The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change †Free Samples

Question: Discuss about the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Answer: Introduction The report is based on an analysis of different issues that include apposite as well as relevant international, legal as well as normative frameworks. This will help in analyzing the relevant historical as well as political context in the identification of the issues in the international laws. The appropriate consideration of the major actors as well as interests are necessary in nature, this will help in identifying the roles in the international processes that are relevant. The role of the nongovernmental as well as intergovernmental organizations is required to be analyzed. This will help in understanding the issues in the international organization. The main aim of the report is to analyze the current state of affairs in relation with the international law. The main purpose of the report is to examine the major challenges as well as critiques that are faced by the legal frameworks and the organizations in terms of the implementation and development of the law at hand. The structure of the report includes the discussion on different issues that are faced along with investigation of major interests and actors of international law. The appropriate future prospects have to be discussed and this will help in suggesting the different recommendations related to the legal frame of the convention have to be strict in nature. Issues of United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea emerged in the year 1982 and the said convention helps in making suitable regulations of several issues related to maritime in comprehensive manner (Schmale et al. 2014). This helps in making inclusion of the civil as well as naval navigation rights. The particular convention helps in making appropriate protection of the coasts as well as the environment that is related to marine. The respective convention helps in including the different rights of the non-living as well as living resources along with rights to the research that is specific in nature for maritime (Pereira et al. 2013). The Convention of the United Nations which is related to the Law of Sea is also known as the Sea Treaty Law (Dez Rodrguez et al. 2015). This is the international agreement which has emerged properly from third conference of the UN that was appropriately held as the sea laws. The third conference is named as sea UNCLOS III. These kinds of conferences took place between the years 1973-1982. The UNCLOS renders apposite definition of different responsibilities and rights of nations that are in respect of the use of the oceans of world as well as making suitable guidelines for doing business (Booth 2014). The UNCLOS also emerged for entire management of different natural resources that are related to marine and convention ended in the year 1982 with the help of making appropriate replacements of treaties of the year 1958 (Griggs et al. 2013). It came into effect after one year of the actual fact that Guyana emerged in 60th century that helped in making the entry to convention in year 1994 . In 2015, there are more than 166 countries in the entire convention as well as the European Union also joined convention, however there is uncertainty on the codification of international law that is customary in Convention (Kaczorowska-Ireland 2015). The secretary general of the UN gets apt instrument of ratification as well as accession, the UN makes correct provision for rendering support for holding different meetings by State parties relating to Convention. The UN does not play appropriate role in making implementation of Convention, on the other hand the organizations those who have direct role in making implementations are considered as International Maritime Organization as well as International Whaling Commission. In 1967, there were issues relating to territorial waters in UN and Arvid Pardo of Malta created such issues. In 973, the third conference was held on sea laws of the UN. The entire conference lasted till 1982 and the convention emerged into having suitable force on 16th November 1994 after correct ratification of the treaty that was done by Guyana. Convention was limited to the functioning of few occasions and the limitation is subject to the measurement that is based on the baseline defined (Barros et al. 2014 ). Major Actors as well as Interests In the present years, there are more than 71 countries that are the parties of Convention. Out of these parties, there are 68 parties that are developing in nature and the rest four are industrialized in nature. The developed countries are Australia, Italy, Iceland as well as Germany. Out of 72 parties, there are 8 countries that are land locked and 11 countries that are the archipelagic states and they consider themselves such states as well and rest 31 countries are commonwealth parties in nature. The main decision was taken in the year 1994 on 28th of July and the general assembly made correct adoption of agreement that was particularly based on the implementation factor of the Part XI of Convention. Furthermore, 72 parties have properly signed the convention and the article 8 of the agreement helps in making suitable declaration of the making correct applications of agreement provisionally having effect from 16th November 1994. The Part XI was qualified in nature upon different enactments of the conventions as well as annexes and these were applied in the provisions as well. The second change was seen in the year 1994 in the month of 22nd November wherein the change emerged after a formal gathering that was properly held stuck between the different state parties to Convention. The place of meeting was in New York and the decision was taken in order to properly defer from initial election of Tribunal of the International Judges on the sea laws (Foucault 2013). The entire verdict was made after formal consultation of the non state parties. The majority of the non state parties were industrialized in nature. The imbalance existed between 72 countries properly raised questions relating to the representation in the legal system majority and not in budget of the United Nations. Part XI of the Convention helps in making suitable provisions for regime related to the seabed minerals which is not within territorial waters of the country (Druel and Gjerde 2014). The provision helps in making appropriate establishment of fact that ISA has appropriate authority in order to conduct as well as explore the seabed as well as mining collection as well as distribution of the authority of mining. The primary as well as main argument was by Convention was not favorable in nature for the United States by interests of the security as well as economic interests. It is because that the part that the United Nations made refusal to make apt ratification of UNCLOS. But, there was a appropriate conformity which was provided with remaining provisions of Convention (Caron 2014). In between period of 1983 as well as 1992, United States made accurate acceptance of all convention but part XI was accepted as the international law customary in nature (Hansen et al. 2013). The same convention was established in order to make the establishment an alternative regime for apt principle of different exploitation of the minerals embedded in deep of seabed. There was a suitable agreement that was made between the different nations that were engaged in appropriate mining of the seabed. Appropriate licenses were granted in nature for four consortia international in nature (Newman 2016). Current state of affairs The conference has generated limit in numerous places that were considered on a particular basis that is based on the baseline which is defined in nature. In normal scenario, the baseline of sea makes appropriate and following low water line, but in case of the coastline indented deeply has island that is fringing or unstable in nature. The Convention helps in covering the following areas that are as follows: Internal waters wherein it covers all water as well as different ways that lie on baselines side that is leeward in nature. The country of such state is authorized to set the regulations and administer the use of maritime resources. The far-off vessels possess no such accuracy to make apt channel with water of the country that is internal (Aust 2013). Territorial waters will be within 12 nautical miles from baseline, the respective country is allowed to set laws as well as the policy as well as have the power to make correct usage of resources of maritime (Dixon 2013). The vessels are granted suitable right for making innocent passage within territorial waters allowing the military crafts to properly make a passage known as transit. The terms related to fishing, make use of weapon as well as spying is not considered as the innocent by Convention in nature. The Convention also requires appropriate submarines as well as the vehicles of underwater to make apt display of the flag. The authority to prohibit as well as suspend the innocent passage in specific areas of the seas needs to take suitable permission for the protection of the country. Continental shelf is the process of the persistence that happens naturally or due to territory of land to external edge of the margin or to an apposite distance of 200 nautical miles from baseline, whichever is greater in nature. The continental shelf can exceed for 200 nautical miles that is excepting the end of persistence. However, there is stipulation of fact that distance may never exceed 350 nautical miles from baseline (Ban et al. 2014). Exclusive economic zones are wherein right extension has been made that makes appropriate extension from edge of territorial sea to nautical miles from baseline. Within the area of EEZ, any coastal state, possess the sole and full right of different natural resources. In the sense, the term includes continental shelf territorial area. Contiguous zone is the extra area wherein the limit of marine miles wherein there is 12 nautical miles from base limits of territorial sea which is regarded as the contiguous zone. It is done in case of the infringements that have started in case of terrain of the country and this makes the contiguous areas an area of the hot pursuit. Archipelagic waters is wherein in Part IV, the convention declared right definition of term as the Archipelagic states. The baseline that has to be drawn between the various outer islands as well as outer points is suitable subject to location of the islands that are close to one another. All the water that is inside the entire baseline is known as archipelagic waters. The vessels of the foreign state have suitable rights like the territorial waters. Future Prospects The Seabed Disputes Chamber of International Tribunal for the sea law made issue of the advisory opinion that is related to the obligations that are legal in nature as well as the tasks of State Parties to convention that is in relation to funding of different activities in areas that is in agreement with the Part XI of Convention as well as the agreement of 1994. The suggested opinion was issued by construction response to a formal request made on the International Seabed Authority. With appropriate analysis of the future prospects, recommendations that can be generated are the legal framework related to Convention has to be much stricter in nature as this will help in curbing the different offenses related to the territorial waters. Conclusion Therefore, it can be concluded that there are different issues that has been considered as this helped in identifying the key states that were required in the international processes. A apposite analysis was shaped as this helped in understanding the major actors as well as interests in the Conventions that were created with different countries both developed as well as developing in nature. Apposite analysis was represented as this helped in understanding the current state of affairs in relation to the international law along with suitable challenges that were required in analyzing the future prospects of the Conventions. References Aust, A., 2013.Modern treaty law and practice. Cambridge University Press. Ban, N.C., Bax, N.J., Gjerde, K.M., Devillers, R., Dunn, D.C., Dunstan, P.K., Hobday, A.J., Maxwell, S.M., Kaplan, D.M., Pressey, R.L. and Ardron, J.A., 2014. Systematic conservation planning: a better recipe for managing the high seas for biodiversity conservation and sustainable use.Conservation Letters,7(1), pp.41-54. Barros, V.R., Field, C.B., Dokke, D.J., Mastrandrea, M.D., Mach, K.J., Bilir, T.E., Chatterjee, M., Ebi, K.L., Estrada, Y.O., Genova, R.C. and Girma, B., 2014. Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability-Part B: regional aspects-Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Booth, K., 2014.Law, Force and Diplomacy at Sea (Routledge Revivals). Routledge. Caron, D.D., 2014. When law makes climate change worse: rethinking the law of baselines in light of a rising sea level. Dez Rodrguez, J.J., Oliver, C., Vicente, L. and Ahumada Cervantes, B., 2015. Addressing strategic environmental assessment of Mexico's transition towards renewable energy. InAEIPRO 2015: International Congress on Project Engineering(pp. 1121-1132). Dixon, M., 2013.Textbook on international law. Oxford University Press. Druel, E. and Gjerde, K.M., 2014. Sustaining marine life beyond boundaries: Options for an implementing agreement for marine biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.Marine Policy,49, pp.90-97. Foucault, M., 2013.Politics, philosophy, culture: Interviews and other writings, 1977-1984. Routledge. Griggs, D., Stafford-Smith, M., Gaffney, O., Rockstrm, J., hman, M.C., Shyamsundar, P., Steffen, W., Glaser, G., Kanie, N. and Noble, I., 2013. Policy: Sustainable development goals for people and planet.Nature,495(7441), pp.305-307. Hansen, M.C., Potapov, P.V., Moore, R., Hancher, M., Turubanova, S., Tyukavina, A., Thau, D., Stehman, S.V., Goetz, S.J., Loveland, T.R. and Kommareddy, A., 2013. High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change.science,342(6160), pp.850-853. Hughes, S., Chu, E.K. and Mason, S.G., 2017. Introduction. InClimate Change in Cities(pp. 1-15). Springer, Cham. (Hughes, Chu and Mason 2017) Kaczorowska-Ireland, A., 2015.Public international law. Routledge. Newman, T.P., 2016. Tracking the release of IPCC AR5 on Twitter: Users, comments, and sources following the release of the Working Group I Summary for Policymakers.Public Understanding of Science, p.0963662516628477. Pereira, H.M., Ferrier, S., Walters, M., Geller, G.N., Jongman, R.H.G., Scholes, R.J., Bruford, M.W., Brummitt, N., Butchart, S.H.M., Cardoso, A.C. and Coops, N.C., 2013. Essential biodiversity variables.Science,339(6117), pp.277-278. Schmale, J., Shindell, D., von Schneidemesser, E., Chabay, I. and Lawrence, M., 2014. Air pollution: clean up our skies.Nature,515(7527).