著者

栗林 忠男 クリバヤシ タダオ Tadao KURIBAYASHI

雑誌

東洋英和大学院紀要

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2, pp.1-14, 2006-03-15

---

The new international legal order of the ocean has been extensively embodied in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which was adopted at the Third U. N. Conference on the Law of the Sea in 1982 and became effective in 1994. The sovereign right and jurisdiction of a coastal state in its 200-mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and continental shelf has largely expanded under UNCLOS, As a result, many disputes on the maritime boundaries have occurred all over the world among states whose coasts are opposite or adjacent to each other. The East China Sea is not an isolated case. The dispute was provisionally settled between Japan and Korea by the Japan-Korea Continental Shelf (South) Agreement of 1974 with respect to the overlapping areas of their claims in the East China Sea, but no such agreement has been concluded between Japan and China in the same sea. It is provided in UNCLOS, to which both Japan and China are the parties, that the delimitation of the exclusive economic zone or continental shelf between States with opposite or adjacent coasts shall be effected by agreement on the basis of international law, as referred to in Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, in order to achieve an equitable solution (Arts.74 and 83). Since this provision does not offer any clear legal basis for settling maritime boundary disputes, one must have recourse to international customary law and judicial judgments. Two principles of international law have been advocated for the delimitation of maritime boundaries: the equidistance principle and the equitable principle. Relying upon the former, China has claimed application of the natural prolongation theory of its land territory in order to extend its continental shelf up to the Okinawa Trough near the Okinawa Islands. On the other hand, Japan, supporting the latter principle, has consistently attempted to apply the median line, every point of which is equidistant from the nearest points on the baselines from which the breadth of the EEZ of each of the two States is measured. The conflict of the two States' positions has not yet been solved. The judicial opinions of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), as shown in many cases concerning the delimitation of maritime boundaries, seem to indicate that the theory of natural prolongation has not played a decisive role in delimiting the overlapping continental shelves, thus gradually losing its relative importance as a legal principle, and that the use of the median line has instead gained relative weight. International law is, however, in the process of development in this respect, and some tentative arrangement for a joint development of the two States may well be conducive to the peaceful and effective use of the ocean area which is extremely precious for all states facing the South China Sea. Political prudence is strongly required for the governments concerned to get over the difficulties in drawing a concrete and satisfactory line.

著者

川島 慶雄 横川 新 中村 道 芹田 健太郎 栗林 忠男 安藤 仁介

出版者

大阪大学

雑誌

総合研究(A)

巻号頁・発行日

1987

---

本研究は、過去10年にわたる継続的な研究の一環であり、わが国の国際法に関する実践をできるかぎり網羅的に調査・検討し、その成果を体系的に整理・公表することによって、これまで外国の事例に依拠しがちであった日本の国際法研究に新たな資料的裏付けを提供することを目的としている。その際、国際法の対象領域が極めて広いことから、日本の諸事例が国際的にみて特に有用性の高い領域を選択すべきことに留意した。昭和62・63年度の研究においては、すでに完成した「国家承認」及び「国交再開・政府承認」の研究に続き、「国家領域」に関する国際法的実践の分析を手掛けた。本研究では、対日平和条約第2条及び第3条による領土処理の対象となった領域を中心に、現在なおその帰属について周辺諸国と係争中である領域や、第二次大戦終了後に日本に復帰した領域、更に第二次大戦終了前に日本が何らかの形で支配していた領域についても検討を加えている。具体的には、対日平和条約に直接係わる領域として、朝鮮(第2条(a)項関係)、台湾及び澎湖島(同(b)項関係)、千島及び樺太(同(c)項関係)、太平洋諸島(同(d)項関係)、南極地域(同(e)項関係)、新南群島及び西沙群島(同(f)項関係)及び南西・南方諸島(同第3条関係)である。この中には、歯舞、色丹、国後、択捉四島の帰属をめぐるいわゆる北方領土問題、竹島及び尖閣諸島の帰属問題、国際連盟時代に日本の委任統治地域であった太平洋諸島の法的性質の問題、沖縄・小笠原諸島の潜在主権の問題などが含まれている。更に、日本の領土ではないが、日本が統治権を行使した山東半島及び遼東半島の租借地の問題も併せて検討している。本研究は、以上の各領域について、その歴史的経緯や問題点を分析し、今秋「国家領域(領土)-日本における国際法事例研究-」として一連の研究の第3巻を出版する予定である。