Fu Ying: why are the South China Sea, China Nanhai Arbitration Arbitration case say no | | Fu _ news

The Philippines unilaterally instituted arbitration case concern the South China Sea, the Hague Tribunal has announced final decision results will be announced on July 12. Some Western countries and media seem to know verdict unfavorable to China, early urged the Chinese side to accept the ruling. But China's position on the arbitration case is clear, that is, "does not accept, no participation, no recognition, no". Nanhai arbitration cases against China has adequate international legal basis. China did not only defend their national interests, but also in defence of the integrity and legitimacy of the international order of the sea.

Why China has refused to accept and participate in the arbitration process? Because China, as a sovereign State has the right to choose the way to resolve the dispute, which is a legitimate right under international law of sovereign States. But also because the Philippines unilaterally sea arbitration cases brought by abuse of dispute resolution procedures, concept confusion and deliberately covered up the substance of the dispute problems, flawed from the very beginning, therefore lacks legitimacy.

First of all, the Philippines filed arbitration claims involving some islets disputed with China and the delimitation problem between the two countries. Territorial sovereignty does not belong to the United Nations Convention on law of the Sea (hereinafter referred to as the Convention) adjustment range for the delimitation problems, China has made in 2006 pursuant to the provisions of article 298 of the Convention excluded statement, thus no longer accept the use of compulsory dispute settlement procedures.

Second, the Philippines unilaterally instituted compulsory arbitration does not meet the preconditions of the provisions of the Convention. Under the "no dispute to arbitration" principle, before any compulsory arbitration, the two sides on matters of arbitration shall be really controversial. However, such as the Philippines, raised in the arbitration on the question of the legal status in a single island, but China has never advocated maritime rights in a single island, is as part of the Islands.

The Convention also stipulates that related parties shall be a full exchange of views before the lawsuit, but never any communication with China on matters submitted to arbitration in the Philippines. Philippine claims in the report, in connection with China's "bilateral consultations" and "follow-up of the many communication" "trapped in stagnation," unable to solve the problem and filed for arbitration. This is not the truth, the fact is that the Chinese side has been trying to meaningful communication with the Philippines and not to respond.

Thus, unilateral arbitration brought by Philip did not meet the statutory precondition to the provisions of the Convention. In addition, the Philippine side to unilaterally initiate an arbitration against the previous consensus reached with the Chinese side, namely: the two sides pledge to resolve the dispute through bilateral negotiations and consultations.

Why is China "does not acknowledge, does" arbitral awards made? Although the Convention 288 (4) provides that the arbitral tribunal has the right to determine their own jurisdiction, the application of the provisions is not unconditional, however. International law does not exist in the so-called "absolute power", the Arbitration Tribunal as an international dispute settlement mechanism under the Convention regime, its authority and powers are transferred by all States parties. If the arbitral tribunal misuse of powers including China and the international community have the right to refuse to accept the ruling. It is not difficult to see, the arbitral proceedings in the case of excessive willful, in clear violation of basic norms of international law governing, shaking confidence in China and other countries to the Convention.

Although we do not yet know the final result, but to be sure, in the jurisdiction of the arbitral award did not understand and confirm what is the dispute between China and the Philippines, ignore purpose and substance of the claims filed in the case of the Philippines, calculated to be considered a pure problem of interpretation and application of the Convention, and the actual disposition of content far beyond this area. In addition, China is highly concerned, the Tribunal did not take into account specific geographical framework of the South China Sea and maritime delimitation, which is in the Philippines in waters overlapping claims to maritime interests are.

In view of the above, the Chinese side "does not acknowledge, does" decided that it should be easy to understand. At present, more than more than 60 countries have publicly supported China's position on the negotiated settlement of the dispute through consultations, many experts began to question the Tribunal's procedures. China, as the parties to the Convention, support and respect for its principles and spirit, we're not against the Convention and mandatory arbitration mechanism itself, but of the arbitral tribunal in the case of abuse.

In today's world the majority of disputes are resolved through negotiations between the parties directly. Both bilateral and multilateral negotiations, or through an international mechanism, its premise is to direct the parties to reach agreement or consensus. In the case of China advocating basic spirit and position in line with international law and practice of international relations.

Arbitration to solve disputes in the Philippines in the South China Sea will only stimulate resentment and undermine regional peace and stability. Disputed States bordering the South China Sea if you do not intend to escalate, there needs to go back to the track of bilateral negotiations to resolve the dispute. China and the ASEAN countries are now supported by a "twin-track" address the issue of South China Sea: direct negotiations to find a peaceful solution to the dispute through friendly consultations, China and the ASEAN countries to jointly safeguard peace and stability in the South China Sea. Discuss "the code of conduct of parties in the South China Sea" efforts of the early results have been achieved. The momentum should not be interrupted.

XI Jinping noted that China insists on maintaining international justice against their will on others. The processing concerns the peace and stability of the South China Sea, is about fairness and justice. Countries in the region need to work together to establish cooperation mechanisms based on rules. Should be supported by the international community, China and other States bordering the South China Sea by peaceful means control and made efforts to resolve the dispute, respecting the choice of China's negotiations to resolve their differences, maintenance of international mechanisms, in particular the Convention's legitimacy and impartiality. (The author is Chairman of the national people's Congress Foreign Affairs Committee, Academy of social sciences of national global strategic think tank Chief expert and Vice President of the China Center for international economic exchanges, guest, English version published in United States foreign policy magazine)

Source: global times

Responsible editor: Qiao Leihua SN098

Article keywords:
Fu Ying sea arbitration

I want feedback
Save a Web page
Integrated

傅莹：中国为什么对南海仲裁案说不|南海仲裁|傅莹_新闻资讯

　　菲律宾单方提起的南海仲裁案备受关注，海牙仲裁庭已经宣布将于7月12日公布最终裁决结果。一些西方国家和媒体似乎知晓裁决结果将对中国不利，早早开始敦促中方接受裁决。但中国对仲裁案的立场十分明确，即“不接受、不参与、不承认、不执行”。中国反对南海仲裁案有充分的国际法理依据。中国这样做不仅是在维护自身的国家利益，也是在捍卫国际海洋秩序的完整性和合法性。

　　为什么中国拒绝接受和参与仲裁程序？因为中国作为主权国家，有权选择解决争议的方式，这是国际法赋予主权国家的合法权利。同时也是因为菲律宾单方提起的南海仲裁案存在滥用争端解决程序、偷换概念和刻意掩盖争议实质的诸多问题，自始就存在瑕疵，因此缺乏合法性。

　　首先，菲律宾提起仲裁的诉求涉及与中国一些岛礁争议和两国之间的海域划界问题。领土主权问题不属于《联合国海洋法公约》（以下简称《公约》）调整范围；对于海域划界问题，中国已于2006年依据《公约》298条规定作出排除性声明，因而不再接受使用强制争端解决程序。

　　第二，菲方单方面提起的强制仲裁未满足《公约》规定的前置条件。根据“无争议不仲裁”的原 则，提起任何强制仲裁前，双方就仲裁事项须确实存在争议。但是，例如菲律宾在仲裁中提出关于单个岛礁法律地位的问题，而中方从未就单个岛礁主张海洋权益， 是一直将其当作群岛的组成部分。

　　《公约》也规定，提起诉讼前相关方须充分交换意见，但菲律宾从未与中国就仲裁事项 进行任何沟通。菲在申诉报告中声称，因与中国的“双边磋商”以及“后续的众多沟通”都“陷入僵滞”无法解决问题而提起仲裁。这不是实话，事实上，是中方一 直试图与菲律宾进行有意义的沟通而得不到回应。

　　因此，菲单方面提起的仲裁并未满足《公约》规定的法定前置条件。此外，菲方单方面提起仲裁也违反了其先前与中方达成的共识，即：双方承诺通过双边谈判和协商解决争议。

　　为什么中国“不承认、不执行”仲裁庭即将作出的裁决？尽管《公约》288（4）条 款规定，仲裁庭有权决定自身管辖权，但是该条款的适用不是无条件的。国际法中不存在所谓“绝对权力”，仲裁庭作为《公约》制度下的一个国际争端解决机制， 其权威和权力是所有缔约国让渡的。如果仲裁庭滥用权力，包括中国乃至国际社会有权拒绝接受裁决。我们不难看到，仲裁庭在该案的审理过程中过度任性，明显违 反国际法治基本准则，动摇中国和其他国家对《公约》的信心。

　　虽然我们还不知道最终结果，但可以确信，仲裁庭在管辖权裁决中没有了解和确认中菲 间存在的争议是什么，忽视菲律宾提起该案的目的和诉求的实质，刻意将其视为纯粹的《公约》解释和适用问题，而实际处置的内容又远远超出这个范畴。另外，中 方高度关切，仲裁庭未考虑南海的特定地理框架和海洋划界态势，也就是中菲两国在相关海域的海洋权益主张上是有重叠的。

　　鉴于上述，中方做出“不承认、不执行”的决定应是不难理解的。目前，已有60多个 国家公开支持中国关于通过协商谈判解决南海争议的立场，不少专家开始质疑仲裁庭的程序问题。中国作为《公约》的缔约方，支持和尊重其原则和精神，我们反对 的不是《公约》和强制仲裁机制本身，而是仲裁庭在审理此案中的滥权行为。

　　当今世界上绝大部分争端都是由直接当事国之间通过谈判协商解决的。无论是双边、多边谈判，还是通过国际机制解决，其前提都是要直接当事国达成协议或者形成共识。中国对此案的主张和立场符合国际法的基本精神和国际关系实践。

　　仲裁解决不了中菲在南海的争议，只会刺激对立情绪，损害地区和平与稳定。南海沿岸存在争议的国家如不打算激化矛盾，总还需要回到双边谈判解决争议的轨道上来。中国和东盟国家现在都支持通过“双轨思路”处理南海问题，即直接当事国通过友好协商谈判寻求和平解决争议，中国与东盟国家共同维护南海和平稳定。商谈“南海各方行为准则”的努力也已取得先期成果。这个势头不应被中断。

　　习近平主席指出，中国坚持维护国际公平正义，反对把自己的意志强加于人。南海问题 的处理事关和平稳定，也事关公平正义。本地区的国家需要共同努力，建立基于规则的合作机制。国际社会应支持中国和其他南海沿岸国以和平方式管控和解决争议 所做的努力，尊重中国以谈判解决分歧的选择，维护国际机制特别是《公约》的合法性和公正性。（作者是全国人民代表大会外事委员会主任委员、社科院国家全球 战略智库首席专家、中国国际经济交流中心特邀副理事长，英文版本刊发在美国《外交政策》杂志）

　　来源：环球时报

责任编辑：乔雷华 SN098

文章关键词：
南海仲裁 傅莹

我要反馈
保存网页
综合