The Chinese Verdict

Tulica Bhattacharya reports the disregarding of the Philippine Arbitral Tribunal by the deeply concerned People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) in the 12th July white paper.

Releasing a powerful position paper on the 12th of July 2014, China’s stance on Philippines’ recent efforts for peaceful coexistence, seems to be firm. The nation has not only decided to disregard any claims made by Philippines, but “reiterated that it will neither accept nor participate in the arbitration, thus, initiated by the Philippines.”[1] With the Chinese government all set to boycott the verdict presented by the tribunal, PRC demands that its historic rights be met with due justice.

The position paper began with China reinstating a simple notion: The Arbitral Tribunal established has no jurisdiction over the case. Their argument stated that since the subject-matter of the arbitration deals with reinforcing territorial rights, the tribunal should act as an umbrella which unifies the historical significance, the regional importance, as well as the aquatic richness of the South China Sea. Presuming the tribunal to be incapable of doing the same, China instead pointed fingers at the Philippines for violating international law by “By unilaterally initiating the present arbitration”[1] . Breaching its obligation to use bilateral discussions for resolving the disputes, China shamed the Philippines for their deed. Furthermore, accusing Philippines of being well aware of the same, China alleged a cunning act of deceit. They stated that rather than ruling on the compatibility of the Chinese maritime claims, the Philippine argument impinges on misinterpretation of these claims and their true motives, which lies beyond the scope of the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

Thereafter, China liberally established the incompetence of the Convention in understanding the Chinese stance. They claimed indisputable sovereignty over the islands of South China Sea, stating that Chinese activities dated back 2,000 years ago. China also alleged Japan of illegally seizing parts of the islands, once the Japanese front claimed superiority in historical rights.

Next on the list of flaw-findings was disproving the Philippines’ Constitutional Law which indeed, pointed out the gaping holes in the Filipino argument. Article 1 of the 1935 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines stated "The Philippines comprises all the territory ceded to the United States by the Treaty of Paris concluded between the United States and Spain “...The Philippines comprises all the territory ceded to the United States by the Treaty of Paris concluded between the United States and Spain…”. This revokes few of the many islands that the Philippines claim, since, these islands never revealed their rarity to the United States before.

To conclude, the Chinese armed their legal battle with verbose arguments and threatening claims. Their mild air of superiority successfully gathered adequate skeletons locked in closets, with a few being their own. Despite the accusations and heightened misunderstandings between the two countries, the Chinese chose to disregard the tribunal in every possible way, much to the dislike of the Philippine end.

[1] - http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/zxxx_662805/t1217147.shtml

Image Courtesy: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/19/opinion/disputes-in-the-south-china-sea.html

(Edited by Shruthi Subramanian)