The Right of Hot Pursuit Under the UNCLOS for Vessels Violating Coastal State Law

The jurisdiction of a state principally extends to its own territory, territorial sea, and airspace. At sea, states generally have jurisdiction only over vessels within their territorial waters. The high seas are areas where the freedom of navigation is guaranteed and fall under the jurisdiction of no specific state. Under the principle of flag state jurisdiction, a vessel on the high seas is subject to the jurisdiction of the state whose flag it flies. One significant exception to this flag state principle is the right of hot pursuit, as stipulated in Article 111(1) of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The right of hot pursuit allows a coastal state to pursue and seize a vessel suspected of violating its laws and regulations while in its territorial sea, contiguous zone, or exclusive economic zone (EEZ), even if the pursuit extends onto the high seas. This right effectively extends the coastal state's jurisdiction to the high seas and constitutes a significant exception to the principles of freedom of navigation and flag state jurisdiction. However, the requirements for exercising the right of hot pursuit have long been a subject of controversy in international law, and even after being codified in 1982 UNCLOS, issues of interpretation remain contentious. Key areas of disagreement include the maritime zones where pursuit may begin, the entities authorized to conduct the pursuit, the continuity of pursuit, and the use of force during pursuit. For South Korea, where much of the national territory is adjacent to the sea, analyzing the legal principles and cases related to the right of hot pursuit under UNCLOS has considerable significance in enforcing domestic law at sea. This paper first briefly examines the extraterritorial application of criminal law in connection with passive personality jurisdiction when exercising the right of hot pursuit. It then explores the requirements for the right of hot pursuit under UNCLOS, with a particular focus on the maritime zones where pursuit may commence and the requirement of continuity. The domestic case of the M/V Tyumen is analyzed in this context. Additionally, this paper addresses considerations for interpreting and applying the provisions on the right of hot pursuit under UNCLOS, as well as key factors to be considered by domestic law enforcement agencies, such as the Korea Coast Guard, when exercising this right.