{"title":"《南海仲裁案裁决》与和平解决争议方案","authors":"T. Schoenbaum","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2931150","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"After the Philippines contested Chinese claims and actions in the South China Sea, a five-man panel of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016 handed down a judgment that is surely the most important set of jurisprudential rulings in the modern history of the international law of the sea. The tribunal's judgment provides convincing interpretations of many UNCLOS articles that are important, not only in the context of the South China Sea, but generally in other maritime areas as well. The tribunal's judgment enhances freedom of navigation in ocean areas and provides guidelines for enforcing international law to protect the marine environment. \nBut the tribunal's judgment is unlikely to have much effect with regard to settlement of the South China Sea disputes. Although China technically is bound by the judgments of the tribunal, China did not participate in the proceeding and will never expressly affirm the rulings' correctness. The paper puts forth a three-point plan to allow China to save face in this controversy. It is hoped that taking these steps the tribunal's important rulings may be accepted for what they are—the basis for a settlement of the South China Sea controversy.","PeriodicalId":106511,"journal":{"name":"AARN: Peace & Reconciliation (Sub-Topic)","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The South China Sea Arbitration Decision and a Plan for Peaceful Resolution of the Disputes\",\"authors\":\"T. Schoenbaum\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2931150\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"After the Philippines contested Chinese claims and actions in the South China Sea, a five-man panel of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016 handed down a judgment that is surely the most important set of jurisprudential rulings in the modern history of the international law of the sea. The tribunal's judgment provides convincing interpretations of many UNCLOS articles that are important, not only in the context of the South China Sea, but generally in other maritime areas as well. The tribunal's judgment enhances freedom of navigation in ocean areas and provides guidelines for enforcing international law to protect the marine environment. \\nBut the tribunal's judgment is unlikely to have much effect with regard to settlement of the South China Sea disputes. Although China technically is bound by the judgments of the tribunal, China did not participate in the proceeding and will never expressly affirm the rulings' correctness. The paper puts forth a three-point plan to allow China to save face in this controversy. It is hoped that taking these steps the tribunal's important rulings may be accepted for what they are—the basis for a settlement of the South China Sea controversy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":106511,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AARN: Peace & Reconciliation (Sub-Topic)\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AARN: Peace & Reconciliation (Sub-Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2931150\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AARN: Peace & Reconciliation (Sub-Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2931150","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
摘要
在菲律宾对中国在南中国海的主张和行动提出质疑后,常设仲裁法院(Permanent Court of Arbitration)的一个五人小组于2016年做出了一项判决,这无疑是现代国际海洋法历史上最重要的一套法理裁决。仲裁庭的判决对《联合国海洋法公约》的许多重要条款提供了令人信服的解释,这些条款不仅在南中国海的背景下重要,而且在其他海域也普遍重要。仲裁庭的裁决加强了海洋地区的航行自由,并为执行保护海洋环境的国际法提供了指导方针。但仲裁庭的裁决不太可能对解决南海争端产生太大影响。虽然中国在技术上受仲裁庭裁决的约束,但中国没有参与仲裁程序,也不会明确肯定裁决的正确性。文章提出了一个三点计划,让中国在这场争议中挽回面子。希望通过这些步骤,仲裁庭的重要裁决能够被接受,因为它们是解决南中国海争议的基础。
The South China Sea Arbitration Decision and a Plan for Peaceful Resolution of the Disputes
After the Philippines contested Chinese claims and actions in the South China Sea, a five-man panel of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016 handed down a judgment that is surely the most important set of jurisprudential rulings in the modern history of the international law of the sea. The tribunal's judgment provides convincing interpretations of many UNCLOS articles that are important, not only in the context of the South China Sea, but generally in other maritime areas as well. The tribunal's judgment enhances freedom of navigation in ocean areas and provides guidelines for enforcing international law to protect the marine environment.
But the tribunal's judgment is unlikely to have much effect with regard to settlement of the South China Sea disputes. Although China technically is bound by the judgments of the tribunal, China did not participate in the proceeding and will never expressly affirm the rulings' correctness. The paper puts forth a three-point plan to allow China to save face in this controversy. It is hoped that taking these steps the tribunal's important rulings may be accepted for what they are—the basis for a settlement of the South China Sea controversy.