Inside Philippine politics & beyond

You gotta watch this: Our lawyer Paul Reichler explains the Philippine’s arbitration case on the South China Sea

Share:
LinkedIn0
Pinterest0

 

Reichler said: 29 minutes, 22 seconds into the forum:

“The Philippines had spent many years – actually negotiations go back to 1995 – mainly bilateral, some multilateral, and at no point was any progress made in reaching any kind of a solution bilaterally.

China simply held to the position that China has sovereignty and sovereign rights within the nine-dash line and that includes sovereignty over all the insular features – reefs, shoals, cays, rocks within the nine-dash line and there is no flexibility in the position in the negotiations.

So the Philippines was faced with a very difficult position that was getting worse.”

The sound of the tape is a bit low. This is best viewed on a computer with the sound amped up.

Comments

  1. at first it was difficult putting down an item that was cheap but “made in china”, now it has become a habit, done with pleasure and a feeling of cleanliness from doing away with something dirty. my only regret is that i am more often than not mistaken for coming from that bully of a country. the thing of it is i meet more and more people acting and feeling the same way.

  2. The area of the sea that is being disputed is just a little over 100 miles from Philippines. It is completely inside the 200-mile exclusive economic zone of Philippines. Philippines claim on that is in accordance with the Law of the Sea Treaty that was ratified by the United Nations Organization.
    I am optimistic that the judges will rule in favor of Philippines. A victory for Philippines is not only for Philippines. It could also mean a victory for all other nation’s right to their EEZ’s.

  3. A victory for Philippines could mean a victory as well for other countries right to their 200-mile eez. I’m confident judges will think of the future of the EEZ’s of nations be all protected.

  4. Remember my post few days ago? Before it was only a single island that was changed to Nansha island and the Reed Bank’s name was removed.

    Now in Scarborough Shoal the name Zhongsha Islands is added. Can anyone DELETE or change this naming on google map like in wiki? Or do you need google’s approval?

    Google Maps urged to remove Chinese reference to shoal
    http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/07/12/15/google-maps-urged-remove-chinese-reference-shoal

  6. “Joma Sison backs PH legal battle vs China over sea dispute” Inquirer Southern Luzon (inquirerdotnet) by Delfin T. Mallari. July 10, 2015

    Sison said he and his wife, Julie de Lima-Sison, signed the “Joint manifesto of Filipinos and friends of the Filipino people in the Netherlands” supporting the Philippine government’s fought for national sovereignty and maritime rights in the West PohilippinemSea “against the aggressive act of China.

  9. Intereting video of the explainations of Philippines’ claims presented by it’s lawyer Paul L. Reichler.

    The first question asked by the good fellow to his left, Mr. Bower, said ‘How will the Tribunal enforced the judgment (or any judgement). . . something like that.

    A good question ‘says Mr. Reichler.’ But I did not hear any answer, good or what, to the question.

    I just immediately thought about that question: Can the Tribunal’s judgment, in case favorable to the claim of the Philippines, be ‘enforced’ by way to the Peoples Republic of China? Through it various politican or governmental organs of the Chinese State?

    Like enforcing a valid foreign judgment with jurisdiction, with facts and the law – in the corcerned courts or organs of the PRC (China)? Philippine Courts provides this method. US Court also does the same. Maybe many other countries have similar methods.

    If we look at the Constitution of the Peoples’ Republic of China, dated December 4, 1982, in it’s PREAMBLE you will see this –

    The Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference is a broadly representative organization of the united front, which has played a significant historical role and will continue to do so in the political and social life of the country, in promoting friendship with the people of other countries and in the struggle for socialist modernization and for the reunification and unity of the country.”

    I went over this Constitution to find anything about China recognizing international law (like the Philippine Constitution) etc. I have not yet found it.

    ‘Promoting friendship with the people of other countries’ is so far the nearest about International law in their Constitution.

    Let us proceed further. In the same PREAMBLE referred to it is also expressly stated, as follows:

    China consistently opposes imperialism, hegemonism and colonialism, x x x and strives to safeguard world peace and promote the cause of human progress. x x x

    Strives to safeguard world peace. Promote the cause of human progress. Found in China’s PREAMBLE in their Constitution.

    Before that last quote, the PREAMBLE says this clear words (as declared by Chairman Deng before the UN Assembly we just put here recently), as follows:

    The future of China is closely linked with that of the whole world. China adheres to an independent foreign policy as well as to the five principles of mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, mutual non-aggression, non-interference in each other’s internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful coexistence in developing diplomatic relations and economic and cultural exchanges with other countries

    Future of China with ‘Mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial intergrity.
    Future of China with ‘Non-aggression and non-interference in each other’s internal affairs.’
    Future of China with ‘Equality and Mutual Benefit.’
    Future of China with/in ‘Peaceful coexistence in developing DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS and economic and cultural exchanges WITH OTHER COUNTRIES.’

    By coming out with their (China’s) 9-Dash Lines claiming sovereignty and territory in the South China Sea, where is the ‘Mutual Respect’ with other coountries?

    Where is China’s ‘Non-aggression and non-interference’ pact with other countries’ – the Philippines’ internal affairs?

    Where is China’s ‘Peaceful coexistence’ in developing diplomatic relations with other countries, like with the Philippines?

    Where is China’s ‘Economic and Cultural exchanges with other countries’ as expressed in their Constitution’s PREAMBLE?

    In China’s Constitution, Chap. I General Principles, on Article 3 it says –

    The National People’s Congress and the local people’s congresses at different levels x x x
    are responsible to the people and subject to their supervision. All administrative, judicial and procuratorial organs of the state are created by the people’s congresses to which they are responsible and under whose supervision they operate.

    China as a State, it’s ‘National People’s Congress’ is responsible to it’s judicial organ. Meaning to China’s Supreme Court. If the UN Tribunal has a decision expressing the erroeous claims of China in the South China Sea, can such judgment be referred to China’s Supreme Court for enforcement?

    In Article 9 of the General Principles, it enumerates something like this –

    Article 9. Mineral resources, waters, forests, mountains, grassland, unreclaimed land, beaches and other natural resources are owned by the state, that is, by the whole people, with the exception of the forests, mountains, grassland, unreclaimed land and beaches that are owned by collectives in accordance with the law.

    Nothing about ‘Mineral resources, water, forests, mountains, grassland, unreclaimed land, beaches and OTHER NATURAL RESOURCES’ in the South China Sea. These things are clearly meant only in mainland China and not elsewhere.

    The Supreme People’s Court is established under Article 124 of Section 7 People’s Court. It is the highest judicial organ [Article 127] and ‘exercise judicial power independently and are not subject to interference by administrative organs, public organizations or individuals.

    China’s Constitution ends with Article 136 about the ‘March of the Volunteers.’ (as UPDATED March 22, 2004)

    Their Constitution (as website shows) does not show ‘who signed and approved it.’ No date when it became operating and effected except that the website says “Adopted on December 4, 1982.’ it contains it’s ‘Amendments.’

    Did China submit an official ‘copy’ of this Constitution to the UN Body? When? Did the UN Body accept it as official like other copies of other countries’ constitutions?

    Again, I found nothing about recognizing or respecting International laws etc., except those nearest about such quotes quoted here.

    The link of China’s Constitution below.

  10. Thanks, @raissa.

    —–

    The Republic of the Philippines v. The People’s Republic of China

    On 22 January 2013, the Republic of the Philippines instituted arbitral proceedings against the People’s Republic of China under Annex VII to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (the “Convention”), “with respect to the dispute with China over the maritime jurisdiction of the Philippines in the West Philippine Sea.” On 19 February 2013, China presented a Note Verbale to the Philippines in which it described “the Position of China on the South China Sea issues,” and rejected and returned the Philippines’ Notification. The Permanent Court of Arbitration acts as Registry in this arbitration.

    • As China insists on sovereignty over the entire South China Sea, bilateral talks had reached dead end…

      That”s why…

      A CASE FOR ARBITRATION: THE PHILIPPINES’ SOLUTION FOR THE SOUTH CHINA SEA DISPUTE
      EMMA KINGDON*

      Abstract: Arbitration under Annex VII of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) would be the most effective resolution method and would lead to the most favorable outcome for the Philippines against China in the South China Sea (SCS) Dispute.

      The Philippines will likely not pursue adjudication in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) because the court would likely grant sovereignty over any islands to China, thus legitimizing China’s aggressive actions in the SCS. Furthermore, continued negotiations are also not a viable option for the Philippines because any agreement would be inadequate to deter China from future actions in the SCS.

      Under the Annex VII approach, a holding by an arbitral tribunal in the Philippines’ favor would enable the states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to present a united front to China that the only acceptable basis for maritime claims in the SCS must be under UNCLOS and would ensure access to the abundance of natural resources in the SCS that are central to the Southeast Asian economies.

      Overall, not only will arbitration lead to the most efficient and favorable outcome for the Philippines, it will also lay the groundwork for future stability among all claimant states in the SCS.

    • A backgrounder from Prof. Batongbacal…

      Introduction

      The arbitration case launched by the Philippines against China currently stands as the most significant, and most closely watched, development for specialists and observers of the maritime disputes in the South China Sea (SCS). To help observers navigate through this foggy proceeding, this article attempts to provide a focused overview of the arbitration case and developments in the bilateral dispute between the two parties.

      http://amti.csis.org/arbitration-101-philippines-v-china/

      Expected ruling is in January 2016. ( http://csis.org/files/attachments/140807_Reichler.pdf )

      —–
      “Jay L. Batongbacal is Assistant Professor, University of the Philippines College of Law, and Director, University of the Philippines Institute for Maritime Affairs and Law of the Sea. He is on leave and affiliated with the East West Center in Washington as a U.S.-ASEAN Fulbright Initiative Visiting Scholar, doing research on evolving US maritime security policies and their impact on the resort to international arbitration and the Rule of Law in the South China Sea disputes.“

  13. Hi Raissa, on my smartphone I can see the video but get no sound at all.