中國法學會關于菲律賓共和國單方面提起的南海仲裁案的聲明

????????對于菲律賓單方面提起仲裁和菲律賓南海仲裁案仲裁庭無視基本事實，罔顧基本法理，嚴重違背公平正義和法治原則，強行推進仲裁案的行徑，中國法學會代表中國法學界、法律界鄭重聲明如下：

　　中國法學會堅決支持中國政府不接受、不參與、不承認的一貫立場。無論是基于《聯合國海洋法公約》(以下簡稱《公約》)的宗旨、原則和規(guī)定、國際社會公認的基本法理，還是基于基本的歷史事實，菲律賓單方面提起仲裁和仲裁庭強行推進有關程序均是違法、無效的。

　　本案仲裁庭濫用職權，肆意擴大自身管轄范圍。中菲在南海的有關爭議根本不適用《公約》規(guī)定的仲裁程序，雙方協(xié)議選擇了通過談判協(xié)商解決爭議的方法，并排除了第三方程序。菲律賓所提起的事項不屬于《公約》解釋與適用的爭端，本仲裁事項的實質是島礁主權和海洋劃界問題，海域劃界、歷史性海灣或所有權、軍事和執(zhí)法行動等方面的爭端已被中國政府依據《公約》于2006年聲明明確排除在仲裁庭管轄范圍之外。仲裁庭卻對此置若罔聞，視而不見。

　　《公約》旨在尊重國家主權的基礎上建立海洋法律秩序，仲裁庭所作所為卻嚴重背離了《公約》所確立的基本原則，無視中國在南海的主權和主權權利，無視菲律賓提起仲裁程序之前未履行雙邊談判義務的事實，違反《公約》以諒解和合作的方式解決海洋法爭端的精神;仲裁庭還對菲律賓和中國的立場采取雙重標準，嚴重背離公平正義。

　　中國對南海諸島的長期開發(fā)經營和主權管轄歷來為周邊國家所承認，已具有習慣國際法基礎;中國根據《開羅宣言》、《波茨坦公告》等國際法文件確定的二戰(zhàn)后國際法秩序安排，恢復了對南海有關島礁及海域行使主權及其他合法權益，維護和鞏固了二戰(zhàn)以來南海區(qū)域的國際法秩序。

　　仲裁庭有意割裂海洋國際法秩序與整體國際法秩序的有機聯系和統(tǒng)一性，是一種國際法治的倒退。仲裁庭完全不顧南海區(qū)域相關國家談判解決爭端的普遍愿望和《南海各方行為宣言》所確定的和平解決爭端的進程，完全不顧中國和相關國家為解決南海有關爭端問題所作的努力和達成的共識，執(zhí)意作出錯誤裁決。該裁決不僅不能定分止爭，而且進一步激化了矛盾，使爭端解決更加復雜化，將破壞南海地區(qū)的和平與穩(wěn)定。

　　我們認為，菲律賓和仲裁庭所作所為助長了某些國家攪亂南海局勢、阻擋南海地區(qū)和平發(fā)展趨勢的險惡用心，是以仲裁名義導演的反公正、反法治的政治鬧劇，中國法學法律界予以嚴厲譴責。我們呼吁，國際社會正確認識該仲裁案的非法性和危害性，并促請有關國家回到依據國際法原則談判解決南海有關爭端的正確軌道上來。

?

　　China Law Society

　　A Statement on South China Sea Arbitration?Initiated by the Philippines

　　With regard to the unilateral initiation of the South China Sea arbitration by the Philippines and the arbitrary decision by the Arbitral Tribunal to hear the arbitration case in disregard of basic facts, the principles of fairness and rule of law, the China Law Society (CLS) hereby makes the following statement on behalf of the Chinese legal community.

　　CLS stands firmly by the consistent position of the Chinese Government of not accepting, participating in, or recognizing the aforementioned case. No matter judging by the purpose, principles and provisions provided for in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), or the basic principles of law generally acknowledged by the international community, or basic historical facts, it would all be illegal and invalid for the Philippines to unilaterally initiate the arbitration and for the Arbitral Tribunal to have pushed forward the relevant proceedings.

　　The Arbitral Tribunal abused its authority and willfully expanded the scope of its jurisdiction. The arbitration procedure under UNCLOS is not applicable to the relevant disputes between China and the Philippines in the South China Sea. The two sides had agreed to settle the disputes through negotiations and consultations, and therefore excluded any third-party procedure. The Philippines' submissions do not fall within the interpretation and application of UNCLOS and are in essence related to territorial sovereignty and maritime delimitation. Furthermore, the Chinese Government's declaration in year 2006 on optional exception has explicitly excluded disputes concerning maritime delimitation, historic bays or titles, as well as military and law enforcement activities from the dispute resolution procedures of UNCLOS. The Arbitral Tribunal, however, chose to ignore and turn a blind eye to all this.

　　In so-doing the Arbitral Tribunal has grossly deviated from the basic principles established by UNCLOS，which is to establish maritime legal order on the basis of respecting the sovereignty of the State Parties. It disregarded China's sovereignty and sovereign rights in the South China Sea, and glossed over the fact that the Philippines had failed to perform its legal obligations to hold bilateral consultation before initiating the arbitration procedure, running counter to the spirit of UNCLOS of settling maritime disputes through understanding and cooperation. The Tribunal also breached the principles of fairness and justice by applying double standards to the positions of the Philippines and China.

　　China's long history of development, management and jurisdiction in the South China Sea has long been recognized by neighboring countries, which has gained the status of customary international law. As part of the post-WWII international legal order underpinned by such international legal instruments as the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation, China resumed its exercise of sovereignty and restored its legal rights over the islands and reefs as well as waters of the South China Sea, which has contributed to the maintenance of such legal order in the South China Sea region.

　　The Arbitral Tribunal intentionally broke the intrinsic connection between the maritime international legal order and the general international legal order, which is a regression of international rule of law. The Arbitral Tribunal’s award completely disregards the general desire among relevant countries in the South China Sea region to settle disputes through dialogue, and the process of peaceful dispute settlement as established by the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC). It also defies the endeavor that China and relevant countries have made and the consensus they have reached to settle South China Sea disputes. The award, rather than contributing in any way to dispute resolution, will only further complicate the disputes, and damage peace and stability in the South China Sea.

　　The acts of the Philippines and of the Arbitral Tribunal, in our opinion, have emboldened the attempt in some quarters to create tension in the South China Sea and undercut the trend of peaceful development in this region. The arbitration is a political farce in the name of law. The Chinese legal community gravely deplores this. We call on the international community to recognize the illegal and harmful nature of the arbitration, and urge the relevant countries to come back to the right track of settling disputes through dialogue in accordance with the principles of international law.