Long-term anchorage legality
September 11, 2009 at 9:14 pm #1061
I’ve got a floating island design that I’m attempting to prototype and test in Singapore. But assuming I get stonewalled by the government I’d like to ask the lawyers in the forum,
If I anchor the island outside the territorial waters of a country(probably Malaysia), but WITHIN their EEZ am I breaking any laws if I don’t remove anything from the seabed or fish from the sea?
Furthermore, if there are any other Singaporeans on the forum do contact me. I’m currently in talks with the MPA regarding the use of local waters for anchorage. If all goes well I’ll be registering a company to produce and market these islands. But before that happens I’d like to meet with like-minded individuals to assess the possibility of a business partnership. =)September 12, 2009 at 4:51 am #7704
I aint no lawyer but I am familiar with UNCLOS and Maritime Law. If you plan to anchor for a long time inside the EEZ of any nation, they might consider it an artificial island and will fall under their jurisdiction. So you wont be able to claim sovereignty on your seastead. If this is just a business and you dont care about becoming a seastead-nation-state, than I guess sovereignty dont matter and you can apply for permits with the nation (in this case Malaysia) in which EEZ you will anchor. All this, of course, is theoretically… It might be that different nations enforce (or dont) UNCLOS @ different degrees. It might be that Malaysia dont care about you anchoring in their EEZ or that you might be able to bribe somebody to get the business going. Here in the US we have to deal w/ the Coast Guard (getting certified and inspected by them) and with the laws of the state in which waters you plan to anchor (getting business permits). I am working on a similar project here in US, in Florida. A floating eco-resort (small scale) to be anchored close to the reef in the Key West area. If you have any interest in a joint venture here in US, sent me a private message.
But your question is very interesting. I said you “might” be considered an artificial island if you anchor,…What if you dont, but instead, you float around (as a floating island) outside the territorial waters but inside the EEZ of the said nation? It might be a different status for the floating island…. I will ask the Coast Guard officer who is in charge of reviewing my project and I will let you know. Still, keep in mind that will be the American way of interpreting international law. Malaysia might have a different aproach.September 12, 2009 at 9:03 am #7705
Hi Guys, please keep us posted on both projects. These seem like excellent ways to explore near shore ideas.September 12, 2009 at 9:37 am #7706
Like ocean said, it seems to be a gray area. They can claim sovereignity over permanent installations, or somesuch formulation.September 12, 2009 at 11:13 am #7709
I’ve gone and read up on UNCLOS, it seems a nation cannot prevent loitering in their EEZ as long as no resources are taken and no pollutants are dumped. I’ve gone and done a rough map of the territorial waters around the area i’m intending to anchor the structure if the government here doesn’t approve.September 14, 2009 at 6:55 am #7718
If you avoid being considered an artificial island by not securing to the seabed you can be floating around invoking the right of inoccent passage,….But if you will be hanging in the same spot for days, lets say 20nm ofshore, just drifting around and bringing passengers or let say “customers” aboard for profit, then you are no longer under passage,…@ this point you will be considered an “installation” inside that nation EEZ and they can say that you are in violation of Artucle 60. 2. of UNCLOS:
“2. The coastal State shall have exclusive jurisdiction over such artificial islands, installations and structures, including jurisdiction with regard to customs, fiscal, health, safety and immigration laws and regulations. “
Here we go,…”w/ regard to custom, fiscal, health, safety”,…”exclusive”,…They own you, brother. And if you are making money, they’ll come down upon you like vultures, for a chunk of the action. And you are not even in their territorial waters,…but they extended their “jurisdiction”, read- greedy paw-, 200 nm from their coasline!!!
The introduction of this EEZ notion is just another example of fiscal protectionism @ the international level. Mainly, its all about oil and fish, and money, ultimately.
The only place you will be REALLY FREE is 200+ nm offshore and packing a lots of fire power !
I did look up the same area on Google Earth when you first mention it….I do like it. How about a bit further E, deeper into S. China Sea, 7*46′ N, 111*40′ E, about 40nm SW of the Spratly Island ? It looks like a nice shoal and it is in international waters (well,…if we discard the cluster of the Spratly’s,…E of you). All that you need its a pact w/ the local pirates, so they’ll leave you alone. I’d rather deal with the pirates than with any goverment,…Their codes are based on pride and morals rather then greed.September 14, 2009 at 9:03 pm #7723
Actually, the entire area you’re looking at is an existing nation’s EEZ. My map only shows the 12NM of territorial waters.
The forum ‘Law and Politics’ is closed to new topics and replies.
Posted on at