Ritania requests the Court to adjudge and declare that:

1. Ritanias conduct with respect to the Excelsior Island project complied in all respects with its obligations
under international law and the terms of the Malachi Gap Treaty, and Ritania has no obligation to
compensate Amalea for any loss or damage allegedly caused by the 2009 landslide.
2.Milo Bellezzas salvage of the Cargast is unlawful, and the cargo and artifacts recovered from the wreck
properly belong to Ritania, which has the right to protect them.
3.The Amalean Navys pursuit of Oscar de Luz into Ritanias EEZ, and his subsequent arrest, were illegal.
4.Amalea was without jurisdiction to try Luz in connection with the Rosehill collision, and must return him
to Ritania immediately.

2- Underwater cultural heritage case law

Art and cultural heritage Hoofman

http://www.asia.si.edu/exhibitions/SW-CulturalHeritage/downloads/Luxford2006.pdf
Salvage and the underwater cultural heritage Geoffrey Brice

http://202.114.89.60/resource/pdf/2338.pdf
International approaches to underwater cultural heritage Staniforth
UNCLOS
1996 ICOMOS Charter for the protection and management of underwater cultural heritage
2001 UNESCO Convention
The Illicit Movement of Underwater Cultural Heritage: The Case of the Dodington Coins

http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=279576
Who Owns Sunken WWII German Military Aircraft? Uncertainties in the Law of Underwater Cultural
Heritage

http://www.ejiltalk.org/who-owns-sunken-wwii-german-military-aircraft-uncertainties-in-the-lawof-underwater-cultural-heritage/
Cultural property v. cultural heritage: A battle of concepts in international law?

http://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/irrc_854_frigo.pdf
Underwater Cultural Heritage: Challenges to the Office of Coast Survey (some interesting case law at the
end)

http://www.thsoa.org/hy09/0514A_01.pdf
Heritage at risk (many cases)

http://www.icomos.org/risk/2006/fulldocan.pdf

Illicit trafic of cultural objects (displays the european and internacional' regulation)

http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/12053/ael_2009_09.pdf?sequence=1

3- hot pursuit and criminal jurisdiction

1982 UNCLOS
Lotus case
Doctrine of hot pursuit

http://www.law.washington.edu/Directory/docs/Allen/Publications/Article_1989_DoctrineOfHotPur
suitpp309-341.PDF
IT LOS 1 july 1999 the M/V Saiga case

1995 English decision R v. Mills and others

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/760628?uid=3737512&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21102902684597
1998 Canadian case The Queen v. Rumbaut
1989 article by Creig Allen
all these three emphasizes the doctrine of extended constructive presence in customary international law and
favours the policy goal of the effective enforcement of the criminal law at the expense of other long
established values of int' law.
In recent years states from the Caribbean basin : practice against the drug trafficking : extend the right of hot
pursuit at sea, including provisions on pursuit into the territorial sea and overflight.
2003 multilateral agreement co-operation in suppressing trafficking of drugs