The Ratification of Maritime Conventions
Chapter I.7.385
PROTOCOL CONCERNING SPECIALLY PROTECTED AREAS AND BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY IN THE MEDITERRANEAN, 1995
ADOPTED: Done at Barcelona, 10 June 1995
REFERENCE:
ENTERED INTO FORCE: 12 December 1999
DEPOSITARY: Government of Spain
SECRETARY: Spanish Ministry of Foreign Affairs
IMPLEMENTATION
SIGNATURE, RATIFICATION, ACCEPTANCE, APPROVAL AND ACCESSION
Article XXIX
This Protocol shall be open for signature in Barcelona on 10 June 1995 and in Madrid from 11 June 1995 to 10 June 1996 by any Contracting Party to the Convention.
Article XXX
This Protocol shall be subject to ratification, acceptance or approval. Instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval shall be deposited with the Government of Spain, which will assume the functions of Depositary.
Article XXXI
As from 10 June 1996, this Protocol shall be open for accession by any State and regional economic grouping which is Party to the Convention.
ENTRY INTO FORCE
Article XXXII
1. This Protocol shall enter into force on the thirtieth day following the deposit of the sixth instrument of ratification, acceptance or approval of, or accession to, the Protocol.
2. From the date of its entry into force, this Protocol shall replace the Protocol Concerning Mediterranean Specially Protected Areas of 1982, in the relationship among the Parties to both instruments.
AMENDMENTS
Article XIV
1. The procedures for amendments to Annexes to this Protocol shall be those set forth in Article 17 of the Convention.
2. All proposed amendments submitted to the meeting of Contracting Parties shall have been the subject of prior evaluation by the meeting of National Focal Points.
DECLARATIONS AND RESERVATIONS
France
[IML Translation]
In approving the Protocol concerning Specially Protected Areas and Biological Diversity in the Mediterranean, France expressed the following reservation:
Should the provisions of the present Convention and of the protocols thereto be considered as hindering activities which it deems to be essential to its national defence, the Government will not apply the said provisions to such activities. However, by adopting appropriate measures, the Government shall endeavour to take account of the objectives of the Convention and of the protocols thereto as far as possible.
Interpretative declaration
France considers that the Protocol concerning Specially Protected Areas and Biological Diversity in the Mediterranean falls completely within the framework of the principles that were approved in the program of action 21 in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, and specifically in point 17.30.
On the other hand, France considers that any amendment to the plan of management of a specially protected area of Mediterranean interest should be subject to the consensus rule.
Greece
Greece makes the following interpretative declaration:
“Greece understands that the procedures for submission of a proposal for inclusion in the SPAMI list referred to in part C par. 3 (legal status) of Annex I of the Barcelona Protocol of 10–06–1995 and in article 9 par. 2 sub. b of the same Protocol apply to those areas situated partly or wholly on the high sea which are in a reasonable distance from, and immediately adjacent to zones where the neighbouring Parties exercise sovereignty or jurisdiction.”
Turkey
Turkey makes the following declaration upon the interpretative declaration of Greece:
“The maritime boundaries between Turkey and Greece has [sic] yet to be delimited. Apart from those islands given to Greece and Turkey by international treaties and enumerated in them by name, there are numerous islets and rocks in the Aegean whose status is not clearly defined. This situation is also interrelated with other issues concerning the Aegean. Therefore, Greece’s legislation as well as her application to international organisations for such islets and rocks and their acceptance by such organisations can in no way constitute a basis for claims of sovereignty, nor could they be referred to as such in the future.”
Greece
In response to the declaration made by Turkey, the representative of Greece made the following declaration:
“With reference to the statement by the Turkish delegation to this meeting, the Greek delegation wishes to confirm that the legal status of the Aegean Sea and the maritime boundaries between Greece and Turkey are clearly defined by international law and the existing international treaties such as the Peace Treaty of Lausanne of 1923, the Greek–Turkish Protocol of Athens of 1926, the Agreements between Italy and Turkey of 1932 and the corresponding Letters exchanged between them, and the Peace Treaty with Italy of 1947. Greece is determined to continue to protect and exercise all its sovereignty and sovereign rights in its territory (continental area, islands, islets, rocks, territorial waters and continental shelf) including its competences in the open sea, through all means recognized by international law.”
Malta
The representative of Malta makes a reservation regarding the inclusion of the following species in the Annexes to the Protocol: Mobula mobular, Paracentrotus lividus, Homarus gammarus, Maja squinado, Palinurus elephas, Scyllarides latus, Scyllarus arctus, Anguilla anguilla, Epinephelus marginatus, Lamma nasus, Prionace glauca, Raja alba, Sciaena umbra, Squatina squatina, Thunnus thynnus, Umbrina cirrosa, Xiphias gladius.
The representative of Malta pointed out that these species are of particular interest to the economy of Maltese traditional fishing industry, and that Malta feels it needs to further study the possible implications which these annexes would have on a national level.
[IML Translation]
With the ratification of the present Protocol, Malta does not renounce in any way any of the rights it has, enjoys or may invoke by virtue of the International Law related to the internal waters, the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the continental shelf and its fishing zone or any maritime zone over which it has sovereignty, jurisdiction or regulatory authority.
Joint declaration by France, Greece, Italy and Spain
The representatives of France, Greece, Italy and Spain make the following joint declaration:
“The exploitation of a number of species listed in the Annexes, notably in the list of species whose exploitation is to be regulated, comes within the European Community’s exclusive competence in the area of fisheries. Hence, the member states of the European Community will, whenever necessary, implement any future exploitation measures in so far as the European Community approves the Annexes. Any future measures will be taken in the framework of the European Community’s fisheries policy.”