HIGH STAKES:   In its zeal to take on China's claims in the South China Sea, the Philippines has alienated itself
     
The official map of the Philippines labels the South China Sea as the West Philippine Sea and  includes Sabah.
By  initiating an arbitral proceeding against China, the Philippines 
has upped the ante in the South China Sea. Manila says it is left with 
no choice but to take Beijing to arbitration after exhausting all 
remedies. However, many see Manila's action as a desperate act -- a 
publicity stunt to regain international prestige following the 
Scarborough Shoal fiasco in April last year.
Manila's request for an arbitral award opens up a can of worms, 
especially when its Regime of Islands claim (to the Kalayaan Islands and
 Scarborough Shoal) under its 2009 Baseline Law is contestable under 
international law.
Incidentally, its new official map that has renamed the South China Sea
 as the West Philippines Sea has re-incorporated Sabah, which is sure to
 reopen old wounds.
People who live in glasshouses should not throw stones, as they will 
expose not only the throwers' hypocrisy but also vulnerability.
No one doubts that Manila is fed-up with Beijing's intransigence. 
Lately, the Philippines has mounted diplomatic and political offensives 
in the South China Sea in a hope to get the United States and the 
international community to sanction China. Unfortunately, following a 
rebuff by Washington, the offensive failed to undermine China, the 
Goliath who was close to former president Gloria Arroyo, now under house
 arrest.
As a domestic political agenda, Manila's unilateral legal proceeding is
 likely to be futile again. Its success record in international 
arbitration has been dismal. For example in 1927, the US, acting on 
behalf of Manila, failed to convince judge Max Huber that the island of 
Palmas belonged to the Philippines. The judge awarded the ownership of 
the island (now known as Miangas) to Indonesia, although the island is 
within the 1898 Treaty of Paris Limits.
In October 2001, the Philippines sought permission to intervene as a 
non- party in the case involving the sovereignty of Pulau Ligitan and 
Pulau Sipadan. the International Court of Justice (ICJ) rejected (14 to 
1) the request.
China, the world's second largest economy and a permanent member of the
 United Nations Security Council, has said no to arbitration 
proceedings. Without its consent, it is unlikely for the tribunal to 
act; furthermore, the tribunal may lack jurisdiction to hear the case.
Manila has insinuated that Beijing can no longer hide behind its 
declarations under Article 298 of the UN Convention on the Law of the 
Sea (UNCLOS). In 2006, China declared, "it does not accept any of the 
procedures provided in Section 2 of Part XV of United Nations Convention
 on the Law of the Sea with respect of all categories of disputes...", 
including sovereignty issues.
Manila says this proceeding against China is not over sovereignty. Yet, the notification statement implies the contrary.
Manila wants the proposed tribunal to determine the legality of China's
 nine-dash line of 1948 and to determine the legal status of 10 features
 that China has occupied in the South China Sea (mainly in the Spratlys)
 as either "islands or rocks". These issues are jurisdictional in 
nature. The nine-dash line relates to jurisdictional and sovereignty 
issues.
The Philippines brings the case to the tribunal under UNCLOS. Those 
familiar with jurisdictional claims in the South China Sea are aware of 
the nine-dash line, published in 1948. This means the line has preceded 
UNCLOS by thirty-four years; UNCLOS came into force in 1996.
The only way for UNCLOS to have jurisdiction over the case is to give 
it a retrospective power, which arguably constitutes an abuse of rights 
and goes against the legal principle of good faith (Article 300 of 
UNCLOS).
The unfortunate omission of the applicable law under Article 38 of the 
ICJ Statute in the notification statement has significantly weakened 
Manila's position.
I also find it puzzling for Manila to ask the tribunal to "require 
China to bring its domestic legislation into conformity with its 
obligations under UNCLOS".
On the diplomatic front, Manila has garnered zero support from the claimant parties.
Their silence results possibly from disagreement with the manner the 
Philippines handled a vital matter in the light of Statement on Asean's 
Six Point Principles on the South China Sea of July 20 last year.
Moreover, Manila's objection in May 2009 to the Joint submission to the
 UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf is still fresh in 
the minds of Hanoi and Kuala Lumpur.
Is Manila telling the world that it has broken ranks with Asean?
The way forward is not to break ranks but to mend fences with China.
by Dr BA Hamzah New Straits Times
Related posts/articles:
Philippines wants rearmed Japan to contain China 
Tensions in South China Sea: US won’t take sides...
Manila and ASEAN: Upping the ante on the South China Sea
Overhyping the South China Sea 
 


You definitely have writing skills. I like articles where complicated legal issues become more clear for readers. Would you like to write legal articles for Attorney Online? I can not pay for it, but you can promote legal services in your articles, nevertheless who provide these services, you or other lawyers. Moreover, good lawyers can submit for free their contacts to Attorney directory on my site or publish legal news and posts to attorney blog. By the way, I can write an interesting legal article to your blog.. I think, we have a lot of things to talk about.
ReplyDelete