<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: 97人妻蜜臀中文字幕| 国产在线观看免费人成视频 | 日韩高清在线亚洲专区国产| 国产乱子伦农村xxxx| 九九re线精品视频在线观看视频| 一卡二卡三卡四卡视频区| 超碰成人人人做人人爽 | av中文字幕国产精品| 久久亚洲欧美日本精品| 宅宅少妇无码| 国产精品午夜福利免费看| 伊人久久综合无码成人网| 成人无号精品一区二区三区| 亚洲人成小说网站色在线| 日韩精品中文字幕综合| 久久久久免费看成人影片| 天天夜碰日日摸日日澡性色AV| 国产麻豆放荡av激情演绎| 午夜免费视频国产在线| 国产午夜视频在线观看| 欧美国产精品不卡在线观看| 国产精品亚洲色婷婷99久久精品| 噜噜久久噜噜久久鬼88| 日本经典中文字幕人妻| 亚洲av成人在线一区| 神马影院伦理我不卡| 免费无码肉片在线观看| 91香蕉视频在线| 国产日韩一区二区在线| 中文字幕在线精品国产| 日韩成人性视频在线观看| 久久996re热这里只有精品无码| 国产粉嫩系列一区二区三| 中文字幕第一页国产| 亚洲精品国产综合久久一线| 在线观看成人永久免费网站| 亚洲欧洲色图片网站| 加勒比亚洲视频在线播放| 免费乱理伦片在线观看| 中文有码字幕日本第一页| 放荡的美妇在线播放|