Environmental Protection of the Black Sea: A Legal Perspective

Abstract

This article critically analyzes the present environmental protection regime of the Black Sea. A summary is presented of the peculiarities of this sea and the most important causes of pollution. After outlining the legal instruments imposed by states to ensure the preservation of the Black Sea’s marine environment, the article then focuses on the crucial issue of the specific shortcomings of the legal ‘toolkit’. Many of these shortcomings are common to the protection regimes of most other maritime areas (e.g., the principle of relative effect of treaties, or the flexible, lightly constraining character of some of the rules formulated within associated legal instruments). However, a number of other difficulties arise due to the particular conditions in the area (e.g., the limited cooperation among coastal states for protection against pollution, the lack of funds and the difficulties in reconciling the interests of stakeholders who utilize the sea). These issues are examined and analyzed to justify the proposals made in this article for improved environmental protection of the Black Sea.

Notes

[1] This geographical feature is also recognized by law. For the legal definition of ‘enclosed seas’, see Article 122 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Without prescribing a special regime for enclosed seas, the UNCLOS recommends to the coastal states of enclosed seas to cooperate in some fields, such as the protection and preservation of the marine environment (Article 123). Thus, the legal concept of the enclosed sea seems to conciliate territorial expansion with the limited size of some marine areas.

[2] Three treaties have been concluded in the past between the Soviet Union and Turkey concerning, respectively, the territorial sea boundary (agreement of 1973), the continental shelf boundary (agreement of 1978) and the exclusive economic zone boundary (exchange of notes of 1987). After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Russian Federation and Ukraine informed Turkey that they succeeded to the Soviet Union in the treaties concerning the continental shelf and the exclusive economic zone boundaries. In 1997, Georgia and Turkey concluded a protocol confirming the maritime boundaries between them in the Black Sea resulting from the treaties previously concluded between the Soviet Union and Turkey. The same year, Turkey and Bulgaria concluded an agreement for the delimitation of the territorial sea, the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf up to the existing Turkish‐Russian Federation continental shelf‐exclusive economic zone boundary. For further information, see http://www.un.org (law of the sea).

[3] See Application to the International Court of Justice, 13 September 2004, Maritime Delimitation in the Black Sea (Romania v. Ukraine). ⟨http://www.icj-cij.org⟩.

[4] Until 1991 there were four coastal states in the Black Sea: Bulgaria, the USSR, Romania and Turkey. After the disintegration of the USSR, the number of coastal states changed: apart form Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey, Russia (took the place of the USSR) and Ukraine and Georgia were added to the list.

[5] For the full text of the Framework Convention and its Protocols, see http://www.blacksea-environment.org/; for further analysis, see Oral, (forthcoming).

[6] According to the International Court of Justice ‘international agreements may take a number of forms and be given a diversity of names’ (Case Concerning Maritime Delimitation and Territorial Questions between Qatar and Bahrain (Qatar v. Bahrain), Judgment 11 June 1994, Jurisdiction and admissibility, p. 121, §22).

[7] See the Communication of the European Commission for environmental cooperation in the Danube and the Black Sea regions (COM (2001) 615 final).