I move: That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
In anticipation of getting to Committee Stage today I am circulating a very small amendment to the last line of the Bill. It concerns the commencement date in the Bill of 1 March which of course is now past and the amendment merely seeks to delete "March" and substitute "September". I take it that when we come to Committee Stage that will be acceptable. I wanted to give the House full notice of it before I started my Second Stage reading.
On 16 June last I informed this House that I hoped to present to it legislation extending the breadth of Irish territorial waters from three to 12 nautical miles. Accordingly, it is with great satisfaction that I now address the House on the Maritime Jurisdiction (Amendment) Bill, 1987, which gives effect to this proposal.
As Deputies will notice, the Maritime Jurisdiction (Amendment) Bill, 1987, is a very short piece of legislation containing only three sections but this fact should not be allowed to take from its importance. Let me, therefore, explain to the House the purpose and effects of this legislation.
First, Deputies should be aware of what this legislation does not affect. It does not affect the coastal State's exclusive sovereign rights over the natural resources of the seabed and subsoil of the submarine areas known as the continental shelf. That should clarify the matter for the House. This is a natural feature, being a prolongation of the land under the sea out from the Irish coast namely, the Atlantic ocean. Its outer limits are irregular, but Ireland is fortunate to have the extensive shelf which can stretch in some areas up to approximately 450 miles from our coast.
Ireland's sovereignty in respect of any minerals to be found on the continental shelf and the exploration and exploitation of them, has already been established in accordance with international law to the outer limit of the continental margin, so that any increase in the national territory will not affect the State's entitlement to these rights. The processes used for the recovery of such natural resources, for example, offshore installations, are governed by the Minerals Development Act, 1940, the Petroleum and Other Minerals Development Act, 1960 and the Continental Shelf Act, 1968, and likewise will not be affected by the Bill currently before the House.
Similarly, with regard to living resources, Deputies will be aware that the fisheries regime is governed by the Common Fisheries Policy within the Community. An extension of the national territory will not affect that regime. Irish fishing vessels will continue to have exclusive rights within six miles from the baseline or shore. Voisinage arrangements, that is, a reciprocal sharing with close neighbours, in respect of Northern Ireland fishermen will continue to be applied, and the rights of other Community countries in areas beyond six miles and up to 200 miles from the coast will remain unchanged.
Deputies are probably conversant with the current fisheries regime. Five of our EC partners are entitled to fish in our six to 12 mile area. However, they may only fish for certain species, for example, mackerel and herring. This was most recently laid down by Council Regulation (EEC) No. 170/83 of 25 January 1983. Meanwhile, in the 12 to 200 mile area all fishing is governed by the Common Fisheries Policy and the regulations made under it. Within the framework of these regulations the total allowable catches — tacs — and quotas of each member state are reviewed annually on the basis of the best available scientific advice and evidence. Again, this remains unaffected.
The responsibility for patrolling up to 200 miles, which is the extent of the Irish exclusive fishery zone, rests with the Irish naval service. It will continue to perform this task.
Neither does this legislation deal with or affect the State's right under international law to an exclusive economic zone. Such a zone, a new concept under international law, will give extensive jurisdiction not only over living and nonliving resources, but over all matters relating to the sea within 200 nautical miles from the coast. This zone is to be distinguished from the continental shelf which gives the coastal State sovereign rights over the natural resources it contains, particularly minerals, and the exclusive fishery zone which grants the coastal State extensive jurisdiction over living resources in the waters up to 200 nautical miles from the coast. Separate legislation will probably be required to establish an exclusive economic zone and to protect and advance our interests therein. Again, this is a matter to be distinguished from the current legislation before the House which extends the breadth of the territorial seas.
A fourth issue not affected in any way by the current legislation is the position of the State with respect to the national territory. The national territory consists of the whole island of Ireland, its islands and the territorial seas. The purpose of this Bill is to extend the breadth of the territorial seas from three to 12 nautical miles. In doing so, this legislation is subject to Articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution and, therefore, will not in any way affect the State's position under the Constitution in respect of Northern Ireland and the waters off its coast.
Having indicated the areas not affected by the present legislation, I now come to consider the concept of the "territorial sea" and the matters that come within its ambit. The law governing the uses of the sea and its resources is a complicated and difficult subject, as it is made up of a number of different principles which may, on occasion, even appear contradictory.
The most long-standing, fundamental and, until recent times, over-riding principle is that of the freedom of the high seas, which has been jealously guarded for centuries against attempts to erode it. Nevertheless, it could never be regarded as an absolute freedom. Coastal states, in the interest of their own sovereignty and security, succeeded in placing limits on this concept by the introduction, as early as the seventeenth century, of an entitlement to an area of coastal waters. Therefore, it is now an accepted principle of international law that the sovereignty of a state extends beyond its land territory and its internal waters to a belt of sea adjacent to its coast. That belt of sea is described as the territorial sea.
This principle was recognised by Ireland and incorporated into Article 2 of the Constitution, which states that "The national territory consists of the whole island of Ireland, its islands and the territorial seas". Within this belt the coastal State is entitled to exercise sovereign rights. Thus, as Deputies will note, there appears to be a contradiction between, on the one hand, the freedom of the seas for all states and, on the other, the right of all coastal states to a territorial sea. These conflicting rights are partly reconciled in the right of innocent passage for all ships in the territorial sea.
The question of the breadth of the territorial sea has exercised the minds of international lawyers for quite some time. By the end of the 18th century, a territorial sea of three nautical miles was generally accepted and applied by most states. This is often referred to as the "cannon shot rule", based on the premise that the range of a cannon fired from the coast was approximately three nautical miles.
However, within the last hundred years a small number of coastal states began to claim territorial seas of greater and differing breadths. The difference in practice gave rise to many concerns with respect to the coastal state's jurisdiction and the rights of other states which were consequently affected. Since the beginning of this century, numerous international conferences have been held in an attempt to rationalise and codify these unilateral actions by states. There was considerable resistance to the claims of coastal states in respect of the breadth of their territorial seas. Much of this resistance came from those states with large seafaring commercial enterprises and interests. In fact, this lack of agreement persisted to the extent that as late as 1958, at the first UN Conference on the Law of the Sea, sharp differences were revealed between those states which sought to secure maintenance of the three mile limit and those which desired wider limits. In the event, the Geneva Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone, 1958, is silent on the breadth of the territorial sea.
Many efforts were made since 1958, at Law of the Sea Conferences, to achieve agreement based on the practice of states in this regard. These conferences also had as their ultimate objective the creation of an international legal regime to govern the sea in all its aspects and to thus clarify the rights and duties of all states. It was not until very recently, 1982 in fact, that a Convention was finally concluded which codifies the general practice of states in respect of the breadth of their territorial sea and includes a large number of provisions covering a wide range of issues relating to the sea and its resources.
The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, which was the result of the lengthy third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea, was adopted in 1982 and signed by 155 states, including Ireland. Although not yet in force (it has been ratified by 34 states and requires 60 ratifications to bring it into force), it is now generally regarded by the international community as incorporating the international law governing the seas and, in particular, as codifying, inter alia, the breadth of the territorial sea.
Article 3 of the Convention provides that "every State has the right to establish the breadth of its territorial sea up to a limit not exceeding 12 nautical miles . . . ". By November 1987, 103 states had established a territorial sea taking advantage of this rule. Of the European Community's 11 coastal states, only one other (Denmark) still adheres to the traditional three nautical mile territorial sea, Belgium being our most recent Community partner to extend its territorial sea to 12 nautical miles.
The purpose of the Bill at present before the House is to give effect to this international law and practice. As a consequence, it is necessary to amend the Principal Act in this area, the Maritime Jurisdiction Act, 1959, which states in section 3 that the breadth of the territorial seas shall be three nautical miles from the nearest point of the baseline. Section 2 (1) of the Bill proposes that the 1959 Act be amended so that the breadth of the territorial seas shall now be 12 nautical miles from the nearest point of the baseline.
The normal baseline, in accordance with international law, is the low water line along the coast of the mainland, or of any island or on any low tide elevation situated wholly or partly at a distance not exceeding the breadth of the territorial sea from the mainland or an island. Where the coastline is deeply indented as it is off our southern, western and north-western coasts, straight baselines may be drawn, joining appropriate points along the coast. Section 4 of the 1959 Act reflects this rule and provides that the Government may, by order, prescribe straight baselines. The Maritime Jurisdiction Act (Straight Baselines) Order, 1959, accordingly established straight baselines for Ireland from Carnsore Point around to Malin Head. It is now necessary to amend section 4 of the 1959 Act to ensure that it corresponds with the proposed extension of the breadth of the territorial seas. This is done in section 2 (2) of the Bill.
Section 2 (3) of the Maritime Jurisdiction (Amendment) Bill, 1987, is designed to ensure that for the purposes of all legislation, both pre-and post-1959, the territorial seas shall be taken to be 12 nautical miles from baselines.
In accordance with section 3 of the Bill, it is proposed that this legislation will come into effect on a particular date in 1988. The international community and, in particular, those navigating in our waters can thus be made aware in advance of this most important step by Ireland. As Deputies will note, it is necessary to amend section 3 (3) to provide for a later date than the section currently proposes. I have circulated an amendment to this date at 1 September of this year, instead of March as in the draft Bill before the House.
This legislation will, of course, have far-reaching consequences. The immediate effect of the extension of the breadth of the territorial sea is to increase the national territory. Such an extension of state sovereignty also includes the air space over the territorial sea, as well as its bed and subsoil. As a result, the area of application and effect of all legislation is also correspondingly increased.
With the enactment of this legislation, Ireland's customs, fiscal, sanitary and immigration laws and regulations will extend to a 12 nautical mile territorial sea. It must be noted, however, that all states operate within the international community — a central aspect of which is the need for co-operation and interdependence among all states — and states must therefore conduct their relations in accordance with international law. Consequently, while a state has extensive rights over its territorial sea, these rights are subject to corresponding duties.
Under international law, the ships of all States are entitled to innocent passage through the territorial sea. Passage is innocent so long as it is "not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of a coastal state". The coastal state is under a duty not to hamper innocent passage through its territorial sea.
Foreign ships exercising the right also have certain duties; for example, laws and regulations enacted by the coastal state in the interests of safety of navigation must be complied with. Where passage is considered to be non-innocent, the coastal state is entitled to take the necessary steps in its territorial sea to prevent such passage. The coastal state is also entitled to suspend innocent passage temporarily in specified areas of its territorial sea where it is essential for the protection of its security.
As Deputies may recall, I mentioned earlier that the ships of all states are entitled to innocent passage through the territorial sea. This includes both warships and submarines, but the law also requires that submarines and other underwater vessels navigate on the surface and show their flag. Further, submarines and warships must stow all weapons and comply with such other laws and regulations of the coastal state concerning passage through the territorial sea, as are in compliance with international law. If a warship or submarine fails to comply, the coastal state may require it to leave its territorial sea immediately.
All states have the obligation to protect and preserve the marine environment. In this respect, all states are required firstly to prevent, reduce and control pollution of the marine environment when exercising their sovereign rights to exploit their natural resources. Secondly, the coastal state has the exclusive right to permit, regulate and control dumping in its territorial sea. Consequently, no dumping may take place without its express prior approval. Thirdly, the coastal state is entitled to require all vessels to comply with its laws and regulations on the prevention of marine pollution. Fourthly, all states are required to prevent, reduce and control pollution of the marine environment from or through the atmosphere and from land based sources. As Deputies will be aware, in respect of these last three points, Ireland has ratified the Paris Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution from Land Based Sources, 1974, the Oslo Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping from Ships and Aircraft, 1972, and the London Dumping Convention, 1972. The Dumping at Sea Act, 1981, gives effect to the provisions of the London and Oslo Conventions. The Water Pollution Act, 1977, and the Air Pollution Act, 1987, give effect to the Paris Convention.
An important part of the duty of a state in this respect is to co-operate with and notify other states of any imminent or actual danger and further, in coming to any decision, states must take due consideration of the views of any states which may be adversely affected by reason of their geographical position.
On the question of marine scientific research, coastal states have the exclusive right to regulate, authorise and conduct marine scientific research in their territorial sea. Any such marine scientific research can be conducted only with the express consent of and under the conditions set forth by the coastal state. If a foreign ship engages in any research or survey activities in the territorial sea without such consent, it is in breach of the law in this regard and can be required to stop such activities immediately and to leave the territorial sea.
In conclusion, I would like to stress that Ireland has always been willing to play its part in the international community, and will continue to do so. In this instance, the Bill at present before the House gives effect to a very important aspect of international law which, at the same time, is of immense benefit to Ireland. It gives effect to a right which can be claimed by every coastal state — a right to extend the state's sovereignty throughout a territorial sea of 12 nautical miles. This step has already been taken by a large number of states on all five continents of the world. This Bill proposes that Ireland do likewise.
Let me recall briefly to this House the effects of this legislation. It extends the breadth of Ireland's territorial seas from three to 12 nautical miles, and accordingly extends the national territory. It gives Ireland increased sovereignty and increased control over the sea that surrounds her, which is one of our most important natural resources from the economic, tourist, scientific and security points of view. This House will appreciate that by giving effect to this aspect of international law, the Maritime Jurisdiction (Amendment) Bill, 1987, is increasing the options and benefits, and ultimately the sovereign control, of this State.
I commend the Bill to the House.
