نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
عنوان مقاله English
نویسنده English
Abstract
Introduction
The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world’s most vital maritime choke points for global energy flows and international trade. Sustaining navigation safety, traffic management, and environmental protection in this congested waterway entails substantial operational costs and positive externalities. Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the regime of transit passage prohibits the levying of tolls or charges solely for the right of passage. However, international law and public economics allow for cost recovery where distinct, identifiable, and beneficial services are rendered. Consequently, establishing an economic mechanism based on the User-Pays Principle requires a rigorous distinction between unlawful transit tolls and legitimate service charges.
Objective
This study evaluates the conditions under which maritime service charges in the Strait of Hormuz can be structured as lawful, proportionate, and operationally viable cost-recovery instruments, fully compliant with UNCLOS provisions and customary international maritime law.
Research Method
Adopting an applied, descriptive-analytical, and documentary approach, this study analyzes international legal instruments (notably UNCLOS, MARPOL, and regional marine agreements) combined with welfare economics doctrines (Pigovian externalities and club goods theory). Furthermore, it employs a comparative case analysis contrasting artificial canals (Suez and Panama) with strategic natural straits (Malacca, the Turkish Straits, and Gibraltar) to benchmark international best practices.
Results and Discussion
The legal and comparative evaluation demonstrates that transit fees cannot be imposed arbitrarily on passage. Instead, legitimacy hinges on a demonstrable nexus between the fee and an actual, rendered service. Legitimate candidate services include Vessel Traffic Services, advanced aids to navigation, hydrographic and meteorological data provision, search and rescue, emergency oil-spill response, port reception facilities for ship-generated waste, and continuous ecological monitoring. To avoid violating transit passage rights, the pricing model must adhere to the principles of cost proportionality, non-discrimination, transparency, and dedicated revenue earmarking. Imposing unilateral security escorts or generalized environmental surcharges without an underlying, measurable service would face severe legal challenges from the international maritime community.
Conclusion
A viable financing regime for the Strait of Hormuz should unequivocally reject direct transit tolls. Instead, it must establish a transparent cost-recovery framework for specific navigation, safety, and environmental services. Legal robustness, auditing transparency, service quality assurances, and collaborative regional frameworks will ensure international acceptability and compliance, thereby securing long-term funding for the preservation of the marine ecosystem and navigation resilience in the Persian Gulf.
کلیدواژهها English
