Hague tribunal ruling hints of eventual decision on PH case vs China - Carpio

From InterAksyon (Nov 6): Hague tribunal ruling hints of eventual decision on PH case vs China - Carpio



Map of the South China Sea showing China's claim in red and the EEZs of surrounding countries as defined by the UNCLOS in blue

The international tribunal hearing the Philippines’ case against China over disputed territory in the West Philippine Sea may have hinted of its eventual decision when it ignored China’s so-called nine-dash line, Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio said.

On October 30, the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague ruled that it has jurisdiction over the case, handing Manila a victory in the first-round issue of admissibility.

The tribunal has scheduled the hearing on the merits of the case from November 24 to 30 and is expected to hand down its final decision by mid-2016.

Discussing the ruling, Carpio, speaking at a forum in Quezon City Thursday, highlighted the section on the Philippines’ claim regarding Scarborough Shoal, which it called “merely a rock above water at high tide and incapable of sustaining human habitation of its own.  Thus, Scarborough Shoal is entitled only to a 12 nautical mile territorial sea, and not to an EEZ (exclusive economic zone) or ECS (extended continental shelf).”

To this, the tribunal ruled, “there is no sovereignty or sea boundary delimitation issue involved. Maritime entitlement is separate from maritime boundary delimitation.”

“There is also no geologic feature claimed by China or any other state with possible EEZ or ECS that reaches Scarborough Shoal,” it added.

Carpio said this means China’s nine-dash line “do(es) not generate maritime zones that can overlap with Philippine EEZ or ECS.  This implies that if Scarborough Shoal is merely a rock, the Philippines has a full 200 nautical miles EEZ in the northern sector, excluding territorial sea of Scarborough Shoal.”

“The nine-dashed line (is) totally ignored,” he said.

Beijing routinely outlines the scope of its claims with references to the nine-dash line, which takes in about 90 percent of the 3.5-million square kilometer South China Sea, which Manila calls the West Philippine Sea.

“I was just trying to give you the mindset of the tribunal,” the magistrate explained. “They don't really consider it as material in determining exclusive economic zone … This could be an indication of how they will rule -- the nine-dash line has no effect at all.”

The tribunal deferred ruling on several other claims of the Philippines, either because these involved the merits or because of possible overlapping EEZ and ECS claims in the disputed areas.

Scarborough Shoal, known as Huangyan Island in Chinese, became the focus of a confrontation between the two countries in 2012 when Beijing ordered its coast guard vessels to stop Philippine authorities from arresting Chinese fisherman allegedly poaching in the area.

The nine-dash line was first officially published on a map by China's Nationalist government in 1947 and has been included in subsequent maps issued under Communist rule, according to an earlier report by Reuters.

Carpio reiterated that activities by China to enforce the nine-dash claim violate the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the 2002 ASEAN-China Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea. Such activities threaten peace, security, and stability in the region.

In 2002, China, along with member-countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations agreed that the South China Sea dispute should be resolved “in accordance with universally recognized principles of international law, including the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.”

The UNCLOS grants each nation 200 nautical miles of EEZ.

Carpio acknowledged that even if the Philippines gets a favorable final ruling, compliance on the part of China is likely the next hurdle.

Nevertheless, he cited several precedents in which smaller nations took their case against powerful countries before international courts.

In the 1970s, Nicaragua sued the United States before the International Court of Justice over the latter’s support for contra rebels and deploying mines in the Latin American country’s harbors.

In 1986, the ICJ decided in favor of Nicaragua and ordered the US to pay damages.
Carpio said that, like China’s attitude toward the Philippine case, the US refused to participate in the ICJ proceedings.

Nicaragua filed a resolution before the UN every year demanding enforcement of the court’s decision, with the US wielding its veto power to reject the claim until the UN General Assembly urged the American government to pay up. The US has also been heavily criticized by the international community for not abiding by the ruling of the international court.

“If you look at the records, 97 percent of the cases came out saying that the parties to this dispute must abide by the ruling,” Carpio said.

He said that the Philippines is not alone in its battle against China, with fellow ASEAN countries and claimants Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei standing to gain from a favorable ruling on Manila’s case.

And, in the end, he added, “China needs the world to survive,” noting that Beijing needs to fulfill its plan of building the Maritime Silk Road, which will pass through South China Sea.

http://www.interaksyon.com/article/119812/hague-tribunal-ruling-hints-of-eventual-decision-on-ph-case-vs-china---carpio