July 7, 2026

July 2026 marks the tenth anniversary of the South China Sea arbitration award issued by an arbitral tribunal constituted under Annex VII to the 1982 United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The 2016 ruling, initiated by the Philippines against China, rejected the legal basis for China’s “nine-dash line” claims. China’s position on the arbitration is the “Three Nos”: no acceptance, no participation and no recognition.

Although many states welcomed and supported the arbitration’s ruling and considered it a landmark decision with binding force, the ruling is not uncontested. There are scholars within the international law community, such as Stefan Talmon, a professor of international law at University of Bonn, who argue that the case was “decided wrongly”, that the tribunal lacked jurisdiction, that some of the Philippines’ claims were inadmissible, and that procedural errors occurred during the proceedings. The tribunal’s decision to classify Itu Aba (Taiping Island) as a “rock” was also highly contentious, with legal scholars such as Myron Nordquist and William Phalen arguing that the tribunal erred in the interpretation and application of UNCLOS.

Building habits of practical cooperation 

Regardless of these scholarly debates, the Philippines certainly considers that it won a great legal victory against China and maintains that any outcome of the settlement of the South China Sea dispute must be based on the arbitration award. The wider and practical impact of the arbitration on the situation in the South China Sea, however, has been rather mixed. 

Read more:

https://www.thinkchina.sg/politics/law-alone-wont-save-south-china-sea