III - The Peru-Chile Maritime Dispute
[…] Currently, the existence of a special zone —established by the “Agreement relating to a Maritime Frontier Zone”— referred to the line of the parallel of the point at which the land boundary must be considered as a formula which, although it fulfilled and fulfils the express object of avoiding incidents with “seafarers with scant knowledge of navigation” is not adequate to satisfy the safety requirements nor for the better attention to the management of marine resources, with the aggravating circumstance that an extensive interpretation could generate a notorious situation of inequity and risk, to the detriment of the legitimate interests of Peru, that would appear seriously damaged. The definition of new maritime spaces, as a consequence of the approval of the Convention on the Law of the Sea, which counted with the vote of Peru and Chile, as well as the incorporation of its principles into the domestic legislation of the countries, adds a degree of urgency, insofar as both States shall have to define the characteristics of their territorial seas, contiguous zones and exclusive economic zones, as well as the continental shelf, that is to say, the seabed and subsoil of the sea, also up to 200 miles, including the reference to the delimitation of those spaces at international level. The current ‘200-mile maritime zone’ —as defined by the Meeting of the Permanent Commission for the South Pacific in 1954— is, with no doubt, a space that differs from any of the abovementioned zones, in respect of which the domestic legislation is almost non-existent as far as it concerns to international delimitation. The only exception might be, in the case of Peru, the Petroleum Law (No. 11780 of 12 March 1952), which established ‘an imaginary line traced seaward at a constant distance of 200 miles’ as outer limit for the exercise of the State competences over the continental shelf329. This law is in force and it is worth noting that it was issued five months before the Declaration of Santiago.330
The Government of Chile, upon receiving such proposals, did not state that the boundary had already been established; let alone that it had been done so through the parallel. Aware that delimitation had not yet been established, all Chile did was name the competent agencies that would assess the Peruvian proposals. This was recorded in an official communiqué from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile of 24 May 1986. The text of such communiqué is quite relevant since it implicitly assumes that there is no maritime boundary between the two countries: With regard to the information reported by the press regarding the fact that Peru and Chile would be undergoing negotiations on the maritime delimitation between the two countries, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile must point out the following: Petroleum Law No. 11.780 of 12 March 1952. Embassy of Peru, Note 5-4-M/147 addressed to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile, Santiago de Chile, 23 May 1986. 329 330
189