By: Raegan Mach

Today, the International Court of Justice heard oral arguments from the advocates from Finland and Denmark regarding Passage Through the Great Belt.  The Great Belt (Storebælt) is a strait of water that passes through Danish territory and is one of the few passages between the Baltic and North Seas. The strait allows for direct passage from the Baltic Sea to the North Sea and the international waters beyond. As the largest of these passages, it is an essential regional shipping route and allows Finland to engage in international transport and shipping. The Kingdom of Denmark has proposed the construction of a bridge over the strait that would connect the Eastern Danish island of Zealand with the Western Danish island of Funen to facilitate more straightforward trade and commerce within the country. This bridge would be built to a height of 65 meters and would effectively prohibit the movement of larger ships through the strait, mainly the larger drill ships and oil rigs that pass through the strait on behalf of the Republic of Finland.

The Republic of Finland relies heavily on the Great Belt for its maritime shipping industry, including the movement of oil rigs and drill ships, for which other passages between the Baltic Sea and the North Sea are inadequate. Finland asserts the resurrection of this bridge would impede their right of “innocent passage,” as outlined in Article 16 of the Convention on the High Seas and Contiguous Zones (1958). Finland acknowledges that Denmark has a territorial right to improve its sovereign waterways but argues that this right is limited by other States’ right to free passage through the Strait. Finland requests that the Court declare they have a right to innocent passage through the Great Belt and that the construction of the bridge proposed by Denmark violates this right. 

The Kingdom of Denmark asserts that the proposed bridge will be of sufficient height to allow for the average use of most nautical vessels, which would not prevent free, innocent passage entirely. Additionally, Denmark argues that the purpose of this bridge is to connect two portions of Denmark, facilitating the ease of transportation between the two land masses. Denmark claims that this bridge will not substantially impede other States’ right to free passage because there are alternate options, such as the Little Belt. 

The Justices will enter deliberations and their opinions will be published and read this evening at 7 pm in Superior A/B on the North side of the Office Level.

_{The views and opinions expressed in this article were part of simulation of the United Nations held from 18 to 21 November 2023 and do not reflect the views and opinions of the American Model United Nations Conference, American Model United Nations International, LLC. or the governing bodies of the states mentioned in the article.}