Conservation groups have accused the International Seabed Authority (ISA) of being ‘captured by the industry it was created to govern’ after it closed its 31st Assembly session in Jamaica last week by “rewarding a company connected to unlawful mining plans” and inviting commercial contractors to observe its proceedings.

The session was marked by a deepening divide between a growing coalition of nations demanding stronger protections and an authority that – campaigners say – is ‘increasingly beholden to corporate interests’.

As of last week, 46 countries – including Mauritius, Mozambique, and the Republic of Congo – have now backed a moratorium on deep-sea mining, an action the ISA Council is still to oblige.

Instead, the Council has extended the exploration contract for Nauru Ocean Resources Inc., a subsidiary of The Metals Company – a corporation whose connections to unilateral mining operations in US waters have drawn both legal challenge and international censure.

The inquiry into companies linked to unilateral mining activity will continue, but without a deadline attached. And in a decision that drew immediate condemnation from conservation organisations, the Council voted to allow commercial contractors to participate as observers at future ISA sessions – a move critics say hands industry a formal seat at the table of the body nominally charged with holding it to account.

Contractors already hold significant informal access to the ISA. Many join as part of member state delegations, which carry voting power that observer status does not. This means they are able to participate in working groups and submit written statements.

Critics argue that formalising their observer status adds an extra level of influence to the access that already exists, without clear guidelines on how contractor engagement would be regulated or vetted. It also means they evade the level of scrutiny applied to intergovernmental and non-governmental organisations seeking the same standing.

Many states called for the decision to be postponed until the 32nd session, when more detailed guidelines could be established.

Haldis Helle, Ocean Campaigner at Greenpeace International, said: “While governments buried their heads in the sand over illegal US unilateralism, the ISA has actively rolled out the red carpet for rogue corporations,” she said.

“Rewarding The Metals Company and its subsidiary despite their clear disregard for international law and opening the ISA’s doors to let commercial contractors participate as observers is an outrageous conflict of interest. It cements corporate control over an organisation that was supposed to safeguard the common heritage of mankind.”

The Metals Company has been at the centre of mounting legal and diplomatic pressure following moves by the United States to pursue deep-sea mining unilaterally – outside the framework of international law and without ISA authorisation. 

The handling of that issue at the 31st Assembly raised its own serious concerns. When the agenda point on unilateral action was adjourned by the Assembly President – with no explanation offered as to when it would be reopened – it left a politically loaded statement from the United States, delivered in its capacity as an observer state, as the final and unchallenged word on the subject. 

In that statement, the US spoke of emerging markets and supply chain security, and invoked an historic balance between economic growth and environmental protection. No other observer was permitted to respond and the agenda point was closed.

Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, sponsoring states including the Netherlands, Canada, and the United Kingdom carry binding legal obligations to prevent their corporations from enabling unlawful operations. 

Greenpeace is now urging governments to act where the ISA has not – disrupting and limiting unlawful deep-sea mining supply chains at the national level. “Any government that permits its corporations to bankroll, engineer, or enable unilateral deep sea mining is directly violating international law,” Helle said. “Under UNCLOS, nations like the Netherlands, Canada and the UK have a non-negotiable legal obligation to step in. 

“Governments must now urgently act to discharge their obligations to block corporate rogue actors from using their ports, capital, and workforce to fuel this lawless, destructive race to the bottom.”

At the other end of the scale, a draft decision tabled by Vanuatu – aimed at strengthening the role of scientific evidence and traditional knowledge in ISA decision-making – generated substantive debate throughout the week. Governments did not reach consensus, but the proposal drew strong statements of support from a range of states, and discussion is set to continue at the 32nd Assembly session.

The stakes of that conversation are particularly acute for nations in the Global South. Some member states are currently up to two years in arrears on their required financial contributions to the ISA, with ongoing legal proceedings adding further strain to their already stretched national budgets. 

The nations being asked to absorb the greatest long-term risks from deep-sea mining – to their fisheries, their coastal economies, their ocean health, and the cultural ties to the marine environment that define island and coastal communities across the Pacific and Africa – are, in many cases, the same nations least able to fund their own meaningful participation.

The ISA was established under UNCLOS to manage mineral resources in international waters as the common heritage of mankind – a principle that places the seabed beyond the reach of national claim or corporate appropriation. 

Whether the organisation can still be said to honour that founding principle is a question that the 31st Assembly has made considerably harder to answer.

Click here for more from the Oceanographic Newsroom.