋秩序。

一是合理平衡海洋保护与可持续利用。保护海洋生态环境，关乎人类的前途命运。同时，海洋自古以来就提供渔盐之利，舟楫之便,在增强人类科学认知、维护人类粮食安全、促进全世界互联互通等方面具有不可替代的作用。因此，我们应认真落实联合国可持续发展目标14，将平衡兼顾保护与利用的理念贯穿于渔业、航运、科研、采矿等海洋活动中，充分体现在BBNJ协定、国际海底开发规章、南北极规则制定中，不断优化海洋治理方案。同时要坚持将科学研究作为推动海洋可持续发展的基础，以“联合国海洋科学促进可持续发展国际十年”倡议为契机，加强海洋创新型技术的推广与应用，进一步提高海洋保护和利用效能。

二是加强海洋治理机制协同增效和普惠。当前参与国际海洋治理的机构众多，全球、区域及部门模式并存。如，《联合国海洋法公约》框架内，海底采矿采用全球治理模式，公海渔业则采用区域分散化治理模式。全球模式有助于规则和标准的统一适用；区域或部门治理模式则针对特定领域及区域给出专业、符合当地实际的治理方案。我们要坚持好、发展好目前行之有效的海洋治理机制和模式，加强各机制间信息分享和协同增效，而非率然成立新的综合性机制，造成职能重复冲突。此外，陆地和海洋是密不可分的，海洋垃圾、微塑料等污染多来自陆地。我们要坚持陆海统筹，加强陆地和海洋治理机制的联动和体系性应对。 

应对全球性海洋挑战是国际社会的共同责任，同时海洋发展“红利”也应普遍惠及各国。我们要采取切实国际行动弥补发展中国家在参与海洋治理方面的能力不足，协助相关国家有效应对海平面上升等所带来的挑战，使广大发展中国家更多地分享海洋治理成果。

三是处理好海洋法继承与发展的关系。《公约》编纂了长久以来形成的国家实践，诸多制度都反映了习惯国际法，其作为“一揽子”平衡的产物，满足各方合理关切。但随着海洋法的实施和发展，缔约国间权利与义务的微妙平衡有被打破的可能。例如，BBNJ协定谈判中，有声音要求对公海环境影响评价的全过程予以“国际化”，这与《公约》有关环评由“国家主导、国家决策”的规定相悖。再如，《公约》争端解决机制在多个案件中管辖本不属于《公约》处理的事项，或缩小解释“海洋划界例外”“军事活动例外”等有关“任择性例外”事项。这种扩权做法打破了《公约》争端解决机制自愿程序和强制程序的平衡。

我们要继续重视国家实践在推动海洋法形成与发展上的基础性作用，避免对传统海洋法秩序造成太大冲击。对于《公约》未予规定的事项，应继续遵循一般国际法的规则和原则。国际司法机构应切实遵守国家同意原则，在当事国授权范围内行使管辖权，正确解释和适用《公约》，支持当事国通过谈判协商解决争端的意愿和努力，促成长期有效的争端解决方案。

女士们，先生们，

中国将始终做全球海洋治理的建设者，海洋可持续发展的推动者，国际海洋秩序的维护者。我们愿同各国一道，本着相互尊重、公平正义、合作共赢精神，深度参与全球海洋治理，共同践行海洋命运共同体理念，为实现海洋可持续发展作出贡献。

The Development of the International Law of the Sea and China’s Views

Speech by Director General Jia Guide at the Symposium “International Law of the Sea: Developments, Challenges and Prospects” for the Centenary of Xiamen University

Distinguished Guests,  Ladies and Gentlemen,

Good afternoon．

At the outset, I wish to, on behalf of the Department of Treaty and Law of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, extend warmest congratulations to the faculty, students and alumni of Xiamen University on the centenary of this esteemed institution.

The past century has seen Xiamen University thrive and develop a culture of openness like the sea that embraces this campus. In the early 20th century when our nation was facing deep suffering, the renowned overseas Chinese community leader Mr. Tan Kah Kee, a true patriot, decided to help rejuvenate the nation through education and founded Xiamen University, known for its seaside garden-like campus.

Situated on the southeastern coast of China, a crucial hub for cooperation under the Belt and Road Initiative and gateway to the world, Xiamen University has fully drawn strength from its unique location on the Maritime Silk Road, across the Taiwan Straits and by the ocean in its academic endeavors. It has welcomed experts and scholars from home and abroad with open arms, established the Malaysia Campus in an innovate spirit, constructed the 3,000-ton scientific research vessel “Tan Kah Tee”, and carried out research on the law of the sea in an open and inclusive manner. All these symbolize the spirit of openness and diversity of maritime civilizations.

So it is only fitting that we are gathered by the seaside in the beautiful season of spring to celebrate the centenary of Xiamen University and discuss the development, challenges and prospects of the law of the sea.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

As the oldest branch of international law, the law of the sea came into existence more than 400 years ago when Hugo Grotius proposed the “freedom of the seas”. The practices of states over the centuries since gave birth to provisions regarding the territorial sea, contiguous zone and continental shelf. Since the 1930s, the international community has made consistent efforts to develop legal frameworks for the sea. From the four Geneva Conventions of 1958 to the 1982 UNCLOS and later its two implementing agreements, the modern framework for the law of the sea gradually took shape.

Since the turn of the century, our ability to understand and explore the sea has increased significantly. Human activities in the ocean have intensified and expanded in both scope and form. Global challenges such as climate change have had a profound impact on the marine environment. Advances in marine technology and changes in the environment have brought about new challenges for global ocean governance. In this context, there is a strong need for the law of the sea to move forward to keep up with these developments.

Today, the development of the law of the sea has gained some new characteristics. 

- In terms of its form, the development of the law of the sea is driven by both hard and soft law. Ocean governance has been discussed at a multitude of platforms;

- In terms of its content, the global ocean order is getting “greener”, with more detailed environmental protection rules being fleshed out;

- In terms of the fields involved, the latest law-making for the seas and oceans is mainly about global commons such as the high seas and the international seabed area, and focuses on emerging fields such as the exploration and development of marine genes and deep seabed mining;

- In terms of the approaches involved, a lot of rule-making is about frontier issues where there is no precedent. It is different from the traditional approach where the law of the sea is codified and gradually developed on the basis of state practices.

The latest progress in the development of the law of the sea is mainly reflected in the following areas:

First, law-making on the high seas and the international seabed area is moving forward. The COVID-19 pandemic has not stopped the BBNJ Agreement negotiation or the development of Regulations for Exploitation of Mineral Resources in the international seabed area. Such efforts are ongoing through virtual meetings and discussions.

Regarding the BBNJ negotiation, delegations have demonstrated an increasingly pragmatic attitude, with more constructive proposals and concrete ideas about the design of the BBNJ regime.

At the moment, the key issues under discussion are: how to strike a balance between the freedom of scientific research on the high seas and the regulation on the access to MGR, as well as reasonable benefits-sharing; how to properly address the relationship between the BBNJ agreement and the existing relevant legal instruments and frameworks and relevant global, regional and sectoral bodies while sticking to “not undermine” principle; how to promote the transparency and normalization of the EIA procedure in a reasonable manner; and how to establish a truly effective CBTT regime. Judging from recent discussions, the parties are still divided on the above issues and can continue to exchange views and seek common ground at the IGC 4 scheduled this August.

As the deep seabed mining moves from exploration to exploitation, the International Seabed Authority (the Authority) should prioritize the formulation of the Regulations on Exploitation of Mineral Resources in the Area (the Regulations). The core of the Regulations is to adjust the rights and obligations among the Authority, the States sponsoring persons and entities and the Contractors. The crux lies in the payment mechanism.

In-depth discussions have been held on the different models such as ad valorem royalty and profit-sharing system. The purpose is to find a balanced solution which ensures both the incentives and sustainability of the Contractors’ exploitation and fair sharing of the benefits from deep seabed mining.

The protection of deep sea environment is also an important part of the Regulations. The establishment and governance of Regional Environmental Management Plan (REMP) has received much attention. With the joint efforts of all parties, the Draft Regulations now has a more complete framework, which may serve as the basis for future consultation. To promote the development of the Regulations, the Authority launched three informal working groups last year on “protection and preservation of the marine environment”, “inspection compliance and enforcement” and “institutional matters” respectively. We hope that all working groups will play a positive role in coordinating the positions of various parties and facilitating the formulation of a Regulations that accommodates the concerns of all.

Second, rule-making in new polar areas is getting active. Climate change, ice melting and the expansion of human activities are making the polar areas increasingly accessible, which calls for new rules regarding the Arctic and the Antarctic.

In recent years, Antarctic tourism has been growing rapidly, with over 70,000 tourists traveling to the region between 2019 and 2020. This has created a growing impact on environmental protection, safety and scientific research there.

Antarctic Bioprospecting is also emerging, which directly entails economic interests and other complex issues such as the ownership of biological resources and the protection of intellectual property. In light of the purpose and spirit of the Antarctic Treaty, the parties are consulting on how to regulate relevant activities.

The Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) has already established the Ross Sea and South Orkney Marine Protected Areas. Several proposals for Marine Protected Areas are under discussion in the Commission. The establishment of large marine protected areas beyond national jurisdiction is still in its initial exploratory stage, and their efficacy and feasibility remain to be seen. The development of sound research and monitoring plans for marine protected areas is essential for their operation and evaluation. China and Russia are pushing forward discussions on this in the Commission.

Climate change is accelerating sea ice melting in the Arctic. Some say the “White Arctic” is gradually becoming the “Blue Arctic”. This has complex implications for the ecological environment there but at the same time, helps to improve the connectivity conditions in the region. The International Maritime Organization adopted the International Code for Ships Operating in Polar Waters, or the Polar Code to regulate shipping in the Arctic, and the Arctic Council approved three agreements on search and rescue, oil pollution preparedness and response and scientific cooperation. While commercial fishing in the central Arctic Ocean remains infeasible for the time being, relevant countries have taken a precautionary approach and reached the Agreement to Prevent Unregulated High Seas Fisheries in the Central Arctic Ocean. I believe that with joint efforts of all, harmony between man and nature can be preserved in the Arctic.

Third, the influence of “soft law” on sustainable development of the ocean is growing. The global ocean order is not only regulated by the legally binding “hard law”, but also profoundly affected by the “soft law”.

In keeping with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 14 (SDG 14), the international community has been working actively to promote the conservation and sustainable use of the ocean and marine resources. We are taking actions to prevent marine pollution, protect marine environment, tackle ocean acidification, regulate fishing activities and improve capacity building. Efforts are also being made to develop a more ambitious target under the Convention on Biodiversity.

Beyond political commitments, the United Nations and its specialized agencies have also been playing an important role in developing the “soft law” of the sea. The two annual resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly on “Oceans and the Law of the Sea” and “Sustainable Fisheries” are leading and guiding the development of global maritime affairs. This year marks the start of the United Nations Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development, which aims to promote the ocean’s sustainable development through scientific and technological innovation. As the agency responsible for international fisheries, the Food and Agriculture Organization has also adopted several instruments, including the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries to provide guidelines for global fisheries.

Fourth, new maritime issues keep emerging. The international community has never stopped joint efforts to tackle the ocean-related risks and challenges. For example, the International Law Commission is studying the potential legal implications of sea-level rise on baselines, outer limits of maritime zones, maritime delimitation, and the status of islands and rocks, all of which are legal issues most critical and relevant to coastal states. The United Nations Environment Assembly has established an expert group to study marine litter and microplastics and discuss the possibilities of international legislation, enhanced coordination and other actions. The United Nations Open-ended Informal Consultative Process on Oceans and the Law of the Sea has also made a big contribution in this regard, shedding light on a number of emerging issues in recent years, such as the impact of climate change on the ocean, marine litter, ocean acidification and underwater noise. Its work has provided valuable information for policy-making.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The earth is a blue planet we all call home. Guided by the vision of a maritime community with a shared future, it is important that we uphold multilateralism and work together to enhance the ocean governance mechanism and contribute to the harmonious, open, inclusive, clean and beautiful ocean. In light of the new developments in global ocean governance, we should get a keen understanding of the development of the law of the sea, and in particular properly handle the following three issues so as to develop a fair and reasonable global ocean order.

First, we need to strike a balance between ocean protection and sustainable use. Protecting the marine ecological environment bears on the future of mankind. Also, since ancient times, mankind has been exploring the ocean for food and for exchanges across different lands. The ocean has played an irreplaceable role in expanding human knowledge, maintaining food security and promoting connectivity across the world.

It is thus imperative that we work hard to implement SDG 14, balance protection and utilization across marine activities such as fishing, shipping, scientific research, mining, and fully reflect such balance in the BBNJ agreement, international seabed development regulations, and the formulation of Antarctic and Arctic rules, so as to improve ocean governance.

Sustainable development of the ocean must be based on scientific research. The United Nations Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development is a good opportunity to better promote and apply innovative marine technologies and further improve the efficiency of marine protection and utilization.

Second, we need to enhance the synergy and shared benefits of ocean governance mechanisms. Currently there are multiple institutions involved in global ocean governance, and global, regional and sectoral models exist at the same time. For example, within the UNCLOS framework, seabed mining is governed on a global basis, while fisheries in the high seas are regulated in a regional, decentralized manner. The global model is good for unified application of rules and standards, whereas the regional or sectoral models are more professional and more tailored to specific fields and regions.

We should keep to and improve the effective ocean governance mechanisms and models, and enhance information sharing and synergy among them, rather than hastily set up new, all-encompassing mechanisms, which might cause redundancy and even conflicts.

Land and sea are inseparable, and marine pollution such as litter and microplastics mostly comes from the land. We should take coordinated steps to enhance governance of both land and ocean and step up systemic response.

It is the common responsibility of the international community to address global ocean challenges. Likewise, ocean development should benefit all countries. It is important that concrete actions be taken internationally to help developing countries’ address weaknesses in ocean governance and help countries in need effectively meet the challenges of sea-level rise, so that developing countries can benefit more from ocean governance.

Third, we need to properly balance the continuation and development of the law of the sea. UNCLOS codifies state practices established over a long period of time and contains a great number of rules that reflect customary international law. As the outcome of a package deal, UNCLOS meets the reasonable concerns of all parties.

At the same time, with the implementation and evolution of the law of the sea, the delicate balance between the rights and obligations of States Parties could be tipped. For instance, during the BBNJ negotiation, there have been calls for internationalizing the whole EIA process of the high seas. This contradicts the EIA rule established by UNCLOS that the EIA process should be driven by states and the decision should be made by states. Also, the UNCLOS dispute settlement bodies have, in various cases, exercised jurisdiction over matters that are not governed by UNCLOS. There has also been restrictive interpretation of “the maritime delimitation exception” and “the military activities exception”. Such overstretch of jurisdiction has jeopardized the balance between the voluntary procedure and compulsory procedure under the UNCLOS regime.

We should continue to value the fundamental role of state practices in promoting the formation and development of the law of the sea, and avoid undue impact on the traditional order of the law of the sea. For matters not regulated by UNCLOS, the general rules and principles of international law should be followed. International judicial bodies should effectively abide by the principle of state consent, exercise jurisdiction within the mandate of the parties concerned, correctly interpret and apply the Convention, support the will and efforts of the parties to resolve disputes through negotiation and consultation, and facilitate effective dispute resolution in the long run.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

China will always be a contributor to global ocean governance, a facilitator of sustainable ocean development, and a defender of the international order of the ocean. We stand ready to act in the spirit of mutual respect, fairness and justice and win-win cooperation and work with all to participate actively in global ocean governance, build a maritime community with a shared future, and contribute to the sustainable development of the ocean.