Argentina – Key Statements

March 2023

24/3/2023

• We consider it is not possible to begin the exploitation phase without robust regulation taking into account environmental, institutional, etc. aspects and in line with 1994 Agreement and in respect of principle of common heritage of humankind.

16/3/23

• Stated that our delegation cannot pursue exploitation without having a robust framework that takes into account all financial, technical and environmental considerations.

October/November 2022

10.11.22

• Wish to continue negotiations to develop a robust framework for the exploitation of the mineral resources in the Area, respecting the protection of the marine environment and the common heritage of mankind. 
• Echoed concerns by other delegations relating to the use of the silence procedure in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and linked to the decision-making process of the LTC. 

July/August 2022

3/8/22

• Stated that they had doubts on the Belgian proposal and that in the Authority there is special representation of the States that have carried out the greatest efforts for development of activities in area and therefore their interests are already represented. They also raised questions on the potential conflicts of interest and stated “We are not in favour of including contractors as observers in the interests of the Authority.”

4/8/22

• The position of our country is of commitment. After 2 years of suspension of negotiation for the exploitation of resources in the area we consider we should not postpone for an indefinite time. 
• We should respect however the time needed for a good framework. It is also important to work for a regime that gives us legal certainty and guarantees.
• Considering the level of importance and specifically there are technical environmental and financial challenges that should be considered taking into account DSM needs to take into account best practices and Ca respect for CHM. We should also figure out royalty systems. 
• We understand there is legal uncertainty regarding the 2 year clause and its consequences. We need more time for studying possible scenarios in case we do not succeed in adopting regulations in 2 years.”

3/8/22

• Stated that they had doubts on the Belgian proposal and that in the Authority there is special representation of the States that have carried out the greatest efforts for development of activities in area and therefore their interests are already represented. They also raised questions on the potential conflicts of interest and stated “We are not in favour of including contractors as observers in the interests of the Authority.”

29/7/22

• The delegation stated that “the time has come to start establishing the EPC.”

28/7/22

• The delegation stated that “The establishment of environmental normative thresholds is important for protecting the marine environment as per article 145 of UNCLOS.”

27/7/22

• Stated that they had doubts on references to international law, which could “gives rise to legal uncertainties.”
• The delegation called for references to be made to the precautionary approach rather than principle in regulations.

26/7/22

• Agreed with Italy, Costa Rica and others regarding Tuvalu’s rescission, underscoring the concept of effective control.