| Abstract [eng] |
“Communia omnium, propria nullius” (lit. “Common to all, but the property of no one”) — so stated Hugo Grotius when discussing the principle of the freedom of the seas. This idea is also reflected in the legal regime of the exclusive economic zone, which seeks to reconcile the freedoms of the high seas with the interests of coastal states without extending their sovereignty beyond the territorial sea. However, state practice shows that the EEZ regime, based on the pursuit of compromise, creates certain legal uncertainties. Since the EEZ is primarily focused on safeguarding the economic interests of the coastal state, security aspects are largely unregulated within it, which creates conditions for the emergence of a “gray zone” that, if exploited, could have a negative impact on coastal states. Therefore, this thesis aims to assess whether the security of coastal states is sufficiently ensured by the current legal regulation of the EEZ. The first part of the master’s thesis discusses the legal regime of the exclusive economic zone, its characteristics, and the limits of the rights and jurisdiction granted to coastal states. The second part highlights the ambiguities in international maritime law, particularly the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, in the context of hybrid threats (damage to underwater infrastructure and interference with navigation signals) and military activities (the presence of warships and the conduct of military exercises in the EEZ). The third part analyzes the nature of the coastal state’s jurisdiction and related enforcement issues in cases of identifying and attributing violations. The fourth part analyzes the specific characteristics of the Baltic Sea, assesses the peculiarities of the legal regulation of the EEZ in Lithuanian law, and discusses incidents that have occurred in the Baltic Sea, revealing the ambiguity of international maritime law. The results of the study indicate that international maritime law currently does not provide a sufficient legal basis for the effective protection of the security interests of coastal states. The rights and jurisdiction granted are of a functional nature and are limited to areas clearly defined in the Convention. In practice, this creates gaps that limit the ability to respond effectively to modern security threats. |
