THE Federal Government has made substantial changes to the terms upon which Australia accepts international dispute resolution mechanisms, particularly as they apply to maritime boundaries.
The changes relate to the International Court of Justice and to dispute settlements under the 1982 United Convention on the Law of the Sea covering areas of disputes between sovereign states. It does not hear commercial matters.
The Government lodged a declaration to the International Court of Justice, based at The Hague, in the Netherlands, that excludes the setting of maritime boundaries from compulsory dispute resolution.
Australia has been a party in disputes before the courts on only three occasions.
In 1973 it brought a case forward against France in a bid to stop nuclear testing in the Pacific. In 1989 Nauru took Australia to court concerning access to phosphate deposits and, in 1991, Portugal used the courts concerning East Timor, a case subsequently thrown out because it involved Indonesia, which is not a signatory to the court.
In a joint statement issued by the Attorney-General Daryl Williams and Foreign Affairs Minister Alexander Downer, the Government said its remained Australia’s strong view that maritime boundary disputes are better settled by negotiation than litigation.
Australia also has amended its acceptance of the powers it will subscribe to under the ICJ in a bid to emphasis the desire for negotiation as the best means of settlement.
Under the changes, Australia will continue to accept the jurisdiction of the court apart from where the parties have agreed to other peaceful means of dispute resolution, where disputes involved maritime boundary delimitations or disputes concerning the exploitation of an area in dispute or adjacent to an area in dispute.
It also will not seek the jurisdiction of the court where a country has only accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the court for a particular purpose, or has been a signatory for a period of less than one year.
“This underpins Australia’s view that actions relying in the compulsory jurisdiction of the ICJ should be undertaken on the basis on a long-term commitment to acceptance of that jurisdiction,” Attorney-General Daryl Williams said.
Australia is only one of 61 countries out of the United Nations’ 189 members that accept the compulsory juris-diction of the ICJ.
Under the convention, Australia may choose the dispute resolution bodies it prefers and whether to exclude certain areas.
Australia’s maritime zones abut the maritime zones of Indonesia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, East Timor, Norway and France (New Caledonia), Kerguelen Island and Antarctica.
