日朝之间捕鱼船纠纷.docVIP

ugefanJAPAN v. KIM SUN-KI. CASE NO. 35, 1997. MATSUE DISTRICT COURT, SHIMANE PREFECTURE, JAPAN, AUGUST 15, 1997.Hee Kwon Park?[FNa1]Copyright (c) 1998 by the American Society of International Law; Hee Kwon Park Pacta sunt servanda-priority of international agreement over municipal law under Japanese Constitution-duty to consult under international agreement-effect on prior fisheries accord of changes in municipal law regarding territorial sea limits and straight baselines On August 15, 1997, the Hamada branch of the Matsue District Court in Shimane Prefecture, Japan, dismissed an indictment against South Korean national Kim Sun-Ki, captain of the South Korean fishing boat?Daedong-Ho No. 909, seized in June off Hamada on charges of illegal fishing in an area claimed by Japan to be within its newly expanded territorial sea. The court concluded that, notwithstanding the fact that the vessel was within the newly expanded territorial sea of Japan as measured from the altered Japanese baselines, the seizure violated the Agreement on Fisheries concluded between South Korea and Japan in 1965. The 1965 Agreement establishes exclusive fishery zones to a limit of 12 miles?[FN1]?measured from each partys “coastal baselines.”[FN2]?However, the Agreement provides that, in case either party uses straight baselines to measure the limits of its exclusive fishery zone, such baselines shall be determined upon consultation with the other party.?[FN3]?The Agreement also establishes joint regulation zones outside the 12-mile limit of the exclusive fishery zones. It provides that in the joint regulation zones, enforcement shall be carried out and exercised only by the contracting party to which the fishing vessel belongs.?[FN4]?In other words, South Korea and Japan exercise exclusive control and jurisdiction over their own fishing vessels in the joint regulation zones. In 1967 Japan enacted the Law on Regulation of Fishing Activities by Foreigners, which prohibited foreigners from