Kulyk M. Ways of optimization of international law on maritime delimitation

The dissertation is examining problems of improving the legal basis and of strengthening the effectiveness of methods of maritime delimitation. The body of law which governs the delimitation process has been evolved through codification and progressive development of the relevant international practice and treaty provisions with substantial contributions from the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice and some ad hoc arbitral tribunals. The overall analysis of the available State practices and major decisions of the relevant international jurisdictional bodies proves the insufficient degree of consistent interpretation and application of the relevant rules of international law on maritime delimitation. Hence, known delimitation models lack appropriate comprehensive recognition to become part of the customary international law or to be reflected in the provisions of relevant universal legal instruments. Through the theoretical and modeling approach and on the basis of provided analyses of international legal instruments, orders of international courts and decisions of arbitrary tribunals as well as of the available treaty practice the author suggested his approach to the establishment of delimitation model, followed with appropriate legal and mathematic explanations, and submitted proposals on possible development of international legal rules governing extension of claimed and delimited maritime zones. Ever since the aim of achieving an equitable solution has become the principle of customary international law applicable to all maritime delimitation and reflected in the provisions of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea the question remained against what parameters or criteria to assess the equity of particular delimitation line. In view of the author, equity of delimitation should be considered as reflection of equal rights of parties (granted by law chances) to realize their basic opportunities, which in itself are not automatically equal. The role of proportionality should be elevated beyond a mere test to evaluate the equitableness of a result obtained after other methods of delimitation have been applied. But it is incorrectly to understand proportionality as ratio between lengths of relevant coast lines or baselines of two or more States in a disputed area whose maritime zones have to be delimited and the area of maritime space to be allocated to each of the parties by the delimitation (as it is often interpreted by the international law scholars and in the relevant contemporary practice) since there is no unambiguous mutual interdependence between these parameters. Principle of proportionality should be understood as the ratio between the sizes of overlapping claims in the relevant zone, measured on the basis of applicable rules of international maritime law, and parts of maritime spaces, which participating states acquire as the result of delimitation. This approach opens new possibilities for codification in maritime delimitations, narrowing the room for subjective court or arbitrary decisions, and provides basic criteria for evaluation of previous and current international practice on these issues.