Highlights and images for 11 July 2025

Standards and guidelines to be developed as part of the deep-sea mining regime aim to, among other things, ensure effective protection of the marine environment from harmful effects and promote operational safety.

They will support the implementation of the regulations for commercial deep-sea mining under the International Seabed Authority (ISA), with standards being mandatory and legally binding, while guidelines will provide non-binding recommendations. On Friday, Council members discussed, among other things, the draft regulations on the adoption of standards and the issuance of guidelines.

During the discussion of regulation 94 (adoption of standards), delegates debated language about the Legal and Technical Commission (LTC) taking account of the views of experts and stakeholders when making recommendations to the Council on the adoption and revision of standards. Some members proposed replacing “recognized experts” with “competent independent experts.”

To avoid overlap with the list of environmental standards set out in regulation 45 (development of environmental standards and guidelines), a member proposed, with the support of another, to place the list in regulation 94. An observer cautioned that such a proposal would allow the approval of an exploitation contract without standards being in place.

On regulation 95 (issuance of guidelines), one delegate proposed renaming the regulation “compliance mechanism.” Members expressed diverse views on language requiring contractors to observe all guidelines, despite their non-binding nature. Several delegations preferred the LTC or compliance committee, not the Council, to request explanations for divergence from the guidelines, while others suggested deleting this reference. 

Some members queried language requiring that the guidelines will be reported to the Council “immediately” after they are developed or revised, with a regional group suggesting “within 10 days.” 

On regulation 96 (the inspection mechanism), delegates’ views differed on the appointing authority, with preferences split between the Secretary-General, compliance committee, and the Council. Members also expressed divergent views on referencing the compliance strategy, with some delegates pointing out that it is still under discussion by the informal working group on inspection, compliance, and enforcement.

On regulations 93 ter (consultations with potentially most affected / coastal states) and 93 quater (consultations with coastal states pursuant to Article 142(1) and (2) of the Convention), President Laki noted the informal working group on rights and interests of coastal states will continue its deliberations. Some members expressed their intention to provide general comments, pending the outcome of discussions in the informal working group. 

Several members highlighted relevant provisions on rights of coastal states, contained in the Agreement under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement). They suggested using some of those provisions to support this discussion. 

An observer queried the need for this regulation, calling for broad and efficient stakeholder consultations, and questioned whether coastal states would be allowed to self-identify as “potentially most affected.”