CLCS process flawed by its secretive nature that prevents thorough examination of claims
Despite UNCLOS's mandate that the CLCS examine a nation's claim to a physically connected continental shelf, problems arise with the Commission's structure. Sessions of the CLCS are secret."' The only nation that is privy to the CLCS deliberations is the one that submitted the scientific data purporting to support an extended continental shelf claim.20 Because the CLCS "considers itself bound by States' requests to keep their submissions information confidential,"21 the executive summaries of the CLCS sessions do not contain any details. Moreover, the CLCS process itself seems to be the only check on possible abuse by a nation making a fraudulent or erroneous extended continental shelf claim. Written interventions by nations that are not opposite from or adjacent to a submitting state are not allowed.
Related argument(s) where this quote is used.
Even if U.S. had a seat on CLCS, they would have limited ability to influence the direction or decisions of the CLCS as members are required to act independently from their governments and in secrecy.Related Quotes:
- Should not overstate the impact that US will be able to have with a full seat on CLCS
- CLCS process flawed by its secretive nature that prevents thorough examination of claims
- Members of CLCS are bound by agreement not to act as agent of their respective governments, undermining "seat at the table" argument
- By ratifying UNCLOS, U.S. could still be outvoted in CLCS decisions but then be obligated to abide by the ruling