The Construction of China’s Artificial Island in the South China Sea : The Failure of the UNCLOS

Subject Manila's case against Beijing at the UNCLOS arbitral tribunal. Significance An international tribunal is expected this month or next to rule on a landmark case brought by the Philippines against China over the South China Sea issue. The decision will have far-reaching reverberations for the South China Sea, the Law of the Sea, and international law and politics in East Asia. US officials have expressed concern that it will exacerbate tensions in the region as China responds assertively to an adverse finding. Impacts The case may provide the long-awaited legal definition of an 'island' under the UNCLOS. The arbitration could 'legalise' China's nine-dash line. The tribunal is most likely to uphold Philippine claims in waters around Scarborough Shoal. It will probably reject Chinese assertions of 'historic rights', but some key findings will favour China.

Download Full-text

Remarks by David Freestone

Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting ◽

10.1017/amp.2019.45 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 112 ◽

pp. 4-7

Author(s):

David Freestone

Keyword(s):

South China Sea ◽

International Law ◽

South China ◽

The South China Sea ◽

Law Of The Sea ◽

The South ◽

China Sea ◽

State Practice ◽

The Unclos ◽

Arbitration Award

As a teacher of international law for more years than I care to admit, I have to declare at the start of my comments that I admire the South China Sea Arbitration Award greatly. It presents an interpretation of the provisions of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) on islands and rocks in a comprehensive, carefully considered and intellectually satisfying way. As my colleagues will doubtless point out, it does present problems relating to current existing state practice, but it does to my mind capture what the UNCLOS III drafters had in mind when the 1982 Convention text was put together.

Download Full-text

Legality of China’s Entitlements of Historic Rights beyond the UNCLOS in the South China Sea

The Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law ◽

10.1163/22134484-12340127 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 7 (2) ◽

pp. 249-261

Author(s):

Renyuan Li

Keyword(s):

South China Sea ◽

International Law ◽

South China ◽

The South China Sea ◽

The South ◽

China Sea ◽

Opposite Conclusion ◽

History Of ◽

The Unclos

Abstract In the Award of the South China Sea Arbitration, the Tribunal concluded that the Convention had superseded any historic rights in excess of the limits imposed by the Convention. Consequently, China’s claim of historic rights in the relevant part encompassed by the nine-dashed lines in the South China Sea exceeded the limits of China’s maritime entitlements under the Convention. But an analysis on the context and negotiation history of paragraph 8 of the preamble and issues related to historic rights in the Convention leads to an opposite conclusion. For the issues related to historic rights, the negotiation history of the Convention indicated that the Convention does not supersede any historic rights but left lacunae on related issues. According to the text and negotiation history of paragraph 8 of the Convention, historic rights were not superseded but were regulated by general international law.

Download Full-text

Judicial Fact-Finding Initiatives in the South China Sea Arbitration

Asian Journal of International Law ◽

10.1017/s2044251318000048 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 9 (1) ◽

pp. 20-30 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Jacqueline Joyce F. ESPENILLA

Keyword(s):

South China Sea ◽

South China ◽

The Philippines ◽

The South China Sea ◽

Legal Issues ◽

The South ◽

China Sea ◽

Article 9 ◽

Fact Finding ◽

The Unclos

AbstractThe historic Award in the South China Sea Arbitration gave much-needed clarity to many of the complex legal issues lying at the heart of the Philippines-China maritime dispute. Often overlooked, however, is the procedural significance of the case. This Comment submits that the South China Sea Arbitration represents a shift towards the use of judicial fact-finding initiatives as a means to overcome the adjudicatory challenges inherent to highly technical and scientific cases where one Party fails or refuses to participate. Even more striking, the Tribunal’s independently acquired facts appear to be the basis for the majority of its conclusions in the Award. This Comment highlights the appropriateness and practicality of the Tribunal’s actions in view of its extraordinary obligation under Article 9 of Annex VII of the UNCLOS to “satisfy itself” that the Philippines’ claims are “well-founded in fact and law”.

Download Full-text

Unilateral Claim in Dispute of Island Over the South China Sea

Sriwijaya Law Review ◽

10.28946/slrev.vol4.iss2.221.pp1-8 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 4 (1) ◽

pp. 1

Author(s):

Muhammad Nasir ◽

Wan Siti Adibah Wan Dahalan ◽

Harun Harun ◽

Phoenna Ath Thariq

Keyword(s):

South China Sea ◽

International Law ◽

South China ◽

The South China Sea ◽

The South ◽

Sovereign State ◽

China Sea ◽

International Regulations ◽

The Right ◽

The Unclos

In the unilateral claim, every determination of a territory is the right of a sovereign state and does not require agreement with international organizations or other countries. Especially regarding the borders of a country, many international regulations require a joint determination (bilateral or multilateral). The norm will impact the absence of responses from another country, or such a country does not react because its interests were not disturbed. China's unilateral statement over the South China Sea has tried to dominate globally, and at the same time, there has been no stabilization of peace. It will likely continue, expand, and have long-term adverse impacts on the regional economic and security situation in the region. China's unilateral claims in the South China Sea have also resulted in other warring countries, strengthening their presence and claims. This research uses normative approach which examines the unilateral claims under international law in the South China Sea especially in the UNCLOS 1982 and other related international law instruments. As a result, for China, it is necessary to improve its current position, at least it needs to negotiate in the future. Countries which is involved in the South China Sea should clarify and submit territorial claims and maritime rights under international law, including the UNCLOS 1982.

Download Full-text