男女羞羞视频在线观看,国产精品黄色免费,麻豆91在线视频,美女被羞羞免费软件下载,国产的一级片,亚洲熟色妇,天天操夜夜摸,一区二区三区在线电影
US EUROPE AFRICA ASIA 中文
Opinion / Op-Ed Contributors

Arbitral tribunal abusing its power

By Jia Yu (China Daily) Updated: 2016-06-03 08:45

Arbitral tribunal abusing its power

A formation of the Nanhai Fleet of China's Navy on Saturday finished a three-day patrol of the Nansha islands in the South China Sea. [Photo/Xinhua]

The United States and some of its allies are using international forums to sensationalize the South China Sea disputes, especially the arbitration case initiated by the Philippines in January 2013.

Although China rejected the notice of arbitration by the Philippines in February 2013 and made it clear that China will neither accept nor participate in the arbitration, the Philippines handed in a request for arbitration to the Hague-based Permanent Court of Arbitration in March 2014 with 15 submissions.

Despite China's strong opposition, the arbitral tribunal announced in late October 2015 that it can judge on seven of the 15 submissions, and linger over some other submissions.

However, the truth is that the arbitral tribunal has no jurisdiction over this case according to international law.

China's 2006 Declaration on Optional Exceptions made in accordance with Article 298 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, clearly excludes disputes on maritime delimitation from compulsory arbitration.

At the heart of the disputes between China and the Philippines is the latter's illegal occupation of Chinese reefs and islets in the South China Sea. Categorizing maritime features is in essence subject to territorial sovereignty, which is beyond the scope of UNCLOS. Hence the arbitral tribunal has accepted submissions over which it does not have jurisdiction in the first place.

Manila claims China's Meiji Reef, Ren'ai Reef, and Zhubi Reef are low-tide elevations that can't claim territorial sea, an exclusive economic zone or continental shelf. However, to judge whether a maritime feature is an island, reef or low-tide elevation is an inseparable part of territorial sovereignty. Terra nullius is not entitled to any maritime rights, so it will be nonsense to discuss the maritime rights of a feature if the sovereignty is not made clear first.

That the arbitral tribunal has turned a blind eye to the Philippines' self-evident attempt to muddle the issue constitutes an abuse of power that may deal a blow to its credibility in settling international disputes under the Convention.

As for their disputes over maritime delimitation in the South China Sea, Beijing has repeatedly informed Manila that it will not accept the arbitration case in accordance with Article 298 of the Convention. Should the court's ruling touch upon relevant appeals by Manila, such as the one including Meiji Reef and Ren'ai Reef as part of its continental shelf and exclusive economic zone, the arbitral tribunal will inevitably be judging on the sovereignty of the islands and reefs involved in this case. Should the arbitral tribunal make a judgment on this, it would in fact not only arbitrate the sovereignty of the Meiji Reef and Ren'ai Reef, but also delimitate the seas of China and the Philippines. However, any territorial dispute is far beyond the arbitral tribunal's jurisdiction. The Chinese government has consistently called for candid negotiations with the Philippines, which is in line with several bilateral agreements between the two countries, as well as the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea signed by China and ASEAN countries in 2002.

In other words, Manila has failed to fulfill its commitment to rule-based dispute management, and placed a ticking time bomb in regional stability. The arbitral tribunal is conniving in the Philippine's attempt to violate agreements.

The final ruling, if it's a result of well-orchestrated misinterpretation of international laws including UNCLOS, will inject more uncertainties into the regional order and serve as an unwanted precedent that may "inspire" other countries to take articles out of context while dealing with similar maritime disputes.

China has every reason to dismiss the unlawful arbitration case.

The author is deputy director of the China Institute for Marine Affairs attached to the State Oceanic Administration.

Most Viewed Today's Top News
...
主站蜘蛛池模板: 乌拉特后旗| 呈贡县| 东安县| 庐江县| 德阳市| 克什克腾旗| 麻江县| 滦平县| 塘沽区| 威海市| 刚察县| 汉阴县| 仙桃市| 儋州市| 井研县| 墨竹工卡县| 嘉荫县| 长乐市| 闵行区| 台州市| 梨树县| 剑川县| 卢龙县| 中卫市| 孝感市| 乌拉特前旗| 鄂托克前旗| 额敏县| 望都县| 林芝县| 乌鲁木齐县| 杭州市| 星子县| 靖远县| 抚顺市| 新兴县| 阳东县| 集贤县| 怀来县| 鄂尔多斯市| 高淳县| 壤塘县| 五台县| 阳新县| 郓城县| 聊城市| 会宁县| 班戈县| 西乌| 富平县| 庆城县| 正定县| 宁晋县| 鲜城| 衡山县| 昌平区| 临邑县| 思茅市| 清苑县| 新蔡县| 台江县| 北辰区| 万安县| 闵行区| 上犹县| 邵武市| 阜阳市| 缙云县| 鸡泽县| 同心县| 昌宁县| 中江县| 长治县| 通榆县| 岳池县| 武平县| 江油市| 甘洛县| 大城县| 新河县| 郸城县| 顺义区|