Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 175: To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs the position regarding Ireland's participation in talks regarding the island of Rockall and the surrounding seabed and waters; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20846/09]

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The regime governing the exploration and exploitation of the continental shelf in international law is set down by the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Under that Convention a coastal state is entitled to a continental shelf 200 nautical miles (approx. 370 km) in breadth regardless of whether its continental shelf physically extends that far, subject only to the similar rights of its coastal neighbours. It may also claim a broader shelf where it can show that the natural prolongation of its land territory under water actually extends beyond that limit. A claim to extended shelf must be supported by scientific and technical data and be established to the satisfaction of the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, which was created by the Convention for this purpose.

Ireland's shelf naturally extends beyond 200 nautical miles both to the west and to the south of the country, including in the Hatton-Rockall Area of the North East Atlantic. Ireland and the UK agreed a maritime boundary on the continental shelf here in 1988 but this is not accepted by Iceland or Denmark (on behalf of the Færoe Islands), both of which also make extensive overlapping claims. The UN Commission's rules of procedure prevent its consideration of a submission concerning an area of disputed continental shelf without the consent of the states concerned. The four countries have met regularly since 2001 (most recently in London before Christmas) but have so far failed to reach an agreement that would allow the Commission to consider a submission on the area concerned.

In view of this, and in consideration of the 12 May 2009 deadline for the making of submissions that applies to Ireland, the Government recently authorised the making of a national submission to the Commission in respect of the Hatton-Rockall Area. This submission was lodged with the Commission in New York on 31 March. While the Commission's rules of procedure prevent its consideration without the consent of all the states concerned, submission at this time does preserve Ireland's legal position. In the meantime, the four states intend to keep the matter under regular review and we will continue to work for the creation of conditions that will permit consideration of the submission by the Commission as soon as possible.

Rockall itself, which is a tiny islet or rock and the only part of the Hatton-Rockall Area that is above water, is not relevant to these discussions. Although a matter of controversy during the 1960s and 1970s when sovereignty over such rocks and skerries was thought to be central to the mineral rights in the adjacent seabed and to fishing rights in the surrounding seas, the matter was effectively resolved in 1982 upon adoption of the Law of the Sea Convention. Article 121, paragraph 3 of the Convention provides that: "Rocks which cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own shall have no exclusive economic zone or continental shelf."

Article 121 (3) applies to Rockall. Ireland ratified the Convention on 21 June 1996. The United Kingdom acceded to the Convention on 25 July 1997. It is accordingly accepted by both sides that Rockall cannot be used as a basis for delimiting their respective continental shelves or exclusive economic zones and the matter has not been relevant to the discussions that have taken place concerning the continental shelf in the Hatton-Rockall Area.

Ireland has also made submissions to the Commission in respect of two other areas: nationally in respect of the area adjoining the Porcupine Abyssal Plain to the south-west and jointly with France, Spain and the UK in respect of a large area in the Celtic Sea and Bay of Biscay. The Commission issued favourable recommendations following its consideration of the Porcupine Abyssal Plain submission and on foot of these the Government made an order under the 1968 Continental Shelf Act on 31 March last that incorporates 39,000 square kilometres of additional seabed in this area into the designated Irish continental shelf. The Commission has also recently made recommendations following its examination of the Celtic Sea and Bay of Biscay submission and these are currently under consideration by the four states concerned.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 176: To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs the position regarding his efforts to support the inhabitants of the Chagos Islands in their bid to return to their homeland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20847/09]

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The demand of the Chagossian natives to return to the Chagossian archipelago is a complex issue involving competing sovereignty claims and legal arguments.

In November 2000, the High Court of England and Wales found that the "wholesale removal" of the Islanders between 1967 and 1971 was an "abject legal failure". The Court ruled that the Islanders could return to the small outlying islands in the group but not to the largest, Diego Garcia, and granted the Islanders British citizenship. Following this ruling, the British Government commissioned a study on the matter which concluded that island resettlement would be "impractical and inconsistent with the existing defence facilities". A study commissioned by the Islanders contested this position. In November 2002 the Islanders launched a further action in the High Court of England and Wales claiming that they had been treated in such a way by the British Government as to entitle them to compensation and return of their property. In October 2003, the Islanders lost this claim for compensation.

In June 2004 a royal decree was issued in Britain banning the Chagos Islanders from returning to the islands. In October 2004 the High Court agreed to a judicial review of the royal decree, and it was overturned in May 2006. This decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal in May 2007. The British Government requested that the House of Lords examine this decision in June 2008, and in October 2008 the Law Lords ruled that the royal decree which imposed the ban on returning to the islands should stand. The Law Lords ruling is the final judgement in the British legal system. The group have stated that they may bring their case to the European Court for Human Rights.

The Government will continue to monitor the situation of the Chagossian Archipelago. We would wish to see the issue resolved by agreement between the parties, and in a manner which properly addresses the unfortunate situation of the Chagos Islanders.