{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.014953271028037384, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.190751445086705, '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}}
Sovereignty on Ice: The Status of Antarctica in International Law

The purpose of this paper is to determine the status of Antarctica in international law, taking into account the effect of the Antarctic Treaty on Antarctica’s legal status, and the extent to which this has been altered or affected by the major additions to the Antarctic Treaty System since its entry into force. The essay first considers whether sovereign claims in Antarctica may be made out. Subsequently, it examines whether sovereignty and territorial claims have been superseded by a common management regime. Finally, it considers the possibility that Antarctica comprises a distinct international law regime in a class of its own. Based on an assessment of these competing regimes, this essay argues that there is no convincing basis in international law to overturn established territorial claims in Antarctica. The logical conclusion is that such claims are valid; however, claimants may be obliged to accept diminished sovereignty as an ineluctable by-product of the Antarctic Treaty System.