The Right of Hot Pursuit in the Law of the Sea: States’ Response to Breaches of Internal and International Law

Akpoviri Michael Akatugba; PhD; LLM; LLB HonsAg; Brain Ogheneovo Nelson

doi:10.56201/JLGP.vol.10.no2.2025.pg16.25

📄 Download Paper

The Right of Hot Pursuit in the Law of the Sea: States’ Response to Breaches of Internal and International Law

Akpoviri Michael Akatugba, PhD, LLM, LLB HonsAg, Brain Ogheneovo Nelson

Abstract

International law has made it possible for both coastal and land lock states to enjoy freedom of the high sea for the purpose of peaceful navigation and to ensure that the free gift of nature is utilized by all nation irrespective of whether developed or not. This is made possible as a result of the coming into effect of the international convention on the law of the sea, 1982 which provides amongst other things the right to innocent passage through the territorial sea. But over the years the activities of criminals especially from other Countries or State using foreign vessels to perpetuate crimes on the high sea has made it more imperative for Coastal state to act swiftly to curb this evil trend for the purpose of self- preservation of their territorial boundaries and their sovereignty. One of the ways to do this as provided under Article 111 is the right of hot pursuit which is critically analyzed in this work. This study analyses the procedural requirements of immediacy, continuity, and proportionality in the enforcement of hot pursuit. It also explores how differing State practices and regional enforcement models affect the doctrine’s consistency and legitimacy. The paper further discusses the legal limitations, challenges in implementation, and the risk of diplomatic tensions or abuse of rights. This work recommends that transfer of technology from the developed Nations to the underdeveloped States and the entering of bilateral agreement among neighboring States will go a long way to solving the problems by foreign Ships or vessels whose act are deemed prejudicial to the peace and good order of a coastal state. In conclusion, the article advocates for the reinforcement of multilateral frameworks and regional cooperation to ensure lawful, effective, and human rights compliant application of the right of hot pursuit in contemporary maritime governance.

Keywords

Hot PursuitInnocent passagebreacheslaw of the sea.

References

1 I. Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law, 7th edn (Oxford University Press, 2008). 2 United Nation Convention on the Law of the Sea. (UNCLOS), 1982 3 Ibid. Art. 17 4 Ibid. Art. 18 5 Ibid. Art. 19 6Geneva Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone 1958. UNTS, Vol. 516, p. 205.7Philpott Daniel, ‘Sovereignty: An Introduction and brief History,’’ (Journal of International Affairs) 1995. 8NnamdiAkani,‘The Concept of State Sovereignty in International Law and Relations,’ 2019. <https://www.researchgate.net.the.concept.of.state.sovereignty.in.international.law.and.relations.> accessed March 22, 2025. 9DevanshuBhadauria, ‘Theories of Sovereignty,’ (Research Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 2012). 10Ibid 11Goodin, Robert, The Oxford handbook of international Relations, (Oxford University Press.) Pp.132-13312Pramit Bhattacharya and AbhijitPrabhat ‘’The Concept of Hot Pursuit: An Analysis under International Law,’(NILSINDIA Journal, 2016). 13 See Articles 111(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8) of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the sea, 1982 13 See Art. 19 (2) of the United Nations convention on the Law of the Sea, 198214R.R. Churchill and A.V. Lowe, The Law of the Sea 3rdedn, (Manchester University Press, 1999). 15I. Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law, 7th edn(Oxford University Press, 2008). 16 UNCLOS, 1982. Art. 111 17 (1935) 3.R.1.A.A 1609 18 R.R. Churchill, (n-14) 19 Denmark v. United Kingdom (1962) 35 ILR 485 20 D. R. Rothwell, and T. Stephens, The International Law of the Sea, (Hart Publishing, 2010).216 U.S. 2 CRANCH 187 (1804) 22Ibid 23 UNCLOS, 1982. Art.111 (3). 24UNCLOS, 1982. Art.111. 25UNCLOS, 1982. 26VasiliosTasikas,’Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and the Doctrine of Hot Pursuit: A New Era of Coast Guard Maritime Law Enforcement Operations,” (Tulane Maritime Law Journal, Vol. 29, 2004), p. 72.27A. Boyle and C.Chinkin, The making of International Law, (Oxford University Press, 2007) 28UNCLOS, 1982. Art. 101. 29I. A, Shearer, Starke’s International Law, 11th edn(London: Butterworth’s Press, 2005). 30I. Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law, 6th edn, (Oxford: OUP Publishers, 2003). 31R.R. Churchill, & A.V Lowe, The Law of the Sea, 3rd edn (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1999)32T. Treves, ‘Piracy, Law of the Sea, and Use of Force: Developments off the Coast of Somalia’ European Journal of International Law, 2002) 20(2) 399–414. 33 UNCLOS, 1982, Art. 110. 34 A. G. Oude Elferink, ‘The Law of the Sea Convention and the Implementation of the duty to Cooperate in Combating Drug Trafficking,’ (Ocean Development and International Law, 2006). 37(2) 207–228. 35 UNCLOS, 1982, Art. 109.36 UNCLOS, 1982, Art. 108. 37 D. Guilfoyle, Shipping Interdiction and the Law of the Sea, (Cambridge: CUP, 2009). 38 D.R. Rothwell, and T. Stephens, The International Law of the Sea , (Hart Publishing, 2010). 39 T. Treves,‘Customary International Law’ in Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (Oxford University Press, 2009).

The Right of Hot Pursuit in the Law of the Sea: States’ Response to Breaches of Internal and International Law

Abstract

Keywords

References

More Articles from JOURNAL OF LAW AND GLOBAL POLICY