Legal Rules Applicable to the Equitable Maritime Boundaries Delimitation in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea: An Egyptian Perspective Ibrahim Ahmed EL Diwany United Nations – The Nippon Foundation of Japan Fellowship Programme 2018 Disclaimer The views expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations, The Nippon Foundation of Japan, The Government of the Arab Republic of Egypt or Utrecht University. Abstract The Eastern Mediterranean Sea Basin is a semi-enclosed Sea bordered by ten States. The growing economic interests in the basin natural resources have motivated the basin States to claim jurisdiction over its exclusive economic zones and continental shelves. The absence of defined maritime boundaries, in this confined basin with numerous islands, have generated contesting claims between basin States on the overlapping undelimited maritime areas. The majority of maritime boundaries in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea are not delimited yet. Only four maritime boundaries, out of seventeen potential boundaries, were delimited by agreements. The delimitation of maritime boundaries in the basin is vital. It establishes legal certainty to maritime boundaries that enables basin States to exercise safely their sovereignty rights for exploring and exploiting their natural resources in their maritime areas. The research paper aims to identify the legal rules and principles governing maritime boundaries delimitation in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea Basin and its application on the delimitation of Egypt’s maritime boundaries with opposite and adjacent States. It explores in the first part the “equidistance/special circumstances” rule applicable for the delimitation of the territorial sea, the “agreement/equitable result” rule applicable for the delimitation of the extended maritime zones and the “equidistance/relevant circumstances” rule considered in recent jurisprudence. Subsequently, it assesses the “three-stage” delimitation methodology and the role of relevant circumstances to achieve an equitable delimitation solution. It examines in the second part the rules and principles of maritime delimitation applicable to the delimitation of Egypt’s maritime boundaries with opposite and adjacent States; Turkey, Greece, Palestine, Israel and Libya. The anticipated boundary line with Turkey is the median line between both States coasts. However, the expected boundary line with Greece is the “adjusted” median line due to the effects of the Greek islands on the delimitation line, which is considered as a relevant circumstance, that requires adjusting the median line to achieve an equitable delimitation. The anticipated eastern boundary line with Palestine and Israel is the equidistance line established in the first stage of the delimitation process which provides an equitable delimitation excluding any adjustment in the second and third stages. However, the expected western boundary line with Libya is the equidistance line constructed in the first stage. It achieves an equitable delimitation result by allocating comparable maritime areas to both States. i Acknowledgments The research leading up to this paper was made possible thanks to the kind assistance of the United nations - The Nippon Foundation of Japan Fellowship Programme on the Law of the Sea. I am particularly grateful to Ms. Valentina Germani, Legal Officer, Programme Advisor, Division of Legal Affairs of the United Nations for her continuous support and valuable advises since the beginning of the programme. I wish to express my sincere gratitude to the Nippon Foundation, which provided the necessary financial support to complete this work. I would like to express my deepest gratitude and appreciation to Professor Alex G. Oude Elferink Director of the Netherlands Institute for the Law of the Sea (NILOS), School of Law, Utrecht University for the helpful and kind support received during the preparation of this research paper. My deep thanks go as well to Dr. Solene Guggisberg, Senior Research Associate and Nippon Foundation Senior Nereus Fellow at (NILOS) for her helpful comments and recommendations on the draft of the research paper. I would like to thank all members of staff at the NILOS, School of Law, Utrecht University for their help and cooperation. My heartful thanks also extends to the staff of the Division for Oceans Affairs and the Law of the Sea of the United Nations (DOALOS) for the kind assistance given during the programme. I wish to express also my appreciation to the Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs for the kind financial support also received and the assistance from directors, friends and colleagues at the International Legal Affairs and Treaties Department, the Egyptian Permanent Mission to the United Nations in New York, the Egyptian Embassy in the Hague. Finally, it please me to express my deepest appreciation to my parents and family for their understanding and encouragement during the period of my studies and research. Ibrahim EL Diwany Utrecht, The Netherlands December 2018 ii Table of Contents ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................................................................... I ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ....................................................................................................................................... II TABLE OF CONTENTS ....................................................................................................................................... III LIST OF ACRONYMS ......................................................................................................................................... IV LIST OF FIGURES ...............................................................................................................................................V LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................................ VI INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................ 1 PART I: LEGAL REGIME GOVERNING MARITIME BOUNDARIES DELIMITATION IN THE EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN SEA .................................................................................................................................................................. 8 CHAPTER ONE : THE CONVENTIONAL RULES OF THE LAW OF MARITIME BOUNDARIES DELIMITATION .............................................. 11 Section A: Rule applicable for the delimitation of the territorial sea ................................................................... 11 Section B: Rules applicable for the delimitation of the exclusive economic zone and continental shelf ................ 17 CHAPTER TWO: THE “THREE-STAGE” MARITIME DELIMITATION METHODOLOGY ....................................................................... 27 Section A: The “three-stage” methodology ......................................................................................................... 27 Section B: Relevant circumstances in maritime boundaries delimitation: ........................................................... 36 PART II. MARITIME BOUNDARIES IN THE EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN SEA: EGYPT’S MARITIME BOUNDARIES ...... 57 CHAPTER ONE : MARITIME BOUNDARIES IN THE EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN SEA ....................................................................... 57 Section (A): The legal status of maritime boundaries in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea .................................... 57 Section (B): Maritime boundaries delimitation agreements in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea ......................... 63 CHAPTER TWO: EGYPT’S MARITIME BOUNDARIES DELIMITATION IN THE EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN SEA ....................................... 68 Section A: Egypt’s maritime boundaries delimitation with opposite States ......................................................... 69 Section B: Egypt’s maritime boundaries delimitation with adjacent States ........................................................ 82 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................................. 98 ANNEXES ..................................................................................................................................................... 110 TABLES ..................................................................................................................................................................... 110 FIGURES .................................................................................................................................................................... 115 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................................. 136 3 List of Acronyms 1982 “UNCLOS” United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea “TCF” Trillion Cubic Feet 1958 “CTS” Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous zone 1958 “CCS” Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf “ILC” The International Law Commission “UNCLOS I” The 1958 Geneva Conference on the Law of the Sea “ICJ” The International Court of Justice “UNCLOS III” Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea n.m. Nautical Miles Km Kilometre EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone CS Continental Shelf FZ Fishery Zone “TRNC” Turkish Republic of Northern