THE LEGAL CONSEQUENCES OF CHINA’S OBJECTION AGAINST PCA’S AWARDS ON INTERNATIONAL LAW

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 168
Author(s):  
Winardi Winardi ◽  
Chomariyah Chomariyah
Keyword(s):  
South China Sea ◽  
International Law ◽  
South China ◽  
International Community ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
China Sea ◽  
Legal Consequences

<p>South China Sea (SCS) dispute has been running for so long. The claimant states keeps endeavoring various resolutions to settle that dispute, either through reconcilement by their own choice or under several compulsory procedures provided by UNCLOS 1982 (Convention). Considering the content of UNCLOS 1982, one of the claimant states, Philippines, brought the dispute to PCA unilaterally against China which objected the jurisdiction along with its final award through official government statements and verbal notes. China was found violating International Law based on the principle of Pacta Sunt Servanda. Nine Dash Lines claimed based on Historic Rights are still retained by China. The procedures should lead to a permanent resolution by International Community to avoid any possible armed conflicts, including the likelihood that Historic Rights turned into Customary International Law.</p>

scholarly journals SOUTH CHINA SEA DISPUTE

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (02) ◽  
pp. 35-54
Author(s):  
Muhammad Rizky Prawira
Keyword(s):  
South China Sea ◽  
International Law ◽  
South China ◽  
Social Constructivism ◽  
Structural Realism ◽  
International Community ◽  
China Sea ◽  
The North ◽  
Nuclear Issue ◽  
Compliance Policy

During the past decade, China has been striving for a more prominent status in the international community. In doing so, China undertook several measures that indicate its willingness to become a supportive collaborator in the international politics, including taking a part in the Six Party Talks regarding to the North Korean nuclear issue as well as striving for the Market Economy Status (MES). However, the recent development of the South China Sea dispute seems to show a contrasting circumstance. As one of the claimant states, China showed a fairly aggressive gesture in expanding and exploiting the disputed territory. Recently, China even declared a refusal against the verdict from the international law which stated that China had no legal base in claiming the territory. This situation sparked a puzzle as the non-compliance against the international law seemed to be violating China�s on- going efforts to win the broader acceptance in the international community. Thus, using two different perspectives, namely structural realism and social constructivism, this study analyses puzzle and finds the contextual relevance behind China�s non- compliance policy. The overall findings show that the rational interest of pursuing the hegemony in the disputed region becomes the primary goal that China is pursuing beyond the interest of adhering to the international law.

Merits Award Relating to Historic Rights in the South China Sea Arbitration: An Appraisal

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xinmin MA
Keyword(s):  
South China Sea ◽  
Continental Shelf ◽  
International Law ◽  
South China ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
The South China Sea ◽  
Exclusive Economic Zone ◽  
The South ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
China Sea

AbstractThis paper provides an assessment of the Tribunal’s Award on the merits relating to the Philippines’ Submissions No. 1 and 2. First, it argues that the Convention is not the sole legal source of maritime rights. Second, the Tribunal erroneously infers from Article 311 that the Convention prevails over customary international law. Meanwhile, Article 293 does not terminate rules of general international law that are incompatible with the Convention. Third, the Tribunal, by deciding that historic rights under general international law have been superseded by the regimes of exclusive economic zone and continental shelf established under the Convention, fails to draw a distinction between the two separate legal regimes, namely the Convention and general international law. Fourth, as one of the “matters not regulated by the Convention”, historic rights should be governed by, and have been well established in, general international law.

Regional Customary International Law Related to China’s Historic Rights in the South China Sea

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 262-276
Author(s):  
Chenhong Liu
Keyword(s):  
South China Sea ◽  
International Law ◽  
South China ◽  
The South China Sea ◽  
The South ◽  
Fishing Rights ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Law System ◽  
China Sea ◽  
United Nations Convention

Abstract In the customary international law system, there exist general customary international law and regional customary international law. Based on the general practice and opinio juris of the States surrounding the South China Sea, China’s historic rights which conclude historic title to all the maritime features in the South China Sea, and historic fishing rights and navigational rights, are regulated by regional customary international law. Due to the parallel relationship between this regional customary international law and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), China’s historic rights should co-exist with the rights regulated by UNCLOS.

THE LAW-MAKING EFFECTS OF THE FAO DEEP-SEA FISHERIES GUIDELINES

2018 ◽  
Vol 67 (4) ◽  
pp. 801-832
Author(s):  
Lene Korseberg
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
South China Sea ◽  
International Law ◽  
Fisheries Management ◽  
South China ◽  
Deep Sea ◽  
International Community ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Substantive Content ◽  
Law Making

AbstractThe second half of the twentieth century saw major improvements in the legal regime for fisheries management. This notwithstanding, the deep seas remain largely unregulated under international law, until recently only being covered by the general environmental and management provisions found in UNCLOS. In light of this regulatory gap, this article evaluates the potential law-making effects, if any, of the FAO Deep-Sea Fisheries Guidelines, a voluntary instrument designed to provide States with a regulatory framework for the management of their deep-sea fisheries. It considers how the Guidelines may inform, interpret and influence the content of the general high-sea obligations in UNCLOS. Despite the vagueness and generality of those provisions, some indication of their substantive content has been given in recent decisions, particularly the South China Sea Arbitration. By assessing their compatibility, and their level of acceptance by the international community, this article argues that the FAO Deep-Sea Guidelines are beginning to have a law-making effect by providing an authoritative interpretation of the general high-sea obligations found in UNCLOS relating to deep-sea fisheries.

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.

South China Sea Islands: Implications for Delimiting the Seabed and Future Shipping Routes

1977 ◽  
Vol 72 ◽  
pp. 743-765 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hungdah Chiu
Keyword(s):  
South China Sea ◽  
International Law ◽  
South China ◽  
Sea Islands ◽  
China Sea ◽  
Marginal Sea ◽  
General Rules ◽  
The Law

Until recently few international law scholars and governments have paid much attention to the special sea law problems concerning mid-ocean archipelagos. The question of whether a group of islands can be considered as a unit in delimiting territorial sea has, according to most authorities, been adequately solved by general rules concerning the delimitation of the territorial sea of the mainland or island. The 1929 Harvard Draft on the Law of Territorial Sea contains no provision relating to groups of islands or archipelagos. Article 7 of the Draft provides that the territorial sea of islands should be measured in a similar way to that of the mainland. It is a contention of this article that no different rule should be established for groups of islands or archipelagos, except that, if the outer fringe of islands is sufficiently close to form one complete belt of marginal sea, then the waters within such a belt should be considered as territorial waters.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document