동북아역사넷

상세검색 공유하기 모바일 메뉴 검색 공유
닫기
리스트

한일회담외교문서

상세검색

닫기
회의명
기사명
작성·수신·발신자
문서종류
사료라이브러리 열기
ID :NAHF.kj.d_0007_0020_0090IDURL
사료라이브러리 열기
  • 글씨크게
  • 글씨작게
  • 프린트
  • 텍스트
  • 오류신고

인접해양의 주권에 관한 대통령의 선언에 대한 국제법상 근거 논의 건

 
  • 작성자외무부
  • 날짜1955년 8월 2일
  • 문서종류공한 기안문
  • 형태사항필사 국한문 
施行月日番號 : 四二八八.八.二.
四二八八年 六月 日起案
決裁 : 四二八八.八.二
長官
次官
政務局長
第二課長
文書課長
事務官
起案者
件名 인접해양의 주권에 관한 대통령의 선언(隣接海洋의 主權에 關한 大統領의 宣言) 에 대한 국제법상 근거(國際法上 根據) 논의 건
 


품의

머리의 건에 관하여 별첨二와 여한 단기 四二八七年九월九일자 장관명의 유엔국총차령관「헐」장군 앞으로의 공한에 대하여 별첨과 여히 단기 四二八八年 四월一일자로 주한미국대사관(駐韓美國大使館) 으로부터 (一九四五年) 九월 二十八일자 「트르만」대통령의 선언을 동 공한 중에서 잘못 인용(引用) 하였다는 공한이 내도하였기 별첨一과 여한 이론으로 론박회한을 발송하옴이 어떠하오리까 고재를 앙청하나이다

 
별지 : 회신 안해제
 
  • 발신자외무부장관
  • 수신자주한미국대사
  • 날짜1955년 6월 27일
  • 문서종류공한
  • 형태사항영어 
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Korea presents its compliments to the Embassy of the United Stites of America in Korea and has the honour to acknowledge the receipt of the latter's note No.122 of April 1, 1955.
While, in its note, the Embassy first emphasizes that neither of the United States Presidential Proclamations of September 28, 1945 may properly be used as precedents for the Korean action, it should be admitted that the Korean Proclamation of January 18, 1952 follows the same faria ▣ with the former, which explicitly stated the inadequacy of the present arrangements for the protection of the fishery resources contiguous to their coasts, perceiving an urgent need to protect such resources from destructive exploitation.
It is in this sense that the Minister's letter of September 9, 1954,mentioned of in the Embassy's note, cited the United States Proclamations as precedents for the Korean action, even though there is a difference between them which the Ministry again does not fail to notice Still existing, as in the Minister's note of February 13, 1952 addressed to His Excellency Ambassador of the United States.
The Ministry has fully taken note of the interpretation notes by the Embassy reading "Neither of the two Presidential proclamations ..." and the sequent sentences which end in "... as provided in such agreement."
As far Korean Government to the view of the United States Government, as stated in the Embassy's note, that "there is no rule of international law requiring it to recognize as valid actions of coastal states in claiming sovereignty over areas of adjacent waters..", the Ministry wishes to cal the attention of the Embassy to the Minister's note cited above in which the intention of the Government of the Republic of Korea was already clarified.
For the Embassy's information of the views of the Korean Government on the certain points of the Regime of the High Seas, the Ministry encloses herewith a copy of The Views of the Korean Goverment on the Draft Articles on the Continental Sheif and Related Subjects submitted to the International Law Commission of the Uhited Nations at its fifth session in 1953 in reply to the latter's request for such views.
Enclosure: The Views of the Korean Government on the Draft Articles on the Continental Shelf and Related Subjects prepared the United Nations International Law Commission at Its Fifth Session in 1953.
June 27, 1955,
Seoul, Korea,

 
별지 : 1953년 유엔국제법위원회 제5차 회기에 준비된 대륙붕과 관련주제에 대한 논문초안에 관한 대한민국 정부의 견해해제
 
  • 발신자대한민국정부
  • 수신자유엔사무총장
  • 날짜1955년 3월 24일
  • 문서종류기타
  • 형태사항영어 
DRAFT

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Korea presents its compliments to the Secretary General of the United Nations and has the honour to refer to the draft articles on the continental shelf and related subjects prepared by the United Nations International Law Commission at its fifth session in 1953.
The Korean government would like to pay a tribute to the International Law Commission for its efforts in preparing the draft articles on the new and controversial subjects which have not as yet been treated in an exhaustive manner nor, as a result, led to the development of pertinent international rules.
Attaching great importance to the formulation of new international rules to establish order in the high seas in step with the progress of times, the Korean government has carefully studied the draft articles and feels obliged to make thereon the following comments:

I Continental Shelf

There is no reason for making a sharp distinction between the rules for the resources of the continental shelf, including sedentary fishery resources thereon, and those for the fishery resources contained in its superjecent waters.
If the exercice of sovereign rights by the coastal state over the continental shelf for the purpose of exploring and exploiting its natural resources is reasonable and just, there seems no reason why it should not be so with the fishery resources in the superjecent waters. Indeed, the continental shelf may be regarded as an extension of the land-mass of the coastal state and thus naturally appurtenant to it. So it may be no less with the fishery resources over it because the sources of the nourishment of the wildlife in the superjacent waters come in no small measure from the coastal state and the continental shelf, and thus the living resources therein may he regarded as the extension of the natural resources of the coastal state.
If self-protection comples the coastal state to keep close watch over activities off its shores which are of the nature necessary for utilization of the resources of the continental shelf, it is all the more so in case of alien activities off its shores necessary for the exploitation of fishery resources.
It is, therefore, suggested that the draft article 2 be amended to read, "The coastal state exercises over the continental shelf and the superjacent waters sovereign rights for the purpose of exploring and exploiting its natural resources."
Accordingly the Article 3 and Article 6 paragraph I should read as follows respectively:
Article 3. "The rights of the coastal state over the continental shelf do not affect the legal status of the superjacent waters as high seas in relation to navigation."
Article 6, Paragraph 1. "The exploration of the continental shelf and the exploitation of its natural resources must not result in any unjustifiable interference with navigation."

II Fisheries

The fishery problem is one of the most urgent problems requiring a new international solution. The present international rule on fishery utterly fails to cope with new requirements arising from the changed conditions of the problem.
The old rule of the freedom of fishery in the high seas can be reasonable only on the premise that fishery resources are inexhaustible.
This was relatively the case when the fishing methods were rather primitive and the fruits of scientific progress were not utilized in fishing yet. However, as is well-known, fishery resources are rapidly depleting due to the scientific development in fishery machines on the one hand and to the abuse of fishing rights by nations thus far accorded by the international law on the other.
The seas are no longer vast and beyond effective control. They have been controlled and utilized by maritime powers mainly to their own interests. Apart from the freedom of navigation, the principle of freedom of high seas, it can be said, has served only major maritime powers. Thus, the sharp discrepancies between the facts and rule and the inequity of the rule resulted in a legitimate and forceful movement by a number of nations toward the formulation of a new rule which found its expression in numerous unilateral acts and proclamations on the subject.
In formulating a rule on the problem, one must take a farsighted perception that the new rule may provide the mankind with a long lasting solution, taking full account of the direction towards which the times are moving. At the same tine, a universal international rule must give equitable shares to the smaller nations of its benefits. It is overdue that the principle of high seas on fishery should be revised in this light.
The only answer equitable as well as reasonable is to recognize for the coastal state an exclusive fishing and hunting zone extending not more than 100 miles from its territorial waters. This idea has its expression in negative form in the draft article 2, when it provides that in any area situated within 100 miles from the territorial waters, the coastal state or states are entitled to take part on an equal footing in any system of regulations, even though their nationals do not carry on fishing in the area. However, this provision fails to go far enough. It is a compromise with the present vested interests.
The reasons for a positive expression of the basic idea as suggested above are given below in addition to the equally applicable reasons set forth for the case of the superjacent waters of the continental shelf:
1. The maritime resources in the adjacent waters constitute actually one of the most important natural resources of the coastal state and have special importance to it.
2. In practice, nationals of the states other than the coastal state are liable to abusive exploitation. Moreover, the depletion of marine resources outside the territorial waters has direct adverse effects on the fishery of the coastal state in its territorial waters, and thus amounts to compromising the sovereign rights of the coastal state.
As the world knows, during the 40 years of Japanese occupation of
Korea, Japan monopolized fishing rights in what is properly Korean waters and recklessly exploited the marine resources therein, consequently stunting the development of Korean fishing industry. The Korean Government, driven by the dire need of safeguarding its marine resources from further despoliation by such aggressive neighbour as Japan and with the considerations stated above, proclaimed on January 18, 1952, in accordance with a number of precedents the Presidential Proclamation setting forth boundary line around the adjacent seas of Korea within which the Republic of Korea would have a sole jurisdiction and control for fishery purposes. The proclamation makes it clear, it is to be noted, that it does not interfere with the rights of free navigation on the high seas.
A copy of the Presidential Proclamation is enclosed herewith for your reference.
As regards the provision of draft article 3 it ray be reasonably applied to the areas of high seas outside of the fishing and hunting do not carry on fishing in the area. However, this provision fails to go far enough. It is a compromise with the present vested interests.
The reasons for a positive expression of the basic idea as suggested above are given below in addition to the equally applicable reasons set forth for the case of the superjacent waters of the continental shelf:
1. The maritime resources in the adjacent waters constitute actually one of the most important natural resources of the coastal state and have special importance to it.
2. In practice, nationals of the states other than the coastal state are liable to abusive exploitation. Moreover, the depletion of marine resources outside the territorial waters has direct adverse effects on the fishery of the coastal state in its territorial waters, and thus amounts to compromising the sovereign rights of the coastal state.
As the world knows, the Korean government, driven by the dire need of safegarding its marine resources from despoliation by reckless neighbouring nations and with the considerations stated above, proclaimed on January 18, 1952, in accordance with a number of precedents the Presidential Proclamation setting forth boundary line around the adjacent seas of Korea within which the Republic of Korea would have a sole jurisdiction and control for fishery purposes. The proclamation. makes it clear, it is to be noted, that it does not interfere with the rights of free navigation on the high seas.
A copy of the Presidential Proclamation is enclosed herewith for your reference.
As regards the provision of draft article 3 it may be reasonably applied to the areas of high seas outside of the fishing and hunting zones thus established.

III Contiguous Zone

Safegarding of national security is a paramount requirement of a nation in modern times. It is therefore suggested that the national security is added in the enumeration of the reasons for the recognition of the contiguous zone. As to the width of the contiguous zone, the Korean Government reserves its position.
The Korean Government would appreciate it if the Secretary-General of the United Nations would be good enough to transmit the above-mentioned views of the Korean Government to the United Nations International Law Commission that they may he given due consideration.
Enclosure: A copy of the Presidential Proclamation over Adjacent Seas.
March 24, 1955
Seoul, Korea

 
별지 : 연안해의 주권에 관한 대통령 선언해제
 
  • 작성자대한민국대통령 이승만
  • 날짜1952년 1월 18일
  • 문서종류기타
  • 형태사항영어 
PRESIDENTIAL PROCLAMATION OF SOVEREIGNTY OVER ADJACENT SEAS
 

Supported by well-established international precedents and urged by the impelling need of safeguarding, once and for all, the interests of national welfare and defence, the President of the Republic of Korea hereby proclaims:
1. The Government of the Republic of Korea holds and exercises the national sovereignty over the shelf adjacent to the peninsular and insular coasts of the national territory, no matter how deep it may be, protecting, preserving and utilizing, therefore, to the best advantage of national interests, all the natural resources, mineral and marine, that exist over the said shelf, on it and beneath it, known, or which may be discovered In the future.
2. The Government of the Republic of Korea holds and exercises the national sovereignty over the seas adjacent to the coasts of the peninsula and islands of the national territory, no matter what their depths may be, throughout the extension, as herebelow delineated, deemed necessary to reserve, protect, conserve and utilize the resources and natural wealth of all kinds that may be found on, in, or under the said seas, placing under the Government supervision particularly the fishing and marine hunting industries in order to prevent this exhaustible type of resources and natural wealth from being exploited to the disavantase of the inhabitants of Korea, or decreased or destroyed to the detriment of the country.
3. The Government of the Republic of Korea hereby declares and maintains the lines of demarcation, as given below, which shall define and delineate the zone of control and protection of the national resources and wealth on, in or beneath the said seas placed under the jurisdiction and control of the Republic of Korea and which shall be liable to modification, in accordance with the circumstances arising from new discoveries, studies or interests that may come to light in future, The zone to be placed under the sovereignty and protection of the Republic of Korea shall consist of seas lying between the coasts of the peninsular and insular territories of Korea and the line of demarcation made from the continuity of the following lines:
a. from the highest peak of U-Am-Ryung, Kyung-Hung-Kun, Ham-Kyong-Pukdo to the point (42˚15'N - 130˚45E)
b. from the point (42°15'N - 130°451E) to the point (38˚00'N - 132°50'E)
c. from the point (38˚00'N - 132˚50'E) to the point (35˚00'N - 130°00'E)
d. from the point (35°00'N - 130°00'E) to the point (34°40'N - 129°10'E)
e. from the point (34°40'N - 129°10'E) to the point (32°00'N - 127°00'E)
f. from the point (32°00'N - 127°00'E) to the point (32°45'N - 124°00'E)
g. from the point (32°00'N - 124°00'E) to the point (39°45'N - 124°00'E)
h. from the point (39°45'N - 124°00'E) to the western point of Ma-An-Do, Sin-Do-Yuldo, Yong-Chun-Kun, Pyungan-Pukdo.
i. from the western point of Ma-An-Do to the point where a straight line drawn north meets with the western end of the Korean-Manchurian borderline.
4. This declaration of sovereignty over the adjacent seas does not interfere with the rights of free navigation on the high seas.

 
별지 : 유엔국제법위원회 제5차 회기 채택안해제
 
  • 날짜1953년
  • 문서종류기타
  • 형태사항영어 
I. INTRODUCTORY

58. At its first session held in 1949, the International Law Commission elected Mr. J.P.A. Francois as special rapporteur to study the question of the regime of the high seas. At its second session held in 1950, the Commission considered a report (A/CN.A/17) by Mr. Francois on the subject, In the report of the Commission submitted the same year to the General Assembly, at its fifth session, the Commission surveyed the various questions falling within the scope of the general topic of the regime of the high seas such as nationality of ships, safety of life at sea, slave trade, submarine telegraph cables, resources of the high seas, right of pursuit, right of approach, contiguous zones, sedentary fisheries, and the continental shelf. On the basis of a second report of the special rapporteur (A/ N.4/42) most of these questions were reviewed at the third session in 1951 at which, in addition, the Commission adopted draft articles on the continental shelf and the following subjects relative to the high seas: resources of the sea sedentary fisheries, and contiguous zones.
59. At its fifth session, the Commission examined once more, in the light of comments of governments, the provisional draft articles adopted at the third session. Final drafts were prepared on the following questions: (i) continental shelf; (ii) fishery resources of the high seas; (iii) contiguous zone. For reasons explained below in paragraph 71, the question of sedentary fisheries has not been covered in a separate article or articles. It is hoped that the other questions relating to the high seas may, in the course of the next few years, receive further study with the view to being embodied in drafts to be finally submitted to the General Assembly. The result will be the codification of the law covering the entire field of the regime of the high seas as well as proposals for the further development of that part of international law.
60. In its work on the subject the Commission derived considerable assistance from a collection, in two volumes, published in 1951 and 1952 by the Division for the Development and Codification of International Law of the Legal Department of the Secretariat and entitled "Laws and Regulations on the Regime of the High Seas".

II. THE CONTINENTAL SHELF

A Draft articles on the continental shelf

61. As stated above in paragraph 58, at its third session held in 1951 the Commission adopted draft articles, with accompanying comment, on the continental shelf. Subsequent to the third session the special rapporteur re-examined thee articles in the light of observations received from the following governments: Belgium, Brazil, Chile, Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, France, Iceland, Israel, the Netherlands, Norway, the Philippines, Sweden, Syria, the Union of South Africa, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the United States of America, Yugoslavia. The observations of governments are reproduced in Annex II to the present report, In March 1953, the special rapporteur submitted a further report on the subject (A/CN.4/60). The Commission examined the report in the course of its fifth session at its 195th to 206th, 210th and 215th meetings.
62. The Commission adopted, at its 234th meeting, the following draft articles on the continental shelf:

Article 1

As used in these articles, the term "continental shelf" refers to the sea-bed and subsoil of the submarine areas contiguous to the coast, but outside the area of the territorial sea, to a depth of two hundred metres.

Article 2

The coastal State exercises over the continental shelf sovereign rights for the purpose of exploring and exploiting its natural resources.

Article 3

The rights of the coastal State over the continental shelf do not affect the legal status of the superjacent waters as high seas.

Article 4

The rights of the coastal State over the continental shelf do not affect the legal status of the airspace above the superjacent waters.

Article 5

Subject to its right to take reasonable measures for the exploration of the continental shelf and the exploitation of its natural resources, the coastal State may not prevent the establishment or maintenance of submarine cables.

Article 6

1. The exploration of the continental shelf and the exploitation of its natural resources must not result in any unjustifiable interference with navigation, fishing or fish production.
2. Subject to the provisions of paragraphs 1 and 5 of this article, the coastal State is entitled to construct and maintain on the continental shelf installations necessary for the exploration and exploitation of its natural resources and to establish safety zones at a reasonable distance around such installations and to take in those zones measures necessary for their protection.
3. Such installations, though under the jurisdiction of the coastal State, do not possess the status of islands. They have no territorial sea of their on and their presence does not affect the delimitation of the territorial sea of the coastal State.
4. Due notice must be given of any such installations constructed, and due means of warning of the presence of such installations must he maintained.
5. Neither the installations themselves, nor the said safety zones around them may be established in narrow channels or on recognized sea lanes essential to international navigation.

Article 7

1. Where the same continental shelf is contiguous to the territories of two or more States whose coasts are opposite to each other, the boundary of the continental shelf appertaining to such States is, in the absence of agreement between those States or unless another boundary line is justified by special circumstances, the median line every point of which is equidistant from the base lines from which the width of the territorial sea of each country is measured.
2. Where the same continental shelf is contiguous to the territories of two adjacent States, the boundary of the continental shelf appertaining to such States is, in the absence of agreement between those States or unless another boundary line is justified by special circumstances, determined by application of tie principle of equidistance from the base lines from which the width of the territorial sea of each of the two countries is measured.

Article 8

Any disputes which may arise between States concerning the interpretation or application of these articles should be submitted to arbitration at the request of any of the parties.

III. FISHERIES

92. The question of fisheries, under the title of "Resources of the sea", has been under consideration by the Commission as part of the general topic of the regime of the high seas. Reference is made to the introductory paragraphs of the present chapter for a survey of the treatment of the subject by the Commission.
93. At its third session in 1951, the Commission adopted provisionally the articles on resources of the sea. During its fifth session, the Commission reconsidered these articles in the light of observations sent by the following countries: Belgium, Brazil, Chile, Denmark, Ecuador, France, Iceland, the Netherlands, Norway, the Philippines, Sweden, Syria, the Union of South Africa, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Yugoslavia. The observations are reproduced in Annex II to the present report. The Commission discussed the revision of the articles at its 206th to 210th meetings.
94. The Commission adopted, at its 210th meeting, the following three draft articles covering the basic aspects of the international regulation of fisheries:

Article 1

A State whose nationals are engaged in fishing in any area of the high seas where the nationals of other States are not thus engaged, may regulate and control fishing activities in such areas for the purpose of protecting fisheries against waste or extermination. If the nationals of two or more States are engaged in fishing in any area of the high seas, the States concerned shall prescribe the necessary measures by agreement. If, subsequent to the adoption of such measures, nationals of other States engage in fishing in the area and those States do not accept the measures adopted, the question shall, at the request of one of the interested parties, be referred to the international body envisaged in article 3.

Article 2

In any area situated within one hundred miles from the territorial sea, the coastal State or States are entitled to take part on an equal footing in any system of regulation, even though their nationals do not carry on fishing in the area.

Article 3

States shall be under a duty to accept, as binding upon their nationals, any system of regulation of fisheries in any area of the high seas which an international authority, to be created within the framework of the United Nations, shall prescribe as being essential for the purpose of protecting the fishing resources of that area against waste or extermination. Such international authority shall act at the request of any interested State.

IV. CONTIGUOUS ZONE

105. As part of the work on the regime of the high seas the Commission adopted, at its 210th meeting, the following single article on contiguous zone:
On the high seas adjacent to its territorial sea, the coastal State may exercise the control necessary to prevent and punish the infringement, within its territory or territorial sea, of its customs, immigration, fiscal or sanitary regulations. Such control may not be exercised at a distance beyond twelve miles from the base line from which the width of the territorial sea is measured.

 
별지 : 외무부장관이 유엔군사령부 사령관 헐(John E. Hull)에게 보내는 서한해제
 
  • 발신자외무부장관 변영태
  • 수신자유엔군사령부 사령관 헐
  • 날짜1954년 9월 9일
  • 문서종류공한
  • 형태사항영어 
※ 본 문서는 해제정보만 서비스합니다. ※
 
별지 : 주한 미대사가 외무부장관에게 보낸 각서해제
 
  • 발신자주한미대사
  • 수신자외무부장관
  • 날짜1955년 4월 1일
  • 문서종류기타
  • 문서번호No.122
  • 형태사항영어 
No.122
The Mebassy of the United States of America presents its compliments to the Ministry for Foreign Affairs and has the honor to stile that the Government of the United States has taken note of the Foreign Minister's letter of September 9, 1954 to General John S. Hall, Commender-in-Chief, United Nations Command, regarding the basis for actions taken by the Government of the Republic of Korea to conserve fishery resources by establishing a "conservation boundary line" or "Peace-line".
In the Minister's letter, mention is made of two proclamations of September 28, 1945, by the President of the United States relative to the policy of the United States with respect to the natural resources of the submit and seabed of the continental shelf and with respect to coastal fisheries in certain areas of the high seas.
The Embassy invites invites attention to the Memorandum policy Statement on Continental Shelf and Territorial waters dated February 2, 1955, which the Ambassador handed to the Foreign Minister on February 9th. It appears that the Ministry has not interpreted the two presidential proclamations of September 28, 1945 entirely is accordance with the president's intention in promulgating then. In order that the position of the United States may be dear, the Embassy has been instructed to review the position of the United States with respect to the establishment of fisheries conservation zones in coastal waters.
It should first be emphasized that neither of the Presidential proclamations of September 28, 1945, which the Foreign Minister cited in his letter, may properly be used as precedents for the Korean action of unilaterally setting up a "boundary line around the adjacent seas of Korea within which the Republic of Korea would have sole jurisdiction."
Neither of the two Presidential proclamations established any right on the part of the United States to claim jurisdiction and control of any pert of the high seas. The proclamation relating to the 'Policy of the United States with Respect to the Natural Resources of the Subsoil and Sea Bed of the Continental Shelf' had only to do with jurisdiction ever the natural resources of the subsoil and sea bed of the continental shelf, not with jurisdiction over the high seas above the continental shelf.
The second proclamation had to do, as was pointed out in the aforementioned Memorandum, with the 'policy of the United States with Respect to Coastal Fisheries in Certain Areas of the High Seas.' This Proclamation concerned the regulation and control by the United States of fishing activities in explicitly bounded conservation tones which the United States Right regard it as proper to establish. Only Where such fishing activities had been or should thereafter be developed and maintained by the United States alone would the United States take unilateral action to establish such conservation zones.
In those areas were fishing activities had been or should thereafter be legitimately developed and maintained jointly by nationals of the United states and nationals of other States, explicitly bounded conservation zones might be established under agreements between the United States and such other States; and all fishing activities is such zones would be subject to regulation and control as provided in such agreements.
The Presidential proclamation at September 28, 1954 relative to coastal fisheries has never been implemented, but the position of the United States is that, although coastal states have an interest in fisheries in adjacent seas, conservation measures with respect to high seas fisheries must be taken in agreement with other countries having legitimate interests in fishing in such waters. Furthermore, the United States Government is of the view that there is no rule of international law requiring it to recognise as valid actions of coastal states in claiming sovereignty over areas of adjacent waters theretofore recognized as high seas, and the United States has consistently refused to recognise such actions.
American Embassy,
Seoul, April 1, 1955.
P PUHughes/1m

 
별지 : 외무부장관이 유엔군사령부 사령관 헐(John E. Hull)에게 보내는 서한해제
 
  • 발신자외무부장관 변영태
  • 수신자유엔군사령부 사령관 헐
  • 날짜1954년 9월 9일
  • 문서종류공한
  • 형태사항영어 
DRAFT

September 9 1954

Dear General Hull:
I have the honor to take the liberty of informing you of the facts that the preservation of our fishery conservation line is a paramount interest to us and that there exist in Korea the Presidential Proclamation and certain laws with respect to the said conservation of fishery resources in adjacent seas of Korea. These laws provide legal grounds for capture and punishment of any person or vessel violating them.
Due to the development of large-scale and scientific method of fishing which, if uncontrolled, may exhaust the entire marine resources of the world, the old international notion that the world's marine resources are unlimited has had to undergo a considerable reconsideration. "Freedom of the seas" and "freedom of fishing on the high seas" became no longer reasonable as principles of international law. Thus, the need for regulation of fishing on the high seas has gradually developed which resulted in the conclusion of several international conventions. Many nations including the United States have taken measures to place a large part of northern Pacific under its jurisdiction conserving the marine resources. Some of the nations which have taken similar conservation measures for their marine resources are: Argentina, Canada, Chile, Consta Rica, Honduras, Iceland, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Saudi Arabia, and United Kingdom, etc.
The President of the United States issued two Proclamations under date of September 28, 1945, one of which was with respect to coastal fisheries. The Proclamation calls attention to "the inadequacy of present arrangements for the protection and perpetuation of the fishery resources" contiguous to the coasts of the United States and to the need of "improving the jurisdictional basis for conservation measures and international cooperation in this field." In consequence, the Proclamation provides that "the United States regards it as proper to establish explicitly bounded conservation zones in which fishing activities shall be subject to the regulation and control of the United States." It says, however, that the character as high seas of the areas in which such conservation zones are established and the right to their free and unimpeded navigation are in no way tens affected."
Even Japan, during her domination of Korea, enacted "Government-General Ordinance No.109 concerning limitation of trawler fishing area" and established conservation zones amend the Korean coast, which later became the basis of our own conservation zones. The Supreme Commander for Allied Powers (SCAP), during the Allied occupation of Japan, was cognizant of the need for regulating Japanese fishing activities and consequently issued several Directives to the Japanese Government on the matter. SCAP Memorandums to Japanese Government dated January 22, 1946; October 28, 1947; and June 30, 1949 are most noteworthy. In compliance with SCAP Directives, Japanese Government itself enacted several laws to enforce the Directives. Namely, they announced "Essentials for regulating westward ground-net-drawing fishing and trawler fishing" dated June 16, 1949 and also promulgated "Law for preventing exhaustion of marine resources" dated May 10, 1950. It is understood that even each Prefecture of Japan provides for the conservation of marine resources in its adjacent Coast by the Prefecture's own individual Decree, which is said to vary a little according to the need of each Prefecture.
The SCAP Directives set up a boundary-line in the centre of Japan Sea beyond which Japanese fishing vessels were forbidden to go fishing. The line commonly called "MacArthur Line" vas designed not only to regulate Japanese fishing but to prevent possible frictions over fishery between Korea and Japan. However, Japanese fishing vessels ignored the boundary-line, crossed it, came near Korean coast and recklessly exploited marine resources in adjacent seas of Korea, thus ruining the very purpose for which the boundary-line vas established. As many as 83 cases of violation of the MacArthur Line were reported during the period between 1947 and 1951. These are only known cases and there are naturally many more unknown cases of violations.
Under these circumstances, the Republic of Korea was compelled to take minimum measures to protect its adjacent seas from Japanese fishing encroachment which was expected to become more rampant after she had regained her sovereignty. The Korean Government, therefore, compelled by the dire need of safeguarding its marine resources from Japanese poaching, proclaimed on January 18„ 1952, in accordance with well-established international precedents, the Presidential Proclamation setting forth boundary-line around the adjacent seas of Korea within which the Republic of Korea would have sole jurisdiction. The Proclamation, however, makes it clear that it does not interfere with the rights of free navigation on the high seas.
The Republic of Korea also offered to settle the fishery question amicably with Japan each tine the Korea-Japan Conference vas resumed. Japan simply refused to recognize Korea's right to protect her own marine resources and continued to violate the boundary-line provided in the Presidential Proclamation. Their so-called Maritime Safety vessels - a sort of a Coast Guard - openly escorted Japanese fishing vessels into Korean waters in violation of the Proclamation.
Thereupon, Prize Court Order (Emergency Presidential Order No, 12) was promulgated on October 4, 1952, and the Prize Court and Higher Prize Court were established on the same date by Presidential Decres No.707 (Decree for establishment of the Prize Court and Higher Prize Court promulgated on October 14, 1952). In addition, Law for conservation of fishery resources (Law No.298) was promulgated on December 12, 1953 to enforce the provisions of the Presidential Proclamation. Thereafter, any fisherman or fishing-vessel, regardless of nationality, having violated these laws was brought to trial and justly vanished according to the offense.
The conservation boundary-line is commonly called as Peace-line, for it was established to prevent any fishing disputes that may arise between Korea and Japan. We shall welcome and respect the rights of other nations to establish similar conservation zone. If Japan should establish a conservation zone near her coast, we would respect it as we would wish them to respect ours. Not only in the field of fishing but in every other field, we wish to live with Japan as good neighbors, it has so far been Japan that rejected the extended hands of our friendship.
English translation of the relevant laws and Proclamation are herewith enclosed for your reference and information.
With my most cordial regards, I am

Yours very sincerely,

Yung Tai Pyun

Minister of Foreign Affairs

General John E. Hull,
Commander-in-Chief, United Nations Command, APO 500
Enclosure: As stated

DRAFT

September 9, 1954

Dear General Hull:
I have the honour now to draw your affention to now to draw your attention to the fact that the preservation of our fishery conservation line is a paramount interest to us and that there exist in Korea the Presidential Proclamation and certain laws with respect to the said conservation of fishery resources in adjacent seas of Korea. These laws provide legal grounds for capture and punishment of any person or vessel violating them.
Due to the development of large-scale and scientific method of fishing which, if uncontroled, may exhaust the entire marine resources of the world, the old international notion that the world's marine resources are unlimited has had to undergo a considerable change "Freedom of the seas" and "freedom of fishing on the high seas" are no longer reasonable as principles of international law. Thus, the need for regulation of fishing on the high seas has gradually fishery grown and, as a result, several international fishary conventions have come into being. Many nations including the United States have taken measures to place a large part of an open oceam under their jurisdiction ▣...▣ conserving their marine resources. Some of the nations which have taken such measures are: Argentina, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Honduras, Iceland, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Saudi Arabia and United Kingdom, etc.
The President of the United States issued two Proclamations under date of September 28, 1945, one of which was with respect to coastal fisheries. The Proclamation calls attention to "the inadequacy of present arrangements for the protection and perpetration of the fishery resources" contiguous to the coasts of the United States and to the need of "improving the jurisdictional basis for conservation measures and international cooperation in this field." In consequence, the Proclamation provides that "the United States regards it as proper to establish explicitly bounded conservation zones in which fishing activities shall be subject to the regulation and control of the United States." It says, however, that "the character as high seas of the areas in which such conservation zones are established and the right to their free and unimpeded navigation are in no way thus affected."
Even Japan, during her domination of Korea, enacted "Government-General Ordinance No.109 concerning limitation of trawler fishing area" and established conservation zones around the Korean coast. The Supreme Commander for Allied Powers (SCAP), during the Allied occupation of Japan, was cognizant of the need for regulating Japanese fishing activities and consequently issued several Directives to the Japanese Government on the matter. SCAP Memorandums to Japanese Government dated January 22, 1946; October 28, 1947; and June 30, 1949 are most noteworthy. In compliance with SCAP Directives, Japanese Government itself enacted several laws to enforce the Directives. Namely, they announced "Essentials for regulating westward ground-net-drawing fishing and trawler fishing" dated June 16, 1949 and also promulgated "Law for preventing exhaustion of marine resources" dated May 10, 1950. It is understood that even each Prefecture of Japan provides for the conservation of marine resources in its adjacent coast by the Prefecture's own individual Decree, which is said to vary a little according to the need of each Prefecture.
The SCAP Directives set up a boundary-line around Japan,fact fo which now through middle of the Zastirn Sea as between Korea amd Japan beyond which Japanese fishing vessels were forbidden to go fishing. The line, commonly called "MacArthur Line",was designed not only to regulate Japanese fishing but to prevent possible frictions over between Japan and its neighbors including Korea However, Japanese fishing vessels ignored the boundary-line, crossed it, came near Korean coast and recklessly exploited marine resources in adjacent seas of Korea, thus ruining the very purpose for which the boundary-line was established. As many as 83 cases of violation of the MacArthur Line were reported during the period between 1947 and 1951. These were only known cases but there were, of course, many more unverified cases of violation.
Under these circumstances, the Republic of Korea was compelled to take minimum measures to protect its adjacent seas from Japanese fishing encroachment which was expected to become more rampant after she had regained her sovereignty. The Korean Government, therefore, driren by the dire deed of safeguarding its marine resources from Japanese poaching, proclaimed on January 18, 1952, in accordance with well-established international precedents, the Presidential Proclamation setting forth boundary-line around the adjacent seas of Korea within which the Republic of Korea would have sole jurisdiction. The Proclamation, however, makes it clear that it does not interfere with the rights of free navigation on the high seas.
The Republic of Korea also offered to settle the fishery question amicably with Japan each time the Korea-Japan Conference was resumed. Japan simply refused to recognize Korea's right to protect her own marine resources and continued to violate the boundary-line Provided in the Presidential Proclamation. Their around vesslels of the Maritime Safety Guard openly escorted Japanese fishing vessels into Korean waters in violation of the Proclamation.
Thereupon, Prize Court Order (Emergency Presidential Order No.12) was promulgated on October 4, 1952, and the Prize Court and Higher Prize Court were established on the same date by Presidential Decree No.707 (Decree for Establishment of the Prize Court and Higher Prize Court promulgated on October 4, 1952). In addition, Law for conservation of Fishery Resources (Law No.298) was promulgated on December 12, 1953 to enforce the provisions of the Presidential Proclamation. Thereafter, any fisherman or fishing-vessel, regardless of nationality, having violated these laws was brought to trial and justly punished according to the offence.
The conservation boundary-line is commonly called as Peace-line, for it was established to prevent any fishing disputes that may arise between Korea and Japan. We shall welcome and respect the rights of other nations to establish similar conservation zone. If Japan should establish a conservation zone near its coast, we would respect it as we would wish it to respect ours. Not only in the field of fishing but in every other field, we wish to live with Japan as good neighbors. It has so far been Japan that rejected the extended hands of our friendship.
English translations of the relevant laws and Proclamation are herewith enclosed for your reference and information.
With my most cordial regards, I am

Yours very sincerely,

Yung Tai Pyun

Minister of Foreign Affairs

General John E. Hull,
Commander-in-Chief, United Nations Command, APO 500
Enclosure: As stated
CC;
1. America Embassary in Korea
2. Korean Embassary in U.S.A.

 
별지 : 대륙붕과 영해에 관한 정책 성명서해제
 
  • 발신자주한미대사
  • 수신자(대한민국정부 , 외무부)
  • 날짜1955년 2월 2일
  • 문서종류기타
  • 형태사항영어 
MEMORANDUM

Policy Statement on Continental Shelf and Territorial Waters
 

On September 28, 1945, President Harry S. Truman issued Proclamations on the "Policey of the United States with Respect the Natural Resources of the Subsoil and Sea Bed of the Continental Shelf" and "Policy of the United States with Respect to Coastal Fisheries in Certain Areas of the High Seas". The Embassy has received the following statement clarifying the scope of these Proclamations insofar as they relate to sovereignty over the waters above the continental shelf:
The Proclamation relating to the 'Policy of the United States with Respect to the Natural Resources of the Subsoil and Sea Bed of the Continental Shelf' has to do only with 'jurisdiction over the natural resources of the subsoil and sea bed of the Continental Shelf'. In its first substantive paragraph the President stated that he thereby proclaimed the following policy of the United States of America with respect to the natural resources of the subsoil and sea bed of the continental shelf' Its second and final substantive paragraph reads:
'Having concern for the urgency of conserving and prudently utilising its natural resources, the Government of the United States regards the natural resources of the subsoil and sea bed of the continental shelf beneath the high seas but contiguous to the coasts of the United States as appertaining to the United States, subject to its jurisdiction and control. In cases where the continental shelf extends to the shores of another State, or is shared with au adjacent State, the boundary shall be determined by the United States and the State concerned in accordance with equitable principles. The character as high seas of the waters above the continental shelf and the right to their free and unimpeded navigation are in no way thus affected.
It is thus clear" that this Proclamation dealt only with the natural resources of the subsoil and sea bed of the continental shelf and not with the high seas above the continental shelf. This was explicitly stated is the last sentence of the second and final paragraph just quoted, readings: 'The character as high seas of the waters above the continental shelf and the right to their free and unimpeded navigation are in no way thus affected'.
The other Presidential Proclamation, signed the sere day, has to do with the 'Policy of the United States with Respect to Coastal Fisheries in Certain Areas of the High Seas'. This Proclamation has to do solely with the 'conservation and protection of fishery resources' in those areas 'of the high seas contiguous to the coasts of the United States wherein fishing activities have been or in the future may be developed and maintained en a substantial scale. It was stated in this Proclamation that Where such activities have been or shall hereafter be developed and maintained by its nationals alone, the United States regards it as proper to establish explicitly bounded conservation somes in which fishing activities shall be subject to the regulation and control of the United States', but that 'Where such activities have been or shall hereafter be legitimately developed and maintained jointly by nationals of the United States and nationals of other States, explicitly bounded conservation zones may be established under agreements between the United States and such other States; and all fishing activities in such zones shall be subject to regulation and control as provided in such agreements.' Further, it was stated in this Proclamation that 'The right of any State to establish conservation zones oft its shores in accordance. with the above principles is conceded provided that corresponding recognition is given to any fishing interests of nationals of the United states which may exist in such areas.' Finally, it was explicitly stated that 'The character as high seas of the areas is which such conservation zones are established and the right to their free and unimpeded navigation are in no way thus affected.
Nowhere is either of the Proclamations was there any claim what soever to more than jurisdiction and control over the continental shelf: the character of the high seas, whether above the continental shelf or outside the limits of the continental shelf, was carefully preserved as high seas; territorial waters of the United States were is rewise increased or affected.
Nor did the Press Release, issued by the White House on September 28, 1945, concerning the two Proclamations which the President signed that same day, is anywise change the effect or tenor of the Proclamations. It was clearly and accurately stated in the Press Release that;
'While asserting jurisdiction and control of the United States over the mineral resources of the continental shelf, the proclamation is rewise abridges the right of free and unimpeded navigation of waters of the character of high seas above the shelf, nor does it extend the present limits of the territorial waters of the United States'.
In addition, attention is called to the fact that the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, approved August 7, 1953, which provides for the jurisdiction and control of the United States over the subsoil and. sea bed of the outer Continental Shelf, and authorises the Secretary of the Interior to lease such lands for certain purposes, contains the explicit provision in Section 3(b) that -
'(b) This Act shall be construed in such manner that the character as high seas of the waters above the outer Continental Shelf and the right to navigation and fishing therein shall not be affected.'
Thus, the Congress of the United States clearly recognized that the waters above the outer Continental Shelf are high seas and that the right to navigation and fishing therein is not affected by the Act."
American Embassay,
Seoul,
February 2, 1955.

 
이름
J.P.A. Francois , Francois , John S. Hall , Yung Tai Pyun , John E. Hul , John E. Hull , Harry S. Truman
지명
the Republic of Korea , the United States , Korea , Japan , Japan , Korea , the Republic of Korea , Korea , Republic of Korea , the Republic of Korea , Korea , the Republic of Korea , Republic of Korea , Korea , U-Am-Ryung , Kyung-Hung-Kun , Ham-Kyong-Pukdo , Ma-An-Do , Sin-Do-Yuldo , Yong-Chun-Kun , Pyungan-Pukdo , Ma-An-Do , Belgium , Brazil , Chile , Denmark , Ecuador , Egypt , France , Iceland , Israel , Netherlands , Norway , the Philippines , Sweden , Syria , the Union of South Africa , United Kingdom of Great Britain , Northern Ireland , United States of America , Yugoslavia , Belgium , Brazil , Chile , Denmark , Ecuador , France , Iceland , the Netherlands , Norway , Philippines , Sweden , Syria , Union of South Africa , United Kingdom of Great Britain , Northern Ireland , Yugoslavia , the United States , the United States , the United States , the United States , Korea , the Republic of Korea , the United States , United States , United States , the United States , United States , United States , the United States , the United states , United States , United States , the United States , Korea , Korea , the United States , northern Pacific , Argentina , Canada , Chile , Consta Rica , Honduras , Iceland , Mexico , Panama , Peru , Saudi Arabia , United Kingdom , the United States , United States , the United States , United States , Japan , Korea , Japan , Japan , Japan Sea , Korea , Japan , Korea , the Republic of Korea , Korea , Republic of Korea , The Republic of Korea , Japan , Korea , Japan , Japan , Korea , Japan , Japan , Japan , Japan , Korea , Korea , United States , Argentina , Canada , Chile , Costa Rica , Honduras , Iceland , Mexico , Panama , Peru , Saudi Arabia , United Kingdom , the United States , the United States , United States , United States , Japan , Korea , Japan , Japan , Japan , Korea , Japan , Japan , Korea , the Republic of Korea , Korea , Republic of Korea , The Republic of Korea , Japan , Korea , Japan , Japan , Korea , Japan , Japan , Japan , Japan , United States , the United States , United States , United States of America , the United States , the United States , the United States , United States , the United States , United States , United States , United States , United States , United states , United States , United States , the United States , United States
관서
주한미국대사관 , 駐韓美國大使館 , The Ministry of Foreign Affairs , Embassy of the United Stites of America in Korea , Korean Government , United States Government , Government of the Republic of Korea , Korean Government , the Korean Goverment , Korean Government , The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Korea , The Korean government , the Korean government , The Korean Government , the Korean government , Korean Government , The Korean Government , Korean Government , The Government of the Republic of Korea , The Government of the Republic of Korea , The Government of the Republic of Korea , The Mebassy of the United States of America , Ministry for Foreign Affairs , Government of the United States , Government of the Republic of Korea , the United States Government , The Supreme Commander for Allied Powers (SCAP) , the Japanese Government , Japanese Government , Japanese Government , Korean Government , The Supreme Commander for Allied Powers , Japanese Government , Japanese Government , Japanese Government , Korean Government , Government of the United States , the White House , Congress of the United States
단체
Commission of the Uhited Nations , the United Nations International Law Commission , the United Nations , the United Nations International Law Commission , the International Law Commission , the United Nations , the United Nations International Law Commission , the International Law Commission , United Nations Command
문서
the Embassy's note , the Embassy's note , the Memorandum policy Statement on Continental Shelf , Government-General Ordinance No.109 , SCAP Memorandums , SCAP Directives , The SCAP Directives , Presidential Decres No.707 , Government-General Ordinance No.109 , SCAP Memorandums , SCAP Directives , SCAP Directives
기타
the United States Presidential Proclamations , Korean Proclamation , United States Proclamations , Proclamation setting , the Presidential Proclamation , Presidential Proclamation , the Presidential Proclamation , Presidential Proclamation over Adjacent Seas , conservation boundary line , Peace-line , MacArthur Line , MacArthur Line , Presidential Proclamation , Presidential Proclamation , Prize Court Order , Presidential Proclamation , Peace-line , Presidential Proclamation , MacArthur Line , MacArthur Line , Presidential Proclamation , Prize Court Order , Presidential Decree , Peace-line , Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act

태그 :

태그등록
이전페이지 리스트보기 맨 위로