Unit III — Jurisdiction, Law of the Sea & State Responsibility

“The sea is the free highway of nations. No State may claim sovereignty over the high seas.” — Principle of Mare Liberum (Free Sea), Hugo Grotius (1609)

Jurisdiction — Meaning and Types

Jurisdiction = the legal authority of a State to make, apply, and enforce its laws.

flowchart TD
    J[Jurisdiction] --> LEG[Legislative / Prescriptive]
    J --> EXEC[Executive / Enforcement]
    J --> JUD[Judicial / Adjudicative]
    LEG --> L1[Power to make laws applicable to persons or events]
    EXEC --> E1[Power to enforce - arrest, seize, investigate]
    JUD --> JD1[Power of courts to try and decide cases]

Bases of State Jurisdiction — Five Principles

The S.S. Lotus Principle

S.S. Lotus Case (PCIJ, 1927): In the absence of a prohibitive rule, a State may exercise jurisdiction. The default is permission, not prohibition — a State can legislate for acts outside its territory if there is a jurisdictional link.

Law of the Sea — UNCLOS 1982 Maritime Zones

flowchart LR
    BL[Baseline - Low Water Mark along Coast] --> IW[Internal Waters]
    BL --> TS[Territorial Sea - 12 nm]
    TS --> CZ[Contiguous Zone - 24 nm]
    CZ --> EEZ[Exclusive Economic Zone - 200 nm]
    EEZ --> CS[Continental Shelf - up to 350 nm]
    CS --> HS[High Seas - Beyond 200 nm]
    HS --> AREA[The Area - Deep Seabed - Common Heritage of Mankind]

Zone-by-Zone Rights and Duties

Innocent Passage — Territorial Sea

Art 17–19 UNCLOS: Foreign ships have the right to innocent passage through the territorial sea, provided passage is continuous, expeditious, and not prejudicial to peace, good order, or security.

What is NOT innocent?

• Threat or use of force against the coastal State
• Military exercises or weapons practice
• Collecting intelligence against the coastal State
• Submarines must navigate on the surface and show their flag
• Launching or landing aircraft or military devices
• Loading/unloading cargo in violation of customs laws

Right of Hot Pursuit — Art 111 UNCLOS

flowchart LR
    VP[Foreign vessel violates coastal State law] --> HP[Hot Pursuit begins in coastal zone]
    HP --> C1[Visual or auditory stop signal must be given]
    HP --> C2[Pursuit must be continuous - no gap]
    HP --> C3[Can continue onto High Seas]
    STOP[Pursuit must stop when] --> S1[Vessel enters another State's territorial sea]
    STOP --> S2[Vessel is overtaken and arrested]

State Responsibility — Elements

ILC Articles on State Responsibility (2001): A State commits an internationally wrongful act when conduct (1) is attributable to the State and (2) constitutes a breach of an international obligation.

flowchart TD
    IWA[Internationally Wrongful Act] --> ATT{Attributable to State?}
    ATT -- Yes --> BREACH{Breach of IL obligation?}
    ATT -- No --> NOSR[No State Responsibility]
    BREACH -- Yes --> SR[State Responsibility Arises]
    BREACH -- No --> NOSR
    SR --> CONSEQUENCES[Legal Consequences]
    CONSEQUENCES --> CESS[Cessation - stop the wrongful act]
    CONSEQUENCES --> REP[Reparation]
    REP --> REST[Restitution - restore original position]
    REP --> COMP[Compensation - monetary damages]
    REP --> SAT[Satisfaction - apology, acknowledgment]

Landmark Cases on State Responsibility

Diplomatic Protection

Diplomatic protection = a State’s right to espouse the claim of its national against another State for an internationally wrongful act.

Conditions (Mavrommatis Rule):

1. The injured person must be a national of the protecting State
2. Local remedies must be exhausted first (unless futile or unavailable)
3. Nationality must be continuous from the time of injury to the date of claim

Nottebohm Case (ICJ, 1955): Liechtenstein could not espouse Nottebohm’s claim against Guatemala because he had no genuine link (effective nationality) with Liechtenstein — he naturalised only to avoid war service.

Calvo Clause

A Calvo Clause is a clause in contracts between foreign investors and a host State where the investor agrees to:

1. Submit all disputes to local courts only
2. Waive the right to seek diplomatic protection from their home State

State Succession

Examples: Baltic States after USSR collapse (clean slate) · Goa joining India (1961) · Bangladesh (1971)

✏️ Sample Solved Problem (IRAC Method)

Problem: A foreign fishing vessel is found fishing 150 nautical miles from India’s coast. India seizes the vessel. The vessel’s State argues India has no jurisdiction. Decide. (Frequently asked in KSLU)

I — Issue

Whether India has jurisdiction to seize a foreign fishing vessel operating 150 nautical miles from its coast under UNCLOS 1982.

R — Rule

• UNCLOS, 1982, Art 55–57 — The EEZ extends up to 200 nautical miles from the baseline
• Art 56 — Coastal State has sovereign rights in the EEZ over living resources (fish)
• Art 73 — Coastal State may board, inspect, arrest and judicially proceed against violators in its EEZ
• Fishing without coastal State’s permission in its EEZ = violation of UNCLOS

A — Analysis

150 nm falls squarely within India’s 200 nm EEZ. UNCLOS Art 56 grants India sovereign rights over fish in the entire EEZ — not just 12 nm. Art 73 expressly authorises boarding, arrest, and prosecution of fishing violators. The foreign State confuses territorial sovereignty (limited to 12 nm) with sovereign rights over resources (200 nm) — a fundamental error. The vessel had no authority to fish in India’s EEZ without India’s licence or agreement.

C — Conclusion

India has full jurisdiction to seize the vessel. The seizure is valid under UNCLOS Art 56 and 73. The foreign State’s objection fails. India may prosecute the crew, impose fines, and release the vessel on payment of bond (Art 73(2)).

📄 The full PDF bundle has 5 more problems for Unit III — including the Corfu Channel Case, hot pursuit on high seas, Calvo Clause scenario, state succession problem, and the Nottebohm diplomatic protection test. Get the Notes + Question Bank bundle — ₹199