Gulf of Piran

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
The Gulf of Piran, as seen from Portorož

The Gulf of Piran or Piran Bay (Slovene: Piranski zaliv, Croatian: Piranski zaljev or Savudrijska vala, Italian: Baia di Pirano) is located in the northern part of the Adriatic Sea, and is a part of the Gulf of Trieste. It was named after the town of Piran, and its shores are shared by Croatia and Slovenia. It is delimited by the line connecting Cape Savudrija (Savudrijski rt) in the south to the Cape Madona (Rt Madona) in the north and measures around 19 square kilometres (7.3 sq mi). Since the 1990s, the name Bay of Savudrija (Savudrijska vala) has also been used in Croatia.

On the eastern Slovenian coast lay towns of Piran, Portorož and Lucija. On the southern Croatian coast are tourist camps of Crveni vrh and Kanegra, built in the 1980s. The main river flowing into the gulf is Dragonja, whose mouth goes along the border. Along the mouth of Dragonja lie the Sečovlje saltpans, covering the area of 650 hectares (1,600 acres).

The Gulf area has been a theatre of a maritime and land border dispute between Slovenia and Croatia since their proclamation of independence in 1991. The maritime border between Yugoslav republics was never defined.

Contents

[edit] Dispute

[edit] Origins

Following World War II, the area extending from the north of Trieste to the river Mirna in the south was a part of the Free Territory of Trieste. In 1954, the Territory was dissolved and the area was provisionally divided between Italy and Yugoslavia, and formally annexed by the Treaty of Osimo in 1975. Territories were divided between Croatia and Slovenia, both constitute members of Yugoslav federation, by Paris Peace Treaty (1947) and London Memorandum (1954) by ethnic principle established by 1945 census.[citation needed]

In 1991, shortly after both countries declared independence, in the first draft proposal of delimitation, Slovenia proposed[1] to establish the borderline in the center of the bay, which was always the position of the Republic of Croatia. However, Slovenia changed its proposal the following year. A few months later, on 5 June 1992, Slovenia for the first time declared the sovereignty over the entire gulf.[1] Since then, Slovenia has kept insisting on this position.

The name "Savudrijska vala" ("Bay of Savudria") was first used as a toponym for the whole bay around the year 2000 (before it was used for just part of it) by local Croatian fishermen and was quickly adopted, first by Croatian journalists, then local authorities, and finally at the state level, leading to publication of official maps to this effect. Such practice is contrary to established practices with long-standing toponyms, and is seen by Slovene authorities as an attempt to imply historical connections with the bay.[2] Recently a new name has been proposed in Croatia, Dragonjski zaljev or Bay of Dragonja.

[edit] Sea dispute

Croatia claims that the border line should be equidistant from both shores. The claim is based on the first sentence of the Article 15 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea[3].

Slovenian claims are based on the Article 15 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea as well, however its second sentence, which stipulates historical claims and control of the seas supersedes other claims. According to Slovenia, Savudrija was associated with Piran (which had an Italian majority at that time) for centuries, and Slovenia claims that its police controlled the entire gulf between 1954 and 1991.[4] If this claim prevails, Slovenia could request certain parts of the bay on the Croatian side of the median line. Historical control by Slovenia is disputed by Croatia.[1]

Area of proclaimed Croatian ZERP in the Adriatic.
Note the contact between Croatian and Italian territorial waters in the south-central Adriatic

Slovenia also claims the right to access international waters. Slovenian claims are based on the argument that the country had free access to the international waters while being part of Yugoslavia. Due to the statements of Croatian negotiators, Slovenian politicians have also presented the concern that without territorial connection with the international waters, Croatia could limit "harmless passage" to its ports (contrary to international agreements and practice), which would complicate Slovenia's sovereignty at sea and could cause economic damage[5]. Because of these concerns, Slovenia invokes the principle of equity due to unfortunate geographic conditions.[4]

However, Croatian side further asserts that the corridor in the Croatian waters would be useless for traffic since traffic regulations in the Gulf of Trieste allows only incoming traffic on the Croatian side of the border, while outgoing traffic must go through Italian waters.[6] The Slovenian response is that Slovenia's access to international waters is not an exclusively practical or commercial issue; it is rather the logical consequence of the fact that Slovenia is said to be internationally recognised maritime country with granted access to international seas. The latter assertion has been repeatedly disputed by the Croatian side.

Croatia wants to solve this dispute only by certain articles of international law, excluding the principle "ex aequo et bono", on whose inclusion in the process the Slovenian side insists.[7] The point of dispute between the countries is also regarding the question whether the legal principle "ex aequo et bono" itself also constitutes a part of international law or not since the principle had never been used at the International Court of Justice.

[edit] Drnovšek-Račan agreement

Maritime border according to Drnovšek-Račan agreement      Slovenian waters up to the Gulf median line      Croatian waters      Proposed extension of Slovenian waters      Italian waters

On 20 July 2001, the prime ministers of Slovenia and Croatia, Janez Drnovšek and Ivica Račan, made the so-called Drnovšek-Račan agreement, which defined the entire border between the countries, including the maritime border.[8] According to that agreement, Croatia would get approximately one third of the gulf and a maritime border with Italy, while Slovenia would get a corridor to the international waters. This solution included a Croatian "maritime exclave", between Italian and Slovenian waters; there are interpretations that such solution is contrary to the Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone.[1][9]

However, unlike its counterpart in Slovenia[10], Croatia's parliament has not voted on the ratification of the agreement.[11]

[edit] Bled agreement

In 2007, prime ministers Sanader and Janša achieved a principal agreement about solving the border problem before the International Court of Justice in Hague[12]. According to Slovenian proposal[13], both sides could dispute any part of the border and ask for it to be drawn at court. Yet, analogically to the fate of the Drnovšek-Račan agreement, the Bled agreement did not receive much support from Slovenian policy[14]. Croatia, on the other side, has kept insisting on the Bled agreement. Slovenia never officially informed Croatia of abandonment of the agreement, although a Slovene-Croatian working group continued to work for a year and a half on the matter.[citation needed]

[edit] Land dispute

Border dispute in the Gulf.      Main flow of Dragonja, according to Croatian side      Artificial canal of St. Odorick      Slovenia claimed border

Along with the sea dispute, the two countries also have a land border dispute in the Gulf area, along the Dragonja river. Like in other disputed parts of the border, the dispute stems from differing principles of demarcation: while the border between two republics was often drawn based on (sometimes loose) political agreements or along natural landforms, cadastral records from villages along the border continued to refer to the land which ended up controlled by the other republic.[citation needed] In the delta of Dragonja, Slovenia claims that the border is south of the river (thus including all the land that is registered in the cadastral municipality of Sečovlje), while Croatia claims that the border is on the river itself (St. Odoric canal). The Croatian side rejects Slovenian arguments for cadastral borders on just this part of the mutual border (where it goes in favor of Slovenia), saying that if the cadastral principle would be consistently implemented, Slovenia would lose much more territory elsewhere than it could receive in the Gulf of Piran.[citation needed]

Another source of conflict in this area has been the unilaterally established border crossing at Plovanija[15] by Croatian side on the territory which has been claimed by both sides. Despite stating that the border crosspoint is only a temporary solution, Croatia has included this checkpoint as undisputable in its international documents. Consequently, the territories laying south of that border checkpoint with Slovenian population are considered to be under Croatia's occupation by many Slovenian politicians and legal experts [16]. Similarly, Croatia has included in this documents, presented in its process of negotiation for joining the EU, their proposal of the border, without clearly demarcating the disputable status of those parts of the borderline. This was perceived by the Slovenian side as an act of prejudicing the borderline. Therefore it resulted in Slovenia's blocking those Croatia's negotiation chapters for its membership in the EU which included the controversial documents[17].

Both countries claim to have exercised most of the administrative jurisdiction over the contested area on the left bank of the river since 1954. The inhabitants in the strip have also been granted Slovenian citizenship in 1991. The Slovenian judiciary considers the area as integral part of Slovenia.[18][19] Among the Slovenian citizens residing in the area on the left bank of the Dragonja river is also the politician Joško Joras, whose refusal to recognize any Croatian jurisdiction after independence of two countries has led to numerous conflicts between Slovenia and Croatia since the early 1990s.

According to the Drnovšek-Račan agreement, the border strip on the left bank of the Dragonja was recognized as part of Croatia.

According to some Croatian experts, the border between the countries should be a few miles north from the current flow of the river Dragonja, on what is regarded by them as the original flow of the river. The current river flow is actually a man-made canal, known as the Canal of St. Odoric. They point out that in 1944, in a meeting organized by the Partisan Scientific Institute, led by the Slovenian historian Fran Zwitter, Slovenian and Croatian officials agreed on the river Dragonja as the border between the Socialist Republics of Croatia and Slovenia.[20] However, the agreement was not officially established and neither the Slovenian nor the Croatian parliament have ever ratified it, neither was it ever internationally recognized. Even more, acoording to some Slovenian legal experts, e.g. Pavel Zupančič, the last internationally recognized border between the two countries was on the river Mirna to the south of the Dragonja[15]. However, the proposed border on Dragonja has also been referenced many times and even partially implemented[citation needed]. The Croatian argument is, accordingly, based exclusively on the Dragonja border proposal which Slovenia has never officially recognized. According to Croatian view, the current main flow of the Dragonja (Canal of St. Odoric) was man made; and, according to Dr. Ekl, international law does allow changes of river borders when they were made by nature, but not when they were man made[21]. This, however, is not the official position of the Croatian government.

The Slovenian counterpart of the similar argument claims that the historically established municipality of Piran has historically also included the cadastral municipalities of Savudrija and Kaštel which constitute the northern part of Cape Savudrija[22]. The division of the prewar municipality of Piran is therefore considered to be legally void, since any changes of borders should be, according to the former Yugoslav constitution, accepted by either the former federal parliament or by the parliaments of the former Yugoslav republics[23]. Another support for the Slovenian claim of the Cape Savudrija comes from the ethnic structure of the area including Kaštel and Savudrija. In Kaštel, for instance, in 1880, 99.31% of the population was Slovenian-speaking. In 1910, the percent of Slovenian-speaking inhabitants fell to 29.08%, the rest of population being predominately Italian-speaking (65.22%), with only 5.70% Croatian-speaking population. Similarly, in Savudrija, in 1910, the percent of Slovenian-speaking population was 14.01, while the majority was Italian speaking (78.77%)[24]. Slovenians were therefore the largest population in Kaštel and the largest non-Italian minority in Savudrija at the time. On that basis and since the two mentioned towns are claimed by Croatia, those experts claim that the border between the countries should be changed and established at the south border of the cadastral municipalities of Kaštel and Savudrija, at the middle of the Cape Savudrija. This position has been also supported by a few of notable Slovenian politicians, for example by Marjan Podobnik and his political and party- colleagues[16].

Another Slovenian view in which change of international border was proposed by the first President of Slovenian Parliament and legal expert, France Bučar[23]. He asserted that the present division of the Istrian peninsula, which was historically included in the Austrian part of Austro-Hungarian Empire (which also included the territory of modern Slovenia, but not the majority of modern Croatian territory, which was rather included in the Hungarian part), is legally unfounded and irrelevant. According to Bučar, this division has never been based on proper legal acts and especially not on the will of Istria's autochthonous population. Therefore, Bučar proposed that the border in Istria should be determined on the basis of referendum, which should be carried out for any territory which either of the countries proposed[23]. This proposal is, according to Bučar, based upon the legal principle of Self-determination, the same principle on which the both countries' Declarations of Independence were based in 1991. Such process of border determination has been historically employed for the solution of the Slovenian-Austrian border, in the s.c. Carinthian Plebiscite.

[edit] References

  1. ^ a b c d Turkalj, Kristian. "Razgraničenje teritorijalnog mora između Hrvatske i Slovenije u sjevernom Jadranu (Piranski zaljev)" (in Croatian) (PDF). http://www.pravnadatoteka.hr/pdf/aktualno/hrv/20021015/Turkalj_Razgranicenje_teritorijalnog_mora.pdf. Retrieved 2008-09-20. 
  2. ^ Kladnik D., Pipan P. (2008). "Bay of Piran or Bay of Savudrija? An example of problematic treatment of geographical names". Acta geographica Slovenica, 48(1): 57–91. doi:10.3986/AGS48103
  3. ^ "UN convention of the Law of the Sea, Part II". http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/part2.htm. "Article 15: 'Where the coasts of two States are opposite or adjacent to each other, neither of the two States is entitled, failing agreement between them to the contrary, to extend its territorial sea beyond the median line every point of which is equidistant from the nearest points on the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial seas of each of the two States is measured. The above provision does not apply, however, where it is necessary by reason of historic title or other special circumstances to delimit the territorial seas of the two States in a way which is at variance therewith.'" 
  4. ^ a b Avbelj M. & Letnar Černič J. (2007). "The conundrum of the Piran bay: Slovenia v. Croatia". Journal of International Law & Policy: 6. http://www.pennjil.com/jilp/5-1_Cernic_Jernej_Letnar.pdf. 
  5. ^ Mekina I.. "Nuklearni pristop" (in Slovenian). Mladina. p. 26. http://www.mladina.si/tednik/200126/clanek/hrvaska/. 
  6. ^ "Maritime traffic regulations in the Gulf of Trieste". http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_DyiG-0tB5ZQ/SVDwrs6dufI/AAAAAAAAAA8/rWarsbC1NRE/s1600-h/trscanski_zaljev.jpg. 
  7. ^ http://www.axisglobe.com/article.asp?article=766
  8. ^ Damir Arnaut. Stormy Waters on the Way to the High Sees: The Case of the Territorial Sea Delimitation between Croatia and Slovenia. David Caron & Harry Scheiber, Eds., Bringing New Law to Ocean Waters. Klüwer 2004. http://www.brill.nl/m_catalogue_sub6_id21272.htm
  9. ^ "Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone". UN. p. 1. http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/8_1_1958_territorial_sea.pdf. "Article 1:The sovereignty of a State extends, ..., to a belt of sea adjacent to its coast, described as the territorial sea." 
  10. ^ "Croatia Questions Border Agreement with Slovenia". euractiv.com. 2002-06-19. http://www.euractiv.com/en/enlargement/croatia-questions-border-agreement-slovenia/article-118155. 
  11. ^ "Constitutional watch – Croatia". East European Constitutional Review (New York University School of Law) (3): 11. 2002. http://www1.law.nyu.edu/eecr/vol11num3/constitutionwatch/croatia.html. Retrieved 2009-02-17. 
  12. ^ Dogovor Janša - Sanader: Nerešena meja se seli v Haag
  13. ^ nacioal.hr: Rudlof: Slovenska odluka o povjerenstvu bila je očekivana
  14. ^ "Vajgl zavrača trditve Janeza Janše". Zares. 2002-02-25. http://www.zares.si/vajgl-zavraca-trditve-janeza-janse/. 
  15. ^ a b "Sedanja izhodiša za določitev državne meje med Slovenijo in Hrvaško" (in Slovenian). Zavod za varovanje narodne dediščine. 2004-09-01. http://www.25junij.si/publikacija/slo-hr_meja_v_istri.pdf. 
  16. ^ a b "Slovensko-hrvaška meja v Istri: Preteklost in sedanjost" (in Slovenian). Zavod za varovanje narodne dediščine. 2004-09-01. http://www.25junij.si/publikacija/slo-hr_meja_v_istri.pdf. 
  17. ^ "Jernej Šmajdek: Slovenija v petek z blokado hrvaških pogajanj z EU" (in Slovenian). STA. 2001-12-17. http://www.sta.si/vest.php?s=s&t=0&id=1347695. 
  18. ^ "Piransko sodišče je Jošku Jorasu spet dovolilo odstranitev spornih cvetličnih korit" (in Slovenian). Dnevnik.si. 2008-04-17. http://www.dnevnik.si/novice/slovenija/313341/. 
  19. ^ "Joras lahko odstrani korita" (in Slovenian). RTV Slovenia. 2008-04-17. http://www.rtvslo.si/slovenija/joras-lahko-odstrani-korita/86368. 
  20. ^ "Granica na Dragonji određuje granicu na moru" (in Croatian). Vjesnik. 2001-05-29. http://www.vjesnik.hr/html/2001/05/29/Clanak.asp?r=tem&c=2. 
  21. ^ "Dr. Ekl: »Granica sa Slovenijom je prirodni tok rijeke Dragonje, a ne obodni kanal Sv. Odorika«" (in Croatian). Vjesnik. 2001-08-29. http://www.vjesnik.hr/html/2001/08/09/Clanak.asp?r=unu&c=13. 
  22. ^ "Zgodovinska občina Piran obsega tudi katastrski občini Savudrija in Kaštel" (in Slovenian). Zavod za varovanje narodne dediščine. 2001-07-30. http://www.25junij.si/index.php?module=strani&stranid=22&podstranID=9. 
  23. ^ a b c "Bučar za referendum o meji v Istri" (in Slovenian). Siol. 2009-03-01. http://www.siol.net/slovenija/novice/2009/03/bucar_za_referendum_o_meji_v_istri.aspx. 
  24. ^ "Slovenska narodna meja v Istri v 19.stoletju" (in Slovenian). Zavod za varovanje narodne dediščine. 2004-09-01. http://www.25junij.si/publikacija/slo-hr_meja_v_istri.pdf. 

[edit] External links

Coordinates: 45°30′16″N 13°33′43″E / 45.50444°N 13.56194°E / 45.50444; 13.56194

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Piran"