This article discusses the implications of a modality of civil society activism involving direct action in the High Seas. It focuses on three case studies: Sea Shepherd, SOS Méditérannée, and Women on Waves. All three directly challenge states’ claimed monopoly on the enforcement but also the interpretation and production of international law. They insist that they have stepped in only to fill a gap left by states’ inattention to their obligations. The article examines how their authority to do so is and might be justified, and whether it is emblematic of broader developments in international law that are merely made particularly visible on the High Seas.

本文讨论了在公海采取直接行动的公民社会激进主义模式的影响。它侧重于三个案例研究：Sea Shepherd、SOS Méditérannée 和 Women on Waves。这三个国家都直接挑战了国家声称对国际法的执行以及解释和制定的垄断。他们坚持认为，他们的介入只是为了填补国家不注意其义务而留下的空白。这篇文章探讨了他们这样做的权力如何以及可能是合理的，以及它是否象征着国际法的更广泛发展，而这些发展只是在公海特别明显。