Arbitration Case Of The Philippines Against China In Georgia
Description
Form popularity
FAQ
On July 12, 2016, the arbitral tribunal adjudicating the Philippines' case against China in the South China Sea ruled overwhelmingly in favor of the Philippines, determining that major elements of China's claim—including its nine-dash line, recent land reclamation activities, and other activities in Philippine waters— ...
Bilateral ties took a downturn when the Philippine government filed an arbitration case against China under the United Na-tional Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) in January 2013 challenging the legality of China's nine-dash line claim over the contested waters.
Philippines-China relations have lately been dominated by the territorial disputes in the West Philippine Sea, which has escalated since the naval standoff over the Scarborough Shoal in April 2012 and aggravated by issues of Chinese illegal occupation, unlawful establishment of infrastructures, and incidents of ...
China adopted a position of non-acceptance and non-participation in the proceedings. The Permanent Court of Arbitration served as Registry in this arbitration.
It concluded that China breached the provisions of UNCLOS, in particular by (a) temporarily prohibiting fishing in areas of the South China Sea falling within the Philippines' EEZ, (b) failing to prevent Chinese vessels from fishing in the Philippines' EEZ at Mischief Reef and Second Thomas Shoal and (c) preventing ...
The award addresses three main substantive issues: (a) the so-called “nine-dash line” and China's claim to historic rights in the South China Sea, (b) the status of certain maritime features in the South China Sea and (c) the legality of Chinese activities in the South China Sea.
On July 12, 2016, the arbitral tribunal adjudicating the Philippines' case against China in the South China Sea ruled overwhelmingly in favor of the Philippines, determining that major elements of China's claim—including its nine-dash line, recent land reclamation activities, and other activities in Philippine waters— ...
In its ruling, the Tribunal firmly rejected any PRC territorial or maritime claim to areas determined by the Tribunal to be part of the Philippines' exclusive economic zone and continental shelf. As provided under the Convention, the 2016 arbitral decision is final and legally binding on the PRC and the Philippines.
In its ruling, the Tribunal firmly rejected any PRC territorial or maritime claim to areas determined by the Tribunal to be part of the Philippines' exclusive economic zone and continental shelf. As provided under the Convention, the 2016 arbitral decision is final and legally binding on the PRC and the Philippines.
The dispute is ostensibly over the jurisdiction and administration of the maritime features—shoals, reefs, rocks, and islands—territorial waters, and exclusive economic zones of the South China Sea. China (as well as Taiwan) vaguely claims jurisdiction, but not necessarily territorial control, over the entire Sea.