TABLE OF CONTENTS

S.NO PAGE
CHAPTER
. NO.

1. CHAPTER1: DEEP SEA MINING: 4-6

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 2: UNITED NATIONS

7-14
CONVENTION ON LAW OF SEAS
2.
AND INTERNATIONAL SEABED
AUTHORITY

CHAPTER 3: IMPACT OF DEEP SEA 15-17

3.
MINING ON ENVIRONMENT

CHAPTER 4: INDIAS POSITION ON 18-19

4.
DEEP SEA MINING

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION&
20-21
5. SUGGESTIONS

6. REFERENCES 22

1
 ABBREVIATIONS

i.e.: that is
GSI :Geological Survey of India
ISA: International Seabed Authority
ISBA: International Seabed Authority
UNCLOS: Unite Nations Convention on Law of Seas
UNs: United Nations
NSOT: National Institute of Ocean Technology
GSI: Geological Survey of India

2
 CHAPTER 1: DEEP SEA MINING: INTRODUCTION

Deep inside the ocean is a world as vibrant and rich as the one outside. There are mountain
ranges, ridges, forests, seamounts, volcanoes and a unique ecology that defies common
knowledge. For example, life here thrives without sunlight. This barely explored territory is
also believed to hold vast quantities of precious metals and minerals that can sustain the
modern world for centuries.

The possibility of harvesting the deep seabed for limitless supplies of minerals has been known
since the 1860s. The first attempt to mine the seabed was, however, made a century later. The
1970s saw a frenzy of exploration activities (see New gold rush). Towards the end of that
decade, oceanographers discovered the mineral-rich volcanic vents and the UN adopted
regulations governing international seabed. But the euphoria did not last long. Bringing the
resources to the surface did not prove economic. A glut in the world market due to relatively
easy access to minerals in the developing world took the fizz out of deep sea mining projects.1

The UN's International Seabed Authority (ISA) grants prospecting, exploration and
exploitation licenses for all mining activities in the seabed of the international waters, which
are beyond the limits of national jurisdiction. Only an ISA body or state-owned or government-
sponsored companies can engage in mining-related activities.

The vast repository of minerals, including the precious cobalt, zinc, manganese and rare earth
materials that are needed for smart phones, laptops and hybrid cars, are present in three forms
of orepolymetallic manganese nodules that remain strewn across the ocean floor; cobalt-rich
ferromanganese crusts that cover the seamounts; and massive polymetallicsulphide deposits
around hydrothermal vents. These vents are cracks in volcanic areas of the ocean floor through
which seeps iron- and sulphur-rich magma. As these minerals meet cold bottom water, they
precipitate, creating high-grade deposits. Typically, an ore from seabed deposit is seven times
enriched with minerals than that mined from land. This beguiles governments who are fast
running out of reserves on land.

Technological advances in the past four decades, particularly by the oil and gas industry that
delves deeper into the sea in search of reservoirs, have made the operation feasible. Increasing

1 Zimmer, Carl. "Ocean Life Faces Mass Extinction, Broad Study Says".Nytimes.com. N.p., 2017. Web.
3
 demand for metals, particularly rare earth materials, at a time when reserves are dwindling has
caused metal prices to rise.

Laws that protect exploitation and trade of deep sea minerals

Due to geography and jurisdictional location of deep sea mining, the framework for financing
and development of a deep sea mining project will include a complex set of agreements subject
to various governing laws. Exploration and exploitation contracts between project company
and ISA are governed by the Law of the Sea and, where relevant, by international laws. Since
projects are situated beyond territorial waters, a varied security regime will apply to provide
security to surface vessels, submersibles, remotely operating vehicles, dredgers and extraction
equipment.

The starting point for examining international law relating to deep-sea mining is the law of the
sea, the branch of international law that is concerned with all uses and resources of the sea. The
cornerstone of the law of the sea is the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.2 At
present there are 166 parties to UNCLOS including the EU and its Member States. t is,
however, important to note that around 30 States are not party to UNCLOS, including the
United States of America (USA), Colombia, Israel, Libya, Peru, Syria, Turkey and Venezuela.

The sources of the law of the sea are identical to those of international law in general, namely
agreements (treaties) and customary international law. Apart from UNCLOS a number of other
international agreements are also potentially relevant to deep-sea mining and these are
considered below.

Before, however, turning to the provisions of UNCLOS that relate directly to deep-sea mining
it is important to note the continued importance of customary international law, especially with
respect to those areas of conventional law that are not clearly articulated in existing treaties or
in areas where State practice may have extended the application of some treaty provisions. This
phenomenon has been clearly recognised by the International Court of Justice in its decisions
on the law of the sea.3

2 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Montego Bay, 10 December 1982. In force: 16 November 1994, 1833 United Nations
Treaty Series 3;<www.un.org/Depts/los>.

3Rothwell, D.R. & Stephens, T. The International Law of the Sea, 2010, Hart Publishing, Oxford at page 22

4
5
 CHAPTER 2:UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON
LAW OF SEA AND INTERNATIONAL SEABED
AUTHORITY

The international lawbased regulations on deep sea mining are contained in the United Nations
Conventions on the Law of the Sea from 1973 to 1982, which came into force in 1994. 4The
convention set up the International Seabed Authority (ISA), which regulates nations deep sea
mining ventures outside each nations Exclusive Economic Zone (a 200-nautical-mile (370 km)
area surrounding coastal nations).

The development of UNCLOS required a balancing exercise between the competing interests and
claims of States in their various capacities including coastal States and land-locked States, flag
States and port States, and industrialized and developing States.

The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) declared the seabed area
beyond national jurisdiction (the Area) and its mineral resources as the common heritage of
mankind, to be administered for the benefit of mankind as a whole. All mineral exploration and
exploitation activities must be sponsored by a State Party to UNCLOS and approved by the
International Seabed Authority (the Authority). In its 20 years of existence, the Authority has
adopted regulations and guidance for exploration activities5.
UNCLOS in Part XI, sets forth the international legal framework for activities related to deep
seabed mining and marine scientific research in the Area.
The guiding principle of the common heritage of mankind is manifested in many ways:
1. all rights in the resources of the Area are vested in mankind as a whole;
2. no State or natural or juridical persons can claim, acquire or exercise rights in connection to
resources in the Area except in accordance with Part XI;
3. all mining and any minerals recovered may only be alienated in accordance with UNCLOS
and the rules adopted by the Authority;
4. States are required to ensure that they exercise effective control over any activities by their
state enterprises and other natural or juridical persons they sponsor;
5. activities in the Area, including marine scientific research, are to be carried out for the benefit
of mankind as a whole; and
6. financial and other economic benefits from seabed mining are subject to equitable sharing
under rules to be developed by the Authority6

4Halfar, J.; Fujita, R. M. (2007). "ECOLOGY: Danger of Deep-Sea Mining". Science. 316 (5827): 987.
5 "The International Legal Framework For Deep Sea Mining: A Primer | MIDAS". Eu-midas.net. N.p., 2017.
6 UNCLOS articles 133-143
6
 UNCLOS requires that necessary measures shall be taken to ensure effective protection for the
marine environment from harmful effects which may arise from mining-related activities.
The Authority is to adopt appropriate rules, regulations and procedures for:
1) the prevention, reduction and control of pollution and other hazards to the marine
environment; and
2) the protection and conservation of the natural resources of the Area and the prevention of
damage to the flora and fauna of the marine environment.7

UNCLOS in Part XII requires national rules for pollution from seabed activities in the Area as
well as within national jurisdiction to be no less effective than international rules, standards and
recommended practices and procedures.8

UNCLOS Provisions on Deep Sea Bed Mining

Deep seabed mining is governed by UNCLOS exclusively9the activity did not exist at the time of
drafting the previous treaties on the law of the sea.The development of deep seabed mining
actually fostered the adoption of UNCLOS, which tried to reach a compromise between the
various interests at stake. The UNCLOS creates the Area, and defines the general principles
applicable to deep seabed exploration and exploitation in the Area:

Article 136 recognizes the Area and its resources as the common heritage of mankind.

Article 137 precludes States from claiming or exercising sovereignty or sovereign rights over any
part of the Area or its resources, because all the rights in the resources of the Area are vested
in mankind as a whole, on whose behalf the Authority [ISA] shall act. It creates an exception for
the minerals recovered from the Area, which may only be alienated in accordance with this Part
and the rules, regulations and procedures of the Authority.

Article 140 requires activities to be carried out for the benefit of mankind as a whole in the
Area. It missions the ISA to provide for the equitable sharing of financial and other economic
benefits derived from activities in the Area through any appropriate mechanism, on a non-
discriminatory basis.

7 UNCLOS article 145

8 UNCLOS articles 208-209

9 Later modified by the 1994 Agreement relating to the Implementation of Part XI of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Se
7
Article 141 opens the Area to use exclusively for peaceful purposes by all States.

Article 147 requires activities in the Area to be carried out with reasonable regard for other
activities and the marine environment in the Area and requires
that Other activities in the marine environment shall be conducted with reasonable regard for
activities in the Area.This is elaborated in the Regulations on Prospecting and Exploration
adopted by the ISA. More specifically, it provides that in the
process of considering an application for approval of a plan of work, the Legal and Technical
Commission must determine whether the proposed plan will ensure that installations are not
established where interference may be caused to the use of recognized sea lanes essential to
international navigation or in areas of intense fishing activity. It was emphasized that the original
wording precluded interferences with the use of recognized sea lanes essential to international
navigation or other established maritime activities in the area.This wording would have included
submarine cables. But, as noted previously, Article 87(2) imposes a due regard obligation in the
exercise of all of the freedoms listed in that article, including navigation and laying of cables and
pipelines.

Article 153 requires activities to be carried out in association with the Authority by States Parties,
or state enterprises or national or juridical persons which possess the nationality of States Parties
or are effectively controlled by them or their nationals, when sponsored by such States. It means
that each ISA Contractor must have a sponsoring State.

The International Seabed Authority

The ISA is an autonomous international organization established under the 1982 United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
and the 1994 agreement relating to the Implementation of Part XI of the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea. The Authority is the organization through which States Parties
to the Convention shall, in accordance with the regime for the seabed and ocean floor and subsoil
thereof beyond the limits of national jurisdiction (the Area) established in Part XI and the
Agreement, organize and control activities in the Area, particularly with a view to administering
the resources of the Area.

The ISA is charged with regulating seabed mining in areas beyond national jurisdiction and
ensuring that the environment is protected from harmful effects of that mining.

8
With the entry into force of UNCLOS in 1994, ISA came into existence as an international
organisation (and thus a body recognised by international law). The members of ISA are ipso
facto the parties to UNCLOS and therefore include the EU and its Member States. ISA currently,
therefore, has 166 members.

The UNCLOS also creates the ISA, and defines the role of each of its organs in the regulation of
deep seabed mining:

Article 160 institutes the Assembly as the supreme organ of the ISA with the power to
establish general policies on any issue arising in the Area. Its members are the 166 States parties
to UNCLOS as well as the European Union.

Article 162 institutes the Council as the executive organ of the ISA with two
main powers: to approve plans of work with the help of the Legal and Technical Commission,
and to make recommendations to the Assembly with the help of its Economic Planning
Commission. The 36 members of the Council are elected through a complex mechanism detailed
in the previous article. It aims at representing various interests: consumer States, investing States,
exporting States, developing States, and other States for an equitable geographic representation.

The Convention divides the ocean in six major maritime zones. Four of these zones are under
some form of coastal State jurisdiction: the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the exclusive
economic zone and the continental shelf. The other two correspond to the maritime zones beyond
national jurisdiction: the high seas and the areas of the seabed beyond the continental shelf, termed
the Area.

9
 The Area has the status of common heritage of mankind. The International Seabed Authority is
the body entitled to act on behalf of the mankind as a whole 10 and, hence, to give concrete
content to the principle of the common heritage of mankind

The powers and functions of the Authority are those expressly conferred by UNCLOS.
11
Furthermore, the Authority has also incidental powers but, in general, these powers are subject
to a narrow interpretation.

The fundamental competences of the Authority are to regulate exploration and mining in the
deep seabed and to ensure that the marine environment is protected from any harmful effects
which may arise during exploration and mining activities 12. The Authority also has the
responsibility to promote and encourage marine scientific research in the Area and to disseminate

10UNCLOS, art. 137(2)

11UNCLOS, art. 157(2),
12UNCLOS, art. 145
10
 the results of such research13. In contrast, the Authority has no competence over other activities
in the seabed and subsoil, and over activities in the water column. The regulation or control of
activities such as shipping, fishing, bioprospecting for genetic resources, marine scientific
research in general and laying of cables or pipelines are not included in the competences of the
Authority14. Nevertheless, these activities should be conducted with reasonable regard for the
activities in the Area15. Although the Authority is bound by the general obligation to protect and
preserve the marine environment16, the Convention does not give it specific powers to protect the
marine environment, including its biodiversity.

The responsibilities and obligations of sponsoring states

As regards deep-sea mining in areas under national jurisdiction, coastal States clearly have
regulatory jurisdiction in terms of international law and can design and adopt their own legislation
accordingly. There are no international standards for deep-sea mining in areas under national
jurisdiction and consequently there is a risk that different, stricter standards may in due course
apply in the Area than in areas under the coastal State jurisdiction. States are subject to a number
of obligations in terms of international agreements of global or regional application which tend to
be of a rather general nature and the extent to which they may affect and deep-sea mining is not
entirely clear.

The legal requirements of States sponsoring mining entities under UNCLOS were explained
through a special advisory opinion of the Seabed Disputes Chamber of the International Tribunal
for the Law of the Sea in 2011. The Chamber advised that sponsoring States were required to
exercise a high degree of due diligence to ensure that an entity they sponsor complied with
UNCLOS and the regulations adopted by the Authority.The rules and standards must give effect
to:
1. the precautionary approach based on Principle 15 of the Rio Declaration, requiring actions
where scientific evidence is insufficient but where there are plausible indications of potential
risk;
2. best environmental practices (i.e., more than just best available technology);
3. technical and financial guarantees by a contractor;
4. requirements to provide recourse for compensation; and
5. the obligation to conduct an environmental impact assessment.
13UNCLOS, art. 143 and 256
14UNCLOS, art. 87, 112 and 147
15UNCLOS, art. 87(2) and 147(3)
16UNCLOS, art. 192
11
 To prevent the rise of sponsoring States of convenience with varying regulatory requirements,
the Chamber ruled that the due diligence obligation was the same for both developed and
developing States.
For States, it may be necessary to introduce new laws, administrative procedures and resources to
provide the requisite rules, regulations and procedures. Otherwise, according to the Chamber, they
may be held liable for damage (including to the marine environment) caused by their failure to
exercise due diligence.17 Additionally, all States share a common obligation to protect and preserve
the marine environment, including rare or fragile ecosystems as well as the habitat of depleted,
threatened or endangered species and other forms of marine life.18

Deep-sea mining in areas under national jurisdiction

While UNCLOS clearly confers the necessary jurisdiction on each coastal State to regulate deep-
sea mining in areas under its national jurisdiction (in other words within its internal waters and
archipelagic waters if any, its territorial sea, EEZ and continental shelf including any part beyond
200 nm) in accordance with its own legislation, it offers very little guidance as to how this is to be
done. In other words just as there is no comprehensive international legal framework for the
regulation of land based mining, precisely how coastal States are to regulate deep-sea mining is
not specified in international law. Nevertheless, the rights of coastal States are not absolute. In
regulating deep-sea mining in areas under its national jurisdiction, a coastal State may be subject
to other more generally applicable rules of international law, including those contained in
UNCLOS and other international agreements, in particular as regards environmental matters.

One exception to this general principle concerns deep-sea mining on the continental shelf beyond
200 nm. While not specifying how this is to be undertaken, article 82 of UNCLOS does determine
what is to happen to the proceeds. More specifically this article requires the coastal State to make
annual payments or contributions in kind in respect of deep-sea mining in that part of the
continental shelf. Such payments and contributions are to be made through ISA which is then
responsible for distributing them to the parties to UNCLOS on the basis of equitable sharing
criteria taking into account the interests and needs of developing States, particularly the least
developed and the land-locked among them. The obligation to make such payments and
contributions starts five years after the start of production at a particular site at a rate of 1% of the

th
value or volume of the 6 year of production at that site. This subsequently increases by annual

17 "The International Legal Framework For Deep Sea Mining: A Primer | MIDAS". Eu-midas.net. N.p., 2017. Web. 1 Apr. 2017.
18 UNCLOS articles 192 & 194.5
12
 th
increments of 1% to a final rate of 7% from the 12 year onwards.

In contrast, coastal States may retain all of the royalties that they can recover from deep-sea
mining within 200 nm from the baseline. Moreover coastal States are basically free to determine
how such royalties are to be structured and set in accordance with their own economic
development priorities and legislation.

Deep-sea mining in the Areas

In contrast to the relatively sparse legal framework for deep-sea mining in areas under national
jurisdiction, UNCLOS, supplemented by the Part XI Implementation Agreement, established a
relatively detailed, legal framework for deep-sea mining in the Area.

Part XI of UNCLOS establishes a number of generally applicable principles with regard to the
conduct of States in relation to the Area including peace, security, international cooperation and
mutual understanding, the responsibility to ensure compliance and liability for damage, the use of
the Area for exclusively peaceful purposes. The main focus of Part XI, however, is on the
exploration and exploitation of the resources of the Area. These are defined in article 133 of
UNCLOS as all solid, liquid or gaseous mineral resources in situ in the Area at or beneath the
seabed, including polymetallic nodules. In other words the focus of Part XI is on very much on
deep-sea mining.

The relationship between the future regulatory regime for deep-sea mining in the Area and
deep-sea mining in areas under national jurisdiction.

As noted above, in terms of deep-sea mining undertaken in areas under its national jurisdiction, a
coastal State is subject to the obligations set out in UNCLOS and other international agreements as
regards environmental matters. In particular article 208(1) of UNCLOS provides that coastal
States must adopt laws and regulations to prevent, reduce and control pollution of the marine
environment arising from or in connection with inter alia sea-bed activities subject to their
jurisdiction. In other words such legislation must be adopted in connection with deep-sea mining.
To this end coastal States must take such measures as may be necessary to prevent, reduce and
control such pollution.19 Article 208(3) of UNCLOS provides that (s)uch laws, regulations and
measures shall be no less effective than international rules, standards and recommended practices
and procedures.

19 Article 208(2)
13
 CHAPTER3 : IMPACT OF DEEP SEA MINING ON
ENVIRONMENT
The deep ocean was once assumed to be lifeless and barren. Today we know that even the
deepest waters teem with living creatures, some of them thought to be little changed from when
life itself first appeared on the planet. The deep ocean is also essential to the earths biosphere
it regulates global temperatures, stores carbon, provides habitat for countless species, and
cycles nutrients for marine food webs. Currently stressed by pollution, industrial fishing, and
oil and gas development, these cold, dark waters now face another challenge: mining. With
land-based mineral sources in decline, seabeds offer a new and largely untapped frontier for
mineral extraction, and companies are gearing up to mine a treasure trove of copper, zinc, gold,
manganese, and other minerals from the ocean floor20.
There are clear signs already that humans are harming the oceans to a remarkable degree, the
scientists found. Some ocean species are certainly overharvested, but even greater damage
results from large-scale habitat loss, which is likely to accelerate as technology advances the
human footprint.Coral reefs, for example, have declined by 40 percent worldwide, partly as a
result of climate-change-driven warming.

Seabed mining poses a major threat to our oceans. All types of seabed mining will kill
whatever cant escape the mineral extraction operations. Organisms that grow on
the seabed will be smothered as a result of sediment disturbance and the discharge
of waste. The current lack of scientific knowledge on the deep-sea environment, and the lack of
knowledge of the technology employed, limits our ability to predict the environmental impacts
of mining operations and to determine whether habitats can ever recover from the disturbance.

The ISA was established in 1995 under the UN Law of the Sea Convention, which has been
signed by all countries except the US. The body does not have the power to decide whether sea
floor mining is good or bad. Its establishment is more tilted towards exploiting the resources.
Moreover, its mandate is for the sea floors but not the water above it. It is legally convenient
but ignores the ecological linkages between the two. This kills the very principle of ecosystem
interface of many elements in nature creates a habitable system.

A new World Bank report recommends that Pacific Island countries supporting or considering
deep sea mining activities proceed with a high degree of caution to avoid irreversible damage
20 Schmidt, Charles W. "Going Deep: Cautious Steps Toward Seabed Mining". Environmental Health Perspectives 123.9 (2015): A234-
A241. Web.
14
 to the ecosystem, and ensure that appropriate social and environmental safeguards are in place
as part of strong governance arrangements for this emerging industry. Deep sea exploration of
minerals and resources is increasing across the globe, but its short and long-term impacts on
the environment, economy and society in general remain largely unknown, according to the
report, Pacific Possible: Precautionary Management of Deep Sea Mining Potential in Pacific
Island Countries21.

ISA, an intergovernmental body based in Kingston, Jamaica, was established to organise,

regulate and control all mineral- related activities in the international seabed area beyond the
limits of national jurisdiction.With over 1.5-million square kilometres of ocean floor already
under exploration leasehold in the Pacific Ocean alone, the ISA has approved 27
explorationlicences for deep-sea mining.

It is disappointing that so many explorationlicences have been issued without any

understanding of the environmental impacts of exploration, it facilitates the development of an
industry that does not have the consent of potentially affected communities and wider civil
society.The deep sea is one of the worlds last ecosystems to have largely devastating impacts
of mining, and, as an ecosystem that affects all life on earth, it must be protected.

The ISAs decision-making processes must be open to the participation of civil society and
independent scientists. There is insufficient scientific data about the impacts of deep-sea
mining, no regulatory frameworks in place to govern miningoperations and the capacity to
enforce such frameworks does not yet exist. 22 Seabed mining has the potential to tear up unique
ecosystems and introduce pollution into the deep sea.23

21"Precautionary Management Of Deep Sea Mining Potential In Pacific Island Countries - India Environment Portal | News, Reports,
Documents, Blogs, Data, Analysis On Environment & Development | India, South Asia".Indiaenvironmentportal.org.in. N.p., 2017. Web.
31 Mar. 2017.

22Kilian, Anine. "No Deep-Sea Mining Without Civil Society Consent". Mining Weekly. N.p., 2017. Web. 31 Mar. 2017.
23 Zimmer, Carl. "Ocean Life Faces Mass Extinction, Broad Study Says".Nytimes.com. N.p., 2017. Web.
15
 No proposed mining operations consider the cumulative impacts of their extraction in their
assessments. It may be impossible to predict the cumulative impacts without more scientific
understanding of direct impacts in the first place. There is no strategy in place to assess
cumulative impacts of deep-sea mining and other activities such as deep-sea fishing; and there
is a lack of governance to manage and conserve the environments under exploitation.24

24 Van Dover C, Smith C, Ardron J, Dunn D, Gjerde K, Levin L, Smith S & The Dinard Workshop Contributors (2012). Designating
networks of chemosynthetic ecosystem reserves in the deep sea. Marine Policy 36:378-381
16
 CHAPTER 4: INDIAS POSITION ON DEEP SEA BED
MINING

Deep-sea mining has been recognised as a future frontier of scientific research in India. Over
the past few years, deep sea-mining has been the subject of a debate among maritime
analysts. With global desire for minerals and rare metals growing, the competition for deep sea-
spaces rich with poly-metallic nodules and hydrothermal deposits has been increasing.

Recent Trends in India

Indias recent efforts to be a serious player in the strategic arena of deep sea mining have
resulted in the commissioning of a rare-earth mineral processing plant in Orissa, and a project
to up-grade older exploration ships. Deep-sea mining has now been officially recognised as a
future frontier of scientific research, a notion first detailed in the vision plan outlined by a
National Security Council policy paper in 2012. Interestingly, the policy document also
covered the broader domain of rare earths, mandating the creation of a stockpile of
strategically critical input metals. As a corollary, New Delhi has commenced a search for
partners that it could combine forces with to bolster its efforts towards exploration and mining
of rare minerals.

One such agreement was concluded with Japan in November 2012. As part of the larger
framework of Indo-Japan strategic collaboration, an agreement was signed for the exploration
and production of rare earths, following which India is setting up a monazite processing plant
in Orissa. Japan the second largest consumer of rare earths -is driven by its anxiety of Chinas
monopolistic practices, and has been leading efforts to openup the market.

The latest addition to India's deep sea exploration capability must, however, be tempered with
the reality of its efforts so far in this area. Despite being a "pioneer investor" in the Indian
Ocean's mineral exploration and mining sector, and the allotment of 150,000 sq. km in the
Central Indian Ocean Basin by the ISBA in 2002, Indias lack of initiative and action in deep-
sea mining has been striking. Following years of exploratory inaction, mining rights in many of
the blocks in the south-west Indian Ocean had to be surrendered to the ISBA.

17
 As generally seen muuch of the interest in deep-sea mining has been led by the discovery that
poly-metallic sulphides a great source of valuable minerals such as gold, silver and zinc - also
contain valuable rare-earth metals, a commonly used ingredient in modern day electronic
devices and gadgets. As a result, many countries have embarked upon a drive to upgrade their
under-sea mineral exploration and extraction capabilities.
Against this backdrop, the recent acquisition of Indias deep-sea exploration ship
SamudraRatnakar by the Geological Survey of India (GSI) is a noteworthy development. A
state-of-the-art platform acquired from South Korea, the SamudraRatnakar is equipped with
sophisticated deep-sea survey instruments like doppler profilers, multi-beam sonars, acoustic
positioning systems, marine magnetometers and a marine data management system, which give
it a qualitative edge over other survey ships.

While its many features are meant to facilitate modern geo-scientific oceanographic research,
the new ships chief attribute is its cutting-edge deep-sea exploration capability. With an
impressive array of instruments and a modern on-board laboratory, the new ship represents a
technological leap in Indias sea-mining prowess. It is worth noting that India already has a
limited deep-sea exploration capability in the form of the SagarNidhi (a research vessel
operated by the National Institute of Ocean Technology). The SamudraRatnakar, however, is
far more advanced in its features and systems that enable a rigorous survey of the sea-bed, and
an accurate analysis of the excavated material. Not surprisingly, it is being seen as an
illustration of India's determination to be a serious player in deep sea mining and research.

According to officials in India's Department of Science and Technology, the miningoperations

have been taken up following a 15-year mininglicence granted by the International Seabed
Authority (ISA) in the year 2014, under the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea25.

India was is expected to bolster its deep-sea miningtechnology from different countries like
Japan, which seeks to increase exploration and production of rare earths through collaborations
and joint ventures. While a start has undoubtedly been made by the explorerss, but if India
desires to seriously challenge Chinas26sea-bed mining superiority, it will need to develop its
capability to explore for hydro-thermal sulphides deposits and the chance to extract valuable
rare-earths. Until then Chinas dominance in the field will continue to be a cause for concern
for India.

25 Das, Ajoy. "India Expands Deep-Sea Mining". Mining Weekly. N.p., 2017. Web. 31 Mar. 2017.
26 China controls more than 95% of rare earth metals and heads the list of states with a deep interest in deep-sea mineral exploration
18
 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION& SUGGESTIONS

The deep sea is the largest habitat on earth. It is incredibly important to humans and it is facing
a variety of stresses, from increased human exploitation to impacts from climate change.The
technology used for deep-seabed mining is different for different resources. But all the
technologies follow the standard procedure of violating the sea floor, the water above and a
massive reshuffling of habitats.

The current way of managing the high seas puts corporate interests before the long- term health
of our oceans. If states or corporations want to fish, drill or mine the high seas, there are
organisations and processes that enable them to do so. In the case of seabed mining, the
International Seabed Authority was set up to control all mineral- related activities, including
deep-sea mineral exploration and extraction. However, there is still no agreed global process to
identify and create multi-sector protected areas and marine reserves on the high seas, let alone
monitor and control them. There is also no global requirement for the industry to undertake
environmental impact assessments that take into account the cumulative impacts of human
activities, before extractive and potentially damaging activities were allowed to take place on
the deep seas.

Mining will introduce light to an environment where life thrives in darkness. This may attract
or deter some fish or benthic species and alter their feeding and reproductive behaviours (see
Dive to destruction). As the ores mixed with seawater are processed in surface support
vehicles for extracting minerals, this will create massive swirls of debris and sediments. The
treated seawater, of different salinity and temperature and containing trace amounts of toxic
chemicals, will then be dumped in the sea, which will have profound impacts on the ecosystem.
The ISA acknowledges mining as a threat to the fragile sea ecology, but is not ready with an
environmental safeguard. The conditions and rules for mining have not been readied till now. A
protocol to minimise the environmental impact is still being drawn up. Most explorations are
taking place without environmental studies.

The fear of the unknown brings back the focus on how to manage a global common property.
The ISA calls the international deep seas common heritage of mankind where all countries
have equal rights over its resources. But there are a few fundamental flaws with the body.

19
According to UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the state parties are
responsible for ensuring environmental safeguards. A sponsoring state is not liable for
environmental damages resulting from a contractors activities if the state has all domestic laws
and regulations in place. But without a mechanism, it can be seen that, it is difficult to monitor
deep inside sea whether the safeguards are implemented or not.

It is seen that environmental responsibilities in international waters are currently managed in a

very disorganized manner. There are separate instruments covering sea floor mining, cable
laying, ocean dumping, shipping and fishing. The researcher suggests that some fundamental
reforms of the ISA are essential, if it is to be given greater responsibility for the environmental
stewardship of our planets largest home.
This emerging industry would result in serious impacts to our oceans, so it is critical for civil
society to engage now, in the early stages of exploration and development. It would be truly
unfortunate if we allow the same industrial paradigm that destroyed much of the terrestrial
ecosystems of our home planet to do the same in the deep sea. It is time to change this model.

Governments and industries seeking to exploit the oceans must recognise that with rights come
responsibilities. Putting sustainability first and adopting a precautionary approach to any
seabed mining development is the only way to ensure that the oceans a vital part of the life
support system of our planet continue to provide essential ecosystem services and resources
now and in the future.

The oceans hang in the balance. There is no more time to waste. On top ofa number of other
existing threats, our oceans could face the potentially devastating impacts of deep seabed
mining in the coming years. All countries in favour of high seas protection must now join
forces and act together for healthy oceans and the millions of people that depend on them.

20
 REFERENCES

WEBSITES:

Das, Ajoy. "India Expands Deep-Sea Mining". Mining Weekly. N.p., 2017. Web. 31
Mar. 2017.

Kilian, Anine. "No Deep-Sea Mining Without Civil Society Consent". Mining
Weekly. N.p., 2017. Web. 31 Mar. 2017.

Zimmer, Carl. "Ocean Life Faces Mass Extinction, Broad Study Says".
Nytimes.com. N.p., 2017.

"The International Legal Framework For Deep Sea Mining: A Primer | MIDAS".
Eu-midas.net. N.p., 2017..

ARTICLES:

Schmidt, Charles W. "Going Deep: Cautious Steps Toward Seabed Mining". Environmental
Health Perspectives 123.9 (2015): A234-A241.

NEWSPAPER ARTICLE:

Zimmer, Carl. "Ocean Life Faces Mass Extinction, Broad Study Says".Nytimes.com. N.p.,
2017.

21