This article discusses the development of international law concerning the underwater cultural heritage (UCh), with particular emphasis on the 2001 UNESCO Convention on the subject. It attempts to set out the main legal solutions adopted in the 2001 Convention. however, in order to achieve this aim, it traces the genesis of the Convention and identifies the problems which prompted UNESCO to initiate the negotiations that ultimately led to the adoption of the 2001 Convention. hence, before analysis of the UNESCO treaty it firstly describes the initial phase of the development of law regarding UCh, which was mostly based on the national laws of particular coastal States, as well as in some instances on the laws of salvage. Subsequently, the article turns to the discussion concerning the (in)famous two provisions of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) dealing with archaeological objects, as well as the efforts that were undertaken within the framework of the Council of Europe to adopt a convention on UCh.

The study addresses the challenges facing the law of the sea. Although UNCLOS is rightly described as a constitution of the law of the sea, it does not and cannot give answers to all problems and doubts that arise in practice and that are related to global warming, protection of biodiversity, legal status of genetic resources, controversy concerning shipping, delimitation of areas or the protection of underwater cultural heritage. Hence the question arises, what the ways and means of further development of the law of the sea are. Undoubtedly, one of the possibilities is to develop implementation agreements, of which the third devoted to the protection and sustainable use of marine biodiversity outside national jurisdiction is the subject of an international conference convened by the General Assembly, whose resolutions in the area of the law of the sea play an important role. Undoubtedly, also the importance of the organization of the United Nations system, such as the IMO, FAO, UNESCO, UNEP is significant. There is also the possibility of accepting agreements addressing the issues left by UNCLOS without solution or definition. Not without significance is the soft law and the practice of states as well as the position of the organs appointed by UNCLOS.