Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Assistant Professor of Public International Law, Allameh Tabatabaei University, Tehran, Iran

2 Department of International Law, Islamic Azad University of Bushehr, Bushehr, Iran

3 Economic and Private Law. Facualty of Law and Political science. Allameh Tabatabayi University. Iran. Tehran.

4 Department of Private Law, Faculty of Law & Political Science, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran.

10.22034/irlsmp.2021.137007

Abstract

The conflict between sovereignty over parts of the sea and the necessity of "innocent passage" concept has been the most contentious field in the law of the sea." Two hypotheses in this field have collided in the history of international law of the sea. The first hypothesis is that every human possesses the seas together. "Navigation" and other operations are also allowed for all. Under the excuse of owning the sea, no state has the right to restrict other people's use. However, the second theory says that the sea is owned by someone who controls part of it, and its use can be limited. In international law, the "innocent passage" by foreign vessels from the territorial sea of a country is widely recognized. However, in some territories, the requirements for the "innocent passage" of military vessels include the need for prior notice or the coastal state's permission. Most forces, led by the US, believe in absolute freedom of the military vessel's "innocent passage." However, most Asian countries, including Iran, assume that they can prior notification or approval for a foreign military vessel passage. This activity was often resisted in operational as well as diplomatic phases by naval forces such as the United States.

Keywords

Books

Dupuy, R. J., & Vignes, D. (Eds.). (1991). A handbook on the new law of the sea. 2 (1991) (Vol. 2). Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Klein, N. (2005). Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (Vol. 39). Cambridge University Press
 O'Connell, D. P. (1975). The influence of law on sea power. Manchester University Press.
O'Connell, D. P., & Shearer, I. A. (1982). The international law of the sea, v. 1-2.
Roach, J. A., & Smith, R. W. (2012). Excessive maritime claims. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Selden, J. (2004). Of the Dominion, or, Ownership of the Sea (Vol. 1). The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd.
United Nations International Law Commission. (1978). Yearbook of the International Law Commission 1978, Vol II, Part 1. United Nations.
Yearbook of the international Law Commission, 1952, Vol II, p 42.
Yearbook of /CL, 1954, Vol II, UN, NY, USA, p 161.
Articles
Allott, P. (1983). Power Sharing in the Law of the Sea. Am. J. Int'l L., 77, 1.
Ballester, G. R. (2014). The Right of Innocent Passage of Warships: A Debated Issue. Rev. Der. PR, 54, 87.
Chuah, J. "Brownlie: Principles of Public International Law." LAW TEACHER 34, no. 2 (2000):
Churchill, R. R., & Lowe, A. V. (1999). The law of the sea. Manchester University Press.
de Groot, Hugo. "Mare libervm sive De ivre qvod Batavis competit ad indicana commercia dissertatio./[By Hugo de Groot]."
Ebrahimi, H., & Abolghasem, A. (2020). Disarmament, Weapons Control and Defense Diplomacy in the Views and Thoughts of Imam Khomeini. The Iranian Review for Law of the Sea and Maritime Policy, 1(1), 209-239.
Fenn, P. T. (1926). Origins of the theory of territorial waters. The American Journal of International Law, 20(3), 465-482.
Fitzmaurice, G. (1959). Some Results of the Geneva Conference on the Law of the Sea. Part I. The Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone and Related Topics. The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 8(1), 73-121.
Florsheim, B. L. (1970). Territorial Seas-3000-Year-Old Question. J. Air L. & Com., 36, 73.
Franckx, E. (1987). The USSR position on the innocent passage of warships through foreign territorial waters. J. Mar. L. & Com., 18, 33.
Hakapää, K. (2015). Innocent Passage. The Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law [www. mpepil. com].
Hatschek, J. An Outline of International Law, trans. C.
Hebbar, A. (2020). The innocent passage under UNCLOS: An exploration of the tenets, trials, and tribulations. In Maritime law in motion (pp. 227-256). Springer, Cham.
Heintschel von Heinegg, W. (1998). The Law of Naval Warfare and International Straits. International Law Studies, 71(1), 14.
Hinzen, K. (2016). The Affect of Privately Contracted Armed Security Personnel on Navigational Rights in the Territorial Sea of Foreign States (Master's thesis, UiT Norges arktiske universitet).
Karsten, N. (2009). Distinguishing Military and Non-military Superiors: Reflections on the Bemba Case at the ICC. Journal of International Criminal Justice, 7(5).
Kleemola-Juntunen, P. (2017). The right of innocent passage: the challenge of the proliferation security initiative and the implications for the territorial waters of the Åland Islands. The Future of the Law of the Sea, 239.
Lapidoth, R. (1974). Freedom of navigation-its legal history and its normative basis. J. Mar. L. & Com., 6, 259.
Lapidoth, R. (1975). Freedom of Navigation, with Special Reference to International Waterways in the Middle East. Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Leonard Davis Institute for International Relations.
Limpitlaw, E. M. (2001). Is International Environmental Law Waterproof-The Impact of Technology on the Oceans as a Commons. Syracuse J. Int'l L. & Com., 29, 185.
Momtaz, J., Ranjbarian, A, (1996). A Dual Interpretation of the Convention on the Law of the Sea, Maritime Law of Iran and the US Protest. Law & Political science (35), 89-113. 
McNees, Richard B. "Freedom of Transit Through International Straits." J. Mar. L. & Com. 6 (1974): 175.
Ngantcha, F. (1990). The right of innocent passage and the evolution of the international law of the sea. The current regime of 'free' navigation in coastal waters of third states.
Pirtle, C. E. (2000). Military uses of ocean space and the law of the sea in the new millennium. Ocean Development & International Law, 31(1-2), 7-45.
Ranjbarian, A., Seyrafi, S. (2013). An Examination of Iran’s Baseline in the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman and the Protest of Other Countries. International Law Review, 30(48), 35-64. 
Ranjbarian, A., Seyrafi, S. (2015). Iran and the United States Freedom of Navigation Program. International Law Review, 32(52), 121-158. doi: 10.22066/cilamag.2015.15750
Rothwell, D. R. (1992). Coastal State sovereignty and innocent passage: The voyage of the Lusitania Expresso. Marine Policy, 16(6), 427-437.
Schachte Jr, W. L. (1990). The History of the Territorial Sea from a National Security Perspective. Terr. Sea J., 1, 143.
Seify, B. (2020). The Legitimacy of Using Naval Mines Technology during Peacetime in the Light of Developments in International Law of the Seas. The Iranian Review for Law of the Sea and Maritime Policy, 1(1), 175-188.
Shackleton-Fergus, L. (1978). Transit Rights and Maritime Strategy.
Shelton, D., & Rose, G. (1977). Freedom of Navigation: The Emerging International Regime. Santa Clara L. Rev., 17, 523.
Ton, A. D. (2016). Innocent Passage of Warships: International Law and the Practice of East Asian Littoral States. Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy, 1(2), 210-243.
 
Laws and Convention
Convention on territorial sea 1958) TSC (
Law of Marine Areas of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the Persian Gulf and the Oman Sea.
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)
 
Cases
Corfu Channel (U.K. v. Alb.), 1949 l.CJ. 4 (Apr. 9).
Marianna Flora, 24 U.S. 1 US Supreme Court (1825)
S.S. Lotus (Fr. v. Turk.), 1927 P.C.IJ. (ser. A,) No. 10, at 18 (Sept. 7)
 
Others
Barbara Rhodes, Who "Owns" the North Pole? in 90? NORTH, http:// members.tripod.com/90north/northpole.htm (last visited Apr. 24, 2006)
Declaration of the Islamic Republic of Iran on the signing of Convention on Law of the Sea.
Detailed accounts of this incident are given in the Soviet press (Izvestia, 23 March 1986, p 3, cols 5-7); the international tiered Tribune, 13-l 4 February 1988, p 1.
ILC draft articles on the territorial sea.
Law of the Sea Bulletins, No.43 (2000).
League of Nations Conference for the Codification of International Law, Rosenne (ed), Vol2, Oceana Publications, NY, USA, pp 283-293.
Momtaz, J. (2004). Class Lectures on the Law of the Sea, M.Sc. in International Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Tehran
Official Records of UNCLOS I, Vol 2, p 130.
Proposal to that extent was introduced: see US proposal, UN Dot A/CONF.13/C.l/ L.43 (25 March 1958), 3 UNCLOS I, 1958, p 222.
Remarks by the representative of Iran, Official Records, Vol XVII, UN, NY, USA.
Remarks by the representative of the Philippines, Official Records, Vol XVI, D 51.
Remarks by the representative of Romania.
Remarks by the representative of United Arab Emirates,
Reply of the United States to the Questionnaire of the Preparatory Committee, League of Nations Dot C.74.M.39.1929.V (L.N. Pub. No. 1929.V.2) pp 66 and 73.
Reply of the USSR to the Questions Drawn up by the Preparatory Committee, League of Nations Dot C.74 (b). M.39 (b). l929.V (L.N. Pub. 1929. V.13) p 3.
Summary Records of the 307th Meeting, Yearbook of International Law Commission, Vol 1, 1955, p 145, UN DOC A/CN.4/ SER.All955.
Statement of France, Official Records, Vol XVII, UN, NY, USA, p 241.
Statements of Cape Verde, Iran, Oman, Romania and Sudan, Bulletin of the Law of the Sea, No 1, September 1983.
The rejection of Article 24 of the draft convention and the adoption of the Convention (Without the original Article 24 (occurred at one and the same session on 27 April 1958.
Tunkin, ‘The Geneva Conference on the Law if the Sea’, International Affairs, No 7,1985.
United Nations Press Release, U.N. Doc. SEA/494 (Apr. 30, 1982)