EXCLUSIVE: Carpio on South China Sea dispute

Summary

In this interview, a Justice discusses the implications of a tribunal ruling on jurisdiction in the South China Sea dispute, highlighting that the Philippines' case proceeds to the merits phase. The Justice emphasizes the tribunal's rejection of China's objections on sovereignty and maritime boundary delimitation, viewing the ruling as an initial victory. He also addresses the US Navy's freedom of navigation operations, the potential for China to adopt the US position on maritime transit, and the importance of international law in resolving territorial disputes, stressing the need for a peaceful resolution through arbitration.

Takeaways

• 📜 The tribunal's ruling on jurisdiction means the case will proceed to the merits phase, where the Philippines will present evidence against China's claims in the South China Sea.
• 🏆 The initial victory for the Philippines is significant as it allows the tribunal to consider the legality of the 'Nine-Dash Line' and the status of certain geological features.
• 🔍 The tribunal has jurisdiction on seven submissions, while the remaining seven are reserved for consideration after the merits are determined, indicating the complexity and interconnection of the issues.
• 🇨🇳 China's objections to the proceedings, based on sovereignty and maritime boundary delimitation, were rejected by the tribunal, which found the case does not involve these issues.
• 🗣️ The Philippines' legal team believes they have answered all questions from the tribunal satisfactorily, both orally and in writing, contributing to the favorable ruling.
• ⛽️ The halt of oil exploration at Recto Bank due to the arbitration case indicates the importance of the tribunal's decision on maritime entitlements.
• 🚢 The US Navy's freedom of navigation operations within 12 nautical miles of Subi Reef is a demonstration of the US's stance on international waters, separate from the Philippines' case.
• 🌏 China's inconsistent behavior in international waters, such as sailing through the Mediterranean without permission, highlights the need for a unified approach to maritime law.
• 🤝 The territorial dispute in the South China Sea remains unresolved, as China refuses compulsory arbitration, and a regional agreement similar to the Pact of Bogota is suggested for peaceful resolution.
• 🏝️ The South China Sea dispute is not just about resources but also about China's assertion of power and its implications for international law and norms.
• 🕰️ The tribunal's decision is expected by mid-2016, with the Philippines' legal team confident in their preparedness to defend their claims in the merits phase.

Q & A

What does the tribunal's ruling on jurisdiction mean for the Philippines?

The tribunal's ruling on jurisdiction means that the proceedings will continue on the merits, allowing the Philippines to present its evidence on why the nine-dash lines are void and certain geologic features are entitled to only 12 nautical miles instead of 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zones.

Can the tribunal's decision on jurisdiction be considered a victory for the Philippines?

Yes, the tribunal's decision can be considered an initial victory for the Philippines as it allows the case to proceed to the merits phase, which is what the Philippines wanted.

What is the significance of the seven submissions that the tribunal reserved consideration for?

The seven submissions are significant because they are intertwined with the merits of the case, and the tribunal's decision to reserve consideration indicates that these issues cannot be decided without understanding the factual context, which has not yet been presented.

How did the Philippines' position on the tribunal deciding jurisdiction and merits together affect the proceedings?

The Philippines' position influenced the tribunal's approach to bifurcate the proceedings, having a separate hearing on jurisdictional issues due to China's position paper on jurisdiction, which led to the current situation where some issues are reserved for later consideration.

What are the two principal objections by China on jurisdiction that the tribunal addressed?

China's two principal objections were that the Philippines raised sovereignty issues and involved maritime boundary delimitation, which China claimed should not be subjected to compulsory arbitration. The tribunal rejected these objections, stating the case does not involve sovereignty issues or maritime boundary delimitations.

How did the US Navy's actions affect the arbitration case?

The US Navy's actions, sailing within 12 nautical miles of Subi Reef, were part of their freedom of navigation operations and do not directly influence the arbitration case. However, such actions reflect the broader international stance on freedom of navigation beyond territorial seas.

What is the difference between the territorial dispute and the maritime dispute in the South China Sea?

The territorial dispute involves claims over land and sovereignty, while the maritime dispute concerns the rights and entitlements under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), such as exclusive economic zones and continental shelves.

Why is the Code of Conduct (COC) in the South China Sea different from a dispute settlement mechanism?

The COC is intended to regulate conduct at sea to prevent conflicts, whereas a dispute settlement mechanism under UNCLOS is designed to resolve maritime entitlements and territorial disputes through legal processes like arbitration.

What is the expected timeline for the tribunal's ruling on the merits of the case?

The tribunal is expected to deliver its ruling on the merits by mid-2016, based on the typical timeline of four to six months from the case submission for decision.

How does the Philippines plan to ensure China honors the tribunal's ruling if it goes against China's interests?

The Philippines plans to seek international community support to convince China to abide by the ruling, leveraging China's desire to be seen as a responsible member of the international community and its reliance on global trade and cooperation.

What is the role of the G7 and ASEAN in supporting the arbitration process?

The G7 and ASEAN have expressed their support for the arbitration process as a peaceful means of dispute resolution, and they expect all parties involved to respect the tribunal's decision once it is rendered.