violating the regulations may be subject to sanc- 

 tion or excluded from passage, if the violation is in 

 fact prejudicial to the peace, good order or 

 security of the coastal State.* " 



Furthermore, a coastal State's laws and regula- 

 tions, such as those enacted by the United States, 

 prohibiting foreign fishing in its territorial waters 

 are regarded as forbidding also the taking of fish 

 for research purposes, as well as all other research 

 activities relating to fisheries, whether conducted 

 in the course of innocent passage or not.' ' 



2. Recommendation 



In the absence of a prohibitory law or regula- 

 tion enacted by a foreign coastal State, it would he 

 reasonable for the United States to assert, unilater- 

 ally, the right of an American-flag vessel to engage 

 in scientific inquiry while exercising the right of 

 innocent passage through the internal or territorial 

 waters of the foreign coastal State and to grant 

 such a right to foreign-flag vessels exercising the 

 right of innocent passage through United States 

 waters. However, the panel does not think it 

 would be wise for the United States to adopt 

 unilaterally such an interpretation of the Conven- 

 tion. To do so might give a foreign coastal State 

 reason to suspect that every American-flag vessel 

 passing through its waters was also undertaking 

 some kind of scientific inquiry unknown to it. As 

 a result, there might be interference with the right 

 of innocent passage, which is vital to the United 

 States. Nor would any long-rim benefit to marine 

 science ensue, because the coastal State could 

 always enact legislation expressly prohibiting 

 scientific research in the course of innocent 

 passage through its waters. 



The panel does not think much is to be gained 

 by unilateral claims to irmocent access for research 

 buoys. Such buoys would be pecuharly vulnerable 

 to acts of the coastal State. Accordingly, the panel 

 recommends that the question of scientific re- 

 search in the internal and territorial waters of 

 coastal States should be the subject of a new, 

 international convention, as recommended below. 

 Pending the negotiation of the new convention, it 

 may be worthwhile for the United States to seek 



bilateral or regional agreements interpreting the 

 Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contig- 

 uous Zone, together with general principles of 

 international law, as authorizing the conduct of 

 scientific inquiry in the course of innocent pas- 

 sage, as well as the "innocent access" of research 

 buoys. 



Moreover, to encourage international scientific 

 cooperation, the United States should announce 

 that (a) it will consent, upon proper notice, to the 

 conduct, in its territorial waters, of scientific 

 research which is part of an international, coopera- 

 tive project sponsored or endorsed by the Inter- 

 governmental Oceanographic Commission (lOC)'^ 

 and (b) in return for such consent, it will require 

 that (0 it be given the right, if it so desires, to 

 participate or to be represented in the research; (if) 

 the results of the research shall be pubUshed; and 

 {Hi) upon its request, the basic data acquired shall 

 be made available to it. 



B. Research in the Contiguous Zone 



1. Fishery Research in the Exclusive Fisheries 

 Zone 



To date, no State has sought to delimit a zone 

 contiguous to the territorial sea for the sole 

 purpose of extending the coastal State's control 

 over scientific research activities in the zone. 

 However, coastal States, including the United 

 States, claim exclusive rights of access to the Hving 

 resources of the sea up to 12 miles or more from 

 the baselines from which the breadth of the 

 territorial sea is measured. The multipUcity of 

 these claims seems to have resulted in a new kind 

 of contiguous zone recognized not by the Conven- 

 tion on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous 

 Zone but by customary international law.' ^ In the 

 exclusive fisheries zones thus created, coastal 

 States, including the United States, claim the right 

 to prohibit fishery research (including the taking 

 of fish specimens) without their prior consent. ' "* 



Id. at 22-23. 

 Id. at 24. 



For a brief description of IOC, See Appendix B to 

 this report. 



See Burke, supra note 8, at 32. 



'"^The authority stems from the 1964 and 1966 Acts, 

 read together. See notes 13 and 17 to Chapter 3. 



VIII-72 



