FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W96754414> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W96754414 startingPage "677" @default.
• W96754414 abstract "I. INTRODUCTIONIn December 2007, infamous Uruguayan-flagged longline fishing vessel Viarsa I finally came to rest on shores of Mumbai and is presently standing-by to be demolished and sold as scrap in Indian ship-breaking yards.1 Viarsa I was object of one of longest hot pursuits in history, and one so sensational that it was subject of a widely successful novel by a journalist for Wall Street Journal.3 In August 2003, Australian Fisheries and Customs patrol vessel Southern Supporter chased Viarsa I for twenty-one days over almost 4,000 nautical miles, through an iceberg-strewn stormy Southern Ocean in middle of winter.4 Having detected Viarsa I allegedly violating fisheries regulations in Australia's exclusive economic zone (EEZ), Southern Supporter initiated hot pursuit, finally catching up with Viarsa I in South Atlantic Ocean and escorting her back to Australia.5 Although crew was eventually acquitted of all criminal charges by an Australian jury because evidence of violation was only circumstantial,6 Commonwealth still confiscated vessel as forfeited, pursuant to section 106A of Fisheries Management Act (FMA).7 The owners of vessel challenged this forfeiture in Australian courts, as allowed by FMA.8 Four years later, Federal Court of Western Australia finally dismissed Viarsa I owner's application challenging this forfeiture,9 enabling Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) to initiate dismantling process and bring to a close Viarsa saga.10The saga, however, may yet continue. It remains unclear whether Australia's forfeiture provision, section 106A of FMA, is consistent with international law. Although 1982 United Nations Convention on Law of Sea (LOSC) does not specifically address whether forfeiture is an allowable method of enforcement of a coastal state's fisheries regulations, in its most recent case, Tomimaru, International Tribunal for Law of Sea, (ITLOS), recognized issue without resolving it.12 Presiding ITLOS Judge Rudiger Wolfrum, in his statement to Plenary of United Nations General Assembly in December 2007, described Tomimaru case as raising questions concerning the confiscation of a vessel and relation between national and international rules.13 Judge Wolfrum noted on behalf of ITLOS that, although Law of Sea Convention makes no reference to confiscation provisions, States have provided for measures of confiscation of fishing vessels in their legislation with respect to management and conservation of marine living resources.14 As such, ITLOS is primed to hear further cases regarding confiscation15 measures, rendering Australia's related enforcement actions susceptible to challenge.This Comment argues that vessel forfeiture provisions are a valid mechanism for coastal states to enforce their laws and regulations as long as provisions do not upset balance between flag and coastal states rights established in Part V of LOSC.16 In particular, Australia's forfeiture provision should be interpreted so as to conform with LOSC. Part II of this Comment exposes illegal fishing and depleting fish stocks as a time sensitive worldwide issue and provides an overview of EEZ, legal regime through which coastal states effectively manage fisheries. It then introduces ITLOS cases discussing confiscation issue and lays out Australian forfeiture legislation. Part III analyzes LOSC Article 73 and ITLOS case law to establish that forfeiture is an allowable coastal state enforcement measure, as long as it conforms to certain requirements. Part III then proposes a test to determine legality of forfeiture provisions. Part IV applies this test to Australian statute, concluding that statute can, and should, be interpreted to conform with international law.II. ITLOS CASES HAVE CENTERED AROUND COASTAL STATES' RSHERIES REGULATIONS ENACTED TO ADDRESS DEPLETING FISH STOCKSAlthough many coastal states have adopted forfeiture provisions pursuant to their LOSC EEZ powers, ITLOS cases and LOSC articles demonstrate importance of balance between coastal and flag state rights. …" @default.
• W96754414 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W96754414 creator A5021313769 @default.
• W96754414 date "2008-06-01" @default.
• W96754414 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W96754414 title "The End of the Viarsa Saga and the Legality of Australia's Vessel Forfeiture Penalty for Illegal Fishing in Its Exclusive Economic Zone" @default.
• W96754414 hasPublicationYear "2008" @default.
• W96754414 type Work @default.
• W96754414 sameAs 96754414 @default.
• W96754414 citedByCount "2" @default.
• W96754414 countsByYear W967544142012 @default.
• W96754414 countsByYear W967544142020 @default.
• W96754414 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W96754414 hasAuthorship W96754414A5021313769 @default.
• W96754414 hasConcept C113513581 @default.
• W96754414 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W96754414 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W96754414 hasConcept C2777826127 @default.
• W96754414 hasConcept C505870484 @default.
• W96754414 hasConcept C514101110 @default.
• W96754414 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W96754414 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W96754414 hasConceptScore W96754414C113513581 @default.
• W96754414 hasConceptScore W96754414C17744445 @default.
• W96754414 hasConceptScore W96754414C199539241 @default.
• W96754414 hasConceptScore W96754414C2777826127 @default.
• W96754414 hasConceptScore W96754414C505870484 @default.
• W96754414 hasConceptScore W96754414C514101110 @default.
• W96754414 hasConceptScore W96754414C86803240 @default.
• W96754414 hasConceptScore W96754414C95457728 @default.
• W96754414 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W96754414 hasLocation W967544141 @default.
• W96754414 hasOpenAccess W96754414 @default.
• W96754414 hasPrimaryLocation W967544141 @default.
• W96754414 hasRelatedWork W1545024966 @default.
• W96754414 hasRelatedWork W1720128358 @default.
• W96754414 hasRelatedWork W2004697693 @default.
• W96754414 hasRelatedWork W2013920742 @default.
• W96754414 hasRelatedWork W2077704569 @default.
• W96754414 hasRelatedWork W2181208497 @default.
• W96754414 hasRelatedWork W2312262464 @default.
• W96754414 hasRelatedWork W2319639660 @default.
• W96754414 hasRelatedWork W2341119622 @default.
• W96754414 hasRelatedWork W2535483511 @default.
• W96754414 hasRelatedWork W2596912194 @default.
• W96754414 hasRelatedWork W2726524430 @default.
• W96754414 hasRelatedWork W2794560790 @default.
• W96754414 hasRelatedWork W2891913265 @default.
• W96754414 hasRelatedWork W2974551447 @default.
• W96754414 hasRelatedWork W3132043414 @default.
• W96754414 hasRelatedWork W360449627 @default.
• W96754414 hasRelatedWork W5587430 @default.
• W96754414 hasRelatedWork W751604475 @default.
• W96754414 hasRelatedWork W888034634 @default.
• W96754414 hasVolume "17" @default.
• W96754414 isParatext "false" @default.
• W96754414 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W96754414 magId "96754414" @default.
• W96754414 workType "article" @default.