Research & publications 2025

We live in an age of sanctions. For geopolitical reasons, powerful states and economic blocs increasingly impose unilateral measures restricting economic and financial transactions and dealing with certain target states. These sanctions may apply to transactions between the sanctions sender and a target but may at times also extend to transactions between third states and the target. By imposing such ‘secondary’ sanctions, sending states aim to further isolate the target. The extraterritorial character of secondary sanctions makes them controversial, as they impinge on third states’ economic sovereignty and the latter’s operators’ freedom to conduct international business. This book addresses the legality of secondary sanctions from multiple legal perspectives, such as general international law, international economic law, and private law. It examines how third states and operators can legally react against secondary sanctions, for example, via blocking legislation or litigation. It also provides economic and political perspectives on secondary sanctions.

As the scope of the Agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement) overlaps with what is governed by the international deep sea mining regime, interaction between these two frameworks is inevitable, but the nature and implications of this interaction remain largely unclear. The fact that the ratification process of the BBNJ Agreement coincides with the final phase in the development of rules and procedures for commercial exploitation activities in the field of deep sea mining only raises more questions and speculation. Marine environmental protection is a key component in the regulation of deep sea mining, but the rules and measures provided by the BBNJ Agreement might introduce significant changes that alter the legal context in which the deep sea mining regime currently operates, despite the BBNJ Agreement's overall ambition to promote coherence and the general precept not to undermine other legal instruments and relevant bodies. In order to unravel this ambiguous relationship, this article unpacks the principle not to undermine and applies it to the deep sea mining context, thereby demonstrating the issues associated with its interpretation and the consequences this may have. To assess some of the concrete implications in a more pragmatic manner, the article also zooms in on a number of questions and scenarios within the field of area-based management tools, whose relevance will only increase with time.

Can the United States choose to ignore the international deep seabed regime laid down in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea due to its status as a non-State Party? And what is the possible impact of its actions on the current legal order? Focusing on its conduct since the adoption of the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act in 1980, this article aims to evaluate the legality of the US Executive Order of 24 April 2025 (‘Unleashing America’s Offshore Critical Minerals and Resources’) from the perspective of international law. It also provides readers with a general outlook and critical opinion on the potential next steps.

Under the prevailing consensus that Articles 192 and 194(1)(2) of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) constitute due diligence obligations as obligations of conduct, small island states have advocated that in the context of climate change, these provisions should go beyond the due diligence obligations and encompass obligations of result. Some even argue that climate change has transformed the nature of these provisions into obligations of result. This paper, drawing upon the reasoning in the recent advisory opinion and analysing the specific rationales advanced by small island states, maintains that neither the concept of due diligence nor the aforementioned provisions of UNCLOS can be interpreted as containing or transforming into obligations of result. The study emphasizes the critical distinction between the ‘standard of compliance’ for due diligence obligations and independent obligations of result. It further demonstrates that subsequent procedural obligations under Part XII of UNCLOS, along with other rules such as climate targets established by the Paris Agreement, could contribute to clarifying the ‘stringent standard’ of due diligence in climate change contexts. Finally, this paper focuses on achieving systemic coordination between procedural obligations and due diligence requirements, aiming to clarify existing controversies in this field.

Protest at sea against deep-sea mining is on the rise. Following demonstrations against the activities of Global Sea Mineral Resources (GSR) in May 2021, Greenpeace interfered with the operations of Nauru Ocean Resources Inc. (NORI) in November 2023. The latter case received more media attention, increased involvement by the International Seabed Authority (ISA) and led to a Dutch court decision on the matter, shedding more light on a very complex legal issue. To what extent can such actions be reconciled with the freedom of the high seas? What is encompassed by ‘peaceful protest’ and do these protest activities against deep-sea mining meet the conditions? What other principles and provisions are relevant in these situations and how are these applied? And in case of infractions, which remedies are available and who is responsible to enforce the applicable rules? On the basis of a comprehensive examination of pertinent legislation, official documents and case law, this chapter will offer an insightful view on these issues and the relevant legal developments.

Prof. Em. Frank Maes presents a complete picture of MARPOL's ANNEX I provisions regarding construction and equipment standards for oil tankers specifically and all ships in general. The chapter is contained within Prof. Henrik Ringbom and Prof. Aldo Chircop's 2025 Commentary to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, to this day, the only volume globally to comprehensively discuss the MARPOL Convention. Within it, leading international experts such as prof. Em. Frank Maes provide an authoritative analysis of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships 1973/78 and its subsidiary instruments, collectively known as MARPOL.

Na bijna twee decennia aan voorbereidingen en onderhandelingen, werd op 19 juni 2023 een nieuw verdrag inzake de bescherming en het duurzaam gebruik van mariene biodiversiteit in gebieden voorbij de grenzen van de nationale jurisdictie aangenomen. Het BBNJ-verdrag (waarbij het acroniem ‘BBNJ’ verwijst naar ‘biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction’) wordt beschouwd als het eindproduct van een buitengewoon staaltje van internationale diplomatie en wordt reeds gelauwerd als een mijlpaal op vlak van mariene milieubescherming. De concrete implicaties van het verdrag, alsook zijn specifieke rol binnen het grotere geheel aan relevante internationaalrechtelijke instrumenten, blijven echter het voorwerp vormen van veel giswerk en onzekerheid. Zowel de vraag naar de potentiële meerwaarde op vlak van mariene milieubescherming in gebieden buiten nationale jurisdictie, als de interactie met gerelateerde verdragen, organisaties en juridische regimes, zijn daarom bijzonder pertinent.