Int’l court rules it has power to hear PH case over disputed South China Sea

An international tribunal ruled Thursday it had the power to hear a case brought by the Philippines over disputed islands in the South China Sea, in a move likely to trigger fury in Beijing.

The Philippines has insisted the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, which the Philippines and China have both ratified, should be used

to resolve the bitter territorial row over isolated reefs and islets, which has triggered growing international alarm.

But China, which refused to participate in the proceedings by arguing that the Permanent Court of Arbitration has no jurisdiction over the case, will disregard any findings by the international tribunal, Beijing said after the court decided to consider the action.

“We will not participate and we will not accept the arbitration,” Vice Foreign Minister Liu Zhenmin told reporters in Beijing.

“The ruling or the result of arbitration will not affect China’s position,” he added.

“It won’t affect China’s sovereignty rights and jurisdiction in the South China Sea, our rights will not be undermined.”

But as a veto-wielding permanent member of the UN Security Council, the stance will put Beijing in a difficult diplomatic position if the court rules that it has violated one of the UN’s own statutes.

Case reflects disputes “Reviewing the claims submitted by the Philippines, the tribunal has rejected the argument” by China that the “dispute is actually about sovereignty over the islands in the South China Sea and therefore beyond the tribunal’s jurisdiction,” the court said in a statement.

Instead, the court ruled the case reflects “disputes between the two states concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention” – something which falls within its remit.

China insists it has sovereign rights to nearly all of the South China Sea, a strategic waterway through which about a third of all the world’s traded oil passes.

The disputed waters – claimed in part by Vietnam, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Brunei – have also become the stage for a tussle for regional dominance between Beijing and Washington, the world’s two largest economic and military powers.

The international court, however, stressed that the ruling does not decide any aspect of the merits of the Parties’ dispute.

“In light of the foregoing, the Tribunal has concluded that it is presently able to decide that it does have jurisdiction The Tribunal has concluded, however, that its jurisdiction with respect to 7 other Submissions by the Philippines will need to be considered in conjunction with the merits. The Tribunal has requested the Philippines to clarify and narrow one of its Submissions,” the Tribunal, led by Judge Thomas A. Mensah, said in a statement.

“A further hearing will take place at the headquarters of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Peace Palace in The Hague. The hearing will provide an opportunity for the Parties to present oral arguments and answer questions on the merits of the Philippines’ claims and any remaining issues deferred from the jurisdictional phase,” it added.

Concurring with the decision were Judge Thomas A. Mensah of Ghana, Judge Jean-Pierre Cot of France, Judge Stanislaw Pawlak of Poland, Professor Alfred Soons of the Netherlands, and Judge Rüdiger Wolfrum of Germany.

PH welcomes decision President Aquino hailed the court’s swift decision that allows the Philippines to present the merits of the case, hoping the matter could be finally resolved next year.

“We are happy the tribunal declared it has jurisdiction over the case. In the press release I earlier read, the court may reach a decision on the second queries as early as next year,” Aquino said.

“It was a swift action. Even though the issue is complicated, we can truly say who would not be happy that the rule of law has prevailed,” he added.

Solicitor General Florin Hilbay, a member of the Philippine legal team who presented the position of the country that the Tribunal has jurisdiction over the case, welcomed the Court’s award as it paves the way for the presentation of the merits of the Philippines’ substantive claims.

“The decision represents a significant step forward in the Philippines’ quest for a peaceful, impartial resolution of the disputes between the parties and the clarification of their rights under UNCLOS,” Hilbay said in a text message to reporters.

Maritime entitlements

“This arbitration concerns the role of ‘historic rights’ and the source of maritime entitlements in the South China Sea, the status of certain maritime features in the South China Sea and the maritime entitlements they are capable of generating, and the lawfulness of certain actions by China in the South China Sea that are alleged by the Philippines to violate the Convention,” the Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs said in a statement.

Although the hearing on the merits of the Philippines’ case will not be open to the public, the Tribunal said that it will consider written requests from interested States to send delegations to attend the hearing as observers.

The territorial dispute between the Philippines and China escalated in 2012 following a stand-off between Chinese ships and the Filipino Navy. China then took control of Bajo de Masinloc, also known as Scarborough Shoal and a rich fishing ground, which is within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone.

China has also undertaken giant reclamation activities, raising fears it will use artificial islands to build new military outposts close to the Philippines and other claimants.

Ruling in 2016

The tribunal – set up in 1899 to resolve international disputes between countries – stressed Thursday its ruling did not yet go to the heart of the merits of the Philippines’s case, which was first filed in 2013.

A new hearing will now be held behind closed doors in The Hague, and a final ruling is not expected until next year.

The tribunal agreed it would take up seven of the 15 submissions made by the Philippines, in particular whether Scarborough Shoal and low-tide areas like Mischief Reef can be considered islands, as China contends.

It will also mull whether China has interfered with Philippine fishing activities at Scarborough Shoal.

But it set aside seven more pointed claims, mainly accusing Beijing of acting unlawfully, to be considered at the next hearing on the actual merits of Manila’s case.

In a July hearing in The Hague, Philippine Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario warned the integrity of UN maritime laws was at stake.

China’s behavior had become increasingly “aggressive” and negotiations had proved futile, del Rosario said.

Narrow down scope

But the court on Thursday also directed Manila to narrow down the scope of its final request that it should order that “China shall desist from further unlawful claims and activities.”

In Washington, a senior US defense official hailed the tribunal’s decision as victory for international law.

“We of course welcome the decision of the panel. This demonstrates the relevance of international law to the territorial conflicts in the South China Sea,” the defense official said.

“It demonstrates that sovereign claims are not necessarily indisputable and it shows that judging issues like this on the basis of international law and international practice are a viable way of at a minimum managing territorial conflicts, if not resolving them. We strongly welcome the activities of the panel.”

China has said it will not abide by any ruling. But the Philippines hopes a judgment in its favor will pressure China into making concessions.

The tribunal said Thursday’s ruling establishing its competence in the affair had been “unanimous” among the panel of five judges.

And it stressed the ruling “concerns only whether the tribunal has jurisdiction to consider the Philippines’ claims and whether such claims are admissible.” (With reports from Genalyn D. Kabiling and Madel S. Namit)