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.

Brave PH fisherman stands up to China

In this March 28, 2016, photo, Filipino fisherman Renato Etac, from the Philippines, sits on his boat during an interview with the Associated Press in Cato, northwestern Philippines. More than once, Chinese coast guardsmen approached Etac’s boat and pointed their rifles at him, but he says he knew they would not fire and risk starting a war. AP

 CATO, Pangasinan—As Asian countries jostle for territory in the South China Sea, one Filipino fisherman is taking a stand.

He has faced down Chinese coast guard rifles, and even engaged in a stone-throwing duel with the Chinese last month that shattered two windows on his outrigger.

“They’ll say, ‘Out, out of Scarborough,’” Renato Etac says, referring to Scarborough Shoal, a rocky outcropping claimed by both the Philippines and China.

He yells back, “Where is the document that shows Scarborough is Chinese property?”

At one level, the territorial disputes in the South China Sea are a battle of wills between American and Chinese battleships and planes. At another level, they are cat-and-mouse chases between the coast guards of several countries and foreign fishermen, and among the fishing boats themselves.

Indonesia seized a Chinese fishing boat last month and arrested eight fishermen, only to have a Chinese coast guard vessel ram the fishing boat as it was being towed, allowing it to escape.

Vietnam’s coast guard chased away more than 100 Chinese boats over a two-week period, its state media reported this week, and made a rare seizure of a Chinese ship carrying 100,000 liters (26,400 gallons) of diesel oil, reportedly for sale to fishing boats in the area.

The South China Sea, a hodgepodge of overlapping territorial claims in the Pacific, is both strategically important and a vital shipping route for international trade. It may also contain valuable oil and natural gas reserves.

As tensions ratchet up, though, it is perhaps those who make a living at sea who feel it the most. Here are some stories from fishermen around the region.

 In this Feb.27, 2015 photo provided by Renato Etac, Chinese Coast Guard members approach Filipino fishermen as they confront them off Scarborough Shoal at South China Sea, also called the West Philippine Sea, in northwestern Philippines. More than once, Chinese coast guardsmen approached Etac’s boat and pointed their rifles at him, but he says he knew they would not fire and risk starting a war.(Renato Etac via AP)

Guardian of Scarborough

Renato Etac has had dozens of encounters with Chinese ships.

More than once, a small team of Chinese coast guardsmen on a rubber boat approached his boat and pointed their rifles at him, but he says he knew they would not fire and risk starting a war.

At other times, the Chinese will surge as if to hit his boat, but the 37-year-old fisherman uses his keen knowledge of Scarborough Shoal (which Filipinos refer to as Panatag Shoal or Bajo de Masinloc) where he has fished for Spanish mackerel, trevally and grouper since he was a teenager to outmaneuver them.

Etac says he just wants to defend his livelihood in waters that used to be open to all. China took control of Scarborough Shoal in 2012 after a two-month standoff with Philippine government ships. It sits about 230 kilometers (145 miles) west of the Philippines, and 1,000 km (620 miles) from the Chinese coast.

“It’s like quarreling, like playing games,” he says. “Yelling, dirty finger, everything’s there. Sometimes I use expletives in different dialects and I get to laugh when I see them, because they don’t understand what I’m saying.”

He enjoys what he calls the territorial “debates” in the high seas, though his earnings from a weeklong fishing expedition have dropped by more than half to P3,000 because of both the Chinese disruptions and competition.

“He’s like the guardian of Scarborough, sir,” said Greggy Etac, a relative and a fellow fisherman. “I used to sail with him, but now, I’m scared.”

Philippines' arguments vs China

The Philippines' case against China over the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea) boils down to 5 basic arguments.
Philippine Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario outlined these claims on Tuesday, July 7, the first day of arguments at The Hague.
For the oral hearings that run until July 13, we've listed these 5 arguments, quoted verbatim from Del Rosario.
Below each argument, we've added our own notes to explain things in a nutshell. We've also included links to other stories for further reading and reference.
The Philippines' arguments revolve around the right to fish, as well as to exploit other resources, in the West Philippine Sea.
This right is based on the so-called Constitution for the Oceans, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
Under UNCLOS, a coastal state has the exclusive right to fish within its exclusive economic zone (EEZ), an area 200 nautical miles from the coastal state's baselines or edges.

1. China's 'historical rights'

 ARGUMENT: "First, that China is not entitled to exercise what it refers to as 'historic rights' over the waters, seabed, and subsoil beyond the limits of its entitlements under the Convention."
 EXPLANATION: China says the South China Sea has belonged to it for centuries. This is why it claims "historical rights" over the disputed sea.
 Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio of the Philippine Supreme Court, however, says that "even if true," these historical rights have no bearing on sea disputes under UNCLOS. Carpio explains that UNCLOS "extinguished all historical rights of other states." This UN convention instead gives each coastal state an EEZ.

2. China's 9-dash line

ARGUMENT: "Second, that the so-called 9-dash line has no basis whatsoever under international law insofar as it purports to define the limits of China’s claim to 'historic rights.'"
EXPLANATION: The 9-dash line is China's demarcation to claim virtually the entire South China Sea. China says this is based on its "historical rights."
The Philippines, however, asserts that the 9-dash line is baseless under UNCLOS. This UN convention allows an EEZ, not a 9-dash line.

3. Rocks vs islands

ARGUMENT: "Third, that the various maritime features relied upon by China as a basis upon which to assert its claims in the South China Sea are not islands that generate entitlement to an exclusive economic zone or continental shelf. Rather, some are 'rocks' within the meaning of Article 121, paragraph 3; others are low-tide elevations; and still others are permanently submerged. As a result, none are capable of generating entitlements beyond 12NM (nautical miles), and some generate no entitlements at all. China’s recent massive reclamation activities cannot lawfully change the original nature and character of these features."
EXPLANATION: Under UNCLOS, habitable islands can generate a 200-nautical-mile EEZ. Rocks cannot.
China describes some features in the South China Sea as islands. One of these is Panatag Shoal (Scarborough Shoal), a rocky sandbar. China claims these supposed islands.
China also says these "islands" generate an EEZ, which could overlap with the EEZ of the Philippines. The problem for the Philippines is, China declared in 2006 that it "does not accept" arbitral jurisdiction when it comes to overlapping EEZs. UNCLOS allows this exception.
This is partly why China says the tribunal at The Hague has no right to hear the Philippine case – because it supposedly involves overlapping EEZs.
"The maritime dispute between the Philippines and China boils down to whether there are overlapping EEZs between the Philippines and China in the West Philippine Sea," Senior Associate Justice Carpio says.
Carpio, however, explains that "China has no EEZ that overlaps with the Philippines' EEZ in the Scarborough area." Carpio also believes an international tribunal "will deny Itu Aba," the largest island in the Spratlys, an EEZ.
The Philippines adds that China's reclamation activities cannot "lawfully change" rocks into islands.

4. Breach of the law of the sea

ARGUMENT: "Fourth, that China has breached the Convention by interfering with the Philippines’ exercise of its sovereign rights and jurisdiction."
EXPLANATION: China prevents Filipinos from fishing in the West Philippine Sea. UNCLOS, on the other hand, gives Filipinos the exclusive rights to fish within the Philippines' EEZ in the disputed waters.

5. Damage to environment

ARGUMENT: "China has irreversibly damaged the regional marine environment, in breach of UNCLOS, by its destruction of coral reefs in the South China Sea, including areas within the Philippines’ EEZ, by its destructive and hazardous fishing practices, and by its harvesting of endangered species."
EXPLANATION: China is building artificial islands in the West Philippine Sea. The Philippines says China's reclamation activities have buried 311 hectares of coral reefs – around 7 times the size of Vatican City. This can mean P4.8 billion ($106.29 million) in lost economic benefits. At the same time, China is accused of poaching.
China, for its part, refuses to answer the Philippines' arguments in arbitration proceedings. It has instead published a position paper debunking the Philippines' claims.
In the end, the Philippines says, the case at The Hague is set to provide a long-term solution to the sea dispute.
For Del Rosario, UNCLOS provisions "allow the weak to challenge the powerful on an equal footing, confident in the conviction that principles trump power; that law triumphs over force; and that right prevails over might." 

Credit:  Rappler.com

Discussion on the Phillipine’s Arbitration Case

Discussion on the Philippines Arbitration Case

Click Here for the Video Discussion: YouTube Video


The topic includes Reed Bank, Paracel Islands, Spratly Islands but the subject focus on Scarborough (Panatag) Shoal, Ayungin Reef, Mischief Reef and Philippines 200 nautical miles Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).

Mr. Paul S. Reichler
Partner, Co-Chair, International Litigation and Arbitration Department
Foley Hoag

CSIS Concourse Level, Room 115
1616 Rhode Island Avenue NW, Washington DC

Transcript of oral arguments on Philippines vs China arbitration case

The Arbitral Tribunal of the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague, Netherlands released the full transcript of the oral hearings on the territorial disputes in the West Philippine Sea as requested by the Philippines.

Last July, the Philippines sent a delegation composed of top executives from the three government branches as the United Nations arbitral tribunal opened the arbitration court proceedings on the sea dispute.

Day 1: Tuesday, 7th July 2015 
arbitration-case-transcript-day1
 
Day 2: Wednesday, 8th July 2015
arbitration-case-transcript-day2
 
Day 3: Monday, 13th July 2015
arbitration-case-transcript-day3

Credits:
www.imoa.ph
Philstar

Philippines vs. China at The Hague

 

The Philippines’ quest for peacefully resolving territorial disputes in the South China Sea has entered a critical stage. After more than two years of hard work and extensive preparations, culminating in the thousand-page-long memorial, Manila has the chance to convince the arbitral tribunal at The Hague that its case deserves to be heard.

The ultimate aim is to ensure all claimant countries honor their treaty commitments under prevailing international legal regimes, particularly the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which has been ratified by the Philippines (1984) and China (2006) alike.

The Philippines has been praised by nations around the world, because it is the first country to have dared (under Art. 287 and Annex VII of UNCLOS) to take China to the court. Throughout my visits to and interactions with colleagues and officials from sympathetic countries across the Pacific region — and, I must say, there are many of them — I have constantly been told about how they genuinely admire our government’s decision to resort to compulsory arbitration despite China’s vehement opposition.

Though China has refused to engage the legal proceedings, claiming “inherent and indisputable” sovereignty over almost the entire South China Sea, the UNCLOS (under Art. 9, Annex VII) has not barred the resumption of our arbitration efforts, which kicked off in early 2013. Without a doubt, the Aquino administration has made a very bold decision by taking on China directly — albeit not through force, but instead the language of law.  

Beijing knows it would be very difficult to justify its notorious nine-dashed-line doctrine, so it has instead chosen to sabotage the Philippines’ arbitration efforts by raising technicality-procedural questions. China has deployed three related arguments that aim to put into question whether the arbitral tribunal should exercise jurisdiction at all.

China cites that the UNCLOS doesn’t have the mandate to address sovereignty-related (title to claim) questions, while, invoking Art. 298 back in 2006, China has opted out of compulsory arbitration on issues that concern its territorial claims, among others. China also claims that it is premature to resort to compulsory arbitration, since alternative mechanisms haven’t been fully exhausted. The Philippines’ savvy legal team, however, has tried to address the jurisdiction issue by eschewing the sovereignty question, instead focusing on two major issues.

First, the Philippines has emphasized the importance of clarifying (under Art. 121 of UNCLOS) the nature of disputed features: Whether they are low-tide or high-tide elevations or islands, since this has a huge implication on whether the features can be appropriated at all or can generate their own 200 nautical miles Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).

Perhaps the most important argument of the Philippines’ is that the arbitral tribunal should examine (and hopefully invalidate) China’s nine-dashed-line claims, which are based on pre-modern, questionable, and vague notion of “historical rights/waters”. In short, we want to make sure all claimant countries harmonize their claims and maritime behavior along modern, internationally-accepted legal principles, not obscure doctrines.

But practically everyone agrees that China has to first clarify sweeping territorial claims, which are neither consistent nor precise. Up to this day, it is not clear whether China is claiming the entire South China Sea or only the features and fisheries and hydrocarbon resources in the area. And if China doesn’t even clarify the precise coordinates of its claims, it would be almost impossible to have any viable joint development scheme among claimant countries.

The Philippines’ case has also presented a huge dilemma for arbitration bodies under UNCLOS. If the Arbitral Tribunal turns down jurisdiction, and refuses to even hear the merits of our arguments, then the very viability of international law as a conflict-management/resolution mechanism will come under question.

At the same time, if it decides to push ahead and eventually rule against China, then there is a huge risk that, as a good friend Columbia University Professor Matthew C. Waxman puts it, it would be "ignored, derided and marginalized by the biggest player [China] in the region." After all, there are no multilateral compliance-enforcement mechanisms to force China — a permanent member of the UN Security Council — to abide by any unfavorable verdict.

In practical terms, the big concern is that while the legal cycle slowly grinds, China is actually changing the facts on the ground on a daily basis. This is why it is extremely important that the Philippines remains vigilant, and primarily focuses on tangibly guarding its interests on the frontline by fortifying its position on features it already controls, negotiate necessary measures (i.e., hotlines) to prevent unwanted clashes and escalation in the high seas, and employ all instruments in its toolkit to protect its territorial integrity.

An urgent concern, in particular, is to prevent China from imposing an Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) in the Spratly chain of islands, which may give Beijing the ability to choke off the supply-lines of other claimant states and dominate arguably the world’s most important maritime highways. The truth is that, we can’t only rely on UNCLOS to address this critical situation, and we will need the help of our allies and partners across the world as well as the full support of the Filipino nation.

 

By Richard Javad Heydarian, special for CNN Philippines

July 9, 2015

Published article: Click Here

 

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