内蒙古法学会新闻网

您现在的位置:内蒙古法学会新闻网 > 中国法学会要闻 >

中国法学会关于菲律宾共和国单方面提起的南海仲裁案的声明->胡立阳最新观点

  中国法学会关于菲律宾共和国单方面提起的南海仲裁案的声明

        对于菲律宾单方面提起仲裁和菲律宾南海仲裁案仲裁庭无视基本事实,罔顾基本法理,严重违背公平正义和法治原则,强行推进仲裁案的行径,中国法学会代表中国法学界、法律界郑重声明如下:

  中国法学会坚决支持中国政府不接受、不参与、不承认的一贯立场。无论是基于《联合国海洋法公约》(以下简称《公约》)的宗旨、原则和规定、国际社会公认的基本法理,还是基于基本的历史事实,菲律宾单方面提起仲裁和仲裁庭强行推进有关程序均是违法、无效的。

  本案仲裁庭滥用职权,肆意扩大自身管辖范围。中菲在南海的有关争议根本不适用《公约》规定的仲裁程序,双方协议选择了通过谈判协商解决争议的方法,并排除了第三方程序。菲律宾所提起的事项不属于《公约》解释与适用的争端,本仲裁事项的实质是岛礁主权和海洋划界问题,海域划界、历史性海湾或所有权、军事和执法行动等方面的争端已被中国政府依据《公约》于2006年声明明确排除在仲裁庭管辖范围之外。仲裁庭却对此置若罔闻,视而不见。

  《公约》旨在尊重国家主权的基础上建立海洋法律秩序,仲裁庭所作所为却严重背离了《公约》所确立的基本原则,无视中国在南海的主权和主权权利,无视菲律宾提起仲裁程序之前未履行双边谈判义务的事实,违反《公约》以谅解和合作的方式解决海洋法争端的精神;仲裁庭还对菲律宾和中国的立场采取双重标准,严重背离公平正义。

  中国对南海诸岛的长期开发经营和主权管辖历来为周边国家所承认,已具有习惯国际法基础;中国根据《开罗宣言》、《波茨坦公告》等国际法文件确定的二战后国际法秩序安排,恢复了对南海有关岛礁及海域行使主权及其他合法权益,维护和巩固了二战以来南海区域的国际法秩序。

  仲裁庭有意割裂海洋国际法秩序与整体国际法秩序的有机联系和统一性,是一种国际法治的倒退。仲裁庭完全不顾南海区域相关国家谈判解决争端的普遍愿望和《南海各方行为宣言》所确定的和平解决争端的进程,完全不顾中国和相关国家为解决南海有关争端问题所作的努力和达成的共识,执意作出错误裁决。该裁决不仅不能定分止争,而且进一步激化了矛盾,使争端解决更加复杂化,将破坏南海地区的和平与稳定。

  我们认为,菲律宾和仲裁庭所作所为助长了某些国家搅乱南海局势、阻挡南海地区和平发展趋势的险恶用心,是以仲裁名义导演的反公正、反法治的政治闹剧,中国法学法律界予以严厉谴责。我们呼吁,国际社会正确认识该仲裁案的非法性和危害性,并促请有关国家回到依据国际法原则谈判解决南海有关争端的正确轨道上来。

 

  China Law Society

  A Statement on South China Sea Arbitration Initiated by the Philippines

  With regard to the unilateral initiation of the South China Sea arbitration by the Philippines and the arbitrary decision by the Arbitral Tribunal to hear the arbitration case in disregard of basic facts, the principles of fairness and rule of law, the China Law Society (CLS) hereby makes the following statement on behalf of the Chinese legal community.

  CLS stands firmly by the consistent position of the Chinese Government of not accepting, participating in, or recognizing the aforementioned case. No matter judging by the purpose, principles and provisions provided for in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), or the basic principles of law generally acknowledged by the international community, or basic historical facts, it would all be illegal and invalid for the Philippines to unilaterally initiate the arbitration and for the Arbitral Tribunal to have pushed forward the relevant proceedings.

  The Arbitral Tribunal abused its authority and willfully expanded the scope of its jurisdiction. The arbitration procedure under UNCLOS is not applicable to the relevant disputes between China and the Philippines in the South China Sea. The two sides had agreed to settle the disputes through negotiations and consultations, and therefore excluded any third-party procedure. The Philippines' submissions do not fall within the interpretation and application of UNCLOS and are in essence related to territorial sovereignty and maritime delimitation. Furthermore, the Chinese Government's declaration in year 2006 on optional exception has explicitly excluded disputes concerning maritime delimitation, historic bays or titles, as well as military and law enforcement activities from the dispute resolution procedures of UNCLOS. The Arbitral Tribunal, however, chose to ignore and turn a blind eye to all this.

媒体焦点 MEDIA FOCUS