When Good Lawyers Write Bad History: Unreliable Evidence and the South China Sea Territorial Dispute

The recent award by an arbitral tribunal in a case brought by the Philippines against China gives lawyers reason to reexamine the historical evidence put forward by claimants in the South China Sea disputes. While the Tribunal was barred from considering territorial or boundary questions, it did cast doubt on the historical narrative rule that China has asserted in support of its claims. Fresh evidence from other sources also suggests that discussions of these matters need to move beyond arguments put forward in a small number of papers published more than thirty years ago. A close examination of the references used in those papers shows that they relied upon highly partisan Chinese sources. Recent historical research has produced new facts about the development of the competing territorial claims in the South China Sea, but international legal discourse has yet to take these findings into account. This article examines some of the key works in the field and calls for them to be reassessed and for future discussion of the disputes to be based upon verifiable and contextualized evidence rather than on nationalist assertions.     

China's U-Shaped Line in the South China Sea Revisited

Despite its existence on the Chinese maps for more than six decades, the U-shaped line, as a traditional maritime boundary line of China in the South China Sea, has never received a wide recognition in the world community, much less by the other claimant states in the South China Sea. The U-shaped line is a legal conundrum not only for China but also for the world community, particularly after the map with the U-shaped line, together with China's Notes Verbale with respect to the claims to the outer continental shelves made by Malaysia and Vietnam, were submitted to the UN Commission on the Limits of Continental Shelf in May 2009. This article discusses China's recent practice relating to the U-shaped line as well as the external factors that affect the validity of the line and tries to unravel the legal puzzle posed by the line.     

The U-Shaped Line and a Categorization of the Ocean Disputes in the South China Sea

A principal aspect of the territorial and boundary delimitation disputes in the South China Sea is the so-called U-shaped line. This article addresses the genesis and substantiation of the U-shaped line claims as well as the possible change in positions of the governments of the Republic of China and the People's Republic of China with respect to the historical waters claim, which is an integral part of their U-shaped line positions. A legal analysis of the various communications of the South China Sea players with respect to the U-shaped line helps to clarify and identify the nature of four kinds of legal disputes. It is also possible to differentiate the various degrees of difficulty involved in settling each of these disputes.     

A Note on the United States and the Law of the Sea: Looking Back and Moving Forward

Since the Antarctic Treaty was negotiated in 1959, there have been substantial developments in the law of the sea. One of the most significant developments has been the recognition granted to coastal state entitlements to claim a range of offshore maritime areas. Yet, one of the principal aims of the Antarctic Treaty was to eliminate sovereignty disputes between territorial claimants, and the treaty placed limitations on the assertion of new claims. Nevertheless, most Antarctic territorial claimants have asserted some form of Antarctic maritime claim. This article particularly considers Australia's position toward maritime claims offshore the Australian Antarctic Territory (AAT). It reviews the limitations imposed by the Antarctic Treaty, the difficulties in determining baselines in Antarctica, Australia's practice in declaring Antarctic maritime claims, and the potential range of maritime boundaries that Australia may one day have to delimit with neighboring states in the Southern Ocean.     

A Code of Conduct for Human and Regional Security Around the South China Sea

In the past decade, there have been calls for a regional code of conduct for the South China Sea to ensure peace and stability in a region replete with conflicting territorial claims over offshore geographical features. This paper will distinguish between the process of codification of rules and principles in one document, on the one hand, and the process of implementing existing rules and principles, on the other hand. It will be argued that rules and principles governing conduct for human and regional security around the South China Sea already exist in many forms and that the South China Sea states are obligated by international law to implement them without waiting for their consolidation in one document.     

Universalizing the Law of the Sea in the South China Sea Dispute

This article argues that a resolution of the maritime disputes in the South China Sea must be based upon a universalist framework where the maritime interests of the world are upheld. The article discusses the universalist framework of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the universalist approach taken by the Tribunal on 12 July 2016 in the South China Sea Arbitration regarding the extinguishment of a state's “exceptionalist” maritime claims and the adoption of strict criteria for the characterization of features at sea.     

Oil interests and the law of the sea: The case of the philippines

Abstract

In March 1976, after almost eighty years of unsuccessful oil exploration in the Philippines, a significant quantity of oil was discovered offshore and northwest of the island of Palawan in the South China Sea. Subsequent development of a commercially producing oil field there has stimulated renewed interest and investment in the development of her indigenous oil potential, both offshore and onshore.

National interest in oil has become so great that the Philippines has intensified exploration efforts in highly disputed areas of the South China Sea, based on minimal geological evidence of hydrocarbon potential there, and despite strong protests from the other nations that hold conflicting territorial claims in that region. These efforts have been accompanied by extension of Philippine claims, occupation, and control over marine territory and resources in the disputed area. The Philippine bases for these actions are reviewed and several scenarios are explored as to how the Philippine oil interests may influence the resolution of boundary conflicts thus created.     

Historic Titles and Historic Rights in the Law of the Sea in the Light of the South China Sea Arbitration

Historic titles and historic rights have been a complicated issue in the law of the sea both conceptually and practically. The South China Sea Arbitration between the Philippines and China raised important issues regarding the contemporary relevance and validity of historic claims, and the relationship between the Law of the Sea Convention and historic rights. This articles examines historic rights and historic titles in the law of the sea in the light of the South China Sea Arbitration and evaluates the contribution of the Tribunal's Awards to the clarification of these concepts.     

The Spratlys: Are They Rocks or Islands?

The South China Sea is a multilateral battlefield of conflicting claims to sovereignty over island features and vast areas of maritime jurisdiction. In the middle of the South China Sea lies the Spratly archipelago - some 150 small island features to which six states have made claims. The core of the SCS dispute is access to natural resources, and the rivalling claims to sovereignty over islands are largely based on the assumption that whoever has sovereignty to the features can also claim large areas of ocean space attached to them. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea has codified the regimes of the continental shelf and the exclusive economic zone, and it is accepted that islands, as well as continental territory, generate such zones of maritime jurisdiction. However, one category of islands cannot generate these extensive maritime zones. Article 121(3) of the convention states that "rocks which cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own shall have no exclusive economic zone or continental shelf." This provision, if applied to certain features, has the potential to significantly change the scope of the conflict in the Spratlys.     

Some problems concerning the delimitation of the maritime boundary between the republic of china (Taiwan) and the Philippines

Abstract

This paper analyzes the issue of how the relevant provisions of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea can be applied to the delimitation of the maritime boundary in the Bashi Channel between Taiwan and the Philippine island of Luzon and in the South China Sea area. It concludes that the Philippines’ extensive territorial sea claim based on the 1898 U.S.‐Spanish Peace Treaty can hardly find any basis in customary rules of international law and the U.N. Convention and, therefore, should be disregarded in such delimitation. On the other hand, the archipelagic principle provided in the Convention can be applied here. With respect to rules of delimitation, it suggests that the equitable principle of the delimitation of the continental shelf, enunciated in the Anglo‐French Continental Shelf Arbitration (1977) and the Tunisian‐Libyan Continental Shelf Case (1982), can mutatis mutandis be applied to the delimitation of the maritime boundary. As an interim solution, the maritime boundary of certain disputed islands in the South China Sea should be declared neutral zones open to nationals of both countries.     

China and Japan Maritime Disputes in the East China Sea: A Note on Recent Developments

This article examines recent developments in the East China Sea maritime disputes, focusing primarily on the Principled Consensus agreed on by China and Japan for the joint development of energy resources. The article also provides a perspective on the East China Sea maritime disputes between the two countries within the context of international relations.     

Coastal States in the South China Sea and Submissions on the Outer Limits of the Continental Shelf

The purpose of this article is to examine the outer continental shelf submissions made by the coastal states of the South China Sea and their potential impact on legal and political developments in the South China Sea. In accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982 and the guidelines of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, coastal states are to establish the outer limits of their continental shelf where it extends beyond 200 nautical miles. Meeting this obligation is complicated in enclosed or semienclosed seas where there are maritime disputes such as in the South China Sea.     

Defining Seaward Boundaries in a Domestic Context: Norway and the Svalbard Archipelago

Abstract

This article analyzes a little-noticed aspect of the international legal controversy pertaining to Svalbard’s maritime zones. It concerns where and by which method Norway should draw the boundaries between Svalbard’s continental shelf and the 200-mile zone, on the one hand, and other maritime zones subject to Norwegian jurisdiction, on the other. The assumption upon which the discussion rests is that the Spitsbergen Treaty signatories enjoy treaty rights in the maritime zones beyond Svalbard’s territorial waters. The law of the sea does not contain rules on the drawing of maritime boundaries between different parts of a state’s territory, but the rules on delimitation between states offer a strong analogy. In the search for an equitable solution, primacy should be given to geographical factors. The article argues that Norway could do more to enhance the openness regarding the Svalbard delimitation question since its outcome will be of significant interest to other states.     

Maritime Legislation of Mainland China and Taiwan: Developments,Comparison, Implications,and Potential Challenges for the United States

In January 1998, Taiwan promulgated the Law of the Republic of China (ROC) on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone and the Law of the Republic of China on the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and the Continental Shelf, both of which came into force on January 21, 1998. On June 26, 1998, China adopted the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Exclusive Economic Zone and the Continental Shelf, which is the most significant maritime legislation since its 1992 Law on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone. This article studies the recent maritime legislation developments in Mainland China and Taiwan, the differences and similarities between the two sets of laws, their implications for the Asia-Pacific region, and the potential challenges for the United States.     

Legal Issues Related to Sovereignty over Dokdo and Its Maritime Boundary

This article examines the historical events relevant to the claims of sovereignty by Japan and Korea over Dokdo, the legal doctrines that have been applied by international tribunals to other disputes over remote and uninhabited territories, and the principles governing maritime boundary delimitation that are relevant to the ocean space around Dokdo. The applicable decisions of the International Court of Justice and other tribunals are examined in detail. Among the topics addressed are the methods of acquiring sovereignty over territory, the relevance of contiguity to such claims, the requirements of effective protests, and the activities and omissions that constitute acquiescence. Attention is also given to the status of this matter as a “dispute” and how closure might be brought to it.     

The Salish Sea Boundary Straits: “Historic Internal Waters” or Territorial Seas?

The legal classification of the boundary straits of the Salish Sea between the western United States and Canada as either historic internal waters or territorial seas, subject to a right of innocent or transit passage, has been the subject of periodic debate within the U.S. government since the United States and Great Britain entered into the 1846 Oregon Treaty. As neither state has made an express public claim of historic title to the waters, any evidence for such a claim must be sought in less explicit and sometimes conflicting sources. This article applies the United States' legal test for a historic waters claim, recently set out in the U.S. Department of State's analysis of China's claims in the South China Sea, and concludes that the boundary waters of the Salish Sea would not meet that test. Accordingly, the waters of the Salish Sea boundary straits on the United States' side of the international boundary must be considered a territorial sea.     

Marine scientific research and marine pollution in China

Abstract

In recent years coastal states everywhere in the world have paid attention to the preservation of the marine environment and the conduct of marine scientific research. The scope and nature of China's marine scientific research have been expanded and diversified since the late 1970s because of the growing importance of the ocean for the “Four Modernization “ programs. More and more programs have been designed and executed to find fishing resources, search for offshore oil and gas, promote maritime defense, help alleviate the marine pollution problems, reinforce China's territorial claim in the South China Sea, participate in Antarctic scientific research, and to better understand the whole marine environment. This article first examines China's attitude toward the legal regimes of marine pollution and marine scientific research. It depicts China's marine scientific research activities from the early 1950s. Finally it suggests that more scientific research programs will be designed in support of China's ocean development plans in the future.     

The Issue of Jurisdiction Over Mixed Disputes in the Chagos Marine Protection Area Arbitration and Beyond

The real issue in the Chagos Marine Protection Area Arbitration should have been the dispute concerning the Lancaster House Undertakings, over which the Arbitral Tribunal had no jurisdiction. The UNCLOS has no express provision respecting the jurisdiction over mixed disputes—disputes involving territorial sovereignty and maritime boundary delimitation. Thus, a court or tribunal facing a mixed dispute should refrain from exercising its jurisdiction over the maritime issue if its resolution is premised on the resolution of the sovereignty issue involved.     

Regional Cooperation in the South China Sea: Analysis of Existing Practices and Prospects

This article identifies potential areas of cooperation in the South China Sea, particularly on ocean-related matters. Several regional mechanisms related to marine and coastal environments have been established and, to an extent, have achieved their goals. Nevertheless, some improvements to existing mechanisms are highly desirable. Recommended is a regional mechanism that involves all bordering parties; limits its geographic scope to the South China Sea; is initiated and operates without the assistance of global organizations; is embodied in a legally binding instrument; and broadens the scope of cooperation to include marine living resources, maritime safety, and maritime security.     

The Obligation to Negotiate in the Philippines v. China Case: A Critique of the Award on Jurisdiction

The two states in the Philippines v. China Case have continually reaffirmed in multiple documents and the 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea that they agreed to resolve their disputes in the South China Sea through consultations and negotiations. However, the Arbitral Tribunal in its Award on Jurisdiction held that no obligation of negotiation was provided for in these instruments because they were not legally binding agreements. Moreover, the Tribunal found that the Philippines had satisfied the “obligation to seek a solution through pacific means, including negotiation.” There are problems and deficiencies in the reasoning of the Tribunal respecting these findings.