By Roy Lie A Tjam.
The South China Sea issue and the Arbitration initiated by the Philippines against China implicate a score of complex legal issues.
This has prompted the Wuhan University Institute of Boundary and Ocean studies and the Leiden University Grotius Centre for International Legal Studies to organize a seminar on the South China Sea Arbitration and the International Rule of Law.
This event was held at the Hilton Hotel in The Hague on the 26th June 2016. Chinese and international scholars shared their academic views regarding issues relevant to the Arbitration. A press briefing was then held on the 27th June at the Hilton Hotel where a forum, composed of some of the scholars mentioned here below briefed the media and answered some questions.
The general view of the seminar is that any verdict by the Arbitral Tribunal on the South China Sea will be of no legal validity. Simply because the related parties have not all entered into an agreement to authorize the Hague-based arbitration body to handle the dispute.
Composition of the forum:
Chair: Lingjie Kong; Mr.Hu Dekun , Dean at Wuhan University China, Mr. Abdul G. Koroma, former judge of the International Court of Justice. Mr. Sreenivasa Rao Pemmaraju, an international lawyer who has served as a chief legal adviser in India’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Mr. Sienho Yee; Mr. Michael Sheng-ti Gau; Professor of International Law at Institute for the Law of the Sea, National Taiwan Ocean University in Keelung; LL.M. (Cantab.); Ph.D. (Leiden).
Mar Hu Dekun, stated, the tribunal is incompetent, inconsistent and not diligent to take the case. Moreover, it does not respect China’s intentions. How will it all end? I can’t make predictions says Hu Dekun, it is a legal matter.
Judge Koroma highlighted how the tribunal has to ascertain what the very nature of the question submitted for arbitration is (prima facie case?) A non-binding advisory opinion could be given to parties concerned. Judge Koroma also added: The tribunal is not entitled to give binding advice. The South China Sea issue is very complex, so many littoral states are involved. A peaceful solution seems to be the best option with the possibility that the tribunal could maybe advise parties on methods for negotiations. I hope wisdom will prevail.
During the Q&A, the representative of China Central TV noted: the view of China is that the tribunal has no jurisdiction, so China will not participate.
According to Mr. Michael Gou of Taiwan, The Philippines only talks about the surface, about symptoms. He illustrated his view on the South China Sea issue by comparing the situation to a customer in a casino. The customer will not go to play at a table if it is obvious that those at the table are corrupt. China is in such a situation it will not recognize the tribunal. Unfortunately, the South China Sea issue is deadlocked.
Mr. Sreenivasa Rao Pemmaraju, notes how a consensus should be reached. ASEAN might be able to play a role in this as negotiation remains an important option. Mr. Sionho Yee also called for negotiations and the need for a consensus to be reached. He highlighted how this should be possible between good neighbors.
