<tt id="6hsgl"><pre id="6hsgl"><pre id="6hsgl"></pre></pre></tt>
          <nav id="6hsgl"><th id="6hsgl"></th></nav>
          国产免费网站看v片元遮挡,一亚洲一区二区中文字幕,波多野结衣一区二区免费视频,天天色综网,久久综合给合久久狠狠狠,男人的天堂av一二三区,午夜福利看片在线观看,亚洲中文字幕在线无码一区二区
          Global EditionASIA 中文雙語(yǔ)Fran?ais
          Opinion
          Home / Opinion / Chinese Perspectives

          Analyzing the illegality and invalidity of the South China Sea Arbitration Awards via six 'whys'

          Keynote Speech at the Symposium on "South China Sea Arbitration Awards and International Law"

          By Ma Xinmin | chinadaily.com.cn | Updated: 2024-04-30 09:34
          Share
          Share - WeChat

          VI. Why is it absurd for the tribunal to rule that China's activities in the South China Sea are illegal?

          The arbitral tribunal mischaracterized the legal status of sea areas, erred in its factual findings, accepted inadmissible evidence, misinterpreted and misapplied the law. Consequently, its conclusion that China's related activities in the South China Sea violated the Convention's provisions or were illegal was based on entirely subjective speculation.

          First, the tribunal's conclusion that China's activities in the South China Sea were illegal was based on false facts and an illegal premise. The tribunal erroneously asserted that the relevant sea areas of the Nansha Qundao belonged to the exclusive economic zone or continental shelf of the Philippines. For example, the tribunal found that China's activities to affirm and safeguard its sovereignty and rights, as well as its resources management and exploitation activities in the South China Sea, violated the sovereignty rights of the exclusive economic zone and continental shelf of the Philippines. However, this decision was founded on the erroneous assumption that the relevant sea areas involved in China's activities fell within the Philippines' exclusive economic zone and continental shelf. China and the Philippines have not resolved their territorial issues or delimited their sea boundaries. Therefore, the basis for determining their respective claims is absent. As a result, the fundamental prerequisites for establishing the Philippines' claims do not exist. Hence, it is impossible to discuss whether the relevant sea areas are the exclusive economic zone and continental shelf of the Philippines, and it is completely untenable to argue that China's activities in the South China Sea are illegal based on this preposterous premise.

          Second, the tribunal seriously erred in its factual findings, accepted inadmissible evidence, misinterpreted and misapplied the law regarding China's various activities in the South China Sea. In its factual findings, the tribunal's conclusion that the fishing activities of Philippine fishermen gave rise to "traditional fishing rights" lacked a factual basis. In dealing with evidence, the tribunal was biased towards China's activities related to marine environmental protection in the South China Sea. It relied on a report by three experts who conducted a complex scientific assessment of the South China Sea marine environment in no more than 17 days, lacking first-hand empirical data. Additionally, the tribunal made numerous errors in interpreting and applying the law, including incorrectly applying "traditional fishing rights" to the legal régime of the territorial sea through Article 2(3) of the Convention. In short, the conclusion that China's activities in the South China Sea are illegal is entirely absurd.

          In conclusion, the arbitral tribunal in the South China Sea Arbitration egregiously exceeded its jurisdiction, shockingly abused and expanded its power, and seriously infringed on China's rights and interests, rendering the awards illegal and invalid from the beginning. These awards, marred by staggering procedural irregularities and wrongful adjudication, not only harm China but also undermine the common interests of all States Parties to the Convention and the international community at large; therefore, these awards are not worth the paper they are printed on. China neither accepts nor recognizes them, standing firmly in support of international fairness and justice, a stance believed to be backed by an increasing number of countries advocating for these principles.

          Ma Xinmin is director-general of the Department of Treaty and Law of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.

          If you have a specific expertise, or would like to share your thought about our stories, then send us your writings at opinion@chinadaily.com.cn, and comment@chinadaily.com.cn.

           

           

          |<< Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6   
          Most Viewed in 24 Hours
          Top
          BACK TO THE TOP
          English
          Copyright 1994 - . All rights reserved. The content (including but not limited to text, photo, multimedia information, etc) published in this site belongs to China Daily Information Co (CDIC). Without written authorization from CDIC, such content shall not be republished or used in any form. Note: Browsers with 1024*768 or higher resolution are suggested for this site.
          License for publishing multimedia online 0108263

          Registration Number: 130349
          FOLLOW US
          主站蜘蛛池模板: 欧美成人精品手机在线| 亚洲欧美在线观看品| 国产精品无码不卡在线播放| 久久精品成人无码观看不卡| 亚洲人成电影在线天堂色| 国产精品夜夜春夜夜爽久久小说 | 国产精品99中文字幕| 日韩精品福利视频在线观看| 欧洲一区二区中文字幕| 九九热99精品视频在线| 欧美老少配性行为| 亚洲欧洲日产国码高潮αv| 九九热在线免费播放视频| 亚洲VA欧美VA国产综合| 亚洲 制服 丝袜 无码| 丰满的熟妇岳中文字幕| 久久香蕉欧美精品| 亚洲国产系列| 国产旡码高清一区二区三区| 国产成人精品久久一区二| 国产综合色在线精品| 亚洲国产精品18久久久久久| 国产亚洲tv在线观看| 2020国产欧洲精品网站| 亚洲av色图一区二区三区| 国产精品中文字幕在线| 在线播放亚洲成人av| 国产成人午夜福利高清在线观看| 无码人妻aⅴ一区二区三区有奶水| 午夜短无码| 欧美丰满熟妇乱XXXXX网站| 亚洲老妇女一区二区三区| 国产无套护士在线观看| 精品国产丝袜自在线拍国语| 西西人体44WWW高清大胆| 一本色道婷婷久久欧美| 无码人妻视频一区二区三区| 纯肉高h啪动漫| 小泽玛利亚一区二区在线观看| 在线观看潮喷失禁大喷水无码| 中文有码字幕日本第一页|