My brother-in-law can’t help being the professor that he is. This morning, he excitedly told me that he had finished a short piece on how to read the 501-page ruling.
Has he read it, I asked him, because I wanted him to write about it. He said he would need to print out everything first in order to examine it page by page. That’s how thorough he is.
Meanwhile, he’d like to share this guide with his former International Studies students and with anyone who is interested to wade through this formidable ruling, which China has dismissed as “garbage” and mere scraps of paper.
Earlier, my bro-in-law published a brief in The Diplomat entitled China’s South China Sea Diplomacy Could Use Some Lessons from Africa. Pls. click on this link to read. For the complete paper (filled with footnotes), pls go to the Philippine Foreign Service Institute’s Center for International Relations and Strategic Studies by clicking on this link.
I was lucky enough to get Professor Jose Maria Sison’s reaction to the ruling. But not those of former President Benigno Aquino III and former Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario :(
I will post Sison’s reaction separately, as well as what Chinese experts are saying about this momentous issue. – raissa
How to read the 501-page ruling of the Arbitral Tribunal on the PHILIPPINES V. CHINA case
By Dr. Alfredo C. Robles, Jr.
The Award (judgment or decision) of the Arbitral Tribunal constituted under Annex VII of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea is much longer than I expected and much longer than recent judgments of the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
I will have to print not 300 pages, but 479 pages, 1203 paragraphs, more than double the ICJ Judgment in the extremely complex and sensitive Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro)
(201 pages, 471 paragraphs).In its length, the Award is nearly double the length of a normal scholarly book (200 pages, 100,000 words). Like a scholarly book, it contains preliminary matter:
♦ list of representatives of the parties (p. i of the Award, p. 3 of the file);
♦ Table of Contents (pp. iii-viii of the Award, pp. 5-10 of the file);
♦ Table of Maps (p. ix of the Award, p. 11 of the file);
♦ Table of Figures (p. xi of the Award, p. 13 of the file);
♦ Glossary of Defined Terms (pp. xiii-xvii of the Award, pp. 15-19 of the file); and
♦ Glossary of Geographic Names mentioned in the Award (in English, Chinese and Filipino, pp. xix-xx of the Award, pp. 21-22 of the file).Like a book, the Award itself is divided into Chapters, falling into two main groups.
Chapters I to IV cover the background and the history of the arbitration. Although most of this has already been covered in the Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility http://www.pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/1506, these chapters have naturally been updated to take account of developments since the issuance of that Award:
♦ Chapter I, Introduction (pp. 1-9, pages 23-31 of the file, paragraphs 1-9);
♦ Chapter II, Procedural History (pp. 11-40, pp. 33-61 of the file, paragraphs 26-39);
♦ Chapter III, Relief Requested and Submissions (pp. 41-43, pages 63-65 of the file, paragraphs 112-15);
♦ Chapter IV, Preliminary Matters (pp. 45-65, pages 67-87 of the file, paragraphs 116-68).The merits (the substance of the issues) are examined in Chapters V to VIII, constituting the bulk of the Award:
♦ Chapter V, The ‘Nine-Dash Line’ and China’s Claim to Historic Rights in the Maritime Areas of the South China Sea (Submissions No. 1 and 2) (pp. 67-117 of the Award, pages 89-139 of the file, paragraphs 169-278);
♦ Chapter VI, The Status of Features in the South China Sea (Submissions No. 3 to 7) (pp. 119-260 of the Award, pp. 141-282 of the file, paragraphs 279-648);
♦ Chapter VII, Chinese Activities in the South China Sea (Submissions No. 8 to13) (pp. 261-435 of the Award, pp. 283-457 of the file, paragraphs 649-1101);
♦ Chapter VIII, Aggravation or Extension of the Dispute between the Parties (Submission No. 14) (pp. 437-61 of the Award, pp. 459-86 of the file, paragraphs 1110-81); and
♦ Chapter IX, The Future Conduct of the Parties (Submission No. 15) (pp. 465-69 of the Award, pp. 487-91 of the file, paragraphs 1182-1201).The last chapter, Chapter X, is entitled “Dispositif” (pp. 471-77 of the Award, pp. 493-99 of the file, paragraphs 1202-03). In French legal language, “dispositif” means “the final formulation of a judgment that contains the decision of the tribunal (as opposed to the “reasons” of the judgment)” (Paul Robert, Dictionnaire alphabétique et analogique de la langue Française [Paris: S.N.L., Dictionnaire Le Robert, 1978], p. 553). This French term is widely used in English with the same meaning. The last page (p. 479, p. 501 of the file) contains the signatures of the five members of the Arbitral Tribunal and the Registrar of the Case, who is a staff member of the Registry in the case, the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA).
It is noteworthy that the Award has been adopted unanimously (p. 471 of the Award, p. 493 of the file, paragraph 1203). There is no Separate opinion, in which a judge who agrees with the dispositif could have expressed disagreement with aspects of the reasoning that led to the dispositif. There is no Dissenting Opinion, in which a judge could have expressed disagreement with the conclusions in the dispositif.
The absence of either a separate opinion or a dissenting opinion, or even a simple declaration, will confer great moral authority on the Award. Such opinions could have been used by China to undermine the reasoning of the conclusions of the Award itself. In the case of the maritime delimitation between Senegal and Guinea-Bissau, the latter, which was dissatisfied with the Award (Delimitation of maritime boundary between Guinea-Bissau and Senegal ), used the Declaration of the President, appended to the Award (p. 154), to argue that the Award was non-existent and null and void. On this basis, Guinea-Bissau filed a case with the ICJ requesting that the latter invalidate the award (Arbitral Award of 31 July 1989 (Guinea-Bissau v. Senegal). The result was further delays in maritime delimitation and additional expenses for two of the poorest countries on the planet.
Obviously, in the Philippines v. China arbitration, delays, if not indefinite postponement, in implementing the Award will not be due to the conduct of either the Philippines or the arbitrators, but to the intransigence of China.
To read and/or download The Ruling, pls. click on this link.
Ancient Mariner says
Today in the Philippine Star there were 79 of those mandatory posts for foreign persons applying for a work permit.
4i of the 79 posts were from Chinese Nationals.
This is the norm every time the mandatory posts are published in the newspaper. Some times well in excess of 50 applications from Chinese Nationals.
Is it not time for this influx of Chinese Nationals to the Philippines to stop or at the very least for each application to be meticulously checked and cross-checked and the background of the companies who foster the applications to be checked also?
I understand that many of the applicants claim to be applying for jobs in the gaming industry. If there is going to be a gaming industry in the Philippines should it not be manned by Filipinos?
Ancient Mariner says
41 not 4i.
moonie says
the chinese are taking jobs from filipinos. tapos, kung ano mang kalukuhang nagawa nila, lalayas yan kaagad before we can do anything. and nobody hears from them again.
casinos and the gaming industry is favourite of the chinese, that is where there is lots of money laundering going on. then, there is illegal drugs too. all easy money.
the gaming industry also employs contractual pinoy workers, fired before they can be made permanent workers. not accorded benefits befitting permanent workers.
Ancient Mariner says
The logic should be, “No work Permits whilst contractual workers on payroll”.
moonie says
so agree. digong talks about ending contractual workers plight. I so look forward to it. instead, we are given daily menu of police brutalities, unending killing of drug suspects, the rounding up drug suspects. families shedding tears and mourning loved ones, misery and more misery.
Ylocanabelle says
Digong ought to get his priorities right. VP Leni is seeking 1.4 million for housing backlog, meanwhile DFA Sec. Albert gave away 2 million in discretionary fund to DFA personnel. Doesn’t this put them in a form of indebtedness? Then Sen. Kiko seeks billions for the judiciary for swifter justice to prevent extrajudicial killings. In the midst of all these BBM still wont accept defeat graciously. And NO NEWS from the highest authority of the land…Digong the media hater.
boom buencamino says
2012 pa lang nahuli ko na ang fake map :-) http://interaksyon.com/article/30466/manuel-buencamino-the-truth-behind-chinas-nine-dash-map
NHerrera says
Raissa, I am very glad about this note of Dr. Robles:
It is noteworthy that the Award has been adopted unanimously (p. 471 of the Award, p. 493 of the file, paragraph 1203). There is no Separate opinion, in which a judge who agrees with the dispositif could have expressed disagreement with aspects of the reasoning that led to the dispositif. There is no Dissenting Opinion, in which a judge could have expressed disagreement with the conclusions in the dispositif.
The absence of either a separate opinion or a dissenting opinion, or even a simple declaration, will confer great moral authority on the Award. Such opinions could have been used by China to undermine the reasoning of the conclusions of the Award itself.
chit navarro says
Thank you for the series of write-ups on the West Philippine Sea claim. I tried reading the “Dispositif” portion this morning but it is easier to understand your blog, the layman’s language.
I look forward to the reaction of Jose Ma. Sison on thiis. But I believe nothing can beat the reaction of netizens with their meme of Pres. Duterte on jetski to the Kalayaan Islands and plant a flag, as he stated during the campaign season. As well as their description of DFA Sec, Yasay on how he delivered his reaction to this historical win of our government against China,
If only the President will fulfill his campaign promise of jetskiing to the islands and plant a flag of the Philippines and claim it as really ours!!!
aberato says
maam chit, we have the same wish for the president to fulfill his promise. Yeah, i believe that PDU30 is a man of few words and if he will say something he will do it. Come on sir president show them that promises are not made to be broken. You can bring along mr. sison in your jetskiing para masaya…
leona says
Just to share this query: How much [ do we guess] did the Phil Gov’t spend for the Legal Team of Lawyers appearing at the UN Arbitration court in our behalf?
guesses: US$5 million? Or maybe US$10 million? That’s about P400 million x P40.00/US $ flat rate.
Or more than that?
Now, will we be happy if the New Adm will throw away this spent money by discarding the favorable UN Arbitration court’s award/decision?
There’s more to this case: All form of Damages for destruction by China of the corals/reefs etc. on PHL territory at the West PHL Sea. China has a lotsa of MONEY deposited in USA and in other countries. Will a civil action for damages be filed in the courts of these countries?
China will THINK 9 x like its 9-dash line theory hereon. Collection on Deep pocket theory is painful.
The PHL Team of lawyers based on Wash. DC might also handle such civil actions for deep pocket payment for the Philippines.
Flash bar news CNN PHL – China: ‘Null and void’ the UN Arbitration court AWARD/decision.
無效
Wúxiào. . . daw.
中國不好的運動
Zhōngguó bù hǎo de yùndòng !
Andres Bonifacio says
China declared the decision as null and void, means they will stay on the disputed islands. See the darkest problem now? No matter what, China will stay, can the Philippines expelled China? How? Not by mere legalities but by force, do the Philippines have force? If none then the legal victory is useless, if it has then its war. I doubt China will honor payments to the Philippines if they leave. But it is very possible that they will pay the Philippines but they will stay on the islands. War or sharing?
aberato says
@leona, i support your query about how much really the previous pnoy gov’t spent when we hired the battery of lawyers who represented in the PCA. Malamang hinde lang thousands of dollars. I don’t mind anyway if we spent millions than just offering the “islands” for free to the chinese.
The judgement/award was a landmark for us Filipinos not to be bullied by china.
It’s not unusual to hear china insults democracy. They can call it a piece of garbage, null & void, whatever as long as it (award) came from a just & fair trial from a well-respected & dignified court.
My fearless forecast of the issue is, china will antagonize, threat and bully our countrymen in their country. Gof forbids.
leona says
China got the SHAME from that decision. If China ‘appears’ not affected by it, something is definitely wrong with the Chinese leadership in power. Not the Chinese people.
What is the use of being a powerful nation in Asia when it is stained with a SHAMEFUL attitude towards its neighbors? It lost its respect from everybody.
In Filipino saying: Makapal ang balat ! ‘O balat kalabaw ! China is extremely opposite of the beloved animal PANDA.
China is not a true friend of the Filipinos and to many others . Haughty. It was castigated by the UN Court. Worse, China intentionally make it appear that IT does not feel anything about it.
Unremorseful at that.
Haw haw. . . shameful.
Mel says
I agree with your observation @leona!
They encroach on their neighbors’ backyard (EEZ) to exploit its resources and claim it ass their own by mere pronouncements of ‘historical rights’ yet without historical TITLEs to wit.
China didn’t become a super power (economy) on its own. Its communists leaders are not really true friends of the Filipinos, in the truest sense of the word, with their utter contempt.
Super power kuno? Mainam pang tawagang super cheap, tsuper pirata, super illiterate?
Lyn O says
Raisa, i am amazed by how fast you read.
You’re amazing.
raissa says
No, not me.
M bro-in-law.
leona says
A continuing THANK YOU to you – Ma’m Raissa Robles and Doc.. Alfredo C. Robles, Jr., for the work presented at CPMers’ BLOG site.
The new Adm will have a lot of food – 10-course LAURIAT Chinese style, for THOUGHT. . . 279 Pages for deep study for what to DO NEXT.
Kudos to you both.
raissa says
thanks.
duquemarino says
Subscribing.