MUSIC [MUSIC] Hello. Today, I am going to present the two key principles of international water law. Firstly, the principle of equitable and reasonable use of the waters of an international watercourse, and secondly, the obligation to not cause significant harm to the territory or the environment of an international watercourse. Equitable and reasonable use is affirmed by Article 5 of the UN Convention on the Law of Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses, This principle affirms that each State of an international watercourse has the right to the equitable and reasonable use of the waters of an international watercourse. This principle is also affirmed by several other legal instruments such as the 1994 Danube Convention or the 1995 Mekong River Agreement or the Senegal River Charter or the the Protocol on Shared Watercourses Systems in the Southern Africa Development Community. When the International Law Commission analyzed Article 5 of the 1997 United Nations Convention it affirmed that this principle was based on several legal instruments, but also on several international legal decisions, and on the actual practice of States and non-governmental organizations. This principle is based on a doctrinal theory, including the theory of limited territorial sovereignty. In addition to this theory, there are two approaches mentioned by States. One of these is absolute territorial sovereignty as mentioned by the United States Attorney General, Judson Harmon, in 1895 during a dispute between the United States and Mexico over the Rio Grande. The United States position was to assert absolute territorial sovereignty over the waters of the watercourse that crossed its territory. However, in international practice, this principle of absolute sovereignty is not applied even by the State that presented this theory. Alongside this theory of absolute territorial sovereignty, there is another position mentioned by States and this is the theory of absolute territorial integrity. This theory is presented by downstream States to prevent any territorial development that could affect the flow of water. In fact, this theory blocks any territorial development, for example, and construction of a dam by an upstream State. As such, this theory has not been implemented in international practice, and today, limited territorial sovereignty is the basis of the principle of equitable and reasonable use. So how can this be put in place? A series of factors must be considered and these are listed in Article 6 of the 1997 United Nations Convention. The criteria and factors are listed, not to limit but in order to give examples of the factors that should be taken into account by a State of an international watercourse. These factors are geographic, climatic, hydrological, and of course include the needs, both economic and social, of the riparian populations. Therefore, because each State, each watercourse has specific characteristics, equitable and reasonable use takes the different factors of each State, of every river, into account. As I said, the principle of equitable and reasonable use is also affirmed by the judgments of international tribunals, in particular in the 1997 Gabcikovo-Nagymaros case between Hungary and Slovakia. The International Court of Justice affirmed the general obligation, the general character of the principle of equitable and reasonable use and affirmed that each State along the watercourse is entitled to use it, entitled to an equitable and reasonable share of an international watercourse. This principle does not mean that a State is entitled to an equal share of the waters of an international watercourse, but rather, as I said, these factors, unique to each international watercourse need to be taken into account. I would like to highlight Article 10 of the United Nations Convention. This states that if there is conflict over the use of an international watercourse, there is no prioritisation of use. The Convention states that particular attention must be given to the protection of vital human needs. This is a general overview of the equitable and reasonable use principle. Likewise, I have illustrated the content of this principle. Lets move on. The second key principle of international water law is the obligation not to cause any significant harm This obligation is affirmed in Article 7 of the 1997 United Nations Convention but also in other legal instruments. This principle is based on judicial decisions. We can see that already in 1941, the arbitral tribunal between the United States and Canada, over the Trail Smelter case affirmed the obligation of each State to not cause significant harm to a neighbouring State. And this obligation not to cause significant harm was affirmed in the 1949 Corfu Channel case between Albania and the United Kingdom and in the 1995 Advisory Opinion of Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons. So you can see that this obligation is a a fundamental element of international water law. As we will see in our presentation it is the relationship between these two principles that presents a challenge. {0}Thank you."{/0} {1} {/1} MUSIC