unclos

[unclos]

My book (Enforcing International Maritime Legislation on Air Pollution through UNCLOS) analyses the amplified enforcement and notifying obligations of UNCLOS chapter XII placed on flag States, e.g. to sanction “effectively”, also in terms of sanctioning (fining) a violation of the 0,5% sulphur limit of MARPOL Annex VI. The broadened jurisdictions bestowed on port States and coastal States to enforce are also examined. Port State’s in terms of carrying out Port State Controls (PSC’s) and also enforcing emission-violations on the high seas, as well as the right for coastal States to enforce Annex VI within their waters, including in the EEZ and over ships making an innocent passage or transit passage is also studied as well as the possibility of using a drone to conduct a “hot pursuit”. Clarifying the overlapping jurisdictions between a port or coastal States and flag States are also resolved.

These theoretical discussions on jurisdiction are tied to practical applications pertaining to PSC-sanctioning in the form of detention and the imposing of fines. Something which I worked with for almost two years at the Danish Maritime Authority.

These conclusions on enforcement through UNCLOS are afterwards projected on to enforcement of other IMO legislation, including the other annexes of the MARPOL Convention, the Ballast Water Management Convention etc.

I have also, after coming to Maersk, worked with enforcement of the different proposed (short-, mid- and long-term) regulatory measure specified in the IMO’s initial GHG Strategy, such as revised EEDI, speed optimization, shore-power and the use of alternative fuels, etc., is also examined in context of UNCLOS.

The last part of the book offers – due to the increased environmental challenges relating to global warming and given the special legal status of ships – an analysis of whether an envisioned IMO regulation, in the future, could be considered the first environmental peremptory norm of a ‘jus cogens’ character within international law. The immense legal implications hereof (including enforcement erga omnes) are also addressed. It is primarily from teaching International Law for over six years that gave way for fusing the theoretical basis provided by the ILC (the UN’s International Law Commission) and the ICJ (International Court of Justice) with the practical implications from an envisioned global ban on the use of fossil based marine fuels, which presumably must be the final endgame of the IMO GHG Strategy.

[unclos]

unclos: My book (Enforcing International Legislation on Air Pollution through UNCLOS) analyses the amplified enforcement and notifying obligations of UNCLOS chapter XII placed on flag States, e.g. to sanction “effectively”, also in terms of sanctioning (fining) a violation of the 0,5% sulphur limit of MARPOL Annex VI. The broadened jurisdictions bestowed on port States and coastal States to enforce are also examined. Port State’s in terms of carrying out Port State Controls (PSC’s) and also enforcing emission-violations on the high seas, as well as the right for coastal States to enforce Annex VI within their waters, including in the EEZ and over ships making an innocent passage or transit passage is also studied as well as the possibility of using a drone to conduct a “hot pursuit”. Clarifying the overlapping jurisdictions between a port or coastal States and flag States are also resolved. These theoretical discussions on jurisdiction are tied to practical applications pertaining to PSC-sanctioning in the form of detention and the imposing of fines. Something which I worked with for almost two years at the Danish Maritime Authority. These conclusions on enforcement through UNCLOS are afterwards projected on to enforcement of other IMO legislation, including the other annexes of the MARPOL Convention, the Ballast Water Management Convention etc. I have also, after coming to Maersk, worked with enforcement of the different proposed (short-, mid- and long-term) regulatory measure specified in the IMO’s initial GHG Strategy, such as revised EEDI, speed optimization, shore-power and the use of alternative fuels, etc., is also examined in context of UNCLOS. The last part of the book offers – due to the increased environmental challenges relating to global warming and given the special legal status of ships – an analysis of whether an envisioned IMO regulation, in the future, could be considered the first environmental peremptory norm of a ‘jus cogens’ character within international law. The immense legal implications hereof (including enforcement erga omnes) are also addressed. It is primarily from teaching International Law for over six years that gave way for fusing the theoretical basis provided by the ILC (the UN’s International Law Commission) and the ICJ (International Court of Justice) with the practical implications from an envisioned global ban on the use of fossil based marine fuels, which presumably must be the final endgame of the IMO GHG Strategy. #IMO2020 #UNCLOS #IMO2020enforcement #internationallaw #juscogens #marpol #annexvi #climatechange #cliamteaction #environmentaljuscogens Available at; https://www.bloomsburyprofessional.com/uk/enforcing-international-maritime-legislation-on-air-pollution-through-unclos-9781509927784/ See also: http://imo-enforcement.com/index.html

My book (Enforcing International Legislation on Air Pollution through UNCLOS) analyses the amplified enforcement and notifying obligations of UNCLOS chapter XII placed on flag States, e.g. to sanction “effectively”, also in terms of sanctioning (fining) a violation of the 0,5% sulphur limit of MARPOL Annex VI. The broadened jurisdictions bestowed on port States and coastal States to enforce are also examined. Port State’s in terms of carrying out Port State Controls (PSC’s) and also enforcing emission-violations on the high seas, as well as the right for coastal States to enforce Annex VI within their waters, including in the EEZ and over ships making an innocent passage or transit passage is also studied as well as the possibility of using a drone to conduct a “hot pursuit”. Clarifying the overlapping jurisdictions between a port or coastal States and flag States are also resolved.

These theoretical discussions on jurisdiction are tied to practical applications pertaining to PSC-sanctioning in the form of detention and the imposing of fines. Something which I worked with for almost two years at the Danish Maritime Authority.

These conclusions on enforcement through UNCLOS are afterwards projected on to enforcement of other IMO legislation, including the other annexes of the MARPOL Convention, the Ballast Water Management Convention etc.

I have also, after coming to Maersk, worked with enforcement of the different proposed (short-, mid- and long-term) regulatory measure specified in the IMO’s initial GHG Strategy, such as revised EEDI, speed optimization, shore-power and the use of alternative fuels, etc., is also examined in context of UNCLOS.

The last part of the book offers – due to the increased environmental challenges relating to global warming and given the special legal status of ships – an analysis of whether an envisioned IMO regulation, in the future, could be considered the first environmental peremptory norm of a ‘jus cogens’ character within international law. The immense legal implications hereof (including enforcement erga omnes) are also addressed. It is primarily from teaching International Law for over six years that gave way for fusing the theoretical basis provided by the ILC (the UN’s International Law Commission) and the ICJ (International Court of Justice) with the practical implications from an envisioned global ban on the use of fossil based marine fuels, which presumably must be the final endgame of the IMO GHG Strategy.

[unclos]

My book (Enforcing International Maritime Legislation on Air Pollution through UNCLOS) analyses the amplified enforcement and notifying obligations of UNCLOS chapter XII placed on flag States, e.g. to sanction “effectively”, also in terms of sanctioning (fining) a violation of the 0,5% sulphur limit of MARPOL Annex VI. The broadened jurisdictions bestowed on port States and coastal States to enforce are also examined. Port State’s in terms of carrying out Port State Controls (PSC’s) and also enforcing emission-violations on the high seas, as well as the right for coastal States to enforce Annex VI within their waters, including in the EEZ and over ships making an innocent passage or transit passage is also studied as well as the possibility of using a drone to conduct a “hot pursuit”. Clarifying the overlapping jurisdictions between a port or coastal States and flag States are also resolved.

These theoretical discussions on jurisdiction are tied to practical applications pertaining to PSC-sanctioning in the form of detention and the imposing of fines. Something which I worked with for almost two years at the Danish Maritime Authority.

These conclusions on enforcement through UNCLOS are afterwards projected on to enforcement of other IMO legislation, including the other annexes of the MARPOL Convention, the Ballast Water Management Convention etc.

I have also, after coming to Maersk, worked with enforcement of the different proposed (short-, mid- and long-term) regulatory measure specified in the IMO’s initial GHG Strategy, such as revised EEDI, speed optimization, shore-power and the use of alternative fuels, etc., is also examined in context of UNCLOS.

The last part of the book offers – due to the increased environmental challenges relating to global warming and given the special legal status of ships – an analysis of whether an envisioned IMO regulation, in the future, could be considered the first environmental peremptory norm of a ‘jus cogens’ character within international law. The immense legal implications hereof (including enforcement erga omnes) are also addressed. It is primarily from teaching International Law for over six years that gave way for fusing the theoretical basis provided by the ILC (the UN’s International Law Commission) and the ICJ (International Court of Justice) with the practical implications from an envisioned global ban on the use of fossil based marine fuels, which presumably must be the final endgame of the IMO GHG Strategy.

[unclos]

Hi. My name is Jesper Fanø and I have created this Thumblr account to try and find and connect with others that may have some the same interests as me which is “International Law”.

Primarily in terms of enforcing maritime regulation through the United Nations Convention on the Law Of the Sea (#UNCLOS). Regulation adopted by the UN’s International Maritime Organization (IMO). In particular enforcement of the 0,5% sulphur limit of MARPOL Annex VI (also know as #IMO2020) which comes into force 1 January 2020.  

I am also committed to exploring and developing the recognized international law principles of jus cogens, erga omnes and universal jurisdiction to be applicable to enforcement of a future regulatory prohibition on the use of fossil based marine fuels. A potential regulatory gamechanger in terms of reducing the release of GHG (especially CO2) to combat climate change.

I have written a book on these subjects called “Enforcing International Maritime Legislation on Air Pollution through UNCLOS” (Hart publishing and available at; https://www.bloomsburyprofessional.com/uk/enforcing-international-maritime-legislation-on-air-pollution-through-unclos-9781509927784/) 

Now, that might sound like a really boring book, but let me tell you; this book puts the “Fun” in “UNCLOS” = “FUNCLOS”!!

Okay, that’s a lie. But, if you are a huge legal-nerd like me (or a cool legal-nerd) and interested in the law of the sea (UNCLOS) and enforcement of MARPOL Annex VI (IMO2020) and GHG regulations, well this book might be just the thing for you.  

  My “FUNCLOS”* book on UNCLOS (*Disclaimer, not a funny book)

My book (Enforcing International Maritime Legislation on Air Pollution through UNCLOS) analyses the amplified enforcement and notifying obligations of UNCLOS chapter XII placed on flag States, e.g. to sanction “effectively”, also in terms of sanctioning (fining) a violation of the 0,5% sulphur limit of MARPOL Annex VI. The broadened jurisdictions bestowed on port States and coastal States to enforce are also examined. Port State’s in terms of carrying out Port State Controls (PSC’s) and also enforcing emission-violations on the high seas, as well as the right for coastal States to enforce Annex VI within their waters, including in the EEZ and over ships making an innocent passage or transit passage is also studied as well as the possibility of using a drone to conduct a “hot pursuit”. Clarifying the overlapping jurisdictions between a port or coastal States and flag States are also resolved.

These theoretical discussions on jurisdiction are tied to practical applications pertaining to PSC-sanctioning in the form of detention and the imposing of fines. Something which I worked with for almost two years at the Danish Maritime Authority.

These conclusions on enforcement through UNCLOS are afterwards projected on to enforcement of other IMO legislation, including the other annexes of the MARPOL Convention, the Ballast Water Management Convention etc.

I have also, after coming to Maersk, worked with enforcement of the different proposed (short-, mid- and long-term) regulatory measure specified in the IMO’s initial GHG Strategy, such as revised EEDI, speed optimization, shore-power and the use of alternative fuels, etc., is also examined in context of UNCLOS.

The last part of the book offers – due to the increased environmental challenges relating to global warming and given the special legal status of ships – an analysis of whether an envisioned IMO regulation, in the future, could be considered the first environmental peremptory norm of a ‘jus cogens’ character within international law. The immense legal implications hereof (including enforcement erga omnes) are also addressed. It is primarily from teaching International Law for over six years that gave way for fusing the theoretical basis provided by the ILC (the UN’s International Law Commission) and the ICJ (International Court of Justice) with the practical implications from an envisioned global ban on the use of fossil based marine fuels, which presumably must be the final endgame of the IMO GHG Strategy.

I have also written an article on the enforcement of the MARPOL Annex VI 0,5% sulphur limit through UNCLOS in the legal publication; Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law (RECIEL).  The article is entitled; “Enforcement of the 2020 sulphur limit for marine fuels: Restrictions and possibilities for port States to impose fines under UNCLOS”.

  My Background

My book (and article) is the conclusion of a personal project which I have been working on for the last five years.

My journey began back in 2014 when I was employed at the Danish Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), working with implementing MARPOL Annex VI and the EU Sulphur Directive (entailing a 0,1% sulphur limit for most European waters) into Danish law. My work subsequently continued the following years with the enforcement of the 0,1% limit, in collaboration with the Danish Maritime Authority, Danish Attorney-General, the police and public prosecutors in a national sulphur enforcement task force.

2014 was also the year where I started teaching International Law at Copenhagen University, which includes law of the sea (i.e. the United Nations Convention on the Law Of the Sea (UNCLOS)), law of treaties, State responsibility and State jurisdiction in general.

It was through my work at the Danish EPA, and meetings in the enforcement task force, that I learned about many of the foreseen challenges regarding enforcement of the global 0,5 % limit (IMO2020) sulphur limit which comes into force on the 1st of January 2020 as stipulated in regulation 14 of MARPOL Annex VI.

Firstly, pertaining to detecting and proving violations. Secondly, relating to whether it would be possible to sanction a proven violation with a dissuasive fine.

The first part of this “enforcement-challenge” has since been the subject of much work as technologies (“sniffers” etc.) have been developed and refined to detect and measure sulphur emissions from ships. The IMO, it’s Member States and many organizations have also worked vigorously on ensuring that all relevant regulation (MARPOL Annex VI, IMO guidelines etc.) have been revised or developed to ensure the “consistent implementation” of the 0,5% sulphur limit to prevent any circumvention of the rules. This work includes, but is not limited to, matters relating to non-availability of compliant fuel (FONAR’s), fuel sampling and testing, Port State Control (PSC) and, in particular, the adoption of the so-called “carriage ban” banning the carriage of non-compliant fuel in any tank onboard.    

However, my work, and thereby the book, relates to the second part of the enforcement challenge; How States on a national level can enforce violations of the 0,5% sulphur limit within the international jurisdictional frames provided for in UNCLOS. Frames that bind all States.

Or in other words… the focus of the book is on what comes after a violation of the 0,5% limit has been proven, i.e. after a sniffer has detected a violation, or after a PSC fuel sample (taken from any fuel tank) shows the use of non-compliant fuel, or after the next port of call rejects a FONAR, etc.

This is what my book attempts to clarify. “Enforcing International Maritime Legislation on Air Pollution through UNCLOS” is available at https://www.bloomsburyprofessional.com/uk/enforcing-international-maritime-legislation-on-air-pollution-through-unclos-9781509927784/. 

  Other stuff

I am also passionate about the NFL, in particular the GreenBay Packers.

I am therefore also working on fusing me to interests; UNCLOS and the NFL….. This is however a work in progress….