남극에 대해서는 현재 오스트레일리아나 뉴질랜드, 칠레 등 주변 7개 당사국의 이해관계가 대립하고 있기 때문에 잠정적으로 대륙붕경계선 심의와 같은 사안의 결정을 유보하는 경우가 다수 발생하고 있다. 이러한 과정에서 유엔해양법조약과 남극조약 사이에는 일정부분 상호충돌이 발생하게 된다. 남극조약 제6조는 공해에 대해 규정하였지만 공해의 정의와 범위가 분명히 규정된 것이 없고, 이것은 해저와 하층토에 대해서도 마찬가지로 규정이 없기 때문에 법개정이 요구된다. 공해에 대한 정의는 만약 남극조약이 현존하는 국제법 체제를 따르면, 즉 1958년의 보츠와나 해양법조약에서 정의한 공해보다 더 좋다면, 남극대륙에 존재하는 영해를 간접적으로 승인함과 동시에 배타적 경제구역이 존재하게 된다. 동 조약 제4조의 ‘남극에서의 어떠한 주권권리도 수립하면 안된다.’와 ‘남극의 영토주권에 대해서는 새로운 요구나 현행 요구를 확대하면 안된다.’는 규정은 상호모순이 되기 때문에, 이점에 대해서는 남극조약과 유엔국제해양법조약을 대조하여 어느 한쪽이건 간에 상호충돌되지 않는 방향으로 법개정이 진행되어야 한다.
대륙붕문제 또한 남극대륙의 영토주권귀속이 각국의 이해관계에 따른 대립으로 결론이 나지 않기 때문에, 대륙붕귀속과 기타 외부경계선 확정 또한 더 상세하게 해결할 방법이 없다. 남극해역에서 유엔해양법조약이 연해국에 대륙붕 해저광산자원개발의 권리를 부여할 수 있는가라는 문제에 대해서 유엔해양법조약과 남극조약은 서로 대립된 입장을 보이고 있다. 동 조약 제77조는 ‘연해국은 대륙붕과 자연자원개발목적을 위해 조사를 하며 대륙붕에 대해 주권을 행사한다.’라고 규정하였다. 이러한 권리는 배타적인 것이다. 오스트레일리아의 경우 유엔해양법조약에 근거하여 Kerguelen 심해 고원에 대해 광산자원개발권리를 보유했는데 60도 이남의 대륙붕까지 확장된 부분을 포함한다. 반면 남극조약은 과학연구 이외의 모든 광산자원활동을 엄격히 금지한다. 근본적으로 두 조약 사이에 분쟁이 발생할 수밖에 없고 일단 광산자원개발금지가 실행되면 남극의 안정은 깨지게 된다. 법제도적 개정에 앞서 정치적인 혜안이 요구된다.
국제해저구역과 관련해서는 남극조약과의 충돌을 회피하기 위해 유엔해양법조약이 해당지역 대륙붕경계선으로 통과된 「특정방법을 사용하여 대륙붕 외연을 확정한 것에 관한 양해성명」을 확정하고, 남극해역에 대해 필요하고 적절한 특수조항 혹은 성명을 도출해야 한다. 또한 일시적으로 해당지역에 관련된 대륙붕 주장에 대해 심의를 하지 않거나, 혹은 심의할 경우 남극조약과 관련한 사안은 간여하지 않도록 건의하는 것이 적절할 것이다.
The international community launches a new round of international disputes on the Antarctic resources since these resources are of economic and strategic significance. The Antarctic Treaty has frozen the territorial sovereignty of Antarctic. In view of the special connotation of the legal property of the Antarctic area and its resources, which is established on the principle of the common heritage of mankind, and the deficiencies of existing management system, it is suggested that we should amplify the application of common heritage of mankind principle. In the Antarctic Treaty System, it has run through the concept of sustainable development, such as conserving the resources of the Antarctic, protecting the environment of the Antarctic and maintaining the ecological balance of the Antarctic. Suggestions on China’s strategic choices and development path on the Antarctic are put forward: at home we should promote China’s Antarctic policy and legislation to act on international convention, enhance the support from capital and technology strongly, as well as the extensive and in-depth research on the field of science and jurisprudence; and from international view, we should strengthen exchanges and cooperation with the international community to create the harmonious environment of international society and Antarctic.
The Antarctic has been under the restriction of Antarctic Treaty System,which includes Antarctic Treaty as its core agreement and other related agreements,since Antarctic Treaty took effect in 1961. Nevertheless,the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of Sea (UNCLOS,hereafter referred to as the Convention) established the legal regime for the continental shelf and requested a study into the coastal state of the shelf to complete the delineation of the outer limits of the shelf beyond 200 nautical miles within 10 years of the ratification of the convention. Since the Convention entered into force in 1994,Australia,Norway,Argentina and the United Kingdom have successively and individually claimed their sovereign rights over the continental shelves in the south of 60’s,namely the Antarctic region. With such back- ground,the paper assesses the continental-shelf submissions and preliminary information provided by seven countries claiming territorial sovereignty or sovereign rights to the Antarctic region,and reviews the considerations and recommendations of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf(CLCS).Following the above analysis,the paper scrutinizes the legal basis for continental shelf claims to the Antarctic region,and investigates conflicts between the Antarctic Treaty System and the Convention.Additionally,his paper discusses the trend of legal regime development regarding the Antarctic region.With the humanity action is more frequently in the South Pole, the South Pole directly suffers environmental pollution seriously. Since the Antarctic Treaty has concluded, the majority of treaties mainly aim at prevention for the South Pole environmental damage, other than the harm and responsibility. This situation was changed in 2005. The 28th session of Antarctic Treaty consultative conference passed the responsibility appendix of the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty finally, namely Responsibility Appendix of the Environmental Emergency Causes. This article embarks from this appendix, expounds the responsibility nature, the definition of environ- mental damage, the undertaker for responsibility, the right of assertor, the legal responsibility and so on, and penetrates into the development of the liability system of environmental damage in the South Pole.
The status of Antarctic resources such as mineral energy, water and biology source, are briefly summarized in this paper. Meanwhile, the relation of Antarctic resource activity and environmental protection, the relation of Antarctic exploration and resource survey, the relation of its exploitation or potential utilization and high-tech development or application are analyzed. Besides, the trends on the potential utilization of Antarctic resources, Chinese national policy and measures on the Antarctic resource issue, are discussed the Antarctic problem has become a global concern out of its significant strategic position and rich resources.With the decrease of global resources and the awareness of Antarctic consciousness of the developing countries,today's Antarctic sovereignty presents not only the claims of a few powers,but also the involvement of challenge of developing countries. Claims of Antarctic sovereignty without legal foundation cannot get the recognition over the world nor theoretical support. Under the restriction of the Antarctic Treaty that freezes the territorial claims,it is a relatively peaceful and stable period for Antarctic at present.A research of the issue from the legal prospective is crucial for us to obtain a favorable position in this contention and to remain the peace of Antarctic and the world.