المفهوم المتطور للسيادة: رؤى من الاعتراف القادم بفلسطين

BR,

It sounds like you just discovered America!

(I wanted to say hot water, but I will leave you some credit as I believe you are being intellectually honest, after all).

You may need to dig into your research a bit further. Dubai is also not on natural land, yet it has sovereignty.

This has been debated and explained at length before. Keep digging. my friend :-)

BR’s criticism is nonsense. Sealand has very clearly defined boundaries and therefore constitutes a precise territory. Nowhere in the definitions does the Monte Carlo definition mention land or earth. How could it?! That would exclude most of the Arctic and Antarctic and the space stations and geostationary orbits and the Moon and Mars and some islands and atolls. And what about floating villages, houses or hotels?! Tish and piffle. Sealand has probably the most accurately delineated borders on the planet! The territorial aspect cannot possibly be denied.

Dear Residents of Sealand,

I hope this letter finds you well. I am writing to address the matter of Sealand’s status under international law, specifically regarding the criteria for statehood.

Unfortunately, the so-called “Principality of Sealand” does not meet the first criterion for statehood as recognized under international law, which is the possession of a defined territory. The former anti-aircraft platform on which Sealand is based is not considered part of the earth’s surface, as it rests on concrete pillars rather than being a natural landmass. International law defines territory as a portion of the earth’s surface, which encompasses natural land areas.

A man-made structure like Sealand does not fit this definition because it does not naturally originate from the earth. The connection of the platform to the seabed through concrete pillars does not qualify it as part of the earth’s surface or as a natural land area. Consequently, Sealand does not possess the necessary characteristics to be recognized as a territory under international law.

I understand that this may be disappointing news, but I hope this explanation clarifies the legal standpoint on the matter.

Best regards,
BR

MICHAEL B GOODRICK,

Have you emailed the government office? Please remember they are very very busy! They are doing the BEST they can. If you wish to email me, I will try to assist: george.day@sealandbaron.org :-)

BARON SIR BRANDON CANTILLO, OMS,

SMOM has a de facto territory n Rome and Malta, factually three sites with extraterritoriality functioning as territory.