Public control in Antarctica: towards a problem statement

Maksimov Aleksandr Alekseevich ORCID: 0000-0003-0853-1669 Lecturer; Northeastern Federal University named after M.K. Ammosov 58 Belinsky str., Yakutsk, Republic of Yakutia, 677000, Russia niipgergo2009@mail.ru Other publications by this author     SCHegolev Igor' Borisovich PhD in Law Director, Non-governmental Forensic Expert Center 'FINEKA' 1/4 Montazhnikov str., Krasnodar, 350051, Russia niipgergo2025@mail.ru

Savchenko Marina Stanislavovna Doctor of Law Professor, Head of the Department of State and International Law; I. T. Trubilin Kuban State University 13 Kalinina str., Krasnodar, 350033, Russia niipg2017@mail.ru

Introduction.

Modern issues related to international and interstate cooperation in the field of Antarctic exploration, protection of its natural and living environment, as well as prevention of militarization of the territory of this continent, are widely studied in the works of V. R. Duganova, ^{[7, pp. 108-111]} V. V. Nikulenkov, ^{[9, pp. 29-37]} A.V. Klepikov, ^{[10, pp. 5-6]} A.V. Konyushkova, ^{[11, pp. 41-45]} A. A. Tretyakov, ^{[15, pp. 119-124]} as well as a number of other authors. The works of such scientists as E. G. Petrenko, ^{[1, pp. 3454-3463; 6, pp. 78-91]} S. M. Maksimov, ^{[5, pp. 76-79]} E. D. Kuleshov, ^{[14, pp. 86-89]} as well as some other international lawyers are devoted to the modern problems of public control. At the same time, some authors, in particular, E. V. Berdnikova, ^{[2, pp. 6-9]} T. D. Zavyalova, ^{[8, pp. 11-121]} O. V. Nezhenets, ^{[12, pp. 230-235]} V. M. Palchenkova, ^{[13, pp. 51-56]} point to the need to organize and implement international cooperation and interaction of subjects public control, other subjects of civil society, without which it is impossible to organize and conduct control activities of civil society in relation to complex and hard-to-reach objects of public control (which, we believe, should include public relations related to Antarctica). To date, the problems of the possibility, necessity and inevitability of organizing and implementing public control (control of civil society of countries involved in the development of Antarctica) in relation to actions, acts and decisions of both international organizations and public authorities of national states authorized to develop Antarctica have not been introduced into theoretical and practical discourse in the educational and scientific literature and participation in international relations in this field. This circumstance determines the choice of this topic for a scientific article. The purpose of this scientific research is not only to analyze the modern international and national legal framework that would allow the organization and implementation of public control (control of civil society) in this area, but also to identify and formalize the main problems that may interfere with this control (with the development and justification of a system of measures to resolve these problems). The main scientific objectives of the study include, in particular: a) analysis of the modern international legal framework governing the development of Antarctica, protection of its environment and living environment, preservation of demilitarized status; b) analysis of the national legislation of individual countries in this area; c) justification of the possibility, necessity and inevitability of the organization and implementation of public control (control of the civil society of the countries involved in the development of Antarctica) in relation to the actions, acts and decisions of both international organizations and public authorities of national states authorized to develop Antarctica and participate in international relations in this area; d) identification and analysis of the main problems that hinder the organization and implementation of the above-mentioned control measures e) development and justification of a system of measures to resolve these problems.

Research methods and methodology.

In the course of scientific research, a number of scientific methods were used, including: formal-logical; comparative-legal; historical-legal; statistical; sociological; method of analyzing specific legal situations.

The empirical basis of the study was: a) international legal norms, in particular, the Antarctic Treaty of 06/23/1961, the Convention System for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources of 04/07/1982, a number of other international legal acts of a mandatory or recommendatory nature (for example, Agreed Measures for the Conservation of Antarctic Fauna and Flora (1964), the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Seals (1972) Convention on the Regulation of Activities in the Field of Antarctic Mineral Resources (1988), Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty dated 14.01.1988); b) documents of the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources; c) documents related to the work of observers acting on the basis of the Antarctic Treaty dated 06/23/1961; d) national legislation a number of countries devoted to Antarctic issues (for example, the US Law "On Antarctic Conservation"); e) Russian legislation on public control; f) educational and scientific literature in the field of public control and control of various civil society institutions over international and national objects of public control.

The main text.

International and national legislation has established as the most important legal principles the right of the people to exercise democracy and participate in the management of State affairs. However, these legal principles need an extensive system of legal guarantees, one of which is the existence of an institution of public control (control of the civil society of the peoples of the United Nations) over the national and international government bureaucracy, any bodies and organizations endowed with the right to exercise authority over both citizens and their associations.

Currently, the issue of determining the range of objects of public control (control of the civil society of the peoples of the United Nations) at the national and international levels remains debatable.

In this regard, we consider it necessary to introduce into scientific, educational and practical discussion the problems of including actions, acts and decisions of both international organizations and public authorities of national states authorized to explore Antarctica and participate in international relations in this area into the range of objects of the above-mentioned control.

Why are public relations related to Antarctica so important that it is necessary to replenish the range of objects of public control (control of the civil society of the peoples of the United Nations)?

Firstly, Antarctica today remains the last continent on planet Earth, where natural ecosystems, occupying vast spaces of millions of square kilometers, are still preserved in their original form (untouched by human civilization). The barbaric and uncontrolled (by civil society) development of these spaces, as practice shows, will undermine these ecosystems, which will cause irreparable damage to humanity.

Secondly, huge deposits of hydrocarbons and other minerals worth hundreds of trillions of US dollars have been discovered in Antarctica and the surrounding ocean shelf. The development of these deposits in such remote corners of the planet will clearly be carried out in violation of existing environmental standards, which requires freezing the very possibility of such exploitation of natural resources until the moment of extreme necessity for humanity and subject to comprehensive control over these processes by civil society actors.

Thirdly, the vast and difficult–to-explore expanses of Antarctica are a tasty morsel for the military, who dream of deploying weapons systems on this continent, primarily weapons of mass destruction, which is not acceptable. This danger was realized by the United Nations back in the 60s of the last century, which served as a trigger for the adoption of the Antarctic Treaty of 06/23/1961, as well as for the signing of the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty of 01/14/1988, which fixed the demilitarization of the Antarctic region, its use for exclusively peaceful purposes, transformation into a zone free of from nuclear weapons, as well as other types of weapons of mass destruction.

Fourthly, to date, there are no real mechanisms in international legislation for the participation of the peoples of the United Nations in the organization of public control (control of civil society institutions) in this area, which creates risks of non-compliance with international norms regarding Antarctica, or ignoring them.

The modern international legal framework devoted to Antarctic issues is huge.

It includes, on the one hand, international treaties, conventions, agreements, Antarctic commissions (for example, the Antarctic Treaty of 06/23/1961, the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty of 01/14/1988, the Convention System for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources of 04/07/1982, a number of other mandatory or recommendatory international legal acts nature (for example, Agreed Measures for the Conservation of Antarctic Fauna and Flora (1964), the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Seals (1972), the Convention on the Regulation of Activities in the Field of Antarctic Mineral Resources (1988), and on the other hand, a number of interstate agreements in this area (in particular, similar agreements were concluded between different countries, involved in the development of Antarctica).

In addition, at the level of national legislation, laws and relevant subordinate regulations have been adopted in a number of countries. For example, US legislation contains a number of laws, in particular, criminalizing the commission by US citizens of a number of actions, in particular, the export of any representatives of fauna from the territory of Antarctica, which is not coordinated with authorized structures. Some U.S. laws apply directly to Antarctica. For example, the Antarctic Conservation Act.

It seems obvious that the actions, acts and decisions of both international organizations and public authorities of national States authorized to explore Antarctica and participate in international relations in this area act as the most important type of objects of civil society control.

The organization and implementation of this control in practice are associated with a number of problems, among which are:

Firstly, the above-mentioned norms of international law, as well as the norms of interstate agreements, do not mention the possibility of organizing and implementing such control measures by civil society actors (although control activities over Antarctica itself are envisaged). In particular, article 7 of the Antarctic Treaty of 06/23/1961 established the institution of observers, who are sent by the Contracting Parties to monitor compliance with the norms of this Treaty. We see the solution to such a problem in consolidating the possibility and necessity of organizing and implementing control measures of civil society in relation to the above-mentioned objects in the above-mentioned norms of international law, as well as the norms of interstate treaties and agreements. In particular, the Antarctic Treaty of 06/23/1961 should include provisions that some observers are sent from subjects of public control (subjects of civil society) appointed by international and intra-national civil society actors. For example, some of such observers from the Russian Federation may be appointed (elected) The Public Chamber of the Russian Federation. Some of these observers may be appointed (elected) by domestic and international associations and unions of subjects of public control (subjects of civil society).

Secondly, a significant problem is the fact that the national legislation on public control and on civil society (including Russia) does not contain in most countries any mention of the possibility of organizing and implementing public control over the actions, acts and decisions of both international organizations and public authorities of national states authorized to explore Antarctica and participation in international relations in this field. The solution to this problem (for example, in the Russian Federation) is seen in supplementing the legislation on public control with provisions on the possibility of organizing and implementing public control measures in relation to extraterritorial objects (including Antarctica).

Thirdly, a major problem lies in the fact that domestic and foreign scientific and educational literature does not contain a detailed development of modern principles, methods, forms, types, as well as the grounds and limits of public control (control of civil society institutions) in the above-mentioned area, as well as the mechanism of interaction of subjects of said control with international governmental organizations, as well as by the relevant authorized public authorities of national States. This, as we noted earlier, reduces the effectiveness of the functioning of the institution of public control as a whole. ^{[3, pp. 94-99; 4, pp. 80-91]} The solution to this problem is seen in the cooperation of the efforts of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation with foreign subjects of public control (subjects of civil society) in terms of organizing and conducting scientific and practical research in this area with the development of practical recommendations both in terms of improving international and national legislation in this area, So it is with regard to the organization and conduct of public control events (control of civil society institutions of the peoples of the United Nations) in practice.

Fourthly, an important problem is who will carry out these events. It seems that the range of subjects of public control in this area should be limited to the already mentioned observers, but a wide range of subjects of public control (subjects of civil society) should be allowed to appoint (elect) them. In the Russian Federation, this circle of subjects should include both the country's Public Chamber and All-Russian associations, as well as unions of subjects of public control. Candidates for observers should be coordinated with the Government of the Russian Federation.

Conclusion.

In the course of our scientific research, we have made a number of conclusions, among which the following can be distinguished:

1. Actions, acts and decisions of both international organizations and public authorities of national states authorized to explore Antarctica and participate in international relations in this area act as the most important category of objects of public control (control of civil society entities of countries involved in the development of Antarctica), since: a) Antarctica is the largest land area on the planet, which has preserved natural ecosystems that are not affected by human civilization; b) Antarctica has huge reserves of hydrocarbons, as well as other minerals, which threatens the possibility of their uncontrolled development, which will harm the ecological situation, destroying the natural ecosystems of this continent; c) currently there are real threats to the use of the territory of Antarctica for military purposes, as well as for the burial of hazardous waste of human civilization; d) in international law, as a whole, there is no mechanism for organizing and exercising control of the civil society of the peoples of the United Nations over extraterritorial objects that do not belong to any States (state-like entities) and their associations.

2. The main problems that hinder the organization and implementation of public control (control subjects of the civil society of the countries participating in Antarctic exploration) in respect of acts acts and decisions of international organizations and public authorities of nation-States responsible for Antarctic exploration and participation in international relations in this region, can be identified: a) the international legislation in the field of Antarctic exploration, the protection of its natural and living environment, use of resources, and international cooperation in this field (in particular, the Antarctic Treaty from 23.06.1961, The Protocol on environmental protection to the Antarctic Treaty from 14.01.1988, the System of the Convention on the conservation of Antarctic marine living resources from 07.04.1982, a number of other international instruments binding or non-binding (i.e., Agreed measures for the conservation of fauna and flora of the Antarctic (1964), the Convention on the conservation of Antarctic seals (1972), the Convention on the regulation of activities in the field of mineral resources of Antarctica (1988)), not fixed capabilities of the organization and implementation of control activities by civil society in respect of acts acts and decisions of international organizations and public authorities of nation-States responsible for Antarctic exploration and participation in international relations in the field; b) although the national legislation of some countries (particularly the US) and contains normative legal acts aimed at protecting environmental safety, natural and living environment of the Antarctic, the safe use of its resources, however, domestic rules ignore the problems of organization of public control (control of various institutes of civil society) action, acts and decisions of international organizations and public authorities, authorized to Antarctic exploration and participation in international relations in the field; b) in the scientific and educational literature has not developed the basic approaches to the principles, methods, forms, types, limits of social control (control of the institutions of civil society) in the above field, and the mechanism of interaction of constituent entities of the specified control with international governmental organizations and relevant authorities public authorities of nation-States; g) in scientific and educational literature there is no common understanding on what the subjects of public control (control of civil society institutions) can be authorized to perform the above control measures.

3. Solving these problems will require the development and implementation of a system of measures, among which are the following: a) enshrined in international law, is devoted to the exploration of Antarctica, the protection of its natural and living environment, use of resources and the international cooperation in this field (in particular, the Antarctic Treaty from 23.06.1961, the Protocol on environmental protection to the Antarctic Treaty from 14.01.1988, the System of the Convention on the conservation of Antarctic marine living resources from 07.04.1982, a number of other international instruments binding or non-binding (e.g., The agreed measures for the conservation of fauna and flora of the Antarctic (1964), the Convention on the conservation of Antarctic seals (1972), the Convention on the regulation of activities in the field of mineral resources of Antarctica (1988)), organization and implementation of public control (control subjects of the civil society of the countries participating in Antarctic exploration) in respect of acts acts and decisions of international organizations and public authorities of nation-States responsible for Antarctic exploration and participation in international relations in the field; b) as subjects, commissioners for the organization and implementation of the above control measures should be fixed public observers, who will be appointed as international associations and unions of subjects of public control (civil society actors) and national associations and unions of subjects of public control (civil society actors) of the States parties to the above-mentioned international treaties, agreements, conventions and committees in this area (with respect to the Russian Federation data observers can appoint the Public chamber of the Russian Federation); C) in Russian law on public control should enshrine the rights of subjects of public control (their all-Russian associations, unions) to participate in the organization and holding of events of public control in respect of offshore installations (including the activities, acts and decisions in Antarctica relevant international governmental organizations); g) should be delegated to the Public chamber of the Russian Federation in the framework of international cooperation with foreign and international subjects of public control (various civil society institutions) to organize and conduct scientific and practical research and subsequent development of the main approaches to the principles, methods, forms, types, limits of social control (control of civil society institutions) in respect of acts acts and decisions of international organizations and public authorities of nation-States responsible for Antarctic exploration and participation in international relations in this region.