States Rally Behind UNCLOS, Celebrate 50 BBNJ Ratifications as Deep-Sea Mining and Climate Debates Sharpen

The final panel of the third UN Ocean Conference laid bare the fault lines of global ocean governance: near-universal support for the legal framework that governs the seas, accelerating momentum toward a landmark biodiversity treaty, and unresolved fights over deep-sea mining, fossil fuels, and who gets to define climate obligations. More than 30 delegations took the floor, and the session's most electric moments came from small island states declaring, in blunt terms, that no amount of rising water will erase them from the map.

• BBNJ Agreement hits 50 ratifications — just 10 more needed for entry into force — after 34 treaty actions at the conference alone
• ISA secretary-general urges member states to finalize deep-sea mining code at July council meeting in Kingston; Chile and Panama call for a precautionary pause
• Small island states declare statehood permanent regardless of sea-level rise, citing growing legal consensus
• Fiji demands fossil fuel phase-out, including offshore oil and gas, citing ITLOS advisory opinion linking emissions to marine pollution
• China pushes back, insisting the Paris Agreement — not UNCLOS — is the proper vehicle for climate obligations
• Turkey dissociates from all UNCLOS and ISA references in the conference political declaration

---

A Biodiversity Treaty Nears the Finish Line

The basics: The Agreement on Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction — known as BBNJ — would, once in force, create the first global governance framework for marine protected areas and environmental impact assessments across nearly two-thirds of the ocean that lies beyond any nation's control. It needs 60 ratifications to take effect.

Why it matters: The high seas have long been a governance vacuum. BBNJ would establish rules for area-based management tools, environmental safeguards, and the sharing of benefits from marine genetic resources — questions that affect everything from pharmaceutical development to deep-water fisheries.

Where things stand: UN Legal Counsel Eleanor Hammerscholt announced the agreement's milestone from the podium: "The BBNJ agreement now has 136 signatories and has been ratified by 50 states and the European Union. So at this point, 10 ratifications are still needed for the agreement to enter into force." Vietnam, Papua New Guinea, and The Bahamas ratified during the conference itself — part of 34 treaty actions (18 signatures and 18 ratifications) completed at UNOC3.

IUCN Director General Gretel Aguilar framed the urgency in institutional terms: "The voyage ahead requires unwavering commitment to its rapid ratification and implementation. It needs serious, inclusive, visionary work right now to build its institutions and processes through that preparatory commission."

The other side: The treaty's operational details remain contested. Daniel Wild, of the Commonwealth Secretariat, raised a pointed question about whether benefit-sharing mechanisms could inadvertently disadvantage the nations they are designed to help: "If a special fund is established under BBNJ and is used to finance projects solely based on the quality, the written quality of those projects, is that a fair and equal distribution of resources or is that an unfair distribution based solely on proposal writing capacity?"*

Professor Kentaro Nishimoto of Tohoku University urged states not to wait for entry into force to begin preparing institutional framework bodies, arguing early engagement would prevent bottlenecks once the treaty becomes operational. Chile announced its candidacy to host the BBNJ Secretariat in Valparaíso and proposed co-creating a "First Movers" coalition to designate the first marine protected areas under the agreement.

What's next: With 10 ratifications remaining, momentum from UNOC3 may carry BBNJ across the threshold in the coming months. The preparatory commission's work on institutional design and benefit-sharing modalities will shape whether the treaty delivers for developing nations and small island states.

---

'The Deep Seabed Cannot Become the Wild West'

Why it matters: The International Seabed Authority governs mineral resources across 54% of the ocean floor — the "Area" designated as the common heritage of humankind under UNCLOS. Whether the ISA finalizes regulations permitting commercial deep-sea mining or imposes a pause will set the terms for an emerging extractive frontier worth potentially billions of dollars.

Where things stand: ISA Secretary-General Leticia Carvalho mounted a forceful defense of the Authority's mandate, reporting 1.9 million square kilometers of the Clarion-Clipperton Zone currently protected from mining exploitation. She invoked the highest levels of political leadership: "You would also have heard this sentiment echoed many times over the last few days by dignitaries, including by President Lula of Brazil and the UN Secretary-General who stated that the deep seabed cannot become the Wild West."

Carvalho urged member states to attend the ISA Council meeting in Kingston in July and "come with values rooted in pragmatism, to deliver a solid, strong and science-based regulatory regime — one that will ensure effective governance of mineral resources in the deep sea and protect the marine environment."

The other side: Chile expressed serious concern about proceeding without adequate scientific knowledge and called for a precautionary pause, arguing that current conditions risk undermining both UNCLOS and the ISA's own mandate. Panama similarly warned against mining without rigorous environmental assessments. Brazil pledged full support for the ISA's exclusive mandate. Portugal backed continued development of the draft Mining Code under UNCLOS principles.

What's next: The July ISA Council meeting in Kingston will be the next decisive moment. Whether states arrive with the "pragmatism" Carvalho requested — or with demands for a formal moratorium — will determine whether mining regulations advance or stall.

---

SIDS Draw a Line: 'We Will Not Be Erased'

Why it matters: For small island developing states facing existential sea-level rise, the legal question is not abstract: if land disappears, do maritime zones shrink? Does statehood survive? The answers determine whether nations like Tuvalu, the Marshall Islands, and the Maldives retain sovereign economic rights over vast ocean areas — and their seats at the United Nations.

Where things stand: Speaking on behalf of 39 members of the Alliance of Small Island States, the delegate from Mauritius delivered the panel's most forceful statement: "Our statehood, sovereignty and membership in international organizations will also not be affected by sea level rise. Even if our land is covered by the ocean, we will remain states and be represented at the UN. Until our people decide otherwise. We will not be erased."

The Solomon Islands, representing the Pacific Islands Forum, cited the 2021 Forum Declaration on Preserving Maritime Zones and the 2023 Declaration on Continuity of Statehood. The Maldives, Fiji, Samoa, and Suriname echoed these positions. Delegations pointed to the International Law Commission's final report on sea-level rise as endorsing the interpretation that maritime baselines, once established, should not be required to shift with receding coastlines.

Multiple SIDS delegations emphasized that climate change is the single greatest threat to Pacific peoples and called for the forthcoming International Court of Justice advisory opinion on climate obligations to reinforce these principles. Delegations also demanded capacity building, technology transfer, and targeted financing for SIDS to implement their ocean governance obligations.

What's next: The ICJ advisory opinion, when issued, could provide further legal grounding for these claims. In the meantime, the growing international consensus around maritime zone permanence is building a norm that may prove difficult to reverse.

---

Climate Meets the Law of the Sea — and Not Everyone Agrees

Why it matters: The 2024 ITLOS Advisory Opinion No. 31 ruled that anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions constitute marine pollution under UNCLOS Part 12, creating a legal link between ocean governance obligations and climate policy that some states want to exploit — and others want to contain.

Where things stand: Professor Kentaro Nishimoto explained the opinion's practical force: "Its reasoning makes it very clear that it would be very difficult to comply with the obligation without making genuine efforts to meet the 1.5 temperature goal and the timeline for emission pathways to achieve that goal."

Fiji pushed furthest, arguing the opinion logically requires the phase-out of fossil fuels. The delegate from Fiji stated: "Interpreting the opinion in line with its best available science makes clear that ambitious and equitable reduction of GHG emissions unequally requires the phase-out of fossil fuels, including phase-out of offshore oil and gas." IUCN Director General Gretel Aguilar connected the ITLOS opinion to the Inter-American Court's advisory opinion on climate and human rights, arguing: "At IUCN we believe that it is time to advance integration by also focusing on human rights and the law of the sea."

The other side: China delivered the sharpest rebuttal, insisting climate change belongs in the UNFCCC framework alone. The delegate from China stated: "UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol and Paris Agreement are specifically negotiated and formulated to address climate change issue. The provisions should be respected and implemented by the international community and cannot be ignored or weakened in practice." China also rejected the Philippines' reference to the 2016 South China Sea Arbitral Award as "illegal and invalid."

The delegate from the Philippines had earlier pressed for compliance with UNCLOS dispute settlement rulings: "We must continue to champion compliance with decisions and rulings duly rendered through the compulsory dispute settlement mechanisms under UNCLOS, such as the 2016 South China Sea Arbitral Award."

What's next: The tension between UNCLOS-based and UNFCCC-based approaches to climate obligations is unlikely to resolve soon. The forthcoming ICJ advisory opinion and continued ITLOS jurisprudence will shape whether the ocean-climate legal nexus becomes a meaningful enforcement tool or remains aspirational.

---

UNCLOS at Near-Universal Acceptance — With One Notable Dissent

Why it matters: With 170 parties, UNCLOS — often called the "Constitution for the Oceans" — provides the legal certainty underpinning maritime zones, fisheries management, environmental protection, and seabed governance worldwide. Its authority was reaffirmed by virtually every delegation on the panel.

Where things stand: The UN Legal Counsel noted UNCLOS is nearing universal acceptance. Nathaniel King, the delegate from Singapore, warned against any piecemeal approach: "There can therefore be no selectivity in its application. All freedoms, rights and obligations set out in the Convention must be respected and adhered to."

Turkey was the sole delegation to break ranks. The delegate from Turkey stated: "Turkey dissociates herself from references made to UNCLOS and International Seabed Authority in the 2025 UN Ocean Conference Political Declaration," citing insufficient safeguards for particular geographical situations.

Co-chair Penelope Ridings, of New Zealand and the International Law Commission, summarized the panel's dominant themes in closing: UNCLOS as the framework for all ocean activities, the importance of multilateralism, BBNJ entry into force, seabed mining regulations, the IMO net-zero shipping strategy, and capacity building.

---

Minor Items

• Ocean Vision Legal, a civil society organization, called for states to designate marine protected areas that ban destructive practices like bottom trawling and urged recognition of the ocean's inherent rights and intrinsic values.
• Multiple delegations — including AOSIS, the Commonwealth Secretariat, Chile, Panama, Suriname, Senegal, and São Tomé and Príncipe — called for urgent conclusion of a legally binding international plastics treaty covering the full life cycle of plastics, including remediation of existing marine plastic pollution through a dedicated fund.
• The FAO contributed to the interactive discussion on fisheries management under UNCLOS frameworks.
• Moderator François Alabrine, France's ambassador to the Netherlands, noted that approximately 12 delegations on the speakers list could not deliver their interventions due to time constraints.
• Delegations including Kenya, Iceland, Norway, Honduras, Burundi, and Vietnam reaffirmed UNCLOS and called for capacity building, technology transfer, and reformed financial architecture for developing countries and landlocked nations.