{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.028314028314028315, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006435006435006435, 'mean_word_length': 5.224, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Jurisdiction and Applicable Law Under UNCLOS

It is a well-established principle of international law that applicable law provisions do not expand the jurisdiction of international courts and tribunals. Nevertheless, UNCLOS tribunals have not uniformly conformed to this principle. In particular, the tribunals in M/V Saiga (No. 2), Guyana v. Suriname, and M/V Virginia G effectively invoked Article 293(1) to expand their jurisdiction. And although the tribunals in MOX Plant, Chagos, Arctic Sunrise, and Duzgit Integrity have stood by the principle, they all failed to recognize the legal error committed by the other three tribunals. This Comment argues that an express refutation of the erroneous jurisprudence is necessary to preserve the legitimacy of UNCLOS proceedings.