Eigtheenth Sapru House Lecture: South China Sea/ West Philippine Sea Dispute
The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
-
Upload
faye-cience-bohol -
Category
Documents
-
view
220 -
download
0
Transcript of The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
1/36
Philippine Case againstChinas Claims in the West
Philippine Sea
Faye Cience C. Bohol2ndBlock 3
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
2/36
PERTINENT JUDICIAL BODIES
AND LAWS
ITLOS
An independent and diverse body of 21 judges
who are experts in maritime law.
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the
Sea (UNCLOS)
The underlying and most pertinent body of
legislature that is most applicable in maritime
boundary disputes.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
3/36
PERTINENT JUDICIAL BODIESAND LAWS
Section 2 of Part XV, Art. 286 of the UNCLOS
If States have a disagreement with regards to
the interpretation of a certain aspect of
UNCLOS and they do not reach an agreementvia normal negotiations, one State can submit
the dispute unilaterally to a court/tribunal for
review.
This process is known in the legal community as
the Compulsory Dispute Settlement (CDS)
system.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
4/36
PERTINENT JUDICIAL BODIESAND LAWS
Annex VII Arbitration under UNCLOS
A rather unique feature of UNCLOS is that it allows, under
certain conditions, a State Party to bring another State
Party to arbitration even without the latters consent. This is
allowed under Annex VII when States Parties are unable to
settle a dispute by negotiation, third party resolution or other
peaceful means.
The absence of a party or failure of a party to defend its case
shall not constitute a bar to the proceedings.
An Annex VII arbitral tribunal is composed of five members
free to determine its own procedure. Three members are
jointly selected by the convening parties of the dispute. The
remaining two are unilaterally appointed by each party
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
5/36
Dispute Concerning the Delimitation ofthe Maritime Boundary between
Bangladesh and Myanmar in the Bay
of Bengal(Case No.16 of ITLOS)
An appropriate precedent to the Philippine case against
Chinas claims in the West Philippine Sea.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
6/36
Dispute Concerning On 14 March 2012, the International Tribunal for the
Law of the Sea (ITLOS) released its case judgement.
The first maritime boundary case for ITLOS.
Border delimitation between modern-day Bangladeshand Myanmar re-emerged 30 years after the respective
delegates of each country signed the Agreed M inutes
between the Bangladesh Delegation and the Burmese
Delegation regarding the Delimitation of the Maritime
Boundary between the Two Countr ies(the 1974 Agreed
Minutes) on 23 November 1974.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
7/36
Dispute Concerning Jared Bissinger, a research fellow at the National Bureau
of Asian Research, argues that the dispute resurfacedbecause of two primary factors: new discoveries ofhydrocarbon gas reserves in the Bay of Bengal and
increased demand for natural gas in both countries.
The salient points of the 2008 Agreed Minutes concernthe classification of islands, in accordance with Article121 of UNCLOS.
According to Article 121 UNCLOS, only islands that areable to sustain human habitation or economic life of theirown would be subject to the Convention in considerationsdealing with EEZ and continental shelf.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
8/36
Dispute Concerning It was proposed that the area of land known as St. Martins
Island be considered as an island, in accordance with Article 121
of UNCLOS (UNCLOS 1982). However, Oyster Island off the
coast of Myanmar would not be considered an island, because it
was deemed uninhabitable due to its lack of fresh water and itsinability to sustain economic life or any permanent population.
On 17 October 2008, two Myanmar Navy vessels escorted four
survey ships to begin exploratory drilling approximately 50
nautical miles southwest of St. Martins Island in the contested
area. Bangladesh responded by calling for a suspension of
Myanmars exploratory drilling until the delimitation of
maritime boundaries had been determined, and also threatened
the use of force against Myanmar with the dispatch of three
Bangladesh Naval vessels.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
9/36
Dispute Concerning The lack of any resolution led Bangladesh to pursue third-
party arbitration in accordance with Annex VII UNCLOS
in October 2009.
However, Myanmar chose not to settle the dispute underAnnex VII, but opted rather for arbitration through ITLOS
and concurrent bilateral negotiations.
Nevertheless, Myanmar and Bangladesh decided to pursue
a settlement through ITLOS. It is worth noting that in unrelated Annex VII arbitration
between India and Bangladesh in 2010, both parties failed
to agree on the three joint members, but bilateral
negotiations still ensued.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
10/36
Dispute Concerning
Legal Proceedings
To initiate the legal proceedings under ITLOS, both
countries had to submit by declaration, according to
Article 287 paragraph 1, UNCLOS, that it accepts the
jurisdiction of the International Tribunal for the Lawof the Sea for the settlement of the dispute between the
Union of Myanmar and the Peoples Republic of
Bangladesh relating to the delimitation of maritime
boundary between the two countries in the Bay of
Bengal.
According to ITLOS, the maritime area in dispute was
283,471 square kilometres.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
11/36
Dispute ConcerningLegal Proceedings
Submission of Territorial Sea Delimitation shows the
initial respective proposed demarcations from
Bangladesh and Myanmar. Clearly, Myanmars
proposed demarcation attempted to secure the naturalgas deposits where the October 2008 exploratory
drilling and subsequent stand-off occurred southwest of
Bangladeshs St. Martins Island.
In oral arguments during the September 2011 hearing,the Bangladesh delegation argued that points 1 to 7
submitted to ITLOS coincided with both the 1974 and
2008 Agreed Minutes.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
12/36
Dispute ConcerningLegal Proceedings
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
13/36
Dispute ConcerningLegal Proceedings
Rather than seeing them as binding agreements, Myanmar
stated that the 1974 and 2008 Agreed Minutes served only
as a record of issues discussed, rather than a finalized
resolution.
Bangladesh submitted affidavits from Bangladeshi
fishermen and naval officers as evidence of the informal
boundary that they believed had existed since 1974.
ITLOS ruled that this failed to meet the requirements of atacit or de facto agreement because the submitted affidavits
reflect fishermens opinions and naval officers bias.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
14/36
Dispute ConcerningLegal Proceedings
The test for historical tacit or de facto agreement in Article
15 UNCLOS states:
Where the coasts of two States are opposite or adjacent to
each other, neither of the two States is entitled, failingagreement between them to the contrary, to extend its
territorial sea beyond the median line every point of which
is equidistant from the nearest points on the baselines from
which the breadth of the territorial seas of each of the twoStates is measured. The above provision does not apply,
however, where it is necessary by reason of historic title or
other special circumstances to delimit the territorial seas of
the two States in a way which is at variance therewith.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
15/36
Dispute ConcerningLegal Proceedings
Demarcation involved a three-step process: first,equidistant lines are drawn based on any relevantcircumstances and are taken into consideration inaccordance with Article 15 of UNCLOS.
While the first step is more objective, the second stepinvolves taking into consideration the concavity of coasts,island presence, relative coastal length andconsiderations relating to economic resources, fisheries,
security concerns and navigation. This second stepconsiders those relevant factors in making adjustments toensure an equitable solution.
Lastly, a test for disproportionality is made to reaffirm
the equitable solution.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
16/36
Dispute ConcerningLegal Proceedings
In the absence of a pre-existing and legally-binding agreement,
the Tribunal then looked to determine if any historic title or
other special circumstances were relevant to this specific case.
The Tribunal determined, with no contest from either party, that
no historical titles were relevant to this case.
The Tribunal opted for the middle ground. It awarded St.
Martins Island its own 12 nautical mile territorial sea, but did
not allow for its own relative EEZ or continental shelf.
The Tribunal made a judgement on the delimitation of theterritorial waters. It further judged that the EEZ would follow
the natural prolongation of the demarcation line on a 215 degree
angle (relatively perpendicular to the Myanmar coast) and
extending to 200 nautical miles.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
17/36
Dispute ConcerningLegal Proceedings
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
18/36
Dispute ConcerningLegal Proceedings
Lastly, the Tribunal considered continental shelf claims
beyond 200 nautical miles. Myanmar contested that the
Tribunal did not have the jurisdiction to make the
stated judgement. However, the Tribunal referred toArticles 76 and 83 of UNCLOS, which explicitly define
continental shelf and specifically denote clauses for
entitlement beyond 200 nautical miles.
In the end, both Myanmar and Bangladesh willinglyaccepted the Tribunals decision and both have
proceeded with oil and gas exploration partnerships.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
19/36
The Philippine Territorial Case
against ChinaInvolving the West Philippine
Sea
Chinas nine-dash line claim on the South ChinaSea covers nearly all of the West Philippine Sea.
Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei also lay claim to
potentially rich territories in the South China Sea.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
20/36
The Philippine Territorial
THE WEST PHILIPPINE SEA DISPUTE MAP
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
21/36
The Philippine Territorial The Philippines has exhausted almost all political and
diplomatic avenues for a peaceful negotiated settlement of itsmaritime dispute with China, but to no avail.
On 22 January 2013, the Philippines formally conveyed toChina the Philippine Notification and Statement of Claimthat challenges before the Arbitral Tribunal the validity ofChinas nine-dash line claim and to desist from unlawfulactivities that violate the sovereign rights and jurisdiction ofthe Philippines under the UNCLOS.
China rejected the UN arbitration. It urges the Philippines toget back to bilateral negotiations to settle the dispute.
The Notification initiated the arbitral proceedings underArticle 287 and Annex VII of UNCLOS. The proceedingscontinue despite Beijings refusal to participate in them.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
22/36
The Philippine Territorial The Philippines is requesting the Tribunal to, among others:
1. Declare that Chinas rights to maritime areas in the SCS,
like the rights of the Philippines, are established by
UNCLOS, and consist of its rights to a Territorial Sea and
Contiguous Zone under Part II of UNCLOS, to an EEZ
under Part V, and to a Continental Shelf under Part VI
2. Declare that Chinas maritime claims in the SCS based on its
so-called nine-dash line are contrary to UNCLOS and invalid
3. Require China to bring its domestic legislation into
conformity with its obligations under UNCLOS; and
4. Require China to desist from activities that violate the rights
of the Philippines in its maritime domain in the WPS.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
23/36
The Implications of the Disputebetween Bangladesh and
Myanmar in Philippine Case
against Chinas Claims in the
West Philippine Sea
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
24/36
The Implications Bissingers identification of the prospect of natural gas
exploration as the proximate cause leading to the re-emergence of the dispute between Bangladesh andMyanmar has similarities with the most recent April 2012
standoff between Chinese and Philippine vessels over thedisputed Spratly Islands in the South China Sea.
ITLOS judges, who ruled the proceeding betweenBangladesh and Myanmar, are field experts in both the
maritime scientific and legal aspects necessary toadjudicate the maritime boundary demarcation case.Therefore, this case could set a precedent for the disputeover the territoriality of the South China Sea.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
25/36
The Implications Unlike the Myanmar-Bangladesh Bay of Bengal
ITLOS dispute, the South China Sea issue isinherently more complex in that China, Taiwan,Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, and the Philippines
have overlapping claims. However, all parties to the South China Sea dispute
are ratified signatory members to UNCLOS(though Taiwan falls under Chinas membership).
Challenges arise in that, although the relevantcountries are all members of UNCLOS, accordingto Article 287 UNCLOS, they must each declareITLOS jurisdiction in settlement of the dispute.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
26/36
The Implications China, which has a great deference for bilateral negotiations, is
averse to third-party settlements especially multilateral ones.
When China joined UNCLOS in 1996, it explicitly rejected all
four forms of adjudication explicitly stated in Article 298
UNCLOS, including ITLOS, ICJ, ad hoc arbitration, and
special arbitral tribunal. However, as with the Myanmar-Bangladesh case, bilateral
negotiations could also continue in parallel to Tribunal
proceedings.
ITLOS judges justified the three-step procedure as thefoundation for the resolution of further maritime boundary
claims. One should not try to reintroduce other methods of
delimitation when implementing the equidistance/relevant
circumstances rule. It would amount to reintroducing the very
elements of subjectivity progressively reduced over the years.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
27/36
The Implications Article 15 UNCLOS would also be relevant to South China
Sea resolution in that, unlike in the Myanmar-Bangladeshcase, which did not have historical ties nor special
circumstances, the South China Sea dispute likely will.
The Peoples Republic of China has referenced its historical
maritime charts that show the 1947 Republic of Chinasterritory in an eleven-dashed line that extends into the EEZ
of multiple countries and includes both the Paracel and
Spratly Islands. It is peculiar to note that this issue also
increases in complexity as the PRC references only a nine-dashed line in its current claims, omitting two dashes in the
Gulf of Tonkin.
It is likely, that other countries may also submit evidence to
support historical claims to islands in the South China Sea.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
28/36
The Implications Judge Wolfrums recommendation for clarifying special
circumstances in regards to the definition andclassification of islands under Article 121 UNCLOS willbe of particular importance in the Spratly Islands claims.
However, this case does add legal precedence in theTribunals conclusion that Oyster Island should not beconsidered an Island, according to Article 121 UNCLOS,because it has no permanent population, cannot sustain
life, and has no economic activities. Certain rocks and reefs in the South China Sea, most
likely, also would not classify as islands under Article121 UNCLOS. This has significant implication in dealing
with the EEZs of the claimants.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
29/36
The Implications As for the cases implications for future maritime
disputes, ITLOS has set precedence in adjudicating its
first maritime boundary claim.
Its relatively light docket and concomitant expediencyin adjudication, as well as expertise in maritime law,
are hallmarks for its value as an international legal
body for resolving disputes of this nature.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
30/36
CHALLENGES TO THE
INTERNATIONAL PROCEEDING
INVOLVING THE Philippine Caseagainst Chinas Claims in the
West Philippine Sea
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
31/36
Scope of ITLOS Jurisdiction
The viability of the Philippines entire case depends on
how it has phrased its dispute, what aspects of
interpretation of UNCLOS it is challenging, and
whether or not the ITLOS tribunal determines it hasthe jurisdiction to rule on any of the points that the
Philippines is challenging.
UNCLOS does not give ITLOS the power to directly
review sovereignty or maritime delimitations disputes.ITLOS can only review disputes with regards to
INTERPRETTATION AND APPLICATIONS of
UNCLOS.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
32/36
Points of Dispute that the
Philippines Brought Forth1) Can the 9-dash line serve as basis for valid maritimeclaims in the South China Sea?
This argument assumes China is taking its most expansiveinterpretation of the 9-dash line, claiming sovereignty overnot only the land features but also exclusive rights to allsurrounding waters and therein-contained resources.
This however is an inaccurate premise, as China has notofficially claimed the 9-dash line. Rather, it is a legallyambiguous line whose interpretation is hotly debated evenwithin Chinas domestic law and scholarship.
The Philippines is trying to beat to the chase and get ITLOSto pre-emptively rule out the legality of the 9-dash line. Someexperts believe that the tribunal can potentially claimjurisdiction to review this point.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
33/36
Points of Dispute that thePhilippines Brought Forth
2) Island status of low-tide elevations in the Spratlys andineligibility for territorial sea
UNCLOS contains certain clauses on what defines a land
feature as an island, an important determination because it
decides if a land feature can generate 12 nautical miles (n.m.)of territorial sea and/or 200 n.m. of an EEZ.
This first requirement for a land feature to qualify as an
island is that it must be above-water in high tide. The
Philippines asserts that certain disputed low-tide features inthe Spratlys, specifically Mischief Reef, McKennan Reef,
Gavin Reef, and Subi Reef, can NOT qualify as islands or
rocks and therefore have no territorial seas, even if the
occupying Claimant constructed above-tide infrastructure onthe feature.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
34/36
Points of Dispute that thePhilippines Brought Forth
However, a big counterargument is that even if
these features dont qualify as islands on
their own, they still lie within the territorial seas
of larger disputed land features that can beclaimed as islands.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
35/36
Points of Dispute that thePhilippines Brought Forth
3) Island status of high-tide elevations in theSpratlys and ineligibility for EEZs The second requirement for a land feature to qualify as
an island that can support a 200 n.m. EEZ is that the
land feature must be capable of supporting humanhabitation and/or independent economic activity.Otherwise, the feature is just a rock and can onlyqualify for 12 n.m. of territorial waters.
With this point, the Philippines is asking ITLOS to rule
whether or not a land feature occupied by a Claimantwho has built infrastructure on them to supportlife/economic activity is sufficient to deem it more than arock. The features specifically in question areScarborough Shoal, Johnson South Reef, Cuarteron
Reef, and Fiery Cross Reef.
-
7/29/2019 The Dispute between Philippines and China Concerning Territorial Claims in the West Philippine Sea
36/36
Points of Dispute that thePhilippines Brought Forth
Same as above, the complication in this line of
argument is that these land features can fall in
to the 200 n.m. EEZ of other larger features
that could be islands making the argumentagain, moot.