The Tribunal in the South China Sea Arbitration (the Philippines v. China) has no jurisdiction

[Jlaw]

What a long eulogy.

China is pretty concise:

No recognition
No participation
No implementation

Too much BS from Pinoys. Remember the Vietnamese wanted to do this with Philippines? Even the stupid Viets backed out because they know the world doesn't care nor would it have any merit. They were just barking but the Pinoys actually fall for their ruse yet again!

 

[Zero_wing]

Are you on drugs?

Man you should be ask that question not me first of all you have no evidence of that at all again were in UNCLOS that china has some exceptions?

Too much BS from Pinoys. Remember the Vietnamese wanted to do this with Philippines? Even the stupid Viets backed out because they know the world doesn't care nor would it have any merit. They were just barking but the Pinoys actually fall for their ruse yet again!

Insulting us will not prove you right dbag

 

[Jlaw]

Insulting us will not prove you right dbag

LOL...don't be angry with me, it's the Viets that played you guys. Grow some ca-hones and confront the weasel Viets.

 

[GR!FF!N]

China, like US in old case, will comply with ruling – SC justice

South China Sea Verdict: The Court Decides The Nine-Dash Line Is Invalid?

China is trying to put a brave face,saying "Tribunal has no jurisdiction",but actually,they've.China is "parroting" their "logic that these islands are belongs to China bla bla bla",but they know that their logic is void to any international tribunal.Thats why they didn't become part of this case..

But what they miss???

A chance to settle this case like any other civilized country.actually,PCA is the best way to solve this kind of dispute.Most countries use PCA to solve their dispute.Recently,India-Bangladesh-Myanmar solved their dispute.

China knows these small countries can't do much harm,which is a flawed concept.Yes,they can't do much militarily.but If Manila wins the case,China will find itself more cornered.In Fact,these small countries are perfect "Choke Points" which will be used against China for sure.China got handful of islands,but lost countries around it,which means tussle to regain will continue,and will become "A perfect example" which will be used against China.

 

[Rechoice]

UNCLOS has an exemption clause which allows participants to exempt disputes over historical titles.

China signed the document with exemption.

It is provided for historic bay only, do you know that what is "bay". SCS is big sea. In fact nine dashed claim of China is conflicted with the term EZZ under UNCLOS conditions.

Briefly, nine dash claim of China is baseless. Philippine is winer.

 

[TaiShang]

It is provided for historic bay only, do you know that what is "bay". SCS is big sea. In fact nine dashed claim of China is conflicted with the term EZZ under UNCLOS conditions.

Nine dashed line predates UNCLOS.

UNCLOS cannot be in conflict with something that predates it.

 

[Rechoice]

Nine dashed line predates UNCLOS.

UNCLOS cannot be in conflict with something that predates it.

The Law of the Sea Convention defines the rights and responsibilities of nations with respect to their use of the world's oceans.

China's claim is rejected already by San Francisco conference in 1951..

 

[xunzi]

Have I not written clearly enough?
UNCLOS, and current international law applies only to demarcating sea borders, both territorial and military.

It is NOT for deciding territory. Hence, you won't have to give up any natural islands that happen to be there. You have to give up the claim to any territoriality beyond 12 nm, based on a treaty that you sign, and that you derive enormous benefits from. Rest can be a part of EEZ.

The above is also a response to you @TaiShang
Sure territory isn't included in UNCLOS.



That exemption is solely for territorial disputes. Not laying claim over a whole sea surface. And that is what I'm exactly predicting. That the court will refrain from making any judgement on ownership of natural islands, but will declare any territorial jurisdiction over sea as void. Free Sea Lanes is the foundational principle for UNCLOS.

chrome-extension://oemmndcbldboiebfnladdacbdfmadadm/http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_e.pdf

Somebody willing, can read this stuff. The complete draft of UNCLOS.

The court can't decide shit on EEZ, territorial sea until a clear maritime delimitation line is set. Fact of the matter is we have a triumph card and that is Taiping Island (Itu Aba). If Taiping generates 200nm EEZ, all of our built features are technically legal and our fisherman can legally fish there. We have the rights to escort illegal fishing in the area. The issue then become if Taiping is overlapping with Palawan's EEZ, in which the distance between Taiping and Palawan is 288 miles, then the effect states shall negotiate to delimit the overlapping water. In that case, the courts have no right to set delimitation space in overlapping water. That is the responsibility of effect states to negotiate. The Tribunal have no jurisdiction.