Consultation Mechanisms Between the Conference of the Parties of the BBNJ Agreement and Relevant Instruments, Frameworks and Bodies

Abstract The Agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (the BBNJ Agreement) intends to centralise the establishment and management of area-based management tools ( ABMT s). Meanwhile, an extensive network of existing instruments, frameworks, and bodies ( IFB s) have been managing ABMT s with their legal mandates. During the negotiation of the BBNJ Agreement, it was controversial whether the Conference of the Parties ( COP ) of the BBNJ Agreement or existing IFB s should be the main decision-makers in establishing and managing ABMT s. Despite the negotiators’ efforts, the BBNJ Agreement leaves the issue unresolved. This paper focuses on the two ambiguities related to the undecided balance between the COP and IFB s. First, the BBNJ Agreement is silent on what ‘relevant IFB s’ are in terms of the ABMT s. Second, the BBNJ Agreement is ambiguous about what the ‘mechanism’ for consultation is and what it should be under Article 22. In light of these two uncertainties, this paper explores the scope of relevant IFB s and examines the possible mechanisms of consultation between the COP and IFB s. This paper probes the ideal mechanism for the COP by exploring various inter-institutional mechanisms adopted by IFB s, including both bilateral and multilateral mechanisms. This paper suggests the hub-and-spoke model as the ideal mechanism to streamline the issue of uncertainty in ‘relevant IFB s’ and to effectively implement Part III of the BBNJ Agreement.