General Assembly Session 59 meeting 56

Mr. Kuzmenkov (Russia)

The Russian Federation attaches great importance to the General Assembly's consideration of cooperation on oceans and the Law of the Sea. This year marks the tenth anniversary of the entry into force of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which is the basis of contemporary relations among States on the marine environment. We fully concur with the positive statements about the Convention that we have heard today, as it is the key international legal instrument in the area of marine activities, establishing a unified regime for cooperation on marine affairs. It reflects in a just and balanced manner the interests of all States and coordinates the various State activities in the area of the sea. We call on States that have not yet acceded to the Convention to do so in the near future. We are convinced that further development of international maritime law should proceed on the basis of compliance with the regime established by the 1982 Convention.

This year was replete with various events and activities relating to the law of the sea. With respect to the activities of the International Seabed Authority, we are impressed by the progress it made in elaborating draft rules for locating and mining polymetallic sulphides and cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts. However, we have doubts about the advisability of giving that body special jurisdiction to protect marine biological resources.

We believe that it would be very useful to develop international cooperation for the adoption of further measures to strengthen oversight by flag States of vessels sailing under their flag.

We share the hopes expressed by many delegations in connection with the establishment of the United Nations Oceans programme, which is aimed at a better coordination of the activities of organizations dealing with ocean affairs and at preventing the duplication that often arises, given the extensive network of organizations and the vast challenges they face.

The Russian Federation welcomes the application of Brazil -- and of Australia too, as we were informed today -- to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf requesting delineation of the limits of their continental shelf. We await with interest the results of the Australian and Brazilian applications to the Commission.

The Russian Federation has also requested the delimitation of the continental shelf for the areas of the Arctic and Pacific Oceans. Currently, the relevant ministries and research institutions of the Russian Federation are working to prepare the additional information required by the Commission, and we are working on resolving bilateral questions that have arisen in connection with the Russian Federation submission.

Given that in the next five years the Commission will receive approximately 10 more such requests, attention should be given to creating the conditions for its smooth and effective functioning, since the Commission's workload is growing considerably.

The Informal Consultative Process on Oceans and the Law of the Sea, whose fifth session took place last spring, has made a major contribution to our discussion. We believe it is important to emphasize that the great potential of the Informal Consultative Process, with the equal participation of governmental experts and representatives of international organizations that deal with this subject, is making it possible to properly resolve complex problems involving cooperation on the world's oceans in order to identify long-term forms of interaction. The Consultative Process should make a specific contribution to the cause of sustainable development. However, we draw attention to counterproductive attempts to expand the mandate of the Informal Consultative Process and give it oversight functions of monitoring States' compliance with their obligations under the 1982 Convention. The General Assembly is doing its job successfully, as are the Meetings of States Parties to the 1982 Convention.

I would like to say a few words about the decisions of the fifty-second session of the Marine Environment Protection Committee of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and about recognizing particularly sensitive Western European sea areas. We think it necessary to emphasize that addressing regulatory lacunae for particularly sensitive sea areas should not result in the restriction of the legitimate rights and interests of other States. That applies in particular to the principle of freedom of navigation. We hope that the proposals of the Working Group, which was established pursuant to the decision of the Committee for the Protection of the Marine Environment in order to improve the IMO's current guidelines to establish these particularly sensitive sea areas, can find answers to those questions, taking into account the legitimate interests of all States.

Another important area for international cooperation on marine affairs is the establishment of a regular process for a global assessment of the state of the maritime environment. The first results of the discussion of that problem have been modest to say the least, and we cannot find them satisfactory. It is crucial to make an additional effort to ensure prompt and complete initiation of its work. In that context, we need to establish a transparent process with a clear structure, while avoiding the duplication of functions of the international organization that already exists for that purpose and the imposition of any additional, untenable financial burdens on States.

One of the key instruments in the area of conservation and management of marine living resources and fish stocks is the 1995 Agreement on the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks. The Russian delegation views with interest the proposal to hold an early 2006 review conference on compliance with the Convention, and we intend to participate actively in the preparatory process and the conference itself.

In conclusion, I thank the Secretary-General for the very professional reports that he has submitted to the General Assembly on this agenda item. The Russian Federation commends the draft resolutions that have been prepared on oceans and the law of the sea and on sustainable fisheries (A/59/L.22 and L.23). I am sure that much credit for that should be given to the coordinators. I take this opportunity to convey to them our sincere recognition for the work they have done. We will support the adoption of the draft resolutions before the General Assembly.

Mr. Kendall (Argentina)

The Argentine delegation associates itself with a statement made yesterday by the representative of Chile, whose views we share. We wish in particular, as other delegations have done, to highlight the commemoration of the tenth anniversary of the entry into force of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which establishes the basic legal framework for activities carried out in the oceans and seas, and for their sustainable development.

Issues covered by the agenda item on oceans and the law of the sea are multifaceted, complex and of great interest to our country. I shall not go into them in any depth, because Chile in its statement has already done so. However, we do wish to express our thanks to the coordinators of the draft resolutions now before us, Mr. Marcos de Almeida of Brazil and Jennifer McIver of New Zealand on the issue of the law of the sea and oceans and Ms. Holly Koehler of the United States on the issue of sustainable fisheries, for the excellent job that they have done. We are also grateful to the Division for Ocean Affairs and Law of the Sea of the Office of Legal Affairs for their assistance throughout the negotiating process. Negotiating texts of such drafts is a complex and lengthy process in view of the range and scope of the issues covered in them. For this reason, for future negotiations, a calendar of meetings should be planned that would not overlap with those of the Sixth Committee.

Lastly, on the question of sustainable fisheries, we wish to refer briefly to the report of the Secretary-General on sustainable fisheries (A/59/298), which in paragraph 151 speaks of principal gaps in the coverage of existing measures adopted by regional fisheries management organizations.

I would like to make the point in this regard that the gaps identified by the Secretary-General in the report are not jurisdictional in nature as the paragraph seems to imply. These gaps have to do with the absence of any established regional fisheries organization designed to implement conservation measures. When such gaps are identified, we need to take into account the causes behind them, such as unresolved sovereignty disputes.