South China Sea Arbitration News & Discussion

[William Hung]

Hey, please learn the differences among:
the SCS Arbitration court,
( Hamburg ) International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea,
International Court of Justice,
( Hague ) PCA ( pernament court of arbitration )

Dont mess up all to talk together, all you said seems correct, but their relation is apple and orange.
This SCS arbitration is not UNCLOS convention.

I did not even mentioned ITLOS or the ICJ in my post, nor do I need to. It is you that need to understand more about UNCLOS.

When there are a certain type of disputes between signatories of UNCLOS (which include China), there is a compulsory dispute settlement mechanism that a dispute party can invoke, which include ITLOS, ICJ or an abitration tribunal:

SECTION 2. COMPULSORY PROCEDURES ENTAILING BINDING DECISIONS

Article 286
Application of procedures under this section
Subject to section 3, any dispute concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention shall, where no settlement has been reached by recourse to section 1, be submitted at the request of any party to the dispute to the court or tribunal having jurisdiction under this section.

Article 287
Choice of procedure
1. When signing, ratifying or acceding to this Convention or at any time thereafter, a State shall be free to choose, by means of a written declaration, one or more of the following means for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention:
(a) the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea established in accordance with Annx VI;
(b) the International Court of Justice;
(c) an arbitral tribunal constituted in accordance with Annex VII;
(d) a special arbitral tribunal constituted in accordance with Annex VIII for one or more of the categories of disputes specified therein.

ITLOS and ICJ is not necessary because the Philippines chose option (c), to establish an arbitral tribunal constituted in accordance with Anx VII. This Abitration tribunal was located in the Hague.

What is Anx VII? It is this:
http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/annex7.htm

Basically it is provisions under UNCLOS to establish an arbitration tribunal as a dispute settlement mechanism. The thing to note about this provision is that the ruling and judgment of the abotration tribunal is final, and even if one party refused to participate, it can still continue proceed to settle the dispute.

So you are wrong my dear, this arbitration tribunal was indeed established legally under the provisions of UNCLOS.

 

[CAPRICORN-88]

The PCA is AFFILIATED with the United Nations, if not in hierarchy, then in principles. The UN is a recent development compares to the PCA, so if there are disputes where the PCA's historical experience can be better applied, referrals from the UN carries equal force.

https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=0900001680052af1

The PCA have been accepted by the international community as a legitimate body for appeals in international disputes.

This is a feeble attempt to diminish the impact of the PCA regarding the SCS controversy.

I disagree.

The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) is an intergovernmental organization located at The Hague in the Netherlands. The PCA is not a court, but rather an organiser of arbitral tribunals to resolve conflicts between member states.[1] It should not be confused with the International Court of Justice, a separate institution.

The PCA is a permanent bureaucracy that assists temporary tribunals to resolve disputes among states (and similar entities), intergovernmental organizations, or even private parties arising out of international agreements. The cases span a range of legal issues involving territorial and maritime boundaries, sovereignty, human rights, international investment, and international and regional trade.

The court was established in 1899 by the first Hague Peace Conference. The Peace Palace was built for the Court in 1913 with funds from American steel magnate Andrew Carnegie. Since 1922, the building has also housed the separate Permanent Court of International Justice, which was replaced by the International Court of Justice in 1946.

THE VERY FUNNY THING HERE IS HOW CAN WE HAVE AN ARBITRATION IN THE ABSENCE OF ONE OF THE PARTIES? We cannot have an arbitration in the absence of either one of the parties. Now the so-called International Tribunal which is fully sponsored and approved by Philippines simply appointed an unknown individual to represent the other party.

HENCE TO MANY OF US, THE ARBITRATION COURT SPONSORED BY PHILIPINES HAS MERELY HANDED IN A DEFAULT RULING ALTHOUGH CLEARLY IT HAS NO JURISDICTION! China damage to the eco-system! Uh! China has NO right to historical claim! Uh! This will returned to haunt USA and her cronies, one of these days


https://defence.pk/threads/shinzo-abe’s-henchmen-rigged-the-spratlys-kaw-case-against-china.439159/

 

[gambit]

I disagree.

You can disagree all you want and it will be for naught. The physical location of the PCA is irrelevant. Its intentions and usage are not. As far as the international community is concerned, it the UN referred an issue to the PCA, it might as well came from the UN.

Yours like saying the Supreme Court have nothing to do with lower courts because the Supreme Court is located in a different building.

THE VERY FUNNY THING HERE IS HOW CAN WE HAVE AN ARBITRATION IN THE ABSENCE OF ONE OF THE PARTIES?

Are you saying that China was not invited to the arbitration ? We would like to see the PCA's official statement on why China was officially excluded.

 

[Jlaw]

The arbitration court is made up of those 5 judges and a chief judge:

The Phillipine appoint one judge and the Japanese chief appoint other 4.

View attachment 317296 View attachment 317297 View attachment 317299 View attachment 317300 View attachment 317301


the Japanese chief judge
View attachment 317298

But PCA is not a real court so I wouldn't call these judges. It should be called

'Three men, token black and a midget"

 

[jhungary]

What I don't understand is this..........

If China really like the PDF Chinese here say it's about definance and refuse to accept the ruling, then why these people continue to talk about it as if it is a big deal??

You think this ruling is stupid, you think the order is a toilet paper, you don't care about the ruling, then you should basically let it go as if it never existed. WHat we can see about PDF Chinese here is the exact opposite of not caring......

I would not say giving these so called "illegal" ruling 840 message is what we can defined as "Not Caring" about the verdict.

 

[itaskol]

it the UN referred an issue to the PCA, it might as well came from the UN.

you should watch the UN press conference in newyork from 07.12

 

[CAPRICORN-88]

Are you saying that China was not invited to the arbitration ? We would like to see the PCA's official statement on why China was officially excluded.

Yes. But the respondent party has the right to NOT to participate on the ground she has given.

The International Tribunal full sponsored with its Judges appointed by Philippines has NO jurisdiction in this case as it involved historical teritorial lands.

Hence in the absence of the other party, it became solely a one-sided affair and how are they supposed to arbitrate and with who? Anti-China Philippines vs Pro-China Philippines

 

[greenwood]

I did not even mentioned ITLOS or the ICJ in my post, nor do I need to. It is you that need to understand more about UNCLOS.

When there are a certain type of disputes between signatories of UNCLOS (which include China), there is a compulsory dispute settlement mechanism that a dispute party can invoke, which include ITLOS, ICJ or an abitration tribunal:



ITLOS and ICJ is not necessary because the Philippines chose option (c), to establish an arbitral tribunal constituted in accordance with Anx VII. This Abitration tribunal was located in the Hague.

What is Anx VII? It is this:
http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/annex7.htm

Basically it is provisions under UNCLOS to establish an arbitration tribunal as a dispute settlement mechanism. The thing to note about this provision is that the ruling and judgment of the abotration tribunal is final, and even if one party refused to participate, it can still continue proceed to settle the dispute.

So you are wrong my dear, this arbitration tribunal was indeed established legally under the provisions of UNCLOS.

This is the first case they use the Anx VII. This is a bad start. When the SCS arbitration court rule all objects in SCS are not islands, they have lost the basic theory of law of UNCLOS. By the way, those 5 judge and chief judge receive salary from the Philippines government not from UN or ITLOS, ICJ...

What I don't understand is this..........

If China really like the PDF Chinese here say it's about definance and refuse to accept the ruling, then why these people continue to talk about it as if it is a big deal??

You think this ruling is stupid, you think the order is a toilet paper, you don't care about the ruling, then you should basically let it go as if it never existed. WHat we can see about PDF Chinese here is the exact opposite of not caring......

I would not say giving these so called "illegal" ruling 840 message is what we can defined as "Not Caring" about the verdict.

In order to make the region peace, we have learned how the America use fabricated excues of "massive chemical weapons" to start the war against Iraq. To avoid Amercia use this excuse of SCS arbitration court, we need to tell them what the ruling is, though China isn't afraid of the conflict with Ameria, it's better to avoid a meaningless war potentially.

 

[Jason Zhao]

As so much abundant experiences from USA, we just get it below
1: Both Small Countries quarrels, Solver by UN, Then both Disappered
1: Small and Big country quarrels, Solved by UN, then small country disappered.
2: Big and Big country Quarrels, Solved by UN, then UN disappred.

So.....are you still cute and trust USA??

 

[gambit]

Yes. But the respondent party has the right to NOT to participate on the ground she has given.

Then China have no cause to complain. Simple as that.

There is an old saying about people representing themselves: Fools.

The corollary to that is if the defendant, or party to a dispute, does not show to present his side of the story: Fool.

 

[greenwood]

But PCA is not a real court so I wouldn't call these judges. It should be called

'Three men, token black and a midget"

PCA is a real court, but the court made the ruling is the SCS Casual Arbitration Court, which is faiture case.

 

[kuge]

yes..ALL judges are appointed by philippines & japan. They are non-asians...it is only fair china declared ruling void.
Were it the opposite scenario would philippines accept the ruling?
no country would put national sovereignty into the hands of her antagonists, would her?

 

[itaskol]

problem is china care too much about reputation. that sucks
but we will keep doing what we do as always.
keep island constraction, building more and larger airfield.
keep fishing all over SCS. and keep that place a peaceful place.

 

[beijingwalker]

This is what the PDF Chinese ain't gots the brains to understand.

The Tribunal's decision was not meant for China but for anyone who uses the SCS, that China's claim to the SCS is basically nonsense.

This leave China with two options: Either militarily enforce her claim to the SCS by attacking every ship that does not comply with her wishes, or leave those ships alone as they passage thru the SCS.

The latter is effectively an abandonment of her claim, in idea if not in fact.

That's your personal interpretation. China never tried to block the sea passage routes in this region, not in the past ,not in the future, what China will do is business as usual ,keeps doing what we always have been doing ,nothing more ,nothing less, sneezes at that void ruling cause that ruling is not worth even the toilet paper to us.

 

[dy1022]

And i read two chinese fishing boats were sunk recently,one by Indonesian Navy.What did you then.

093A cruise missile SSN passes Strait of Malacca at the end of June-2016, final warning to Indonesian Navy.

We let them seen what we have sent to there!

We also heard about that nearly 90 Fishing ships from India been destoryed and captured by Sri-lanka alone in 2015 !

what have India done to that situation???