Challenges of the BBNJ Agreement: from the Perspective of Japan’s Ratification

On 12 December (local time), Japan deposited its instrument of accession to the Agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement) with the UN Secretary-General at UN Headquarters in New York. Hereinafter, unless misleading, Japan's action shall be referred to as having “ratified” the BBNJ Agreement.

Unlike the era when international law was termed “foreign relations law” and functioned as law governing a State's external relations, current international law confers rights and imposes obligations upon individuals. Consequently, by becoming a Party to a treaty, what rights a State acquires and what obligations it assumes under international law are matters of significant concern to individuals.

How did Japan explain to individuals the reason for its ratification of the BBNJ Agreement in the Diet? Did it give convincing explanation regarding regulation and restrictions on activities of individuals based upon the BBNJ Agreement?
Can “the rule of law” provide enough reason for the ratification of the Agreement? 

What is Japan’s intention to realise national interests through ratifying the BBNJ Agreement, as well as the general interest of the international society, namely the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction? How does Japan recognize that its national interests encompass both the State's interests and rights, as well as interests and rights of individuals? 

From these perspectives, this paper examines both Japan’s ratification of the BBNJ Agreement, and the challenges of the Agreement.

Related works by Research Director Atsuko Kanehara

• “Significance of the BBNJ Agreement from the Perspective of the Historical Development of the Law of the Sea,” https://cigs.canon/en/article/20240510_8077.html
• “Double Aspects of Being a Sovereign State: Positive and Passive Aspects,” https://cigs.canon/en/article/20240611_8159.html
• “The Reassessment of Acts of the State in the Law of State Responsibility - A Proposal of an Integrative Theoretical Framework of the Law of State Responsibility to Effectively Cope with Internationally Harmful Acts of Non-State Actors,” Recueil des cours, Vol. 399, (2019), pp. 19-266.