JAYLORD MEDINA

12 NUCLEUS

PH wins arbituation case over south china sea

The portion of the sea on the west side of the Philippines known as the West Philippine Sea is
where the nation's maritime boundaries reach. It has many nautical zones, each with unique maritime
privileges that are only available to the Philippines. China effectively militarized and reclaimed seven
reefs in the South China Sea between 2013 and 2015, five of which are in the West Philippine Sea. But
the vast continental shelf of the Philippines is outside the EEZ (Exclusive economic zone.) We know that
the West Philippine Sea belongs to the Philippines because international law says so, aside from maps
from the 17th century, treaties, and even Chinese records. This was the case even before the Filipinos'
historic victory in the Philippines . China case at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016. For many
decades before the 2012 Scarborough Shoal Standoff (panatag shoal), the disputes in this part of the
world remained dormant. The Philippines filed a case against China at the International Tribunal for the
Law of the Sea (ITLOS) concerning maritime questions in the West Philippine Sea. In 2016, the
Permanent Court of Arbitration declared China's nine-dash lines and historical claims on the entire South
China Sea illegal.

The Philippines expressed its appreciation for the award, which supported the majority of its
claims, and declared that talks with China were still on the table. China, on the other hand, disputed the
ruling, declaring it to be unconstitutional, invalid, and without any legal force. Other nations supported
the Philippines and urged China to abide by the tribunal's ruling, including the United States, Vietnam,
Australia, and Japan. However, Cambodia supported China's decision to reject the honor. Members of
ASEAN released a unified statement reiterating the necessity of avoiding measures that might exacerbate
tensions in the South China Sea and of seeking a peaceful settlement of disputes in conformity with
international law, including UNCLOS. In a disagreement about their respective "maritime rights" and the
legitimacy of Chinese actions in the South China Sea, the Philippines launched arbitral proceedings
against China on January 22, 2013. China responded by rejecting the arbitration in a diplomatic note
dated 19 February 2013 addressed to the Philippines. According to China, the Arbitral Tribunal lacked
jurisdiction in the case because China's acceptance of dispute resolution under the UN Convention on
the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the Philippines' proposed legal foundation, was constrained and excluded
establishing sea boundary delimitations and determining historic titles. Since that time, China has
consistently refused to recognize the arbitral processes that the Philippines had started as well as to take
part in them. However, the tribunal did not view this as a barrier, and on 29 October 2015 it issued its
first award establishing jurisdiction, and on 12 July 2016, it issued its judgment addressing the merits of
the case. The tribunal found that China's claims to historical rights inside the "nine-dash line" of the
Philippines are incompatible with UNCLOS. The majority of disputed maritime features could not create
an EEZ or CS, classifying Scarborough Shoal as a rock and determining that Mischief Reef, Subi Reef,
and Second Thomas Shoal are LTEs. These features are all located in the Spratly Islands; Johnson Reef,
Cuarteron Reef, and Fiery Cross Reef are rocks. The tribunal's decision gives the Philippines a clear
advantage over China in court. It concluded that China breached the provisions of UNCLOS, in particular
by fishing in areas of the South China Sea falling within the Philippines' EEZ. The tribunal also
determined that the coral reef environment was severely and permanently harmed by China's
development of artificial islands, installations, and structures in the Spratly Islands. In 2016, the
Permanent Court of Arbitration handed out a landmark victory for the Philippines and declared China's
nine-dash lines and historical claims on the entire South China sea illegal. It also declared key features
in the West Philippine Sea as falling within the Philippines' maritime zone. It came to the conclusion that
China had violated the terms of UNCLOS, specifically by temporarily banning fishing in South China
Sea areas that were part of the Philippine Exclusive Economic Zone, failing to stop Chinese vessels from
fishing in the EEZ at Mischief Reef and Second Thomas Shoal and preventing Filipino fishermen from
engaging in traditional fishing at Scarborough Shoal.

The opinion about the power of the victory of philippines in the case of west philippines in the
international law court driven by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) that
Philippines should be happy that the UN Tribunal affirmed their claim to the Spratly Islands and their
territorial seas. It is only just that the Philippines overcame a well-known superpower without using use
of weapons, instead involving the international community and relying on the rule of law. Filipino
negotiators will now have the opportunity to request more equal conditions for using and gaining access
to the resources in the disputed territory. The UNCLOS or (United Nations Convention on the Law of
the Sea)-the Law of the Sea Treaty, is an international agreement that establishes a legal framework for
all marine and maritime activities. As of June 2016, 167 countries and the European Union are parties,
Its goals include promoting worldwide communication, peaceful usage of the seas and oceans, equitable
and efficient resource exploitation, conservation of the living resources found there, and research,
protection, and preservation of the maritime environment. It further exemplifies that the Philippine case's
victory in the international legal dispute over the West Philippine Sea, which the Chinese have claimed
as the South China Sea, is a significant step toward returning the territory to the Philippines and initiating
negotiations to maintain the Filipinos' right to freely move in the territorial waters and assert their claims,
even though the Chinese government has designated some of the areas as military bases and fishing
grounds.With this result, the Philippines may now approach China with confidence to negotiate their
claims to the Spratly Islands' territorial seas. Filipino negotiators may now demand more equal conditions
for access to and use of resources in the disputed territory because they are certain that the Filipino people
and its government are in the right. The development of infrastructure and China's expanding military
presence on the disputed islands can be stopped by using the pressure of international opinion to persuade
Beijing to reduce its activity there. Since the Philippines is frequently disregarded while discussing the
subject of the disputed sea region, this may be a wonderful place to start the talks. On the other hand that
the China will not accept the ruling of the UN Tribunal and will carry on with its operations in the
disputed Spratly Islands. Since the Philippines brought its complaint against China to the UN, the Chinese
government has rejected the case and has not taken part in any Tribunal sessions. This demonstrates
China's complete contempt for international law and for the UNCLOS, a treaty that China signed but
does not abide with. China will continue to be driven to seize additional land by its military and economic
aspirations. What would prevent China from taking islands that genuinely belong to the Philippines if it
refuses to budge in the face of the ruling and the intense international pressure? It is a calamity waiting
to happen that Chinese military are still stationed in the islands. What would stop the Chinese from
employing lethal force against any other ship that dares to violate in their alleged boundaries, given that
they have control over several islands and have been harassing Filipino fisherman who enter its
neighboring waters? China will not be persuaded that its territorial aspirations have already beyond the
international community's tolerance levels short of a conflict.

And yet another. The argument that the Chinese government won't make this win a major deal
for them since they disregarded this case and redefined their rights to demonstrate that the UN law of the
sea is not an effective legislation for interfering with China's historical maritime and sovereign rights is
false.. This is been a truth behind the present activities of china in the west philippines since china is
ignoring the nefotiation requested by philippines to talk about the issue and the given powe for the
philipiines to make an claim in the area of sea teritory. China taking advantage to the case victory of the
philippines against them in the untied nations law as null and unclearly basis. China's immediate response
to the decision was to issue two statements: one from the Government, which was noticeably subdued
and reiterated its "territorial sovereignty and maritime rights" in the South China Sea and expressed its
desire to "resolve the relevant disputes peacefully," without specifically mentioning the Philippines or
the arbitration process, and another from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which was much more adamant
and declared that the decision is "null and void."China may attempt to "display the flag" in its claimed
seas through patrols or simulated drills using the People's Liberation Army (PLA), the China Coast
Guard, or the maritime militia. It's also likely that marine militia or the China Coast Guard may increase
their frequent harassment and intimidation of Philippine or foreign boats. China might use overt or covert
economic sanctions against the Philippines, as it did when it restricted Philippine banana imports and
forbade Chinese travel to the Philippines during the Scarborough Reef crisis in 2012. The PLA could
also respond by deploying fighter jets or other cutting-edge military equipment to the Spratly Islands
which would contravene China's pledge not to "militarize" the area. In recent years, Chinese officials and
state-affiliated media have promoted an Argument that the arbitral tribunal's actions violate UNCLOS or
are not subject to its jurisdiction and that China's stance on the South China Sea conflicts is completely
compliant with international law. Chinese diplomats allegedly told their Southeast Asian colleagues that
China was considering leaving UNCLOS if the judgement was adverse to China as the decision date
drew closer. But taking this action doesn't really serve China's true interests and more likely undermines
them. In the short term, China's ties with its neighbors, the US, and any other nation that openly supports
the verdict would be strained as a result of the ruling and China's rejection of it. The decision's long-term
effects are expected to be far more severe and might have wide-ranging effects.

As a Filipino, I take the position that the world isn't necessary for world peace and that we should
back off if the conflict is between political leaders' morality and politics. As Duterte claims that the award
is also a null decision to take immediate action and treat the region like a thing. Among the two opinions
being described, I choose to take a stand on how China responded to the recent case defeat because they
view the UNCLO as a non-issue. As long as China continues to hold significant military exercises in the
region as part of their claim to establish their presence there, fight for their marital rights, and provide
their redefined rights, this claim will continue to undermine the legitimacy of the Philippine triumph. on
the previous eras. The tension in the west Philippine Sea has shocked the globe, especially the United
States and its allies who take advantage of the Philippines' assertion that it has a legal right to the region
because of the UNCLOS. But as the tension over the South China Sea case affects political ethics and
territorial claims, as well as the invasion that the world will be facing in the coming decades due to
dictators, particularly as the russian invasion of Ukraine has emerged, the likelihood of future conflicts
has increased. Since the SCS problem is being raised by powerful ally nations like the Philippines and
the USA, the Chinese leadership is using it as a moral issue in the ongoing global conflict.Since the
Chinese are currently acting unconditionally toward the waters off Taiwan after having provoked them,
other nations are using this as an opportunity to push back and promote peace in an effort to avert a global
conflict. The United States is objecting to state visits and military exercises in the West Philippine Sea in
order to keep an eye on China's actions and prevent the ripening invasion that it is planning for
Taiwan.According to earlier reports, China's military operations are sending signals to Taiwan as military
missiles and planes breach Taiwan's airspace, prompting a state visit from the United States. And the
Chinese government makes this a problem because the USA is tense and because the state visit is a
message that the USA has been violated in the cases of SCS or WPS.

As more countries join in to defend the legitimacy of the UNCLOS, this issue will have an impact
on people's opinions, prompting China to respond that it doesn't matter and that they are ready for
whatever consequences may result from defending their maritime rights, which were redefined in the
UNCLOS but denied and dismissed as ridiculous accusations. People's morality over this matter is strong
because a world war is set to break out because certain nations are now at risk of invasion, and because
they believe the Chinese would benefit if there is friction between their respective grievances. As its
allies are being intimidated, the USA will use this as an opportunity to take immediate action. In
conclusion, it is still too early to determine how much of an impact the tribunal's judgment will have on
regional and global levels. However, what we do know is that compared to two years ago, the South
China Sea is currently quite peaceful. It is debatable if this circumstance may be connected to the
tribunal's decision. In the meanwhile, it is difficult to imagine that nations holding claims to features that
they proclaim to be fully entitled islands and not merely rocks, as Japan with Okinotorishima or the
United States with Johnson's Island, will give up their rights.Additionally, in reaction to China's
construction of military facilities in the Spratlys, Vietnam keeps reclaiming ground and building two
large hangars on Spratly Island. As a result, even though it seemed like the tribunal's goal was to pave
the way for resolving the dispute between China and the Philippines, the long-term repercussions of its
decision will only become apparent in the future years.