Parties to UNCLOS can oppose amendments to ambiguous policies

UNCLOS parties would have several options if they desired to clarify this point. The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) has competence to issue an advisory opinion on the provision’s meaning.⁹¹ However, ITLOS lacks competence to try suspected pirates themselves.⁹² Despite calls to permit such trials through amendment to the statute of ITLOS or additional UNCLOS protocols,⁹³ converting a judicial body initially designed to settle interpretive disputes among states relating to UNCLOS into a criminal tribunal remains unprecedented and impractical.⁹⁴ UNCLOS article 105 would nonetheless preclude this possibility at ITLOS and other inter- national courts, such as the International Criminal Court, which also lack the mandate to hear piracy cases.95 Parties could alternatively amend UNCLOS to suit their needs through formal procedure by convening a consensus-seeking conference, or through simplified procedure, followed by adoption of an amendment and signature, ratification, or accession to it.⁹⁶