ANTARCTIC AS OBJECT OF THE GENERAL HERITAGE OF HUMANITY AND TERRITORIAL CLAIMS ON IT

• Main Authors: CHERNIAEV, Oleksandr, KOVTUN, Oleksandr
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Drohobych Ivan Franko State Pedagogical University 2020
• Subjects: history; territorial claims; human heritage; legal regime; Antarctic; The Antarctic; Antarc*; Antarctica
• Online Access: http://eehb.dspu.edu.ua/article/view/188692

Currently, the sixth continent as a region is not under the jurisdiction of any state, given its importance to all mankind in terms of ecology, the importance of mineral and living resources, the need to ensure international peace and security, this article examines and analyzes the possibility of applying to it one of two possible legal regimes, namely:the first is the regime for the implementation of the rights of the international investment community, by concluding an appropriate agreement on the international management of the Antarctic as the common heritage of mankind. At the same time, the existing mechanisms - the Antarctic Treaty and other related documents - are being questioned, since they were not authorized by the international community. In addition, one of the huge drawbacks of transforming Antarctica into a public facility is the emergence of the advantages of individual states that are technically and economically capable of developing Antarctic resources, which can lead to political tensions, friction and military confrontation.The essence of the second legal regime is to recognize Antarctica as a common heritage of humanity, which should positively affect the continued ban on geological exploration in the area, by extending the Madrid Protocol for an unlimited period or adopting a new document for this purpose. Antarctica can be qualified as an object of particular international interest. Analyzing the above possible legal regimes and trying to give preference to a fairer mechanism in resolving the issue of the international legal regime of Antarctica, the conclusions obtained are that the sixth continent would be more expedient to consider the concept of the common heritage of mankind along with the opinions of all interested countries of the world - with different levels economic and social development and completely different legal systems and traditions.