Does maritime law govern the North Pole and other distant ice-covered ocean spots?

[stuyguy]

This came to me watching the Polar Express on TV just now.

If you think about it, the North Pole and much of the polar ice cap is in the middle of the ocean. If someone did something of questionable legality there, would/could the authorities apply maritime law to the case?

[garygnu]

Various countries have laid territorial claim upon the North Pole region. If those countries refuse to prosecute, the perpetrator could be prosecuted in their home countries if the incident was a crime there. Maritime law probably wouldn’t be nesessary, but could be a last resort.

[The_Flying_Dutchman]

@stuyguy

This came to me watching the Polar Express on TV just now.

If you think about it, the North Pole and much of the polar ice cap is in the middle of the ocean. If someone did something of questionable legality there, would/could the authorities apply maritime law to the case?

Fisheries and Oceans Canada has jurisdiction there in the event of illegal fishing.

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (on skidoos) will relentlessly track you down if you kill some one at the North Pole.

[GingerOfTheNorth]

Nah, they’d use planes that far from Alert.

[alice_in_wonderland]

@The Flying Dutchman

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (on skidoos) will relentlessly track you down if you kill some one at the North Pole.

And you know that the Mounties always get their man!

[robby]

The United States does not recognize any territorial claims on the North Pole. It is in international waters, and U.S. nuclear submarines have routinely transited over the pole. I did it myself back in 1993.

However, there’s a lot of controversy and disputes going on, with nations such as Canada and Russia having made claims that extend to the North Pole. These claims have not been recognized by anybody else, though.

BBC NEWS | Business | The Arctic's new gold rush

Northern Canada

Law of the sea

[Gfactor]

@stuyguy

If someone did something of questionable legality there, would/could the authorities apply maritime law to the case?

What do you mean by maritime law? If the US caught someone violating US criminal laws out there (generally, only a subset of US criminal law would apply there), it would probably prosecute under US law. http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mlawofsea.html

[Raguleader]

So, a question for clarification, is the North Pole passage the “Northwest Passage”, or is that something seperate? I seem to recall the Canadia and the US getting into a minor pissing contest over that piece of aquatic real estate too.

[Derleth]

@The Flying Dutchman

(on skidoos)

23 of them?

[Frylock]

@Raguleader

So, a question for clarification, is the North Pole passage the “Northwest Passage”, or is that something seperate? I seem to recall the Canadia and the US getting into a minor pissing contest over that piece of aquatic real estate too.

I’m reporting you to Mnemosyne.

-FrL-

[Raguleader]

@Frylock

I’m reporting you to Mnemosyne.

-FrL-

Ack, my type-foo is weak. Started with “Canadian Navy” and “US Navy”, but then I couldn’t remember if both or either organization were involved, so I shortened it to “Canadia” and “US”

Me sorry.

[Gfactor]

@Raguleader

So, a question for clarification, is the North Pole passage the “Northwest Passage”, or is that something seperate? I seem to recall the Canadia and the US getting into a minor pissing contest over that piece of aquatic real estate too.

Not sure if they’re the same thing or not. Here’s a thread about the Northwest Passage dispute:

Sovereignty over the Northwest Passage

[Gorsnak]

The Northwest Passage doesn’t go anywhere near the North Pole. It runs between continental North America and various Arctic islands. Canada’s argument is that the Passage is thus “internal” waters (like Puget Sound, for example) and under Canadian sovereignty. The American argument is that the NW Passage is an internationally important waterway (like the Bosporus and Dardanelles, for example) and hence international waters.

[Gfactor]

@stuyguy

If you think about it, the North Pole and much of the polar ice cap is in the middle of the ocean. If someone did something of questionable legality there, would/could the authorities apply maritime law to the case?

The U.S. asserts Special Maritime and Territorial Jurisdiction over, among other things, terra nullius ("Terra nullius * is a concept to describe a territory belonging to nobody, like that of The North Pole."):

The term “special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States”, as used in this title, includes:
(1) The high seas, any other waters within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States and out of the jurisdiction of any particular State, and any vessel belonging in whole or in part to the United States or any citizen thereof, or to any corporation created by or under the laws of the United States, or of any State, Territory, District, or possession thereof, when such vessel is within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States and out of the jurisdiction of any particular State.
(2) Any vessel registered, licensed, or enrolled under the laws of the United States, and being on a voyage upon the waters of any of the Great Lakes, or any of the waters connecting them, or upon the Saint Lawrence River where the same constitutes the International Boundary Line.
(3) Any lands reserved or acquired for the use of the United States, and under the exclusive or concurrent jurisdiction thereof, or any place purchased or otherwise acquired by the United States by consent of the legislature of the State in which the same shall be, for the erection of a fort, magazine, arsenal, dockyard, or other needful building.
(4) Any island, rock, or key containing deposits of guano, which may, at the discretion of the President, be considered as appertaining to the United States.
(5) Any aircraft belonging in whole or in part to the United States, or any citizen thereof, or to any corporation created by or under the laws of the United States, or any State, Territory, district, or possession thereof, while such aircraft is in flight over the high seas, or over any other waters within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States and out of the jurisdiction of any particular State.
(6) Any vehicle used or designed for flight or navigation in space and on the registry of the United States pursuant to the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies and the Convention on Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space, while that vehicle is in flight, which is from the moment when all external doors are closed on Earth following embarkation until the moment when one such door is opened on Earth for disembarkation or in the case of a forced landing, until the competent authorities take over the responsibility for the vehicle and for persons and property aboard.
(7) Any place outside the jurisdiction of any nation with respect to an offense by or against a national of the United States.
(8) To the extent permitted by international law, any foreign vessel during a voyage having a scheduled departure from or arrival in the United States with respect to an offense committed by or against a national of the United States.
(9) With respect to offenses committed by or against a national of the United States as that term is used in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act—
(A) the premises of United States diplomatic, consular, military or other United States Government missions or entities in foreign States, including the buildings, parts of buildings, and land appurtenant or ancillary thereto or used for purposes of those missions or entities, irrespective of ownership; and
(B) residences in foreign States and the land appurtenant or ancillary thereto, irrespective of ownership, used for purposes of those missions or entities or used by United States personnel assigned to those missions or entities.
Nothing in this paragraph shall be deemed to supersede any treaty or international agreement with which this paragraph conflicts. This paragraph does not apply with respect to an offense committed by a person described in section 3261 (a) of this title.

(Emphasis added.) http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000007----000-.html

As I indicated earlier, not all U.S. statutes apply in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction. http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm00663.htm Also, the statute only extends the jurisdiction to crimes by or against U.S. nationals.

*Hadi Lille, “A New Era for Indigenous Peoples the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues,” *Journal of Indigenous Peoples Rights * No. 2/2006 at n. 8: http://www.galdu.org/govat/doc/permanentengelsk2.pdf

[Tim_T-Bonham.net]

@alice_in_wonderland

And you know that the Mounties always get their man!

Apparently so!
http://www.365gay.com/Newscon06/05/051806mounties.htm

[garygnu]

@t-bonham@scc.net

Apparently so!
http://www.365gay.com/Newscon06/05/051806mounties.htm

There’s a joke about Mrs. Peacock in there somewhere, I know it