UNCLOS and Pakistan: What the Law of the Sea Actually Grants

What the Convention is, and why it is the starting point

Opened for signature in 1982 and in force since 1994, the Convention addresses navigation, resource use, environmental protection, marine scientific research and dispute settlement in a single instrument. Pakistan is a party, so it applies directly to how the country defines and exercises maritime jurisdiction.

The Convention does not simply hand states territory at sea. It establishes a graduated system: full sovereignty in one band, limited enforcement powers in the next, and resource rights without sovereignty in the widest band. That distinction determines what a state may lawfully do, and what other states may do in the same waters.

The territorial sea: sovereignty up to twelve nautical miles

The territorial sea may extend up to twelve nautical miles from a state's baselines, and within it the coastal state exercises sovereignty comparable to its authority on land. Sovereignty here is not absolute: ships of all states enjoy innocent passage, provided it is continuous, expeditious and not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal state. The Convention lists activities, including weapons exercises and fishing, that fall outside it.

Everything begins with the baseline, which is measured by rules the Convention sets out rather than by preference. A baseline placed carelessly shifts every outer limit at once.

The contiguous zone: enforcement between twelve and twenty-four nautical miles

Beyond the territorial sea, the contiguous zone may extend to twenty-four nautical miles from the baselines. It is narrower in purpose than it sounds: the coastal state may exercise the control necessary to prevent and punish infringement of its customs, fiscal, immigration and sanitary regulations within its territory or territorial sea.

It is an enforcement belt rather than a resource zone, conferring no sovereignty and no rights over fish or minerals. Its value is procedural: a legal basis to act before an infringement is completed inside the twelve-mile limit.

The exclusive economic zone: sovereign rights up to two hundred nautical miles

The exclusive economic zone may extend to two hundred nautical miles from the baselines. Within it, the coastal state holds sovereign rights to explore, exploit, conserve and manage natural resources, living and non-living, in the water column and on the seabed, along with jurisdiction over marine scientific research, protection of the marine environment, and artificial islands and installations.

The phrase sovereign rights is deliberate. The zone is not territory: other states keep freedoms of navigation and overflight, the laying of submarine cables and pipelines, and related lawful uses. A coastal state cannot close its economic zone to foreign shipping or treat passage through it as a privilege it grants.

The continental shelf, and the question of an extended shelf

The continental shelf is distinct from the exclusive economic zone, even where the two overlap. The Convention defines it by reference to the natural prolongation of the landmass to the outer edge of the continental margin, subject to distance and depth criteria, and in any event to a minimum of two hundred nautical miles.

Two features make the shelf unusual: rights over it exist by operation of law rather than depending on an express proclamation, and it is the only route by which resource jurisdiction can extend beyond two hundred nautical miles where the margin physically does so. Any such extension requires a submission to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, which examines geological and geophysical evidence and issues recommendations. That process is lengthy and evidence-intensive.

The duties that come with the rights

The Convention is not a charter of entitlements alone. Each grant carries obligations, and these are often the harder part of implementation.

• Protecting the marine environment and preventing, reducing and controlling pollution from all sources.
• Conserving living resources in the exclusive economic zone, including measures to keep populations at sustainable levels.
• Cooperating with other states on shared and highly migratory stocks.
• Providing for the safety of navigation and for search and rescue arrangements.
• Cooperating in the repression of piracy, which the Convention defines and allows all states to act against.
• Settling disputes by peaceful means, including through the Convention's own mechanisms.

Delimitation: where one state's zones meet another's

Zones rarely exist in isolation. Where states are opposite or adjacent, claims overlap, and the Convention requires delimitation by agreement on the basis of international law to achieve an equitable solution. Regional practice has combined equidistance with other relevant circumstances, and coastal states in many regions have relied on bilateral agreements to fix their maritime boundaries.

Where agreement is not reached, the Convention's dispute-settlement machinery applies, whether through the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, the International Court of Justice or arbitration. Boundary questions tend to be durable, which makes this the part of the framework most likely to be invoked in practice.

The practical conclusion is that delimitation is a technical exercise with political consequences. It depends on accurate baselines, sound survey data and a clear legal position.

Reading Pakistan's position carefully

Legal entitlement and effective control are different things. The Convention may grant resource rights across a wide zone, but the ability to survey stocks, detect unauthorised fishing or respond to pollution depends on patrol capability, data systems and administrative coordination. Where those are thin, the gap between the law on paper and outcomes at sea widens.

Precise outer limits are also technical determinations, not headline figures: the extent of any extended continental shelf claim depends on geological evidence and a review process that takes years. The Convention sets the architecture; how well a state performs within it is a question of governance.