外交部条约法律司司长徐宏谈中国政府就菲律宾所提南海仲裁案发表管辖权问题立场文件

Remarks by Mr. Xu Hong, Director-General of the Department of Treaty and Law of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, on the Position Paper of the Government of the People’s Republic of China on the Matter of Jurisdiction in the South China Sea Arbitration Initiated by the Republic of the Philippines

 

2014年12月7日，外交部受权发表中国政府关于菲律宾所提南海仲裁案管辖权问题的立场文件。外交部条约法律司司长徐宏就此接受了新华社记者的专访。

 

On 7 December 2014, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China is authorized to release thePosition Paper of the Government of the People’s Republic of China on the Matter of Jurisdiction in the South China Sea Arbitration Initiated by the Republic of the Philippines. Mr. Xu Hong, Director-General of the Department of Treaty and Law of the Foreign Ministry, gave an interview to the Xinhua News Agency on this occasion.

 

记者：为什么我国政府要针对菲律宾所提南海仲裁案就管辖权问题发表立场文件？

 

Xinhua: Why does our government need to publish a position paper on the matter of jurisdiction in the South China Sea arbitration initiated by the Philippines?

 

徐宏：2013年1月22日，菲律宾单方面就中菲有关南海问题提起国际仲裁。中国政府对此坚决反对，一再申明中国不接受、不参与仲裁的严正立场。

 

Xu Hong: On 22 January 2013, the Philippines unilaterally initiated international arbitral proceedings regarding the dispute with China in the South China Sea. The Chinese Government is firmly opposed to that, and has reiterated on several occasions its firm position not to accept or participate in the arbitration.

 

菲律宾不顾中国的强烈反对，执意推进仲裁程序。一些人士不明真相，对中国不接受、不参与仲裁表示疑惑。还有人别有用心，片面或歪曲解读有关国际法规则，藉此指责或影射中国不遵守国际法，妄称中国为国际规则的“挑战者”。

 

Despite China’s strong objection, the Philippines has been obstinately pushing forward the arbitral proceedings. Some people, who do not know the truth, have questioned China’s position of not accepting or participating in the arbitration. Some others, who harbor ulterior motives, have made one-sided and misleading readings of international rules and, on that basis, made accusations or insinuations that China does not abide by international law, and perversely branded China as a “challenger” to international rules.

 

针对这些情况，中国政府发表立场文件，从法律上阐明中国认为仲裁庭没有管辖权的立场和理据，阐明中国不接受、不参与该仲裁有充分的国际法依据，以匡正视听。

 

In response to this situation and with a view to clearing up the confusion, the Chinese Government publishes thePosition Paper to elaborate on the legal basis for China’s position that the Arbitral Tribunal manifestly has no jurisdiction in this case and to demonstrate that China’s position not to accept or participate in the proceedings stands on solid ground in international law.

 

记者：我国政府的立场文件明确指出，仲裁庭对于菲律宾提起的仲裁没有管辖权。这一立场的主要依据是什么？

 

Xinhua: Our government’s Position Paper clearly states that the Arbitral Tribunal has no jurisdiction in the arbitration initiated by the Philippines. What are the grounds for this position?

 

徐宏：仲裁庭对菲律宾提起的仲裁没有管辖权，这是十分明显的，立场文件主要从三个方面加以论述。

 

Xu Hong: It is quite obvious that the Arbitral Tribunal has no jurisdiction in the arbitration. The Position Paper presents this view by making analyses from the following three aspects.

 

一是从菲律宾提请仲裁事项的实质来分析。菲律宾提出的仲裁事项本质上是领土主权问题，而领土主权问题超出了《联合国海洋法公约》（下称“《公约》”）的范畴。《公约》框架下的强制争端解决程序仅限于处理有关《公约》解释或适用的争端，无权处理《公约》以外的事项。

 

First, the essence of the Philippines’ claims. The subject-matter of the Philippines’ claims is in essence an issue of territorial sovereignty, which, however, goes beyond the scope of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea(“Convention”). The dispute settlement procedures within the framework of the Convention are only confined to disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention and therefore are not competent to address a matter falling outside the scope of the Convention.

 

二是从中菲之间已经达成的协议来分析。中菲两国之间通过一系列双边和多边文件，已经就通过友好磋商和谈判的方式解决在南海的争端达成共识，排除了其他方式。这是双方之间的国际法义务。菲律宾单方面就有关争端提起仲裁，违反了两国之间的协议，违反了国际法。

 

Second, the bilateral agreement reached between China and the Philippines concerning this issue. Through a series of bilateral and multilateral instruments, China and the Philippines have agreed to settle their disputes in the South China Sea through friendly consultations and negotiations, to the exclusion of all other means. This is a mutual obligation binding on the two States under international law. By unilaterally submitting the dispute to arbitration, the Philippines has breached the agreement between the two States and violated international law.

 

三是从《公约》本身的争端解决条款来分析。即使菲律宾提出的仲裁事项在某些方面可能被认为涉及有关《公约》解释或适用的问题，但它也是中菲海域划界不可分割的组成部分，而中国已于2006年根据《公约》第二百九十八条作出声明，将涉及海域划界等事项的争端排除适用仲裁等强制争端解决程序。

 

Third, the dispute settlement clauses of the Convention itself. Even if the subject-matter of the Philippines’ claims could be considered in part as concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention, it constitutes an integral part of maritime delimitation between China and the Philippines. However, China has already excluded, through a declaration made in 2006 pursuant to Article 298 of the Convention, disputes concerning maritime delimitation, inter alia, from the application of arbitration and other compulsory procedures.

 

从上述三个方面可以清楚地看出，仲裁庭对菲律宾提出的仲裁事项明显没有管辖权。

 

It follows from the above three points that the Arbitral Tribunal manifestly has no jurisdiction over the claims that the Philippines has submitted for arbitration.

 

记者：有一种观点认为，菲律宾提起仲裁是依据《公约》的规定，仲裁本身也是和平解决争端的方式；中国是《公约》缔约国，也一贯主张和平解决国际争端，但却不接受、不参与该仲裁，令人难以信服。请问对此有何评论？

 

Xinhua: There is one view saying that the arbitration the Philippines has initiated pursuant to the Convention is in itself a peaceful means of dispute settlement; yet, China, a party to the Convention and a champion of peaceful settlement of international disputes, has refused to accept or participate in this arbitration. This makes China’s stand look unconvincing. How would you comment on this?

 

徐宏：国家之间和平解决争端的方式有很多，其中最主要、最优先的方式是当事国直接谈判，而非仲裁。

 

Xu Hong: States have at their disposal many ways of resolving disputes peacefully. The most important and preferred means is direct negotiation between the State parties to a dispute, rather than arbitration.

 

根据国际法，选择何种方式解决争端是各当事国的主权权利。国际仲裁只是其中的一种方式，而且这种方式必须遵循“国家同意”原则，以当事各国的同意为基础。在一个双边争议中，如果一方不接受、不参与仲裁，另一方不得强行提起仲裁。

 

Under international law, it is the sovereign right of the States concerned to choose a means of dispute settlement. Arbitration is only one of the means, and it must be based on the principle of consent. In a bilateral dispute, if one party does not accept or participate in arbitration, the other party shall not institute arbitration against its will.

 

《公约》虽然规定了强制仲裁等强制争端解决程序，但适用这类程序是有条件和限制的。这类程序只能用于处理有关《公约》解释或适用的争端；如果当事国之间自行选择了其他的争端解决方式，也优先于这类强制程序；一方当事国还可根据《公约》作出声明，将特定事项排除适用强制争端解决程序。

 

Although the Convention provides for arbitration and other compulsory procedures for dispute settlement, recourse to this category of procedures is subject to conditions and constraints. This category of procedures can only be employed to settle disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention. If the State parties to a dispute have chosen other means of dispute settlement of their own accord, the chosen means has priority over this category of procedures. Furthermore, a State party may also make a declaration pursuant to the Convention to exclude specified categories of disputes from the application of the compulsory procedures.

 

对于菲律宾提起的仲裁，如前所谈，仲裁事项的实质是根本不属于《公约》调整范围的领土主权问题；中菲之间已达成通过谈判解决有关争端的协议；而且中国从未就有关争端接受强制程序。因此，菲律宾单方面提起强制仲裁显然是滥用《公约》规定的强制争端解决程序。国际上不应该提倡这种做法。中国不接受、不参与菲律宾提起的仲裁，是捍卫自主选择争端解决方式的主权权利，是行使国际法所赋予的权利，有充分的国际法依据。

 

Regarding the arbitration initiated by the Philippines, as discussed above, the essence of the subject-matter of its claims is territorial sovereignty, an issue completely beyond the scope of the Convention. China and the Philippines have reached agreement to settle their relevant disputes through negotiation. And China has never accepted any compulsory procedures for the relevant disputes. It follows that the unilateral initiation of compulsory arbitration by the Philippines is a clear abuse of the compulsory procedures provided for in the Convention. Such a practice is and should be frowned upon internationally. By refusing to accept or participate in the arbitration initiated by the Philippines China is defending its sovereign right to choose a means of dispute settlement of its free will. Our decision is an exercise of the rights we enjoy under international law, and is well founded on international law.

 

记者：菲律宾的核心诉求涉及中国依据南海断续线所主张的权利，国际上也有一些声音希望中国依据国际法澄清南海断续线的含义，而立场文件并未回答这些问题，请问是如何考虑的？

 

Xinhua: A core claim made by the Philippines concerns the maritime rights China asserts on the basis of the dotted line in the South China Sea. Some voices in the world have expressed the hope that China clarify the meaning of the dotted line. But the Position Paper does not answer these questions. What are the considerations behind this?

 

徐宏：1948年，中国政府在官方地图上标绘了南海断续线。立场文件在叙述有关南海问题的历史经纬时提及这一史实。

 

Xu Hong: In 1948, the Chinese Government published an official map that displayed the dotted line in the South China Sea. The Position Paper does mention this fact when setting out the historical background to the relevant dispute in the South China Sea.

 

中国在有关问题上的立场是一贯的、明确的。中国对南海诸岛及其附近海域拥有无可争辩的主权。中国在南海的主权和权益是在长期的历史过程中形成和发展起来的，有充分的历史和法律依据，一直为中国政府所坚持。

 

China’s position on the relevant issue is consistent and clear. China has indisputable sovereignty over the South China Sea Islands and the adjacent waters. China’s sovereignty and maritime rights and interests in the South China Sea have formed and evolved over a long course of history. They are solidly grounded in history and law and have been continuously upheld by the Chinese Government.

 

在不接受、不参与菲律宾所提仲裁的前提下，中国政府的立场文件阐明了仲裁庭对于仲裁案没有管辖权，而不就仲裁事项所涉实体问题作出回应。这一点在立场文件的引言部分作了清楚的说明。

 

Given China’s decision not to accept or participate in the arbitration, the Position Paper of the Chinese Governmentonly expounds on its view that the Arbitral Tribunal has no jurisdiction over this case. It does not address the substantive issues involved in the arbitration. This point is made very clear in the introduction of the Position Paper.

 

记者：据了解，仲裁庭要求中国于今年12月15日前提交辩诉状。我国政府选择在这个时机发表立场文件，是否可理解为是对仲裁庭上述要求的回应？立场文件的发表会对仲裁庭发挥何种作用？

 

Xinhua: It has been learned that the Arbitral Tribunal requested that China submit its counter-memorial before 15 December of this year. Our government has chosen to publish the Position Paper at this juncture. May the Position Paperbe considered as a response to the request of the Arbitral Tribunal? What effect will the Position Paper have on the Arbitral Tribunal?

 

徐宏：中国政府的立场文件不是关于仲裁案的辩诉状，也不是针对仲裁庭的要求作出的回应。发表政府立场文件，不意味着中国接受或参与菲律宾提起的仲裁。中国不接受、不参与该仲裁的立场不会改变。

 

Xu Hong: The Position Paper of the Chinese Government is neither a counter-memorial on the arbitration nor a response to the request of the Arbitral Tribunal. The publication of the Position Paper does not represent China’s acceptance of or participation in the arbitration initiated by the Philippines. China’s position not to accept or participate in the arbitration will not change.

 

中国政府发表立场文件，针对仲裁案管辖权问题阐述法律观点和理据，从法律上反驳了菲律宾的无理主张，也彰显了中国维护和促进国际法治的形象。我相信，任何真正秉持法治精神的机构和人士都会尊重和理解中国政府的立场。

 

The Chinese Government publishes this Position Paper in order to set forth its legal positions, together with due reasoning and support, on the matter of jurisdiction in this arbitration. On the basis of international law, this Position Paper debunks the Philippines’ groundless assertions and projects China’s image as a defender and promoter of the international rule of law. I believe that any organ or individual that conscientiously upholds the rule of law will respect and appreciate the stand of the Chinese Government.

 

记者：我国政府发表立场文件，对处理南海有关争端、维护南海的和平稳定有何积极意义？

 

Xinhua: What positive effect will the publication of the Position Paper have on the settlement of relevant disputes in the South China Sea and the maintenance of peace and stability in the South China Sea?

 

徐宏：立场文件从法律上阐明，为什么仲裁庭对于菲律宾单方面提起的强制仲裁没有管辖权，为什么中国不接受、不参与仲裁于法有据。立场文件同时强调，谈判始终是国际法认可的和平解决国际争端最直接、最有效和最普遍的方式。它向国际社会传递一种信息：有关国家要妥善解决在南海的争端，强加于人行不通，磋商谈判是正道。

 

Xu Hong: The Position Paper elucidates legally why the Arbitral Tribunal has no jurisdiction over the compulsory arbitration unilaterally initiated by the Philippines and why China’s decision not to accept or participate in the arbitration is well grounded in law. At the same time, the Position Paper stresses that negotiation is recognized by international law as the most direct, most effective and most frequently used means of peaceful settlement of international disputes. It sends a message to the international community that the relevant countries must properly handle their disputes in the South China Sea; any attempt to impose one’s will on others will get nowhere, and consultation and negotiation is the right way forward.

 

正如立场文件所指出的那样，通过谈判，中国已与绝大多数陆地邻国彻底解决了边界问题，也与越南划定了两国在北部湾的海上边界。事实证明，存在分歧不可怕，问题复杂也不可怕，只要相关国家秉持善意，在平等的基础上进行友好磋商和谈判，就可以增进互信、积累共识，逐步妥善解决领土争端和海域划界问题。处理南海问题理应如此。

 

As pointed out in the Position Paper, through negotiation China has settled its land boundary with almost all of its neighbours and has delimited its maritime boundary in Beibu Bay with Vietnam. Facts have shown that the existence of differences is nothing to be afraid of, neither is the complexity of the issues. As long as the relevant countries have the goodwill and engage in friendly consultations and negotiations on an equal footing, they can enhance mutual trust, expand common understanding and gradually and properly settle their territorial and maritime delimitation disputes. The same is true with the South China Sea issue.

 

中国敦促菲律宾尽快回到通过谈判解决争议的正确轨道上来。中国也愿与有关各国一道，在尊重历史事实和国际法的基础上，通过谈判妥处分歧，加强合作追求共赢，共同维护南海的和平稳定。

 

China urges the Philippines to return as soon as possible to the right track of negotiation to settle the disputes. China is also ready to work with all relevant countries to properly resolve their disputes through negotiation and on the basis of respect for historical facts and international law, and strengthen win-win cooperation, to jointly maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea.

 

来源：中国外交部网

心译翻译工作室