| On 22 January 2013,the Philippines reckoned its compulsory arbitration in the Permanent Arbitration Tribunal under Annex VII to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea(hereinafter “UNCLOS”)on the occasion of the dispute in the Philippines.In accordance with the relevant provisions of international treaties such as the UNCLOS and the facts,the Permanent Arbitration Tribunal under Annex VII has no jurisdiction over the South China Sea Arbitration.But the tribunal still issued the Decision of the Republic of the Philippines v.The People's Republic of China on the jurisdiction and admissibility of the South China Sea issue(hereinafter "Jurisdiction Order")on 29 December 2015,and has initially ruled that it has jurisdiction over the case And promulgated the so-called final decision on 12 July 2016,supporting all requests for the Philippines.The Order of the arbitral tribunal is an abuse of power,which seriously violates the relevant provisions of the UNCLOS.China has also reaffirmed its non-participation,non-acceptance,non-recognition and non-implementation of the provisions of the UNCLOS,and condemned the indictment of the Philippines and the individual Western countries to criticize China,want to let our country do not comply with the international order of the charges,therefore,properly deal with the South China Sea arbitration case,to safeguard our international image is particularly important.This article includes the introduction,the main body of three chapters and conclusions.The first chapter is "an overview of the prerequisites for the determination of jurisdiction by the arbitral tribunal".The parties to the dispute must submit the dispute to the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal under Annex VII to the Convention and must meet the preconditions of articles 281,282 and 283 of the UNCLOS.This section provides a brief overview of the three prerequisites for the jurisdiction of the UNCLOS.Chapter II is the analysis of the main fallacy of the arbitral tribunal's decision on the priority issue.First,the arbitral tribunal's wrongful adjudication dispute relates to the interpretation or application of the Convention.The essence of the matter in the Philippines is the territorial sovereignty of the southern part of the island and does not involve the interpretation or application of the Convention,and the arbitral tribunal has ruled that fact.Second,there is no agreement in the meaning of Article 281 in the wrong decision of the arbitral tribunal.Negotiations to resolve the South China Sea dispute is an agreement between China and the Philippines through bilateral and multilateral treaties,and the arbitral tribunal passed the interpretation of the right to abolish the "Declaration of the South China Sea",the "Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation in Southeast Asia" and other bilateral The document is not an agreement in the sense of Article 281 of the Convention.Again,the arbitral tribunal mistakenly adjudicated the bilateral and multilateral treaties between China and the Philippines without excluding other procedures.Finally,the arbitral tribunal wrongly ruled that the Philippines had fulfilled its obligation to exchange views before submitting the dispute to arbitration.The third chapter is "China's response to the South China Sea ".This chapter is the foothold of the full text,but also the significance of this study lies.Section II sets out the exit mechanism of the Convention and the reasons why China should not withdraw from the Convention.Section II sets out China's specific measures to deal with the South China Sea arbitration case,including adherence,non-acceptance,non-recognition,non-implementation,The organization of experts to write the case to refute the arbitration case and to strengthen the real disaster in the Philippines and the waters of the real control;Section III further proposed China's response to the South China Sea arbitration case of other recommendations and measures.The Conclusion part is a summary to this thesis. |
PDF Full Text Request