Crimean occupation and unclos dispute settlement: navigating territorial sovereignty and non-recognition

Abstract

Abstract. The article examines the interplay between the Crimean occupation and UNCLOS compulsory dispute settlement procedures, exploring how the fact of Crimea’s occupation can be established and UNCLOS dispute settlement procedures applied. It also investigates the contradiction within the Annex VII Arbitral Tribunal’s award in the Coastal State Rights Dispute due to Crimea’s occupation. The study concludes that to address violations made by the Russian Federation under the provision of UNCLOS Crimea’s occupation, Ukraine can seek an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice. Strengthening Ukraine’s position requires a legally binding decision on Crimea’s occupied status and Ukraine’s coastal state status, possibly through an ad hoc tribunal with jurisdiction. Supporting evidence from other courts may be valuable, despite their lack of direct jurisdiction over the matter of occupation. The article also discusses the principle of nonrecognition and the tribunal’s neutral approach to accommodate both parties in its award in Coastal State Rights Dispute.