I Told You So Part 2

[ZummerSoltice]

𝐋𝐞𝐱 𝐒𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬 𝐃𝐞𝐫𝐨𝐠𝐚𝐭 𝐋𝐞𝐠𝐢 𝐆𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬: 𝐎𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐥𝐞 𝟏𝟐𝟑 𝐔𝐍𝐂𝐋𝐎𝐒 𝐝𝐮𝐭𝐲 𝐭𝐨 𝐜𝐨𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐨𝐮𝐭𝐡 𝐂𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐚 𝐒𝐞𝐚

The Aquino Administration's invention of the West Philippine Sea created a FALSE impression among the minds of Filipinos that there are pockets of water that could be separated legally, geographically, and ecologically in the South China Sea. By renaming a huge portion of the South China Sea as the West Philippine Sea, the Aquino Administration created a notion that there are areas that can just be the South China Sea, while some of it can just be the West Philippine Sea.

That the West Philippine Sea refers only to the maritime areas the Philippines claims has no relevance at all in the Arbitration Tribunal because those maritime areas are in the South China Sea. It's after all called the "South China Sea Arbitration” by the Arbitral Tribunal in The Hague under then registry of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) and NOT the "West Philippine Sea Arbitration.”

If the arbitration decision is only about the "area of the maritime claims of the Philippines,then it should have just been named as “The West Philippine Sea Arbitration.”It wasn't.

The fictitious disentanglement of the "West Philippine Sea” from the “South China Sea” has a huge implication on how the Philippines would think about its rights and duties in its EEZ.

The South China Sea is a “semi-enclosed sea.” Under UNCLOS, semi-enclosed seas are governed by a special provision.

The EEZ rights, duties, and jurisdiction that are listed in Article 56 of the UNCLOS is a provision governing general matters. This applies in seas, in their general form.

Article 123 of UNCLOS is a provision that governs a specific form of sea — enclosed and semi-enclosed seas. And an important legal doctrine in interpreting law is 𝒍𝒆𝒙 𝒔𝒑𝒆𝒄𝒊𝒂𝒍𝒊𝒔 𝒅𝒆𝒓𝒐𝒈𝒂𝒕 𝒍𝒆𝒈𝒊 𝒈𝒆𝒏𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒍𝒊𝒔, which means that a specific rule prevails over a general rule.

Article 123 of UNCLOS obliges States bordering a semi-enclosed sea, such as the South China Sea, to "cooperate with each other in the exercise of their rights and in the performance of their duties under the Convention.”

Further, it obliges States to “endeavour… to coordinate the management, conservation, exploration, and exploitation of the living resources of the sea; to coordinate the implementation of their rights and duties with respect to the protection and preservation of the marine environment; to coordinate their scientific research policies and undertake where appropriate joint programmes of scientific research in the area…”

Thus, in an enclosed or semi-enclosed sea, Article 123 imposes a duty to cooperate with the other Coastal States in the exercise of its rights and duties.

The memorial Ireland sent to the Arbitral Tribunal on the MOX Plant Case (Ireland v. the United Kingdom) provides illumination on what this duty entails: “On a plain reading of the text, this must mean that the implementation of management and conservation policies, and of rights and duties, must in every case proceed with an awareness of the actual (as opposed to the hypothetical) interests of other littoral States and in such a way as to pursue the goal of coordination. Unilateral actions taking no account of the interests and rights or polices of neighbouring States, and making no attempt to coordinate with them, are plainly incompatible with the duty in Article 123.”

(You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.)

The Aquino Administratio “West Philippine Sea” has created an impression among Filipinos that the country can pursue its rights and duties under UNCLOS without cooperating and coordinating with the coastal States of the South China Sea, and worse, it encourages the illusion that the Philippines could pursue a policy that would exclude other coastal States. In semi-enclosed seas, such as the South China Sea, UNCLOS obliges cooperation and does not encourage exclusion.

Furthermore, the Filipino jingoistic and unthinking supporters of BBM and the Yellows should, once and for all, read the South China Sea Arbitration decision and its annexes, which are all available on the website of the Permanent Court of Arbitration.

I trust that their reading comprehension skills are competent enough to understand this fact.

Professor Sands, one of the lawyers of the Philippines, stressed this point durong the arbitration: the claims of the Philippines are“made entirely without prejudice to China's territorial assertions, or indeed the territorial assertions of any other state.”This can be found in Sentences 17-21, Page 98 of 𝑻𝒓𝒂𝒏𝒔𝒄𝒓𝒊𝒑𝒕 𝑫𝒂𝒚 1 - 𝑯𝒆𝒂𝒓𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒐𝒏 𝑱𝒖𝒓𝒊𝒔𝒅𝒊𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝑨𝒅𝒎𝒊𝒔𝒔𝒊𝒃𝒊𝒍𝒊𝒕𝒚, 7 July 2015, which you can read at: You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now..

Lawyers use“without prejudice" in order to assure parties in a dispute that their positions would not be weakened.

Paragraph 153 of the 𝑨𝒘𝒂𝒓𝒅 𝒐𝒏 𝑱𝒖𝒓𝒊𝒔𝒅𝒊𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝑨𝒅𝒎𝒊𝒔𝒔𝒊𝒃𝒊𝒍𝒊𝒕𝒚 (20 October 2015), stresses that “The Philippines has not asked the Tribunal to rule on sovereignty and, indeed, has expressly and repeatedly requested that the Tribunal refrain from so doing.”

In Paragraph 272, the South China Sea Arbitral Tribunal offered this important caveat ob 𝑨𝒘𝒂𝒓𝒅 (12 July 2016):

“…because the Tribunal considers the question of historic rights with respect to maritime areas to be entirely distinct from that of historic rights to land, the Tribunal considers it opportune to note that certain claims remain unaffected by this decision. In particular, the Tribunal emphasises that nothing in this Award should be understood to comment in any way on China's historic claim to the islands of the South China Sea.” While the Tribunal found that hisorical rights on the basis of the“nine-dash line”is not compatible with UNCLOS, the Tribunal said that their decision does not limit the ability of China to claim maritime zones “in accordance with the Convention, on the basis of such islands.”

After you respond to this with ad hominems, which you have the right to do, may your neurons allow you to actually think deeper.

 

[plhbg1]

naalala ko pa yung bardagulan between yellowtards at pulanggots, it turned out na magkakampi pala sila, si liza-tanas ngayon yung yellow wing nila, pinag laruan lang nila mga supporters nila, parehas lang sila mag isip mga bo̾bo gawin ba namang pagmamay-ari ang WPS