462 



no rights under international law to regulate the activities of foreign 

 vessels on the high seas in the absence of an international agreement. 

 The convention on the high seas is most explicit on this point ; article 

 2 provides in relevant part that : 



"Tlie high seas being open to all nations, no state may validly pur- 

 port to subject any part of them to its sovereignty." 



Article 6, in part, provides : 



Ships shall sail under the flag of one state only and, save in exceptional cases 

 expressly provided for in international treaties or in these articles, shall be 

 subject to its exclusive jurisdiction on the high seas. 



The Administration's proposed Marine Protection Act of 1971 es- 

 tablishes control over the transportation of material by any person 

 from the United States for dumping on the high seas. It also estab- 

 lishes control over the dumping of material by any person from any 

 source in the S-mile territorial sea of the United States and in the 

 additional 9-mile contiguous zone adjacent to its territorial sea. Both 

 provisions would apply to American and foreign nationals and vessels. 

 We believe this is the proper exercise of our jurisdiction under inter- 

 national law, and that it fully meets all cases of dumping arising now 

 or likely to arise. 



As there is legislation before this committee to control ocean dump- 

 ing on the basis of our jurisdiction over the continental shelf, I would 

 like to briefly discuss the legal problems inherent in this approach. 

 Under the convention on the continental shelf, the United States has 

 exclusive sovereign right for the purpose of exploring the continental 

 shelf and exploiting its natural resources. The convention does not 

 give the United States sovereignty over the continental shelf for all 

 purposes, and it explicitly preserves the status of the superjacent 

 waters as high seas. The drafters of the convention carefully considered 

 what rights and obligations necessarily flowed from the general right 

 of the coastal state over exploration and exploitation, and they were 

 quite explicit. Tlie coastal state, for example, has a right to erect in- 

 stallations and exercise jurisdiction over them for the exploration 

 or exploitation of natural resources, as well as to establish safety zones 

 around the installations. It has certain rights over research under- 

 taken on the shelf and has an obligation to prevent unjustifiable in- 

 terference with other uses of the sea. Xowhere does the convention 

 authorize the coastal state to regulrte dumping. Indeed, it is the con- 

 vention on the high seas, not the Continental Shelf Convention, which 

 specifically refers to the dumping of radioactive wastes. It is clear 

 that the Geneva conventions consider that dumpmg should be treated 

 under the high seas regume, that is by regulation of one's nationals 

 and by international agreement. 



In this connection, we must also consider the question of enforce- 

 ment. The basic principle regarding ^-essels on the high seas is that 

 they are subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the flag state except 

 as otherwise agreed. There is no treaty giving the United States au- 

 thority to arrest a foreign vessel on the high seas for dumping. 



Thus, legislation regarding dumping acti\ities on tlie high seas: 

 above the continental shelf would amount to a unilateral assertion of 

 jurisdiction by the United States without a firm basis in international 



