ARBITRATION - Press Release

Please read the ARBITRATION - Press Release:

THE SOUTH CHINA SEA ARBITRATION(THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES V. THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA)

Court ruling due in South China Sea row between Philippines and China

Territorial disputes

The Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Hague is set to deliver its verdict on Tuesday, July 12. DW answers some of the questions related to the case to explain what the dispute is about and what is at stake.

Mischief Reef in the disputed Spratly Islands

What is the case about?

On January 22, 2013 the Philippines took the South China Sea (SCS) dispute to the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) located at The Hague in the Netherlands.
Basically, the Philippines want the PCA to clarify three key issues:
1. Which legal status do China's claims in the SCS have, especially when it comes to the so-called nine-dash-line (NDL)?
2. Are the claimed areas islands, rocks or just submerged stretches of sand, whose surface can only be seen at low tide? This is one of the key questions, because in international law an island leads to an entirely different territorial claim than a rock.
3. The PCA is supposed to rule, whether China has been operating illegally inside the Philippines' exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and has prevented the Philippines from exploiting its economic zone.
The Philippines has opted out of clarifying the question: which country is able to claim sovereignty over islands, reefs and rocks in the disputed area? Manila wants to clarify how the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) has to be applied.
The cause of the dispute is some islets of the Spratly archipelago, which covers an area of more than 420,000 square kilometers in the SCS. The islands are controlled by various neighboring countries, together with some other reefs and rocks. "Scarborough Shoal," "Second Thomas Shoal," "Gaven Riff" and "Reed Bank" are among them.

What is the legal basis for the claims?

The Philippines refers to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which after years of negotiations was agreed on in 1982, and came into effect in 1994. Together with 165 other nations, the Philippines and the People's Republic of China (PRC) signed the convention. But the United States hasn't.
China claims to have historic rights and cites a series of controversial documents, some of them dating back to the Ming dynasty which ruled China between the 14th and 17th centuries. However, historic issues are not part of the jurisdiction of UNCLOS.
All signatories of the maritime convention have committed themselves to settle any issue peacefully. One mechanism is to take a dispute to court, even if one of the contestants declines arbitration.

Does the PCA have jurisdiction in this case?

On February 19, 2013 the People's Republic of China rejected the Philippines' move and said it did not accept the court's jurisdiction.
According to the PRC, Manila's decision will eventually lead to the question: which country has the right of sovereignty and where maritime borders have to be drawn? In other words, this dispute does not center on the interpretation of UNCLOS, but territorial issues. However, in the PRC's view, this exceeds the jurisdiction of the Permanent Court of Arbitration.

South China Sea dispute

Beijing argues that two treaties between China and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) would be appropriate to solve the dispute: the ASEAN-China Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (2002) and the ASEAN's Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia from 1976 which was signed by China in 2003. The Philippines, in turn, has declared that all attempts to solve the dispute on the basis of the two treaties have been either blocked or delayed by China.
The court accepted the case and initiated proceedings on October 29, 2015, despite the PRC's objections. However, the tribunal rejected some of the Philippines' charges, declaring that the court's jurisdiction was only applicable to lawsuits connected to UNCLOS.
Until today, China does not acknowledge the court's jurisdiction and does not participate in the proceedings.

What is the nine-dash-line (NDL) all about?

The nine-dash-line (NDL) (sometimes it is also called ten- or eleven-dash-line) is a demarcation line which was used by the Republic of China for the first time on an official map in 1947. It illustrates the territorial claims of the Republic of China in the South China Sea.
The demarcation line was inherited by the Communist rulers of China after the PRC was founded in 1949 and, until today, is an official claim of the PRC.

From reef to island
Significant construction on Gaven Reef began in 2014, with a total of 114,000 square meters of land already created. Satellite pictures show just how fast construction has progressed on the reef. A new artificial island was created between March (left) and August (right) 2014.
 

There are two major problems with the nine-dash-line:
1. Nobody has ever defined where the actual dashes are located. There is no exact geographic data using longitudes and latitudes.
2. China has never clarified whether it only claims sovereignty over the islets, reefs and rocks inside the NDL or the entire area falling within the NDL.
Many legal experts say the NDL does not comply with international law.

What may happen after the verdict?

According to the UNCLOS, the court's ruling is binding on all contesting parties. Annex VII of the UNCLOS says the judgment is final and cannot be appealed. In theory, both countries have to accept the court's decision and adhere to it. Nevertheless, the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Hague has no power to enforce the verdict.

At most, the signatories of UNCLOS could punish China with consequences regarding its rights as a member of three UNCLOS bodies: the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, the International Seabed Authority and the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf.

China could be prompted to withdraw its judge from the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in Hamburg. Also, cases at the International Seabed Authority affecting Chinese interests could be shelved.

Credits to: http://www.dw.com

 

Group of Seven (G7) sends message to China

ISE CITY, Japan—With a keen eye on the Philippines’ legal battle with China over territory in the South China Sea, the leaders of the Group of Seven (G7) advanced democracies have agreed to send a strong message on the importance of international law in resolving maritime disputes in Asia.

Though no individual countries were mentioned, the contents of their declaration at the close of an annual summit appeared to be directed at China.

China’s claim to nearly the entire South China Sea and militarization of the region has angered some of its Southeast Asian neighbors and sparked fears over threats to freedom of navigation in the strategic waterway.

“We are concerned about the situation in the East and South China Seas, and emphasize the fundamental importance of peaceful management and settlement of disputes,” the G7 leaders said.

The leaders—representing the United States, Japan, Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Canada—said settlement of disputes should be “peaceful” and “freedom of navigation and overflight” should be respected.

They said claims in the East and South China Seas should be made based on international law and countries should refrain from “unilateral actions that could increase tensions” while also avoiding “force or coercion in trying to drive their claims.”

They also stressed that judicial means, “including arbitration,” should be used.

That call came ahead of a ruling expected within weeks on China’s claims brought by the Philippines to the United Nations Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague. China has said it does not recognize the case.

Speaking to reporters on Friday, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe stressed the importance of the rule of law and mentioned the Philippine case as a focal point.

“As for the Philippines, soon the decision in its arbitration case will be announced. From the standpoint of the rule of law, it’s important that respective countries clearly demonstrate their stance [on this],” Abe said.

Before Friday’s declaration, the G7 leaders said they should pay close attention to the Philippine case, with some of them stating that they should “raise their voice on this,” if necessary.

On the first day of the two-day G7 Ise-Shima Summit, the seven heads of state arrived at a decision to send a bold signal emphasizing international law in disputes in the East and South China Seas, a Japanese spokesperson said.

“On the expected judgment by the [UN] court of the issue of the oceans, G7 should pay keen attention on this, and, if necessary, will raise their voice on this,” said Yasuhisa Kawamura, press secretary of Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Clear signal

At a briefing late Thursday, Kawamura relayed to the press the outcome of the closed session among the G7 leaders who had gathered for their annual meeting at the Shima Kanko Hotel nestled in the picturesque Ise-Shima region.

“They agreed on the importance of observance of international law, rule and principle. This point should be sent out as a clear signal to the rest of the world. That is G7’s expected role,” Kawamura said.

He said the G7 leaders also recognized concerns about the people’s freedom of navigation and overflight, which, he added, were personally important to the heads of state.

Asked to elaborate on what conditions would necessitate raising the G7 bloc’s voice, Kawamura clarified that these words were only a “comment” by the participants, and were not a wrap-up conclusion.

Though not a member of G7, China, the world’s second-largest economy, cast a shadow over the talks with its increasingly aggressive posture in the East and South China Seas.

China is locked in dispute with G7 host Japan over ownership of a group of uninhabited islands in the East China Sea known to the Japanese as the Senkakus and to the Chinese as Diaoyus.

To bolster its claim to the islands, China has declared an air defense identification zone in the East China Sea, which Japan, the United States and their allies have refused to recognize.

Principled approach

Pressed to answer yes or no to a question on whether G7 would take a leadership role in the maritime disputes involving China, Kawamura said the issue was not so black and white.

“Diplomacy is sometimes not a yes or no type of interactions,” he said. “Let me put it this way: They (G7 leaders) recognized the concerns, and they recognized the necessity to address it, and they agreed to a principled approach to the issues on the oceans.”

Kawamura cited another comment by the world leaders that G7 might need to cooperate with members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and possibly bring up the issue at the upcoming East Asia Summit in September.

China wants all the resources in West Philippine Sea

Metro Manila (CNN Philippines) – Supreme Court (SC) Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio, in an exclusive interview with CNN Philippines on Thursday (November 25), said the maritime dispute in the South China Sea is a clash over resources.
For China, it's about asserting itself as a regional power by controlling the area.
"Definitely China wants all the resources in the South China Sea. They want all the fish, all the oil and gas," Carpio said.
"That's why when we tried to bid out internationally areas three and 4 four in the Reed Bank they sent us note verbale. They said 'we own areas three and four in the Reed Bank.' In fact, the entire Reed Bank, that's their position. So it's a fight over resources."
Carpio said China might influence countries around the South China Sea if it could control resources in the area.
Located northwest of Palawan, the Reed Bank or Recto Bank is the site of an oil drilling project by Forum Energy which Philex Petroleum is a majority owner.
But government temporarily stopped the service contract on December 2014 as the drilling site is within the disputed area subject to a United Nations arbitration.
The arbitral tribunal ruled it has jurisdiction over the country's case against China.
But Carpio said the country shouldn't eagerly lift the moratorium on oil drilling because of the ruling.
"The case has not been finished yet. We have to wait for the outcome. It's still pending," said Carpio.
He added: "If the tribunal rules that the Reed Bank belongs to the exclusive economic zone of the Philippines, then of course we have all the right to proceed, because under the law of the sea, we have the exclusive right to exploit our EEZ.

China to move beyond South China Sea?

According to Carpio, there are also speculations that after securing South China Sea, China will move beyond the first island chain in the Western Pacific.
The Supreme Court justice said he doesn't know if China will do that, but that seems to be the direction China is taking.
"If they do that, if they can control the South China Sea economically and militarily, then there will be no law of the sea anymore. There will be no UNCLOS.," Carpio said. "That's why we went to the tribunal and asked the tribunal to apply the law of the sea in South China Sea."
Carpio said the Permanent Court of Arbitration's ruling on jurisdiction could be considered as "an initial victory for the Philippines." He adds it's "the ruling that we wanted."
On the seven submissions that the tribunal deferred ruling, he said: "They have to know the facts. We have not presented the facts. Doesn't mean anything really. We expected that."
He said the Philippines could expect a ruling not later than mid-2016.
He also believes the tribunal will rule that China cannot claim the entire South China Sea, but it will be limited to what UNCLOS allows them, which is 200 nautical miles from its coast line.

By Anjo Alimario, CNN Philippines

China to build on disputed Scarborough Shoal

Beijing will start construction this year on a South China Sea islet within the Philippines' claimed exclusive economic zone as it seeks to project its power in the disputed waters, Hong Kong media reported Monday, April 25.

China will establish an outpost on Scarborough Shoal, 230 kilometers (143 miles) off the Philippine coast, the South China Morning Post newspaper cited an unnamed source close to the People's Liberation Army as saying.
Beijing claims nearly all the strategically vital sea, despite completing claims from several Southeast Asian neighbours, and in recent months has developed contested reefs into artificial islands, some topped with airstrips.

Manila claims Scarborough Shoal but says China took effective control of it in 2012, stationing patrol vessels in the area and shooing away Filipino fishermen, after a two-month stand-off with the Philippine Navy.
The SCMP cited the source as saying construction at the outpost would allow Beijing to “further perfect” its air coverage across the South China Sea, suggesting it plans to build an airstrip.
At a regular press briefing, foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said she was not aware of the report but the area was China's "inherent territory".
Beijing will "adopt the necessary measures to resolutely protect China's sovereignty and legitimate rights and interests", she said.

The report comes ahead of an international tribunal ruling, expected within months, on a case brought by the Philippines over the South China Sea.
It also follows an announcement by the US and the Philippines that they would launch joint naval patrols in the sea.

The construction plans were likely to be accelerated in light of the upcoming ruling from the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague, the newspaper cited the source as saying.
“China should regain the initiative to do so because Washington is trying to contain Beijing by establishing a permanent military presence in the region,” the source said.
Washington has sailed ships close to islands claimed by Beijing, accusing China of militarising the South China Sea and deploying missiles in the area.
Hua said the recent patrol flights in the area by the Philippines and the US were "deserving of suspicion", urging "some countries" active in the region to exercise restraint and "make cooperative efforts with China".

Beijing admits building military-capable airstrips and deploying unspecified weapons on some of the islands, but insists US patrols have ramped up tensions.
As well as China, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan have claims to parts of the sea, which are home to some of the world's most important shipping lanes and believed to sit atop vast oil reserves.

Video Report:Filipino fishermen harassed by Chinese Navy in Scarborough shoal

This is the boat that was harassed by Chinese Navy on Scarborough shoal last March 5 & 6 2016.

The fishermen captured the video evidence via their cellphone and it was turn over to the Philippine coastguard. 

The coastguard reportedly deleted the video evidence.

video report credit to GMA News online:

Video report link – click here

YouTube link - click here
 

Chinese vessels ram PH fishers’ boat in Scarborough Shoal

This undated handout photo taken by the Philippine Navy and released April 11, 2012, by the Department of Foreign Affairs shows Chinese surveillance ships off Panatag (Scarborough) Shoal. AFP FILE PHOTO/DFA/PN

Chinese Coast Guard rubber boats rammed and damaged a boat carrying 11 Filipino fishermen at Panatag Shoal (international name: Scarborough Shoal) in early March, in a move likely to heighten tensions between the Philippines and China in the hotly disputed South China Sea.

The fishermen, who arrived here early Saturday after a 16-day fishing trip to Panatag Shoal, said they were driven away by the Chinese Coast Guard twice, on March 5 and 6.

Junmar Pumicpic, 25, captain of the FB Bubhoy, said Filipino fishermen showed no fear to Chinese Coast Guards, taking out knives and harpoons to defend themselves.

“We feared for our lives and we thought of our families. But if they intended to kill us, we were determined to fight back,” he said.

The shoal is located 230 kilometers from Masinloc, Zambales province, well within the Philippines’ 370-km exclusive economic zone.

“They (Chinese Coast Guard) approached us and told us in English to leave,” Pumicpic said. “This is China Coast Guard. Go back to Subic,” he said, quoting one of the Chinese coast guards as saying to them.
“We were all traumatized by what they did to us. Some of us were shaking. We thought they were going to sink our boat,” he said.

The boat held, but it was damaged in the ramming, he said.

Another member of the fishing trip, Reynante Caitum, 22, said the Chinese coast guards engaged them in a “tug of war,” pulling the rope tied to a small boat that was aboard the fishing vessel.

“They wanted to get our service boat, but we resisted. We lifted the anchor to pull away and save our lives,” Caitum said.

Pumicpic said the Chinese coast guards came again on March 6 and drove them away shining blinding laser devices and powerful lights on them.

The incidents were captured on video, Pumicpic said.

“We gave the video to the Philippine Coast Guard detachment in Subic. I hope they will make an official report about it,” he said.

The shoal is located 230 kilometers from Masinloc, Zambales province, well within the Philippines’ 370-km exclusive economic zone.

It is also known as Bajo de Masinloc to residents of this coastal town.