Women's Empowerment Retreat: 7 Women, 7 Days, 7 Challenges! All-inclusive, intensive, healing goddess support group in Maui, Let Go of the Trauma and Reclaim Your Power! Act Now; space is limited to just 6 participants!

The Greece-Egypt agreement closely reflects the delimitation agreements reached so far in the eastern Mediterranean (for example. B between Cyprus and Egypt, Lebanon or Israel). According to its title, it is an agreement on the “delimitation of the exclusive economic zone.” The agreement does not deal with the continental regime. This is probably because the parties knew that the EEZ included sovereign rights and jurisdiction in the continental shelf. Although they remain two distinct zones, the EEZ and the continental shelf have similar limits and material rights within 200 nautical miles. Thus, international jurisprudence and state practice suggest a trend towards a uniform demarcation line, both for the EEZ and for the continental shelf within 200 nm. In the first case, the coastal state can define the relevant basis points in accordance with the provisions of the CNRS. Footnote 29 However, this is an exercise that still has an international point of importance. 30 In the second case of the delimitation of maritime zones between two or more states, the Court cannot rely on the choice of basis points by one of the parties. For the delimitation of the continental shelf and the EEZ, the Court uses basic points with regard to the physical geography of the coasts concerned. Bangladesh further recalls that Myanmar`s assertion “with regard to the international seabed area does not respect its own submission to the CLCS, which clearly shows that the outer borders of the continental shelf in relation to the international seabed are far from the maritime border with Bangladesh.” Bangladesh`s Note 65 notes some inconsistency in Myanmar`s position on this issue and notes that Myanmar “accepts potential overlaps with India, although [the Tribunal] three states may indicate the “general direction for the last part of the Myanmar-Bangladesh maritime border,” which would be “consistent with established practice” of international courts and tribunals.” Footnote 66 In the case between Bangladesh and India, the Arbitration Tribunal`s demarcation line also creates a grey area beyond 200 nautical miles off the coast of Bangladesh, but within India`s 200 nautical miles. Since Bangladesh does not have rights to the EEZ, the demarcation line beyond 200 miles only limits overlapping requirements on the continental shelf.

As a result, Bangladesh has sovereign rights to explore the continental shelf and exploit “mineral resources and other non-living resources from the seabed and subso soils, as well as living organisms belonging to sedentary species,” east of the demarcation line in the grey area. For its part, India has regal rights to the EEZ with regard to super-yellow waters. The judge will focus only on the circumstances of the state`s legal title in the disputed maritime areas and allow him to draw a demarcation line acceptable and fair to the parties. After considering or not one or more relevant circumstances that may result in the adjustment or removal of the provisional demarcation line, the judge determines and draws what becomes a definitive dividing line. All that remains is to verify the absence of disproportion so that the judge can fully discharge his mission. The judge will now consider whether the result so far with respect to the planned demarcation line should not lead to significant disproportion because of the length of the coasts and the distribution of the resulting areas. In note 39 of the ICJFootnote, it is recommended to take the posture. The views contained in the judgment on the delimitation of the continental shelf between the United Kingdom and the French Republic are essential. Footnote 40 When considering the concepts of “proportionality” and “appropriate assessment of natural characteristics,” the Tribunal found that, as the Tribunal has repeated, the delimitation of footnote 52 involves a field of overlapping claims.

Comments are closed.

Healing the Inner Goddess is an all inclusive retreat that offers a unique opportunity for women to move beyond healing from trauma. Many women who have experienced trauma spend their entire lives burdened by symptoms of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Their personal relationships suffer and they have diminished capacity for happiness. Many women self-medicate and end up with alcohol and/or chemical dependency issues. Residential and out-patient substance abuse treatment programs, 12-step groups and psychotherapy offer support and structure in which sobriety may be obtained. Many women are able to reach this important milestone, yet continue to feel burdened by past trauma, which may make maintaining their clean and sober for life. Healing the Inner Goddess Retreat is a wonderful opportunity for the woman who has obtained a state of sobriety and is ready for Recovery Treatment Aftercare. This inner healing retreat, led by Laurie Monroe, who is a Licensed Clinical Social Worker, provides a rare opportunity to LET GO OF THE TRAUMA and RECLAIM OUR POWER!

Healing the Inner Goddess is a Clean and Sober Retreat. All women with a history of trauma and a desire for healing are invited to sign up for the Healing the Inner Goddess Retreat. Women for whom alcohol and/or chemical dependency has been an issue in the past year may be required to submit evidence of graduation from a licensed treatment program. Contact Laurie Monroe MSW, LCSW at Laurie@healingtheinnergoddess.com for further information or sign up at healingtheinnergoddess.com.

  • All Inclusive Retreat
  • Healing From Trauma
  • Post Traumatic Stress Disorder
  • Recovery Treatment Aftercare
  • Healing Retreat
  • Inner Healing Retreat
  • Clean and Sober Retreat
Sign Up Now!
© Laurie Monroe, Healing the Inner Goddess Retreats 2021
Subscribe to Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS)