Which of the following statements are correct with regard to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) ? 1. UNCLOS authorizes the UN Security Council to take a direct action in case of the disputes between States on sovereign rights over Exclusive Economic Zones 2. UNCLOS defines contiguous zones and specifies its functions 3. Both the US and India have ratified UNCLOS 4. UNCLOS grants certain rights to Landlocked States Select the answer using the code given below : (a) 1, 2 and 4 only (b) 1 and 2 only (c) 2 and 4 only (d) 1, 3 and 4

1. Evolution of International Maritime Law (basic)

To understand international maritime law, we must first look at the oceans as the original 'Global Commons'—vast spaces once considered free for anyone to use. Historically, the law of the sea was governed by the principle of Mare Liberum (Free Sea), championed by the Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius. This doctrine suggested that the sea was international territory and all nations were free to use it for seafaring and trade. This openness fueled the Age of Discovery, where European powers like the Portuguese, Spanish, and later the English sought to control sea-borne trade routes to the East to meet the rising demand for exotic products History, class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Modern World: The Age of Reason, p.147.

As competition intensified, the need for 'rules of the road' became clear. The British victory over the Spanish Armada in 1588 and the subsequent chartering of the East India Company in 1600 marked a shift where naval power was used to secure exclusive trading rights Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.), SPECTRUM, Advent of the Europeans in India, p.37. This era introduced the 'Cannon-shot rule'—the idea that a country's territorial sea extended as far as a shore-based cannon could fire (roughly 3 nautical miles). The use of firearms and cannons significantly reduced the hazards of sea voyages and allowed states to physically enforce their claims over coastal waters History, class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Modern World: The Age of Reason, p.147.

In the modern era, the focus shifted from simple trade to strategic and resource control. Nations began to see the ocean not just as a highway, but as a source of oil and a theatre for geopolitical influence. A prime example is the U.S. establishment of a military base at Diego Garcia to monitor oil transport and influence the politics of littoral countries Geography of India, Majid Husain, (McGrawHill 9th ed.), India–Political Aspects, p.71. This evolution from total freedom to high-tech surveillance and territorial claims eventually necessitated a unified legal framework, which we now know as the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

Sources: History, class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Modern World: The Age of Reason, p.147; Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.). SPECTRUM., Advent of the Europeans in India, p.37; Geography of India, Majid Husain, (McGrawHill 9th ed.), India–Political Aspects, p.71

2. Zoning the Ocean: From Shore to High Seas (intermediate)

To understand the governance of our oceans, we must look at the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), often called the 'Constitution of the Oceans.' Before UNCLOS, the seas were a 'free-for-all,' but today, the ocean is divided into specific zones based on distance from a baseline (usually the low-water mark along the coast). As we move further from the shore, the coastal state's sovereignty gradually decreases, transitioning into shared international rights. In India, all minerals and sea-wealth found within these zones vest in the Union government, rather than the individual coastal states Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Rights and Liabilities of the Government, p.551.

The zones are defined by specific distances measured in nautical miles (nm):

• Territorial Sea (12 nm): Here, the coastal state has near-total sovereignty, just like on land. However, they must allow innocent passage for foreign ships.
• Contiguous Zone (24 nm): This is a 'buffer' zone. While not fully sovereign, the state can enforce laws regarding customs, taxation (fiscal), immigration, and sanitation to prevent or punish infringements that occurred within its territory.
• Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) (200 nm): The state has the sole right to exploit all natural resources—like fishing or oil drilling—and even generate energy from water and wind. Beyond 200 nm lie the High Seas, which are considered the 'common heritage of mankind' and belong to no single nation.

Zone	Distance (from baseline)	Primary Rights/Powers
Territorial Sea	Up to 12 nm	Full sovereignty; innocent passage allowed.
Contiguous Zone	Up to 24 nm	Enforcement of customs, fiscal, immigration, and sanitary laws.
EEZ	Up to 200 nm	Sovereign rights for economic exploitation of resources.

While most countries, including India (which ratified it in 1995), adhere to UNCLOS, some major powers like the United States have not formally ratified the convention, though they generally treat its provisions as customary international law. To resolve disputes arising from these boundaries—such as overlapping EEZ claims—UNCLOS established the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), ensuring that conflicts are settled through legal arbitration rather than unilateral force.

Sources: Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Rights and Liabilities of the Government, p.551; Certificate Physical and Human Geography, GC Leong, World Communications, p.308

3. Sovereignty and Jurisdictional Rights at Sea (intermediate)

To understand sovereignty at sea, we must first understand the nature of a Sovereign State. In international law, a sovereign state is an independent entity with no authority above it, free to conduct its own affairs both internally and externally (Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Preamble of the Constitution, p.43). This sovereignty allows a nation like India to acquire or cede territory according to international norms (Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Union and Its Territory, p.49). However, when we move from land to the ocean, sovereignty becomes 'layered' rather than absolute, governed primarily by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

UNCLOS defines specific maritime zones where a coastal state's jurisdiction changes based on distance from the shore. Within the Territorial Sea (12 nautical miles), the state enjoys full sovereignty. Beyond this lies the Contiguous Zone (extending to 24 nautical miles), where the state possesses limited power to prevent and punish the infringement of its customs, fiscal, immigration, or sanitary (CFIS) laws. Further out is the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) (up to 200 nautical miles), where a state has 'sovereign rights' to explore and exploit natural resources, but not full territorial sovereignty over the waters themselves.

Zone	Distance	Nature of Rights
Territorial Sea	0–12 nm	Full Sovereignty (subject to innocent passage)
Contiguous Zone	12–24 nm	Limited enforcement (Customs, Fiscal, Immigration, Sanitary)
EEZ	Up to 200 nm	Sovereign rights over resources (living and non-living)

Crucially, UNCLOS ensures that the sea is not a 'closed' space. It grants landlocked states the right of access to and from the sea and the freedom of transit. When disputes arise regarding these rights—such as a disagreement over fishing in an EEZ—UNCLOS provides its own Dispute Settlement Mechanism under Part XV, which includes the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) and binding arbitration. It is a common misconception that such disputes are automatically referred to the UN Security Council; in reality, the legal framework of UNCLOS is designed to be self-contained and judicial in nature.

Sources: Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Preamble of the Constitution, p.43; Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Union and Its Territory, p.49

4. Dispute Settlement: ITLOS and Arbitration (exam-level)

When we talk about the 'Constitution of the Oceans' (UNCLOS), its most powerful feature is Part XV, which deals with the settlement of disputes. Unlike many international treaties that rely on voluntary cooperation, UNCLOS mandates that if two countries cannot resolve a sea-related disagreement through negotiation, they must submit to a compulsory procedure that results in a binding decision. This ensures that 'might does not always make right' in international waters. Just as domestic law uses specialized bodies like Administrative Tribunals to handle specific technical matters M. Laxmikanth, World Constitutions, p.705, UNCLOS provides a 'menu' of four specialized forums for states to choose from: the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), the International Court of Justice (ICJ), an Arbitral Tribunal (Annex VII), or a Special Arbitral Tribunal (Annex VIII).

The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), based in Hamburg, is a permanent judicial body specifically designed to interpret UNCLOS. It is particularly famous for its power to order the 'prompt release' of vessels and crews. However, a unique quirk of UNCLOS is that Arbitration is actually the 'default' mechanism. If two countries have a dispute and they haven't both agreed on the same forum (e.g., one wants ITLOS and the other wants the ICJ), the case automatically goes to an Annex VII Arbitral Tribunal. This is different from the WTO model where disputes move from bilateral consultations to a General Council acting as a Dispute Settlement Body Nitin Singhania, International Economic Institutions, p.538; in the Law of the Sea, the chosen tribunal has the final word on jurisdiction and the merits of the case.

Crucially, for a tribunal to be legitimate, it must act within its jurisdiction. If a tribunal rules on a subject-matter beyond its scope or violates principles of natural justice, its decision can be challenged—much like the legal standards applied to any administrative tribunal D. D. Basu, Fundamental Rights and Fundamental Duties, p.158. It is a common misconception that the UN Security Council handles daily disputes over Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ); in reality, UNCLOS relies on these specialized legal mechanisms to provide stable, predictable outcomes for maritime sovereignty and resource rights.

Feature	ITLOS	Annex VII Arbitration
Structure	Permanent court with 21 elected judges.	Ad-hoc body formed specifically for one case.
Flexibility	Strict rules of procedure and fixed location.	Parties have more say in choosing the arbitrators.
Default Status	Only if both parties have specifically chosen it.	The automatic default if parties disagree on the forum.

Sources: M. Laxmikanth, World Constitutions, p.705; Nitin Singhania, International Economic Institutions, p.538; D. D. Basu, Fundamental Rights and Fundamental Duties, p.158

5. India’s Maritime Policy and UNCLOS (intermediate)

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), often called the 'Constitution for the Oceans,' is the definitive international legal framework governing maritime activities. It divides the sea into specific zones where coastal states exercise varying degrees of sovereignty. While a state has full sovereignty over its Territorial Sea (up to 12 nautical miles), the Contiguous Zone (extending up to 24 nautical miles) serves a more functional purpose. In this zone, a coastal state can exercise the control necessary to prevent and punish the infringement of its customs, fiscal, immigration, or sanitary laws. Beyond this lies the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), extending up to 200 nautical miles, where states have sovereign rights for exploring and exploiting natural resources, though other states still enjoy freedoms like navigation and overflight.

While maritime law is often associated with coastal nations, UNCLOS explicitly grants landlocked states (like Nepal or Bhutan) specific rights, including the right of access to and from the sea and the freedom of transit through the territory of 'transit states' by all means of transport. This ensures that a lack of coastline does not mean a lack of participation in global trade. Historically, India has been a proactive participant in these legal frameworks, having ratified UNCLOS in 1995. This commitment to international law is reflected in how India settles maritime and land boundaries, often moving from historical awards like the Radcliffe Award to modern legal settlements and arbitration Majid Husain, Geography of India, India–Political Aspects, p.42.

Regarding disputes, UNCLOS provides a robust dispute settlement mechanism under Part XV. It established the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) and allows for binding arbitration to resolve conflicts over maritime boundaries or resource rights. It is a common misconception that the UN Security Council directly handles standard EEZ sovereign rights disputes; instead, these are typically referred to the specialized legal bodies mentioned. Interestingly, while the world largely follows UNCLOS as customary international law, some major powers, most notably the United States, have not yet formally ratified the convention despite generally adhering to its principles. India’s approach, involving constitutional amendments like the 100th Amendment for land boundaries with Bangladesh, demonstrates its rigorous adherence to formal legal processes in territory matters D. D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India, Territory of the Union, p.76.

Maritime Zone	Distance (from baseline)	Primary Scope of Authority
Territorial Sea	12 nautical miles	Full Sovereignty (except innocent passage)
Contiguous Zone	24 nautical miles	Enforcement of Customs, Fiscal, Immigration, Sanitary laws
EEZ	200 nautical miles	Sovereign rights over resources (living and non-living)

Sources: Geography of India, India–Political Aspects, p.42; Introduction to the Constitution of India, Territory of the Union, p.76

6. Major Powers and the 'Customary Law' Debate (exam-level)

In the realm of international relations, laws generally take two forms: Treaty Law (written agreements like UNCLOS) and Customary International Law (CIL). CIL consists of rules that come from a 'general and consistent practice of states' followed out of a sense of legal obligation (opinio juris). The debate surrounding major powers often centers on their preference for CIL over formal treaties, as it allows them to follow the 'spirit' of the law without being bound by the 'letter' of a treaty’s rigid enforcement mechanisms. For instance, while India ratified the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) in 1995, the United States has famously never ratified it. Despite this, the U.S. maintains that it adheres to most of its provisions because they have attained the status of Customary International Law.

This distinction is crucial when discussing sovereignty and dispute resolution. Under UNCLOS, disputes regarding the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) or continental shelf are handled through specialized bodies like the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) or arbitration under Part XV, rather than through direct UN Security Council intervention. Major powers sometimes resist ratification because they view these mandatory settlement mechanisms as an infringement on their national sovereignty. This mirrors the domestic caution seen in federal systems like the United States, where the American Constitution is kept intentionally rigid and difficult to amend to protect the original compact between states M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, World Constitutions, p.673.

For a country like India, which manages extensive maritime shipping and navigation and a vast network of national waterways D. D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India, TABLES, p.549, adhering to a rules-based treaty framework like UNCLOS provides a predictable legal environment. In contrast, relying on 'customary law' can be ambiguous. While the U.S. uses the principles of UNCLOS to justify its 'Freedom of Navigation' operations, its lack of ratification means it cannot participate in the formal bodies that set international maritime policy, illustrating the complex trade-off between maintaining absolute sovereign flexibility and participating in global legal governance D. D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India, Territory of the Union, p.77.

Sources: Indian Polity, World Constitutions, p.673; Introduction to the Constitution of India, TABLES, p.549; Introduction to the Constitution of India, Territory of the Union, p.77

7. Rights of Landlocked States under UNCLOS (exam-level)

Imagine being a country surrounded entirely by land, like Nepal or Switzerland. Without direct access to the ocean, your economy and trade could be held hostage by your neighbors. To prevent this, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) provides a specific legal framework—primarily under Part X—to ensure that landlocked states (LLS) are not excluded from the benefits of the global maritime commons. At the heart of these protections is the right of access to and from the sea and the freedom of transit. While coastal states enjoy sovereignty over their territorial waters, they must allow landlocked states to transport goods through their territory to reach the coast. However, this is not an absolute, 'check-free' right. The specific terms and conditions for transit must be settled through bilateral, sub-regional, or regional agreements between the landlocked state and the transit state (the neighbor with the coast). This ensures a balance between the landlocked state's need for trade and the transit state's right to maintain its own security and sovereignty. Beyond just transit, UNCLOS grants landlocked states certain economic privileges. For instance, they have the right to participate, on an equitable basis, in the exploitation of a part of the surplus of living resources (like fish) in the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) of coastal states in the same region. While shipping policies in India are managed by the Ministry of Shipping Indian Economy, Nitin Singhania, Infrastructure, p.459, international laws like UNCLOS ensure that even states without a coastline can participate in global maritime commerce.

Feature	Right of Landlocked States	Condition/Limitation
Freedom of Transit	Can transport goods through neighboring countries to reach the sea.	Subject to agreements with the transit state.
Customs & Taxes	Traffic in transit is usually exempt from customs duties.	Specific charges for services rendered (like port fees) may still apply.
EEZ Resources	Right to share in the 'surplus' of living resources (fish).	Does NOT apply to non-living resources (oil/minerals).

Sources: Indian Economy, Nitin Singhania, Infrastructure, p.459; Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu, Tables, p.505

8. Solving the Original PYQ (exam-level)

Now that you have mastered the various maritime zones—from Internal Waters to the High Seas—you can see how UPSC tests the functional boundaries of UNCLOS. This question requires you to integrate your knowledge of geographical definitions with geopolitical realities. While you learned that the Contiguous Zone extends up to 24 nautical miles for the enforcement of customs, fiscal, and sanitary laws, statement 2 confirms this functional definition. Similarly, the concept of the Right of Access for Landlocked States (Part X of the Convention) is a pillar designed to ensure global equity, making statement 4 a solid foundation for your answer.

To arrive at the correct answer, (C) 2 and 4 only, we must apply the elimination technique to the institutional and membership traps. In statement 1, recall that UNCLOS established its own specialized dispute settlement mechanisms, such as the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) and Annex VII arbitration. The UN Security Council does not have a "direct action" mandate for EEZ sovereign rights disputes under the convention itself. Furthermore, statement 3 contains a classic UPSC fact-trap: while India ratified the treaty in 1995, the United States has famously never ratified UNCLOS, despite generally observing its provisions as customary international law.

By identifying these two errors, you can effectively eliminate options (a), (b), and (d), leaving you with the only logically consistent pair. This question highlights why it is crucial to distinguish between signatories and ratifying parties and to recognize the specific Judicial Bodies created by international treaties versus general UN organs. Mastering these nuances, as outlined in the UNCLOS Official Text and Congressional Research Service Reports, is the key to navigating complex International Relations questions.