Global EditionASIA 中文雙語Fran?ais
    Opinion
    Home / Opinion / Chinese Perspectives

    Analyzing the illegality and invalidity of the South China Sea Arbitration Awards via six 'whys'

    Keynote Speech at the Symposium on "South China Sea Arbitration Awards and International Law"

    By Ma Xinmin | chinadaily.com.cn | Updated: 2024-04-30 09:34
    Share
    Share - WeChat

    VI. Why is it absurd for the tribunal to rule that China's activities in the South China Sea are illegal?

    The arbitral tribunal mischaracterized the legal status of sea areas, erred in its factual findings, accepted inadmissible evidence, misinterpreted and misapplied the law. Consequently, its conclusion that China's related activities in the South China Sea violated the Convention's provisions or were illegal was based on entirely subjective speculation.

    First, the tribunal's conclusion that China's activities in the South China Sea were illegal was based on false facts and an illegal premise. The tribunal erroneously asserted that the relevant sea areas of the Nansha Qundao belonged to the exclusive economic zone or continental shelf of the Philippines. For example, the tribunal found that China's activities to affirm and safeguard its sovereignty and rights, as well as its resources management and exploitation activities in the South China Sea, violated the sovereignty rights of the exclusive economic zone and continental shelf of the Philippines. However, this decision was founded on the erroneous assumption that the relevant sea areas involved in China's activities fell within the Philippines' exclusive economic zone and continental shelf. China and the Philippines have not resolved their territorial issues or delimited their sea boundaries. Therefore, the basis for determining their respective claims is absent. As a result, the fundamental prerequisites for establishing the Philippines' claims do not exist. Hence, it is impossible to discuss whether the relevant sea areas are the exclusive economic zone and continental shelf of the Philippines, and it is completely untenable to argue that China's activities in the South China Sea are illegal based on this preposterous premise.

    Second, the tribunal seriously erred in its factual findings, accepted inadmissible evidence, misinterpreted and misapplied the law regarding China's various activities in the South China Sea. In its factual findings, the tribunal's conclusion that the fishing activities of Philippine fishermen gave rise to "traditional fishing rights" lacked a factual basis. In dealing with evidence, the tribunal was biased towards China's activities related to marine environmental protection in the South China Sea. It relied on a report by three experts who conducted a complex scientific assessment of the South China Sea marine environment in no more than 17 days, lacking first-hand empirical data. Additionally, the tribunal made numerous errors in interpreting and applying the law, including incorrectly applying "traditional fishing rights" to the legal régime of the territorial sea through Article 2(3) of the Convention. In short, the conclusion that China's activities in the South China Sea are illegal is entirely absurd.

    In conclusion, the arbitral tribunal in the South China Sea Arbitration egregiously exceeded its jurisdiction, shockingly abused and expanded its power, and seriously infringed on China's rights and interests, rendering the awards illegal and invalid from the beginning. These awards, marred by staggering procedural irregularities and wrongful adjudication, not only harm China but also undermine the common interests of all States Parties to the Convention and the international community at large; therefore, these awards are not worth the paper they are printed on. China neither accepts nor recognizes them, standing firmly in support of international fairness and justice, a stance believed to be backed by an increasing number of countries advocating for these principles.

    Ma Xinmin is director-general of the Department of Treaty and Law of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.

    If you have a specific expertise, or would like to share your thought about our stories, then send us your writings at opinion@chinadaily.com.cn, and comment@chinadaily.com.cn.

     

     

    |<< Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6   
    Most Viewed in 24 Hours
    Top
    BACK TO THE TOP
    English
    Copyright 1995 - . 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
    FOLLOW US
    一本一道av中文字幕无码| 曰批全过程免费视频在线观看无码| 亚洲日本中文字幕一区二区三区| 国产精品VA在线观看无码不卡| 久久中文骚妇内射| 精品无码综合一区| 日韩乱码人妻无码系列中文字幕| 91中文在线视频| 亚洲AⅤ永久无码精品AA| 麻豆亚洲AV永久无码精品久久| 精品人妻系列无码一区二区三区| 亚洲欧美日韩在线中文字幕| 中文字幕无码久久精品青草| 国产精品热久久无码av| 亚洲AV无码专区国产乱码4SE| 无码国产精品一区二区免费虚拟VR| 中文字幕一区二区人妻| 日韩久久无码免费毛片软件| 日韩AV无码精品人妻系列| 在线播放无码后入内射少妇| 色婷婷综合久久久久中文字幕 | 亚洲日韩AV一区二区三区中文| 欧美日韩中文国产一区发布| 亚洲精品无码不卡| 日韩欧国产精品一区综合无码| 国产av无码专区亚洲av桃花庵| 无码少妇一区二区三区| 亚洲av无码专区在线播放| 亚洲av无码乱码国产精品fc2| 永久免费AV无码网站国产| 国产成人无码区免费网站| 国产成人无码AV麻豆| 国产成人无码一区二区三区在线| 日韩精品无码人妻一区二区三区| 无码国产精品一区二区免费| 中文字幕日韩精品有码视频| 国产麻豆天美果冻无码视频| 亚洲中文字幕无码久久精品1 | 久热中文字幕无码视频| 久久久久久国产精品无码超碰 | 久久人妻少妇嫩草AV无码专区 |