Study On Jurisdiction Of Compulsory Conciliation Commission Under United Nations Convention On The Law Of The Sea

As an "Ocean Charter",the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea(UNCLOS)plays a crucial role in handling maritime disputes among nations.It has established a complicated and multi-layered system of dispute settlement mechanism that gives nations multiple choices based on respecting the will of the State Party,among which the compulsory conciliation proceedings under Section II of Annex V is undoubtedly one of the most special procedures.Newly-operated Timor Sea Compulsory Conciliation between Timor-Leste and Australia has brought about emphasis of compulsory conciliation mechanism,which was ignored before.Conciliation has long existed as a means of peaceful dispute settlement,but coercive conciliation seems rare.Unlike the overly voluntary general conciliation and over-enforcing arbitral proceedings under the framework of the UNCLOS,the compulsory conciliation has achieved combination of voluntariness and compulsion,possessing unique values.It is characterized by unilaterality in trigger and proceeding,finality in application sequence,preposition obligation of negotiation in good faith.As a last resort,the compulsory conciliation proceedings may be triggered by one side and the other is obligated to accept.During the process,the Conciliation Committee's non-binding proposals and reports can often help the parties to the dispute to open up new ideas and form new solutions to achieve win-win cooperation.The jurisdiction of compulsory conciliation has a series of rules,for example in terms of preconditions,it requires the procedure has not to be substituted by procedures in the general,regional or bilateral agreements that entailing binding decisions,also not to be excluded by the agreement of the peaceful means chosen by the parties to the dispute at their discretion,additionally the obligation of negotiation and exchange of opinions in good faith during the prior period.However,concerning the establishment of jurisdiction,it is noteworthy that the compulsory conciliation procedures have detailed and complex requirements on ratione materiae jurisdiction and have specific requirements on ratione temporis jurisdiction.Despite the small number of cases of compulsory conciliation,the recent compulsory conciliation between Timor-Leste and Australia concerning Timor Sea under the framework of the UNCLOS goes on well and is nearing completion.In the Commission's decision on competence,many detailed rules were analyzed,such as the interpretation of the "agreement" under Article 281,the timing of the entry into force of the UNCLOS under Article 298 and the fulfillment of earlier negotiations obligation as well as the confirmation of the range of disputes,etc.,which provide many valuable references for carrying out the process of compulsory conciliation in the future.Through the research and analysis of the conciliation procedure,especially its jurisdiction,it can be seen that the unique advantages of this mechanism,which are also inspiring our state the means to solve maritime disputes.China should follow the good faith principle and take positive attitude.On the one hand,under the framework of the UNCLOS,China can attempt to utilize the existing procedures for compulsory conciliation to solve the disputes relating to maritime delimitation between China and South Korea as well as China and Japan;on the other hand,outside the framework of the UNCLOS,China can learn from conciliation mechanisms and take conciliation as the major approach,combining various dispute settlement means,to establish a more vigorous and creative South China Sea Committee mechanism when necessary,in order to resolve the serious disputes over the South China Sea.