News Content
Philippines' Hague court plea denies China's historic rights: Xinhua
THE Philippines' submission at the Arbitral Tribunal on the South China Sea contains "many confusing concepts" aimed at denying China's historical rights, exposing the Philippines' "ignorance and prejudice", according to Xinhua editor Zhang Jianfeng.
In its arbitration statement, the Philippines claimed that the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) has never mentioned historical rights.
"The Philippines undoubtedly misinterpreted the content of the convention. In fact, many articles of the UNCLOS recognise the concepts of 'historic bays" and 'historic waters", Mr Zhang said.
For example, Article 15 of the convention states: "The above provision does not apply, however, where it is necessary by reason of historic title or other special circumstances to delimit the territorial seas of the two states in a way, which is at variance therewith."
"The Philippines claimed that the historical rights mentioned by China had been clearly denied and abolished by the UNCLOS makers, attempting to imply that none of historical rights should be included in the international law.
"In fact, however, no rights could come into being instantly and those rights established in history undoubtedly should be respected by the international law," Mr Zhang said.
"In its submission, the Philippines said that China's Nine-Dash line in the South China Sea lacks a link to the history, claiming that China's historical rights were a new proposal it put forward in 2009.
"In fact, China was the first country to discover, denominate, develop and control the South China Sea islands. The Chinese people's navigation and trade on the South China Sea and jurisdiction over the area has a history of more than 2,000 years, which provides firm evidence for China's historical rights on the South China Sea," said Mr Zhang.
"History cannot be denied and is not allowed to be denied. By whatever legal means or with whatever arguments, China's historical rights are right there. Whether an arbitral award is to be issued or not, history and the rights it offers are indisputable facts.
"As an old Chinese saying goes, an unclear mind can never make it clear to others. The Philippines' submission has ignored not only history but also existing judicial cases, which, along with the current arbitration case itself, will become a laughingstock in history," Mr Zhang said.
In its arbitration statement, the Philippines claimed that the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) has never mentioned historical rights.
"The Philippines undoubtedly misinterpreted the content of the convention. In fact, many articles of the UNCLOS recognise the concepts of 'historic bays" and 'historic waters", Mr Zhang said.
For example, Article 15 of the convention states: "The above provision does not apply, however, where it is necessary by reason of historic title or other special circumstances to delimit the territorial seas of the two states in a way, which is at variance therewith."
"The Philippines claimed that the historical rights mentioned by China had been clearly denied and abolished by the UNCLOS makers, attempting to imply that none of historical rights should be included in the international law.
"In fact, however, no rights could come into being instantly and those rights established in history undoubtedly should be respected by the international law," Mr Zhang said.
"In its submission, the Philippines said that China's Nine-Dash line in the South China Sea lacks a link to the history, claiming that China's historical rights were a new proposal it put forward in 2009.
"In fact, China was the first country to discover, denominate, develop and control the South China Sea islands. The Chinese people's navigation and trade on the South China Sea and jurisdiction over the area has a history of more than 2,000 years, which provides firm evidence for China's historical rights on the South China Sea," said Mr Zhang.
"History cannot be denied and is not allowed to be denied. By whatever legal means or with whatever arguments, China's historical rights are right there. Whether an arbitral award is to be issued or not, history and the rights it offers are indisputable facts.
"As an old Chinese saying goes, an unclear mind can never make it clear to others. The Philippines' submission has ignored not only history but also existing judicial cases, which, along with the current arbitration case itself, will become a laughingstock in history," Mr Zhang said.
Latest News
- For the first time, tianjin Port realized the whole process of dock operati...
- From January to August, piracy incidents in Asia increased by 38%!The situa...
- Quasi-conference TSA closes as role redundant in mega merger world
- Singapore says TPP, born again as CPTPP, is now headed for adoption
- Antwerp posts 5th record year with boxes up 4.3pc to 10 million TEU
- Savannah lifts record 4 million TEU in '17 as it deepens port
