An Analysis of the Jurisdiction of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) to Render an Advisory Opinion

Abstract

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is commonly referred to as the “Constitution for the Oceans.” It establishes the legal framework for all activities at sea. In 2013, the Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission (SRFC) requested an advisory opinion from the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS). In 2015, ITLOS rendered an advisory opinion for this case which is the first time ITLOS rendered a full bench on an advisory opinion on the basis of the broad interpretation. Following this, various states and scholars questioned ITLOS’s jurisdiction to render an advisory opinion. They argued that ITLOS’s interpretation contravenes the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and extends the advisory opinion’s jurisdiction of ITLOS. This article aims to determine whether ITLOS has the authority to render an advisory opinion under Article 21 of ITLOS’s statute and Article 138 of the Rules of the ITLOS. While advisory opinions are not legally binding, they may have significant implications on international politics and third states, particularly Thailand as a state party to UNCLOS.