Progress reported on plans for Sea-Bed Authority.

"Encouraging progress" marked the four-week session (11 March-4 April) of the Preparatory Commission for the International Sea-Bed Authority and for the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, according to its Chairman, Joseph Warioba (United Republic of Tanzania).

Four special commissions--subsidiary bodies of the Preparatory Commission--continued work in Kingston, Jamaica, on problems of developing land-based producer States resulting from sea-bed mining; operation of the Enterprise, the sea-bed mining arm of he proposed Sea-Bed Authority; a sea-bed mining code to regulate prospecting, exploration and exploitation of polymetallic nodules in the deep sea-bed mining area; and rules for the International Tribunal.

Also discussed were questions relating to overlapping claims of applicants for the status of "pioneer investors".

The Preparatory Commission decided its next sexxion will be held in Geneva from 12 August to 5 September.

The Law of the Sea Convention, adopted on 30 April 1982, called for the establishment of the Authority to govern and regulate sea-bed mining in areas designated as the common heritage of mankind. Sea-bed mining would take place under a "parallel system" involving the Authority's own Enterprise and private and State-run enterprises.

The Authority would have an Assembly, made up of all States which ratified or acceded to the Law of Sea Convention, to set general policy and to elect members to a 36-member Council, representing regions and special interests, which closely oversees the operations of the Enterprise. The Tribunal would deal with disputes.

A second reading of the draft rules of procedure for the Assembly had begun at the session, Chairman Warioba said. Rules provisionally approved dealt with date and place of sessions, special sessions and their provisional agenda, time-limit of speeches, and adjournment and closure of debate.

The status of observers and the establishment of main committees for the Assembly had yet to be decided, the Chairman reported. There was broad agreement on the need of the Convention and to accord observers meaningful participation in the Assembly. The plenary, however, had to decide on status of particular observers and had to define 'meaningful participation".

Pioneer investors

Resolution II of the Conference established a special regime to protect the preparatory investment made by countries and enterprises technologically capable of carrying out sea-bed mining or who already were involved in sea-bed mining. These countries could apply for the status of "pioneer investor". Applicants for such status must ensure that areas in which they intended to operate do not overlap.

Three groups were designated eligible to register as "pioneer investors": four States which had 'signed the Convention--France, India, Japan and the Soviet Union--or their private or public corporations; four consortia (Kennecott Consortium, Ocean Mining Associates, Ocean Management Inc., and Ocean Minerals Company) whose components come from one or more of eight States--Belgium, Canada, the Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States; and developing countries which had signed the Convention, or their enterprises.

So far, France, India, Japan and the Soviet Union have filed applications for registration as pioneer investors. France, Japan and the Soviet Union had overlapping claims.

Chairman Warioba reported he had used his good offices to help these applicants resolve their overlapping claims, in accordance with the Understanding on the Procedure for Conflict Resolution among the First Group of Applicants (LOS/PCN/L.8) of 31 August 1984 (see UN Chronicle, 1984, No. 7).

Japan and the Soviet Union had since resolved their differences, he reported. France and the Soviet Union had informed him that they could resolve conflicts between their claims, but they were still considering a difficult practical problem.

No action was taken on a draft resolution introduced by Czechoslovakia, on behalf of Eastern European countries, affirming that the "Provisional Understanding regarding Deep Sea-Bed Matters" concluded by eight countries on 3 August 1984 was incompatible with the United Nations Sea Law Convention and "wholly illegal".

By that "provisional understanding", Belgium, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, Japan, and Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States undertook not to issue authorizations under their national legislation to enterprises for areas which were also claimed in other applications or which had been authorized to other enterprises, and agreed to consult together prior to issuing any authorization to enterprises, or before they engaged in deep sea-bed operations or sought registration for an area.

Land-based producer States: Special Commission 1, on problems of developing land-based producer States, reported substantial progress had been made in identifying developing land-based producer States likely to be most seriously affected, possible effects of sea-bed mining on these States, and possible remedial measures.

It was generally agreed that criteria for identification would be based on the degree of dependence of a particular developing land-based producer State on the contribution of one or more of the four mineral commodities concerned--copper, nickel, cobalt and manganese--to their export earnings or to their economies before sea-bed production of these minerals occurred.

Deliberations on possible effects of sea-bed production focused on the adverse effects on export earnings or economies. While existing remedial measures could go a long way in mitigating the problems of developing land-based producer States, a great need still existed for additional measures, especially for necessary economic adjustment, it was reported.

Also stressed was the need for obtaining continually updated information, data on recycling, projections of demand for copper, nickel, cobalt and manganese in the year 2000 and beyond, a complete listing of possible remedial and assistance measures, and specific data on trade agreements, especially bilateral pacts.

Enterprise: Special Commission 2 on the Enterprise examined papers outlining a project profile of a deep sea-bed mining operation by the Enterprise (LOS/PCN/SCN.2/6), on an ad hoc expert core group for the Enterprise, and on training needs and requirements. It reported that training was a priority issue, and concrete understanding had to be reached regarding designation of personnel for training, and on the nature and scope of training obligations of registered pioneer investors.

Mining code: Special Commission 3 on the sea-bed mining code continued its article-by-article review of a set of draft regulations, concentrating on provisions relating to prospecting.

It reported that the main issue regarding prospecting remained the degree of control to be exercised by the Authority. Some countries wanted prospecting to be encouraged, and left uninhibited, provided a prospector notify the Authority of its intention to prospect and abided by Convention provisions on protection of the marine environment and on training programmes on marine science and technology. The Authority's control should be limited to verification of those undertakings, they felt.

Other nations wanted the Authority to have greater control of prospecting activities, with prospectors applying for permission to operate, and providing notification of areas of prospecting. Verification of activities and levying a fee to cover application costs was also desirable, they said.

A third approach seemed to emerge from discussions, it was reported, whereby freedom of prospecting would be recognized, but the prospectors would regularly report to the Authority on their activities.

Tribunal: Special Commission 4 on the Tribunal continued its article-by-article examination of draft rules for such a body, especially those on: privileges, immunities and facilities accorded to agents, counsel and advocates of parties before the Tribunal; official languages; provision of information by international organizations not parties to the Law of the Sea Convention; preliminary proceedings intended to prevent the abuse of legal process; and provisional measures to preserve the respective rights of the parties to a dispute or to prevent serious harm to the marine environment.

A supplementary article on applications for the prompt release of detained vessels and crews was to be reviewed at the Geneva session, as would questions of disputes involving intergovernmental organizations, consortia or entities other than States and for which rules have not been drafted.