WHERE’S CHINA? Philippine lead external counsel Paul Reichler (standing) confers with Solicitor General Florin Hilbay during round two oral arguments in the territorial dispute between the Philippines and China at the UN arbitral court in The Hague on Tuesday. The empty table is reserved for China, which has refused to participate in the proceedings. ZOILO VELASCO / CONTRIBUTOR
On day 1 of Round 2 of the South China Sea arbitration case in The Hague, the Philippine legal team told the United Nations arbitral court that China’s “historic claim over the nine-dash line” does not exist.
Its claim to the South China Sea has no basis in international law, the Philippines told the court in The Netherlands on Tuesday.
The court issued a statement early Wednesday, announcing it had “commenced the hearing on the merits and remaining issues of jurisdiction and admissibility” in the arbitration case initiated by the Philippines against China.
The hearings, which began 2:30 p.m. on Tuesday in The Hague (9:30 p.m. in Manila) at the Peace Palace, where the arbitral tribunal sits, were to end on or before Nov. 30.
Manila has called on the tribunal, which was established in 1899, to rule on the dispute, invoking the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos).
Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario led the 48-member Philippine legal team, which went into the hearing emphasizing that China’s claims to almost the entire South China Sea, represented on new Chinese maps by nine dashes encompassing about 90 percent of the 3.5-million-square-kilometer waterway, had no basis in Unclos.
In a dispatch from The Netherlands, deputy presidential spokesperson Abigail Valte quoted renowned international lawyer Paul Reichler as telling the tribunal that “China’s historic rights claim and how these purported historic rights, supposedly derived under the Unclos, in fact do not exist under the provisions of the convention.”
“Mr. Reichler mentioned that China has asserted exclusive rights over the areas covered by the nine-dash line and has deprived the Philippines of fishing and exploration activities,” Valte said.
China’s expansive claims have put it in conflict with those of the Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia, Vietnam and Taiwan. Beijing is a party to Unclos but has rejected the tribunal’s jurisdiction over its dispute with the Philippines.
“Our position is clear: We will not participate [in] or accept the arbitration,” the Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson, Hong Lei, told a regular press briefing in Beijing on Tuesday.
The Philippines brought the case in January 2013 after China seized Panatag Shoal (international name: Scarborough Shoal), a rich fishing ground off Zambales province well within Manila’s 360-km exclusive economic zone (EEZ), in June 2012.
Manila’s move angered Beijing, which set about building artificial islands on reefs in the Spratly archipelago, a group of about 100 islets, atolls and reefs in the middle of the South China Sea, to present the UN court with a fait accompli.
Loss of EEZ
China has since built artificial islands on seven reefs: Kagitingan (Fiery Cross), Calderon (Cuarteron), Burgos (Gaven), Mabini (John South), Panganiban (Mischief), Zamora (Subi) and McKennan (Hughes), all in the West Philippine Sea, part of the South China Sea within the Philippines’ EEZ.
According to Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonio Carpio, who has done an extensive study on the dispute, the Philippines will lose 80 percent of its EEZ, including Recto Bank (Reed Bank) and part of the Malampaya gas field of Palawan province, if China’s expansive claims in the South China Sea are allowed to stand.
Malaysia, he said, will be deprived of about 80 percent of its EEZ in Sabah and Sarawak facing the South China Sea, as well as most of its active oil fields in the same area.
He said Vietnam would lose about 50 percent of its EEZ and Brunei, 90 percent.
Indonesia, officially not a claimant in the South China Sea, has asked China to clarify its claims and threatened to take Beijing to court if those claims cover the Natuna Islands, whose surrounding waters comprise the largest gas field in Southeast Asia.
In a legal setback for China, the UN tribunal last month agreed to hear the case despite Beijing’s boycott, clearing the way for the Philippines to present the substance of its complaint.
At the opening of the Philippine presentation on Tuesday, Valte said another member of the Philippine legal team, Bernard Oxman, “tackled the unlawfulness of China’s claim to the South China Sea beyond its maritime entitlements under the Unclos and how it encroaches on the rights of coastal states like the Philippines.”
Peaceful resolution
Japan and Australia, which sent observers to The Hague hearings (see story on this page), have issued a statement expressing support for the Philippines’ effort to settle its territorial dispute by arbitration.
In a joint communiqué after the 6th Japan-Australia Foreign and Defense Ministerial Consultations, also known as 2+2 Meeting, in Sydney on Nov. 22, defense and foreign ministers from the two countries expressed strong concern over rising tensions in the region caused by China’s artificial island building in the South China Sea.
The ministers “reiterated their strong opposition to any coercive or unilateral actions that could alter the status quo in the South China Sea.”
They also “called on all claimants to halt large-scale land reclamation [and] construction for military purposes.”
The ministers noted the arbitration case brought by the Philippines against China invoking Unclos, and affirmed that decisions by the UN arbitral tribunal are “legally binding.”
They called on claimants in the South China Sea to “clarify and pursue” their claims in accordance with international law, including Unclos.
The Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) on Wednesday thanked Japan and Australia for the statement of support for the Philippine case.
“We welcome the consultations’ support for the rights of claimants in the South China Sea to resolve disputes peacefully, including through arbitration,” the DFA said in a statement.
Decision by June
The UN arbitral tribunal is expected to hand down a ruling by June next year.
Manila hopes for a ruling in its favor, which could put pressure on Beijing to rein in its territorial ambitions.
At the start of the proceedings in The Hague in July, Del Rosario told the tribunal that the very integrity of Unclos was at stake in the case. With a report from AFP