Sep 16, 2016

"Mainstream Chinese rejection of the South China Sea ruling by the tribunal at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Philippines v. China case is based on at least three reasons. First, the case contravened the general principle that arbitration can only be initiated after a full agreement has been reached between the State Parties concerned. Second, the case essentially dealt with disputes over land territory and maritime boundary delimitation. The sovereignty over land territory is a matter beyond the purview of United Nation Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). China also made a public declaration in 2006 which excluded the application of the dispute resolution mechanism under Article 298 of UNCLOS to issues relating to boundary delimitation, historic bays and titles, military activities, and so on. Third, the Philippines did not satisfy the requirement in Article 281 of UNCLOS or the agreements it had reached with China, nor did it seek communication with China according to Article 283. What’s more, Article 299 says: 'A dispute excluded under Article 297 or excepted by a declaration made under Article 298 from the dispute settlement procedures provided for in section 2 may be submitted to such procedures only by agreement of the parties to the dispute.'” 

Read more:

http://www.ippreview.com/index.php/Home/Blog/single/id/239.html

NISCSS does not necessarily share in or endorse the opinions of off-site commentators.