Commentary on Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility of the Philippines-instituted Arbitration under Annex vii to the unclos: A Discussion on Fact-Finding and Evidence
{"title":"Commentary on Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility of the Philippines-instituted Arbitration under Annex vii to the unclos: A Discussion on Fact-Finding and Evidence","authors":"H. Tiantian","doi":"10.1163/23525207-12340017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Arbitral Tribunal in the arbitration instituted by the Philippines against China has issued its Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility. Juridical practices have something in common. The arbitral proceedings generally comprise two indispensable stages: findings of fact and application of law. The production, collection, and evaluation of evidence serve a particular purpose: they are meant to enable the adjudicative body to find facts. Thus, evidence is meant to prove or disprove facts. This review paper aims to discuss evidence and fact-finding process in the Award. As a general rule, international judges or arbitrators have wide discretion in the evaluation of evidence, but the guiding principle of the rules governing evidence should be the principle of fair trial. The problems of evidence evaluation and fact-finding revealed in the Award would be much serious at the merits stage, thus have negative implications for the Tribunal to deliver its decision impartially.","PeriodicalId":31142,"journal":{"name":"The Chinese Journal of Global Governance","volume":"2 1","pages":"96-128"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/23525207-12340017","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Chinese Journal of Global Governance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/23525207-12340017","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
The Arbitral Tribunal in the arbitration instituted by the Philippines against China has issued its Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility. Juridical practices have something in common. The arbitral proceedings generally comprise two indispensable stages: findings of fact and application of law. The production, collection, and evaluation of evidence serve a particular purpose: they are meant to enable the adjudicative body to find facts. Thus, evidence is meant to prove or disprove facts. This review paper aims to discuss evidence and fact-finding process in the Award. As a general rule, international judges or arbitrators have wide discretion in the evaluation of evidence, but the guiding principle of the rules governing evidence should be the principle of fair trial. The problems of evidence evaluation and fact-finding revealed in the Award would be much serious at the merits stage, thus have negative implications for the Tribunal to deliver its decision impartially.