UNCLOS

WEST PHILIPPINE SEA

What is UNCLOS?
● The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)
establishes a comprehensive legal framework to govern all
activities and uses of the world's seas and oceans.
● The Convention defines the limits of territorial seas of countries
from which they can explore and exploit marine resources.
● It was adopted in1982 in Montego Bay, Jamaica after nine years of
negotiations. UNCLOS entered into force in 16 November 1994. as
of January 2015, 166 countries and European Union have joined
the Convention.
The Philippines is the
11th country that
ratified the Convention.
 Commitments of UNCLOS
After a State becomes a party to UNCLOS, it The Convention madates member
is compelled to bring its maritime claims and states to promote the development and
national laws into conformity with its rights transfer of marine technology "on fair
and obligations under the Convention. It is a and reasonable terms and conditions",
fundamental principle of international law with proper regard for all legitimate
that a State cannot use its domestic law as interest.
an excuse not to conform to its obligations
under an international treaty to which it is a
party. Hence, the provisions of UNCLOS
prevail over any contrary provisions in the
national laws of the State.
All parties to the Convention are
obligated to settle disputes
concerning the application of the
Convention through peaceful
means. Disputes are coursed
through the International Tribunal for
the Law of the Sea under the
UNCLOS to the International Court
of Justice for arbitration. Conciliation
is also available and, in certain
circumstances, submission to it
would be compulsory.
A vital function of NAMRIA involves
the delineation of the national
maritime jurisdiction in accordance
with the provisions of the United
Nations Convention On the Law of
the Sea (UNCLOS). However,
matters related to Philippines'
maritime dispute with China on the
country's claim in the West Philippine
Sea are dealt with through the Office
of the President and the Department
of Foreign Affairs.
PHILIPPINES
vs. CHINA
Philippines v. China (PCA case number 2013–
19), also known as the South China Sea
Arbitration, was an arbitration case brought by
the Republic of the Philippines against the
People's Republic of China under Annex VII to
the United Nations Convention on the Law of the
Sea (UNCLOS) concerning certain issues in the
South China Sea including the legality of China's
Nine-dash line.
On 29 October 2015, the PCA published
the award by the tribunal on
Jurisdiction and Admissibility for the
case. The tribunal found that it has
jurisdiction to consider the following
seven Philippines' Submissions. (Each
number is the Philippines' Submissions
number.) The tribunal reserved
consideration of its jurisdiction to rule
on Nos. 1, 2, 5, 8, 9, 12, and 14.
● No.3 Philippines'position that Scarborough Shoal is a rock under Article 121(3).
● No.4 Philippines' position that Mischief Reef, Second Thomas Shoal, and Subi Reef
are low tide elevations that do not generate entitlement to maritime zones.
● No.6 Whether Gaven Reef and McKennan Reef (including Hughes Reef) are low-tide
elevations "that do not generate any maritime entitlements of their own".
● No.7 Whether Johnson Reef, Cuarteron Reef, and Fiery Cross Reef do or do not
generate an entitlement to an exclusive economic zone or continental shelf.
● No.10 "premised on [the] fact that China has unlawfully prevented Philippine
fishermen from carrying out traditional fishing activities within the territorial sea of
Scarborough Shoal."
● No.11 "China's failure to protect and preserve the marine environment at these two
shoals [Scarborough Shoal and Second Thomas Shoal]."
● No.13 Philippines’ protest against China's "purported law enforcement activities as
violating the Convention on the International Regulations for the Prevention of
Collisions at Sea and also violating UNCLOS"
TIMELINE
● 22 January 2013 – Philippines served China with notification and Statement of
Claim
● 19 February 2013 – China rejected the Philippines' Notification
● 11 July 2013 – First meeting of the arbitral tribunal at The Hague
● 31 July 2013 – Philippines commented on draft Rules of Procedure for the
Tribunal
● 1 August 2013 – China indicated that "it does not accept the arbitration initiated by
the Philippines"
● 27 August 2013 – Procedural Order No 1 issued via PCA Press Release on
behalf of the arbitral tribunal
● 30 March 2014 – Submission of the Philippines Memorial
● 14–15 May 2014 – Second meeting of the arbitral tribunal at The Hague
● 21 May 2014 – China comments on draft Procedural Order No 2 and observes
that "it does not accept the arbitration initiated by the Philippines".
● 29 May 2014 – Philippines comments on draft Procedural Order No 2
● 3 June 2014 – Procedural Order No 2 issued via PCA Press Release on behalf of
the arbitral tribunal
● 15 December 2014 – China had not filed a Counter-Memorial
● 17 December 2014 – Procedural Order No 3 issued via PCA Press Release on
behalf of the arbitral tribunal
● 16 March 2015 – The Philippines made a Supplemental Written Submission to
the Arbitral Tribunal
● 20–21 April 2015 – Third meeting of the arbitral tribunal at The Hague
● 22 April 2015 – Procedural Order No 4 issued via PCA Press Release on behalf
of the arbitral tribunal
● 7–13 July 2015 – Hearing of the arbitral tribunal at The Hague
● 29 October 2015 – PCA issued the Award on jurisdiction and admissibility
● 12 July 2016 - The tribunal of PCA gave a verdict claiming that China has no legal
basis or historic claim on the Nine-dash line. China rejected the ruling, despite
stating that all nations should 'respect international laws'