Article 38 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea gives ships the right of transit passage through straits used for international navigation. Article 44 bars coastal states from hampering or suspending it. No prior authorization is required. Iran’s Persian Gulf Strait Authority nonetheless asks for a permit 48 hours ahead, according to TechTimes on June 19, 2026.
That gap is the legal core of the Hormuz dispute.
What Iran has signed, and what it has not
Iran signed UNCLOS but never ratified it. Tehran argues that only the weaker “innocent passage” standard applies, which would let it set conditions on vessels. The United States has not ratified the convention either, though TechTimes notes that Washington treats key provisions as binding customary international law.
Umud Shokri, writing for the Middle East Forum on June 29, 2026, rejected the Iranian position. “Even though Iran has signed but not ratified UNCLOS, it cannot legally redefine freedom of navigation through international waters,” he wrote. Under the transit regime, he argued, vessels pass “continuously and efficiently,” and coastal states may not halt the passage or charge ships merely for going through. He drew a line between a natural strait and a built waterway such as the Suez Canal, where tolls are permitted, and concluded that Iran’s toll proposal breaks the rules.
Insurance, permits and the sanctions trap
The Persian Gulf Strait Authority imposed mandatory hull war voyage insurance on commercial ships once the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding took effect on June 18, 2026. Cover is free during the 60-day window of that memorandum. The authority has kept the right to charge fees later, and TechTimes put the likely start around August 17, 2026.
The complication for shippers: the authority is itself designated by the US Office of Foreign Assets Control and is linked to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Paying it could expose a company to sanctions.
A right on paper, risk in practice
The US-Iran war began on February 28, 2026. Brian Patrick Bolger, writing in The American Spectator on September 22, cited the International Maritime Organization’s count of “80 attacks on merchant vessels…with at least 22 seafarers killed.”
His point was narrower than a call to court. “The right of transit passage through an international strait remains a central rule of the law of the sea…That legal right does not guarantee safe passage, affordable insurance, or a contractual obligation to proceed, however,” he wrote.
The Trump administration has offered $20 billion in reinsurance capacity through the DFC and proposed naval escorts. Bolger said those steps address the availability of insurance, not protection from attack. Meanwhile the Persian Gulf Strait Authority has published a list of 77 vessels it accuses of violating its protocols and has threatened consequences, claims Bolger placed outside any internationally accepted legal framework. For charterers, he suggested, the practical answer sits in war-risk clauses, including BIMCO’s 2025 updates, and in the wording of insurance policies.
Sources
- Iran and the Strait of Hormuz: Key Legal References (Middle East Forum, Umud Shokri)
- Strait of Hormuz Insurance Mandate Defies UNCLOS, Traps Shippers in Sanctions (TechTimes, Jerry Owens)
- Shipping Law at Hormuz: the US-Iran War and Rights of Passage (The American Spectator, Brian Patrick Bolger)
