论文部分内容阅读
岛礁法律地位问题是南海仲裁案核心仲裁事项之一,其本质是中国与菲律宾间的领土主权及海域划界争端。仲裁庭在自裁管辖权的基础上,对中国有关外交立场进行了曲解。仲裁庭在阐释《联合国海洋法公约》第121条第3款含义时具有强烈的主观倾向,通过推定意图为缔约国创设权利和义务,偏离了有疑从轻解释和演变性解释的合理化路径,以“释法”之名行“立法”之实,悖离了条约解释的目的。在事实证明阶段,仲裁庭从历史片段中选取的有关南海岛礁的证据,缺乏合法性、真实性和关联性,无法支撑其裁决的合法性和有效性。
The legal status of the islands and reefs is one of the core arbitrations of the South China Sea arbitration case. Its essence is the territorial sovereignty between China and the Philippines and the dispute over maritime boundaries. On the basis of its own jurisdiction, the arbitration tribunal made a misinterpretation of China’s diplomatic position. The arbitral tribunal, in interpreting the meaning of article 121, paragraph 3, of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, has a strong subjective tendency to deviate from the rationalized path of doubtful and light interpretations and evolutionary interpretation through the presumption of creation of rights and obligations for the States parties “Interpretation ” of the name “Legislation ” in fact, contrary to the purpose of treaty interpretation. In the phase of factual proof, the arbitral tribunal’s evidence on the South Island reefs selected from historical fragments lacks legitimacy, authenticity and relevance and can not support the validity and validity of its award.