대륙붕 경계획정에 대한 ‘관련 해안 길이’의 효과: ‘불균형성 검사’의 검정

The jurisprudence of international courts and tribunals shows that continental shelf boundary delimitation ends with the disproportionality test, which verifies, by way of comparing the ratio of the lengths of the Parties’ relevant coasts with the ratio of their respective shares of the relevant maritime area, the equitableness or inequitableness of the result achieved by the adjusted provisional median line. The measured length of coastlines, however, increases without limit as the unit of measurement is made smaller (the so-called “coastline paradox”). As pointed out by the ICJ in the Maritime Delimitation in the Black Sea, diverse techniques have been used for assessing coastal lengths, with no clear requirement of international law having been shown as to whether the real coastline should be followed, or baselines used, or whether or not coasts relating to internal waters should be excluded. In Maritime Delimitation in the Area between Greenland and Jan Mayen, the ratio of relevant coastal lengths was approximately 1:9 in Denmark’s favour, and the ratio of their respective shares of the relevant area was approximately 1:2.7. In Bay of Bengal Maritime Boundary Arbitration, the former ratio was 1:1.92 (not 1:9.92) in India’s favour, but the latter ratio was approximately 1:2.81. In conclusion, apart from the appearance of mathematical exactness, the disproportionality test seems to leave the court or tribunal a considerable extent of discretion in assessing both the length of relevant coasts and the existence of any marked disproportion between the two ratios.