Archipelagic waters. According to Article 46 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982, the term “archipelago” means a group of islands, including parts of islands, their connecting waters and other natural formations, which are so closely interconnected that they constitute a single geographical, economic and political unit or are historically considered as such.

Archipelagic states include, among others, Indonesia, the Philippines, Fiji, etc.

The legal status of archipelagic waters has become particularly relevant in recent decades because of attempts by archipelagic states to subjugate to their sovereignty waters that have traditionally been used as the high seas.

This unilateral action, in violation of international law, was first undertaken by the Philippines in 1955, which declared that it considered all waters between the islands of the Philippine archipelago as internal waters and thus subject to the exclusive sovereignty of the Philippines. The Philippines were followed in 1957 by Indonesia, whose sovereignty was unilaterally extended to the vast maritime areas previously used without restriction for international navigation.

The Convention provides for the right of an archipelagic State to draw straight baselines connecting the most prominent points of the most remote islands and drying reefs of the archipelago, provided that such baselines include the principal islands and an area in which the ratio of water surface area to land surface area, including the atolls, is between 1:1 and 9:1. The length of such baselines shall not exceed 100 nautical miles (only 3% of the total number of such baselines may reach 125 nautical miles).

When such baselines are drawn, no noticeable deviations from the general configuration of the archipelago are allowed.

The breadth of territorial waters, the contiguous zone and the exclusive economic zone are established on the outer side of the archipelagic baselines.

The sovereignty of the archipelagic State extends to archipelagic waters, subject to a number of provisions that allow due consideration for the legitimate interests of other States in the use of such waters. Thus, an archipelagic State must recognize the traditional right of fishing and other lawful activities of immediately adjoining States in certain areas within archipelagic waters. Bilateral agreements shall govern the manner and conditions for the exercise of such rights.

Furthermore, an archipelagic State must not damage existing submarine cables installed by other States that pass through its waters without coming ashore, nor prevent the maintenance and replacement of these cables.

By analogy with territorial waters, the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, subject to the regime of internal waters within archipelagic waters, secured to all states the right of peaceful passage through them.

At the same time, the regime of archipelagic passage is established for the routes normally used for international navigation, which are within the archipelagic waters and the territorial sea.

Archipelagic passage refers to the exercise of the right of normal navigation and overflight solely for the purpose of uninterrupted, rapid and unhindered transit from one part of the high seas or exclusive economic zone to another part of the high seas or exclusive economic zone.

The Archipelago State is recognized as having broad authority to establish and replace maritime corridors or traffic separation schemes for ships. Although such corridors or schemes are approved by the IMO, the decision to do so rests with the Archipelago State.

If such corridors are not established, the right of archipelagic passage through maritime corridors may be exercised through the routes normally used for international navigation.

International Straits. Straits are defined as natural sea passages connecting parts of the high seas or seas and oceans.

It is very important to distinguish in the extensive list of straits used in navigation today the straits used for international navigation, or, as today it is accepted to call them in the international maritime law, international straits.

Before the judgment of the International Court of Justice on the Anglo-Albanian Corfu incident of 1948, it was accepted that a strait was international in the legal sense if it was necessary to cross from one part of the high seas to another part of the high seas and was used by a significant number of foreign ships. The decisive criteria in determining the status of the strait

The Court recognized its geographical location and importance to international navigation.

The optimal combination of the interests of the countries using international straits and the coastal states to them is reflected in Part III of the 1982 Convention “Straits used for international navigation”. Where a strait is used for international navigation between one area of the high seas (or exclusive economic zone) and another area of the high seas (or exclusive economic zone) and is overlapped by the territorial sea of the coastal or coastal States, all vessels in them shall enjoy the right of transit passage, which shall not be hindered. Transit passage in this case is the exercise of freedom of navigation solely for the purpose of uninterrupted and rapid transit through the strait.

This provision is of great importance for the interests of merchant shipping, given the widespread expansion of the territorial seas by coastal states, which has resulted in the total or partial overlapping of a considerable number of the most important international straits by territorial waters.

The 1982 Convention also contains provisions taking into account the interests of the states bordering the straits in the field of navigation safety, fishery, pollution prevention, observance of customs, fiscal, immigration and sanitary rules.

Thus, vessels in transit passage must comply with generally accepted international rules, procedures and practices relating to maritime safety, including the MPSS-72, and the prevention, reduction and control of pollution from ships.

Ships, when exercising the right of transit passage, must refrain from any activity contrary to the principles of international law stipulated in the UN Charter, to refrain from any activity other than that inherent in the normal course of events, unless force majeure circumstances are involved.

According to the Convention, the regime of transit passage does not apply to a strait used for international navigation, if this strait has the same navigational and hydrographic conditions, passing in the high seas or in the exclusive economic zone.

According to Article 38 of the Convention, no obstacle shall be placed in the way of transit passage, except that if the strait is formed by an island of a State bordering the strait and its continental part, the transit passage shall not apply if the sea side of the island has an equally navigational and hydrographic route in the open sea or the exclusive economic zone. An example in the latter case is the Strait of Messina between the Apennine Peninsula and Sicily, which connects the Ionian and Tyrrhenian Seas.

During the transit passage through the Straits, foreign ships cannot conduct any surveys or hydrographic surveys without the prior permission of the states bordering the Straits.

The States bordering the Straits may establish sea corridors and prescribe systems for the separation of ship traffic in the Straits when necessary to facilitate the safe passage of ships.

In doing so, states must comply with the following requirements:

(a) Sea corridors and traffic separation systems must comply with generally accepted international regulations;
(b) The establishment or replacement of sea lanes and traffic separation systems must be approved in advance by IMO;
c) Established sea corridors and traffic separation systems should be marked on nautical charts, which should be duly published.

The provisions of the Convention do not affect the legal regime of the straits, which is regulated by special international conventions. These include, in particular, the Black Sea and Baltic Straits.

Thus, the provision on transit passage, reflected in the 1982 Convention, is fundamentally new in international maritime law. It can be assumed that the provision on transit passage became a universally recognized norm in international law and should act independently of conventions regulating the legal regime of certain international straits, such as the Montreux Convention of 1936.

Black Sea Straits. By the Black Sea straits, this name, historically firmly established in soviet and then in Russian historical and legal literature, is meant one of the most important international sea routes connecting the Black Sea and the Mediterranean Sea and consisting of the Bosporus (length 31 km, width from 0,7 to 3,7 km), the Sea of Marmara (length 222 km, width from 27 to 74 km), and the Dardanelles (length 70 km, width from 1,3 to 2 km).

The legal regime of the Black Sea straits is governed by the provisions of the 1936 Black Sea Straits Convention, better known as the Montreux Convention (after the name of the Swiss city where it was signed).

Article 1 of the Montreux Convention “recognizes and reaffirms the principle of the right of freedom of passage and navigation in the Straits. In peacetime “merchant ships shall enjoy full freedom of passage and navigation in the Straits, day and night, irrespective of flag and cargo, without any formalities”, subject to the payment of very reasonable charges as set out in the Convention and to a health inspection (Article 2). Pilotage and tugage are optional (Art. 2). The captains of the vessels shall inform the Turkish authorities of their names, flag, tonnage, place of destination and departure (Art. 2), and the sanitary inspection is confined to presenting a sanitary declaration, if there are no cases of dangerous infectious diseases on board (Art. 3).

Full freedom of navigation for merchant ships is preserved also in wartime, if Turkey is not a belligerent (Art. 4), and even to a large extent also if Turkey is at war, but in that case it applies only to ships of a state which is not at war with Turkey (Art. 5).

The Convention regulates in detail the passage of warships through the Straits (Articles 11-18), giving preference to ships of the Black Sea states over others. Thus, all ships are obliged to notify the Turkish authorities in advance of their passage, but the Black Sea states do so eight days in advance, and others 15 days before the passage. The Black Sea states can conduct in some cases their submarines, as well as large ships without any tonnage restriction through the Straits, while the total maximum tonnage of ships of other countries in the Straits is limited to 15 thousand tons.

These conditions of passage for warships remain in wartime, but only for the ships of states that are not at war, and if Turkey itself is not a belligerent (Art. 19). If Turkey is at war, however, it determines at its own discretion the conditions for the passage of warships through the Straits (Art. 20).

The Baltic straits. The Baltic Straits, or, as they are sometimes called, the Danish Straits, consisting of three straits: the Great Belt, the Little Belt, and the Sound, are the only sea lanes connecting the Baltic Sea with the North Sea and the Atlantic Ocean.

The regime of the navigation of merchant ships through the straits of the Baltic Sea is determined by the Convention of March 14, 1857 in Copenhagen known as “Treaty for the abolition of duties hitherto levied on merchant ships and cargoes during their passage through the straits of the Sound and the two Belt straits.

The treaty is recognized as still in force. It states that it is concluded with the object of facilitating the trade and maritime relations which exist between the States by abolishing in perpetuity all taxes levied on foreign ships and their cargoes during their passage through the straits.

Denmark, under the treaty, undertook not to levy any customs, lighthouse or any other charges on ships. It was specifically provided, however, that the levies thus abolished could not be recovered indirectly by an increase in port or customs duties. In addition, Denmark undertook to maintain in good order all lights and lighthouses, as well as the existing buoys, milestones and marks for the navigation of the Kattegat, Zunda and Belts. It was also incumbent upon Denmark to replace in good time and, if the navigational situation so required, to increase the number of lights and lighthouses providing navigation in the Straits. Denmark has agreed to provide pilotage, with pilotage charges to be moderate and the same for both Danish and foreign vessels. Pilotage is optional.

International channels. While straits are natural sea passages, canals are man-made shipping lanes.

Fixing the right of all states to freely use canals for navigation is essential for the development of the economy and security of many countries around the world.

The importance of canals as nodal points in the world system of maritime communications has led to the political acuteness of the problem of their legal regime. Some canal countries see in their geographical position additional opportunities for increasing their own role in world politics.

The fact that the canal connects the open seas and is the most important waterway of international importance, to a large extent, distinguishes the canal waters in their importance from other inland waters of the state, such as national rivers. Nevertheless, today there are no treaty norms granting the right of passage through any sea canals or obliging to grant it. The right of passage can be discussed in relation to each canal individually. The most important international canals, such as the Suez, Panama and Kiel, are open to the passage of ships of all nations either by international agreement or by national legislation.

One of the most important factors determining the status of canals is their geographical location. They all form a direct link between vast areas of the high seas. The Panama Canal connects the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, the Suez Canal connects the Mediterranean and Red Seas with access to the Indian Ocean. The Kiel Canal connects the Baltic Sea to the North Sea and then to the Atlantic Ocean.

Another feature of international canals is related to their functional characteristics and importance for international navigation. In this respect, the canals are not inferior to many international straits and even surpass them. Usually they are built to become a maritime communication of international importance and enter the general system of the world’s maritime transport routes.

The Suez Canal connects the Mediterranean Sea to the Red Sea with the possibility of further access to the Indian Ocean.

The legal regime of the Suez Canal is governed by the 1888 Constantinople Convention regarding the Free Navigation of the Suez Canal (Constantinople Convention), other applicable principles and norms of international law and Egyptian legislation.

The Constantinople Convention was the first treaty in the history of international law to declare the principle of freedom of use of the sea canal by ships of all nations.

The most important principles of navigation in the canal established by the Constantinople Convention are:

Freedom of use of the canal by vessels of all nations;
Equality of all States in the use of the canal;
The principle of neutrality, prohibition of blockade of the canal.
As a guarantee of the freedom of use of the canal, the Constantinople Convention stipulates the obligation of the Parties not to violate the free use of the canal in time of war or peace (Article 1) and not to allow attempts aimed at violating the inviolability of the canal (Article 2). Equally, the inviolability of the material part, institutions, buildings and works both in the sea canal and in the freshwater canal shall not be violated (Art. 3). The principle of freedom of use of the canal is not limited in time (Art. 14). This principle is also confirmed in the preamble of the Constantinople Convention, which states the desire of its parties “to approve by treaty the existence of a certain order which shall safeguard at all times and for all States the free use of the Suez Canal”. Article 9 of the Convention obliges Egypt to take the necessary measures to ensure the free use of the canal.

The principle of equality of States in the use of the canal is reiterated in Articles 1 and 12 of the Constantinople Convention. According to article 1, the canal is free and open to all commercial and military vessels without distinction as to flag. In order to avoid infringement of this principle, all states party to the Convention “shall be prohibited from claiming territorial or commercial advantages and privileges in international agreements which may be concluded with regard to the canal” (article 12). Equal for all users of the canal, their ships and companies are the conditions of passage of ships determined by the Egyptian legislation, rights and obligations of ship owners and ship masters. An integral part of the general principle of equality of all states when using the canal is the principle of non-discrimination, as the general rule of equality can be violated by the structure of fees and charges, which would impose greater or lesser financial obligations on users depending on the flag of the vessel, its owner. Transit fees and fees for services rendered are levied on all ships on an equal basis, depending on the net tonnage of the ship, its degree of loading (in cargo or in ballast) and the type of services rendered.

The states parties to the Constantinople Convention undertook to never apply the right of blockade (Art. 1). In order to guarantee the freedom of navigation on the canal, the construction and possession of bases, the construction of fortifications of any kind, and the maintenance of warships in the canal zone are prohibited (Articles 7, 11). The representatives of the signatory powers were obliged to “demand the destruction of all installations and the dispersal of all gatherings which might have the purpose or effect of disturbing the freedom and full security of navigation” (Art. 8). Since the canal remains open during wartime for the free passage even of military vessels of the belligerent powers, “no action permitted by war and no action hostile to or with the purpose of disturbing the free navigation of the canal shall be permitted in the canal, in its ports of entry, or within 12 miles of those ports” (Art. 4).

It should be noted that the text of the Convention specified 3 miles.

But since the 1958 Presidential Decree increased the breadth of Egypt’s territorial waters to 12 nautical miles, the provisions of the Convention were amended accordingly.

The passage of military vessels must be made in the shortest possible time and without any stops or delays. The period of stay of military vessels in Port Said and in the harbor of Suez shall not exceed 24 hours. An interval of 24 hours shall be observed between the departure from the port of entry of ships of the belligerent powers (Art. 4). In addition, no troops, weapons or other military supplies may be landed or taken on board during wartime in the canal and its ports of entry (Art. 5).

More than a century of experience in applying the provisions of the Constantinople Convention has shown that any deviation from observance of the principles proclaimed therein, first of all the principle of neutrality and prohibition of blockade of the canal, poses a threat to the free use of the canal.

Today, the Constantinople Convention is in force with the exceptions of provisions that contradict the UN Charter and the Egyptian legislation.

Thus, the provisions of Articles 8, 9, 10, 13 on the special rights of the Imperial Ottoman government to enforce the Constantinople Convention in connection with Egypt’s realization of the right to self-determination and nationalization of the Suez Canal Company in 1956 are no longer valid.

Russian and foreign doctrine of international law views the Suez Canal as an artificial inland waterway of international importance. Its use by ships of foreign states can take place only with the express consent of the treaty, subject to the rules of navigation established by the sovereign, through whose territory the canal is laid. Egypt acknowledged the obligations to grant the right to use the canal to foreign ships in a unilateral Declaration dated April 24, 1957, attached to the letter of the Egyptian Foreign Minister to the UN Secretary General. This Declaration of the Egyptian Government was registered with the UN Secretariat as an international instrument. In the Statement of the Egyptian President of 1 August 1956 on the Nationalization of the Suez Canal Company, the Memorandum of the Egyptian Government of 18 March 1957 on the Resumption of Navigation through the Canal and the Declaration on the Suez Canal of 24 April 1957 the Egyptian Government affirmed its commitment to its international obligations and its determination “to enable the Suez Canal to be an efficient and satisfactory route connecting the countries of the world and serving peace and prosperity.” At the same time, adherence to the terms and spirit of the Constantinople Convention was bound by fidelity to the Charter, principles and purposes of the UN.

The Egyptian government undertook “to ensure free and uninterrupted navigation for all countries within the limits and in accordance with the provisions of the Constantinople Convention of 1888.

The Suez Canal Authority (SSC), established by the Egyptian government on 26 July 1956, manages the traffic of ships in the Canal.

The SSC is entrusted with all matters related to the management, operation, maintenance and improvement of navigational conditions in the canal. According to the Statute they are not authorized to take measures contrary to the Constantinople Convention and the Egyptian Declaration of 24 April 1957. Under clause 7 of the mentioned Declaration ASC by virtue of its Statute can in no case grant to any vessel, company or party any advantage or preference not granted under the same conditions to other vessels, companies or parties.

The Egyptian Declaration of April 24, 1957 specifies such means of settling possible differences and disputes regarding the interpretation and application of the Constantinople Convention and the Declaration, and

The rules of navigation in the canal, such as appeals to the ASC, negotiations, consultations, arbitral tribunal, and the International Court of Justice (ICJ). By the Egyptian Declaration on the Suez Canal and Measures for its Operation dated 18 July 1958, Egypt recognized the compulsory jurisdiction of the UN International Court of Justice on the basis of reciprocity and without special agreement in accordance with clause 2, Article 36 of the Statute of the UN International Court of Justice.

The navigation on the Suez Canal is governed by the Rules of Navigation of the Suez Canal. They define the requirements for ships, under which they can be allowed to pass through the canal, the powers of the ASC, and port management.

The SSC’s instructions and circulars, which according to Article 1 of the Regulations must comply with the SOLAS Convention, the MPSS-72, as well as the Egyptian legislation, are an integral part of the Regulations.

Without affecting the fundamental principles of navigation on the canal, the ASC Guidelines and Circulars nevertheless make changes, amendments, additions to the Rules, so they can be considered as an integral part of Egyptian legislation on navigation in the canal.

The Kiel Canal crosses the base of the Jutland Peninsula between Kieler-Förde Bay and the Elbe River mouth and is the shortest route connecting the Baltic Sea and the North Sea.

The canal is 98.7 km long and 102 m wide on the surface and 42 m on the bottom. The depth on the navigable fairway is 11.3 m. The canal is fully located on the territory of Germany. It is 685 km shorter than sailing through the Baltic straits.

The canal was created in 1887-1895. The right of passage through the Kiel Canal was established by the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 at the Paris Peace Conference, under which the canal was open to commercial and military ships of all countries which were at peace with Germany.

The legal regime of the Kiel Canal, as stipulated in the Versailles Peace Treaty (Articles 380-386), was based on the principles already known from the Constantinople Convention of 1888. Germany was obliged to refrain from building fortifications and artillery batteries, which could threaten the maritime routes between the Baltic Sea and the North Sea.

Currently, navigation in the canal is governed by the Kiel Canal Regulations.

Under the Rules, merchant ships of all countries are granted free passage upon payment of transit fees and a permit certificate. The passage can be denied to ships that do not meet all the necessary requirements for navigation in the canal.

Military ships can only pass through the canal with permission obtained in advance through diplomatic channels. When passing through the canal, warships enjoy immunity, but must comply with all the rules of passage.

There are no special treaty acts on the regime of the canal so far, which, however, has not changed its international character.

On the basis of a long and extensive practice, an international customary norm has been formed about the right of passage through the canal for merchant and military ships of all countries. The application of this norm is regulated by national acts of Germany.

Vessel traffic in the Kiel Canal is two-way and is regulated by the canal control service. The speed of ships must not exceed 8 knots.

Opposite or overtaking ships must diverge at the designated broadening points in the channel. While waiting for the divergence, the vessel is pressed against the stalls set at the canal edges, gives anchor on one bow and is kept in place by periodically working with the machine.

The passage through the canal, including the time taken for locking, usually takes 8-10 hours.

Before entering the Kiel Canal, a helmsman provided by the canal administration is taken on board the vessel. Two steersmen must be on board the vessel with a gross tonnage of 2500 reg. tons and more.

Pilotage is obligatory for all vessels entering or sailing through Kiel Canal. Ships sailing to or from the outer harbor of Kiel-Holtenau into Kieler-Förde Bay are exempted from pilotage.

In individual cases, at the request of shipmasters, the Kiel Canal Office may exempt vessels and caravans of towed or pushed vessels from the required pilotage.

The following documents are required for passage through the Kiel Canal: arrival notification form completed and signed by the ship’s captain, measurement certificate and other ship’s documents, and cargo documents upon request. Masters with the right of free passage must have the appropriate certificate and present it, as well as a document confirming the identity of the owner of this certificate; sports vessels must present the certificate with a filled in stub.

Radio communications in the Kiel Canal, except where special permission is granted, may only be established with the nearest German public radio shore station.

The use of radio transmitters in the vicinity of large villages must be restricted.

Ships passing through the Kiel Canal must agree to undergo a health examination if they are deemed to be infectious or suspected of being so.

As a result of the long practice of international navigation on the Kiel Canal with the participation of almost all countries of the world, a special legal situation has arisen. It makes it possible to consider the current regime of this canal not only within the framework of national acts, but also already from the perspective of customary international law. In this regard, the closure of the Kiel Canal for the passage of ships or discrimination of the flag is a violation of international law.

Panama Canal. The Panama Canal is 82 km long and connects the Pacific Ocean near the cities of Balboa and Panama with the Atlantic Ocean near the cities of Cristobal and Colon. The Canal was officially opened in August 1914, but has been used for international navigation since 1920.

On December 31, 1999, under the Panama Canal Treaty, the Panama Canal came under Panamanian sovereignty.

The procedure for navigation in the Panama Canal is determined by the relevant regulations. A feature of navigation in the Panama Canal, as well as in the Kiel Canal, is the presence of a system of locks to overcome the difference in water levels. Vessels are driven into the locks by powerful electric locomotives.

Canal dues are a significant revenue item in Panama’s budget. In December of 2001, a record was set for the Panama Canal fee of $208,653.16. It was set by the cruise ship Norwegian Star with more than two thousand tourists on board.

According to the 1977 Treaty between the United States and Panama on the Permanent Neutrality and Operation of the Panama Canal (Article 1), the canal, as an international transit waterway, is permanently neutral. The provisions of this bilateral treaty are reflected in its Protocol, which is open for accession by all states. In 1988, the Soviet Union joined the Protocol.

Thus, Russia, as a successor state of the USSR, is a party to the Protocol to the Treaty on Permanent Neutrality and Operation of the Panama Canal, 1977.

It should be noted that Art. VII of the Treaty on Principles of Relations between Russia and Panama, signed in Bogota on November 27, 1997, guarantees a reliable and stable functioning of the canal as an international waterway open to the safe passage of all vessels of the world.

The Saimaa Canal, dug through the Karelian Isthmus, is located on the territory of Finland and Russia and connects the system of Finnish Saimaa Lakes with the Gulf of Finland of the Baltic Sea near Vyborg.

The length of the canal is 43 km, including locks. Construction of the canal was finished in 1856. In 1968 the canal was reconstructed.

According to the treaty between the USSR and Finland about the lease of the Soviet part of the Saimaa Canal and the Maly Vysotsky Island to the Republic of Finland, signed on September 27, 1962,

The Soviet part of the Saimaa Canal, which passes through Russian territory, with an average width of 30 m on both sides of the artificial channel, and Maly Vysotsky Island, for the transhipment and storage of goods, are transferred to Finland on lease for a period of 50 years.

Under the treaty, the Russian part of the canal may be used only by non-military ships of Finland and third countries engaged in commercial traffic. These vessels may not carry troops, arms, ammunition or other war material. Vessels of any purpose flying the flag of the Russian Federation may use the Russian part of the Saimaa Canal freely. Russian vessels using only the Russian part of the canal shall not be charged the fixed charges.

The Saimaa Canal lease expires in 2012, but the Finnish side has already expressed its desire to extend the agreement.

It should be stressed that according to the European Agreement on the Main Inland Waterways of International Importance, signed in Geneva on January 19, 1996, to which Russia is a participant, the Saimaa Canal was included in the list of inland waterways of international importance.

The Corinth Canal is located on the territory of Greece and is dug through the Corinth Isthmus, connecting the Aegean and Ionian Seas. It was built in 1881-1893. The canal is about 6 km long, about 25 m wide and 8 m deep. It is accessible to ships of up to 5 thousand tons displacement.

The canal was destroyed in 1944, and fully restored in 1948. Annually, over 15 thousand ships pass through the canal. Vessel traffic on the canal is one-way.