P2.

1 Coquia, Analysis of the Archipelago Doctrine in the Law of the Sea, 8 PYIL 30
Essay: discusses the process of the approval of the Archipelagic Doctrine in the Third UN Conference on the law
of the Sea, from proposal to the approval.
Some important points:
 Basic Principles of Archipelagic States:
1. An archipelagic state, whose component islands and other natural features form an intrinsic
geographic, economic and political entity, and historically have or may have been regarded as such
may draw straight baselines connecting the outermost points of the outermost islands and drying
reefs of the archipelago from which the extent of the territorial sea of the archipelagic state is or
may be determined.
2. The waters within the baselines, regardless of their depth or distance from the coast, the seabed
and the subsoil thereof, and the superjacent airspace, as well as all their resources, belong and are
subject to the sovereignty of the archipelagic state.
3. Innocent passage of foreign vessels through the waters of archipelagic State shall be allowed in
accordance with its national legislation, having regard to the existing rules of international law.
Such passage shall be through sealanes as may be designated for the purpose by the archipelagic
State.
 BASIS OF THE PRINCIPLES: the unity of the land, water and people into a single entity. It is for the
purpose of achieving, maintaining, and preserving this unity that an archipelagic State is conceived as one
whose component islands and other natural features form an intrinsic geographic, economic and political
unity, and historically have or may have been regarded as such. This interrelation of geography,
economics, politics, and history is important.
 Conclusion: From the start of the 3rd UN Conference on the law of the sea, the maritime powers objected
to the archipelagic doctrine as it limited the mobility of their naval vessels. Though they eventually
accepted it, this acceptance was half-hearted as they introduced so many limits (i.e. water to land ratio,
max. length of baselines, passage and overflights). Even the regime of the archipelagic waters was treated
differently. While archipelagic principles considered the waters inside the baselines as internal waters, the
opposition coined the word “archipelagic waters” to distinguish the regime over such waters. This
distinction is clear in the Convention which makes the regime of waters, wrt jurisdiction of the
archipelagic states, more liberal than territorial waters.

The archipelagic states also weren’t united during the negotiations. Except for the Philippines, they
abandoned the principle that waters within the baselines (regardless of depth or distances) are internal
waters and subject to the archipelagic state’s sovereignty.

While the archipelagic doctrine is now recognized, the regime of the archipelagic state over its waters has
been curtailed. Sovereignty of the archipelagic state over the enclosed (internal) waters is recognized by
this is limited especially wrt passage and oveflight of military vehicles. The Convention assured the
unimpeded passage of all kinds of vessels. Aircraft in transit passage will observe the rules established by
the International Civil Aviation Organization. During transit passage, foreign ships (including marine
scientific research and hydrographic survey ships) may not carry out any research or survey activities
without the prior authorization of the archipelagic state.