scholarly journals Unilateral Claim in Dispute of Island Over the South China Sea

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.

scholarly journals Remarks by David Freestone

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.

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

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.

The South China Sea

Asian Survey ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 455-477 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stein Tønnesson
Keyword(s):  
South China Sea ◽  
International Law ◽  
South China ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
The South China Sea ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
The South ◽  
Government Behavior ◽  
China Sea ◽  
The Law

The article looks at three ways in which international law has affected government behavior in the South China Sea. It has exacerbated disputes. It has probably curtailed the use of force. And it has made it difficult to imagine solutions that violate the law of the sea.

An International Law Perspective on Insular Features (Islands) and Low-tide Elevations in the South China Sea

2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 298-315 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ted L McDorman
Keyword(s):  
South China Sea ◽  
International Law ◽  
South China ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
The South China Sea ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
The South ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
China Sea ◽  
The Law

The numerous insular features (islands/rocks) and low-tide elevations (reefs, shoals, etc.) within the South China Sea have long been the centre of attention and dispute involving Brunei, China (the People’s Republic of China and the Republic of China (Taiwan)), Malaysia, the Philippines, and Vietnam. This contribution focuses on said maritime features from the perspective of the law of the sea. A general overview is provided of the international legal rules that apply to islands, rocks and low-tide elevations with reference to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, customary international law and international adjudications. The article then examines what the littoral states have said and done respecting the insular features in the South China Sea and offers some reflections in the context of the Philippine-China arbitration.

A Legal Analysis of China’s Historic Rights Claim in the South China Sea

2013 ◽  
Vol 107 (1) ◽  
pp. 124-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florian Dupuy ◽  
Pierre-Marie Dupuy
Keyword(s):  
South China Sea ◽  
International Law ◽  
South China ◽  
The South China Sea ◽  
Political Strategy ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
People's Republic Of China ◽  
The South ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
China Sea

The recent turmoil created by the competing sovereignty claims of several countries over islands and waters in the South China Sea has caused the resurgence of the concept of “historic rights.” Although the term historic rights (sometimes confusingly used in this context in combination with other germane notions, such as historic waters and historic title) has often been imbued with a certain degree of confusion and controversy in international law, it seems bound to play an important part inthe arguments brought by states claiming sovereignty in this region and, in particular, by the People’s Republic of China (China). The vagueness of the legal terminology used by China raises the issue of whether that very vagueness is being used as an element of political strategy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document