領海直線基線劃定之爭議－United States v. Alaska一案判決之解析

United States v. Alaska-The Supreme Court's Ruling Concerning Disputes over the Drawing of Territorial Sea Straight Baselines

宋燕輝(Yann-Huei Song)

《歐美研究》 33卷3期 (2003/09) Pp. 629-683

https://doi.org/10.7015/JEAS.200309.0629

摘要

一九九七年六月十九日，美國最高法院以九票對零票，以及六票對三票，在United States v. Alaska一案當中，就美國聯邦政府與阿拉斯加州歷經十八年，有關該州北極沿岸富有油氣蘊藏之下沉陸地（submerged lands）所有權的爭訟，做出支持美國聯邦政府所提主張的判決。美國最高法院在本案之判決與國際海洋法有關基線劃法、歷史性水域主張、內水法律性質，以及島嶼在海洋劃界之地位等諸多重要問題相關。本文主要目的在於解析美國最高法院就本案與國際海洋法中有關領海直線基線劃法，以及島嶼在海洋劃界之地位等問題所提出的見解與所作之判決。

關鍵字

直線基線 ； 島嶼 ； 美國 ； 阿拉斯加 ； 海域劃界

並列摘要

On the 19th of June 1997, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled, by unanimous vote and a vote of six to three respectively, in favor of the United States in United States v. Alaska. This case, which remained pending for 19 years before the Court, concerned seaward boundaries and titles to coastal lands along the Arctic coast. This article examines less-noticed aspects of the Court's ruling: the method of base-line-drawing, the historic waters claim, the legal nature of internal waters, and the legal status of islands in maritime boundary delimitation [under the law of the sea in that part of the Beaufort Sea where there were fringing islands and disputed hydrographic features]. This case study discusses U.S. practice and policy taken over the past 40 to 50 years with respect to drawing straight baselines to measure the limit of U.S. territorial sea and to determining the legal status of is-lands in maritime boundary delimitation. This case study shows that one of the major policy considerations for the U.S. decision not to adopt the method of straight baseline-drawing was to safeguard the interests and rights of the federal government against the states.

並列關鍵字

Straight baselines ； islands ； United States ； Alaska ； maritime boundary delimitation