US
EUROPE
AFRICA
ASIAdocument.write(“” + m[today.getMonth()+1]+ ” “+ today.getDate()+”, ” + theYear + ” “);HOMECHINAWORLDBUSINESSLIFESTYLECULTURETRAVELSPORTSOPINIONREGIONALFORUMNEWSPAPERChina Daily PDFChina Daily E-paperChina Daily Global PDFChina Daily Global E-paperOpinion / Op-Ed ContributorsEditorialsOp-EdColumnistsContributorsCartoonsSpecialsFrom the PressForum TrendsTalk from streetDebateEditors Pick:Syrian refugeescyberspaceV-Day paradeshrimp scandalTPPPhilippines partition a provocation under a legal cloakBy Lu Yang (China Daily) Updated:2016-05-24 08:00Comments Print Mail Large Medium SmallLi Feng/China DailyThe unilateral arbitration case forcibly pushed forward by the Philippines is a provocation against China under a legal cloak. Essentially, it is not aimed at resolving the countrys territorial disputes with China, but a naked attempt to repudiate Chinas territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests in the South China Sea.
By partitioning Chinas Nansha Islands in their entirety into different ones in its arbitration case submitted to the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, and asking the court to make a ruling on the maritime rights of the islands and reefs “occupied or controlled” by China, Manila is deliberately falsifying the nature of its disputes with Beijing on territorial sovereignty and maritime demarcation in the South China Sea.
This partition trick is a serious infringement of Chinas sovereignty and territorial integrity. China enjoys sovereignty over the Nansha Islands as a whole and such a legal fact has gained international recognition and acquiescence. In its arbitration case, the Philippines intentionally shies away from mentioning some islands and reefs, including those illegally occupied or claimed by itself, in an attempt to deny Chinas territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests in the South China Sea and whitewash its illegal occupation of some of Chinas Nansha Islands.
The exclusion of Taiping Island, the largest of the Nansha Islands where Taiwan stations its troops, from the islands and reefs “occupied or controlled” by China, also constitutes a serious violation by Manila of the one-China principle. All these testify that the Philippines arbitration appeal is an unconcealed challenge to Chinas territorial sovereignty over the Nansha Islands.
According to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the basic fact of the integrity of Chinas Nansha Islands should be taken into full consideration in defining Chinas maritime rights. In a note to then secretary-general of the UN on April 14, 2011, Chinas permanent mission to the UN pointed out that the stipulations of the Convention and Chinas maritime law endow Chinas Nansha Islands with the right of territorial waters, exclusive economic zone and continental shelf. However, in its arbitration case, the Philippines is attempting to fragment the Nansha Islands, proposing that the legal status of the listed islands should be determined one by one. Manila has also argued that these islands belong to atoll or low-tide heights that it says only enjoy a right of 12-nautical-mile waters under the UN Convention. Such arguments are a wanton challenge to Chinas maritime rights based on the nature of Nansha Islands as an entirety.
The intrigue to partition Chinas Nansha Islands also highlights the Philippines attempt to evade territorial sovereignty and maritime demarcation disputes in its arbitration case. The settlement of territorial sovereignty disputes is beyond the scope of the UN Convention and thus inapplicable to international arbitration or other compulsory procedures. In 2006, China also excluded the settlement of maritime demarcation disputes by compulsory arbitration based on the Convention. In this sense, the court in The Hague has no power of jurisdiction over the Philippines arbitration case and Manilas enforced arbitration requirement is essentially an abuse of the Conventions compulsory settlement procedures.
Aside from its lack of jurisdiction, the arbitration courts indiscriminate endorsement of the Philippines partitioning of Chinas Nansha Islands is a serious departure from the fair and a prudent attitude a court should hold. According to Article 9 of Annex VII of UNCLOS, in the absence of one of the two conflicting parties, the arbitration court should verify whether it enjoys jurisdiction over the case and whether all the requirements are factual and have a legal basis before making a ruling. The court should dismiss the Philippines unreasonable arbitration appeal and fully respect the fact that Chinas Nansha Islands have an integral geographic existence if it strictly bases its work on facts and laws. The non-identified endorsement of the Philippines fragmenting of Chinas Nansha Islands demonstrates the court has already been reduced to being Manilas agent and lacks objectivity and fairness.
The illegal and invalid arbitration farce staged by the Philippines and the court does not alter the fact Chinas Nansha Islands are an entirety nor Chinas legal rights and interests.
The author is a Beijing-based observer of international issues.0Related StoriesChinas stance on South China Sea wins more international backingChinese embassy refutes Washington Post editorial on South China SeaDivide in South China Sea serious, but under controlChinese officials, experts defend stance on Philippines arbitrationMost Viewed Todays Top NewsHousing booms may hurt, not heal, local growthTime to break free of protectionist shacklesAllow space for students to discover themselvesPhilippines arbitration case built on false pretextFunding global public goods for worlds recoveryForum TrendsTips to manage stress when studying abroadWhy are Chinese students heading to the US?Should investment lessons be mandatory?How can doctors and patients regain trust?Are women-only buses discriminatory?Do student evaluations measure teaching effectiveness?What annoys you most while traveling in China?ColumnistsTrumps willingness to talk to the DPRK is the right approachFestival drama peels layers of character who isnt thereFeatured ContributorsTurnball highlights China-Australia FTA as a valuable assetBloody curtain rising to greet US first-ever presidentStar BloggersMy best friend in China: 35th anniversary of China Daily By subeChina Daily is like a friend who stays with me in every mood in my life. If I am happy, I can write a blog and if I am upset, I can enjoy what others have said and let my feelings go away.China Daily, 35 years on: my memories By aixiI first discovered China Daily a few years ago. It was my first visit to China, and I was waiting for my tour guide to arrive.My vision for a smog-free China By eddieturksonI’ve lived in China for quite a considerable time including my graduate school years, travelled and worked in a few cities and still choose my destination taking into consideration the density of smog or PM2.5 particulate matter in the region.SpecialChina Daily, 35 years on: your memoriesPositive energy Leifeng laowai story2016 Happy Chinese New Year…| About China Daily | Advertise on Site | Contact Us | Job Offer | Expat Employment |Copyright 1995 -var oTime = new Date();
document.write(oTime.getFullYear());. All rights reserved. The content (including but not limited to text, photo, multimedia information, etc) published in this site belongs to China Daily Information Co (CDIC). Without written authorization from CDIC, such content shall not be republished or used in any form. Note: Browsers with 1024*768 or higher resolution are suggested for this site.License for publishing multimedia online 0108263             Registration Number: 130349