中菲南海争端管辖权探究

发布时间：2019-04-25 22:59

【摘要】：中菲南海争端,主要是围绕岛礁主权归属及海域划界问题而引发的争议。争端始于20世纪50年代初,驻菲律宾苏比克湾的美国军队无视中国主权,擅自将黄岩岛开辟成为靶场。在此后超过半个世纪的时间里,中菲两国就南海问题不断交涉,但始终没有取得实质性的成果,菲律宾也不顾中方劝阻,一次次做出侵犯中方主权的行为。为南海问题建立长效稳固的法律机制是解决南海问题的必由之路,也是双方共同的需要。2013年3月26日,菲律宾单方面将南海争端提交国际海洋法法庭,而国际法庭欲“强行”仲裁南海争端。2013年4月初,中菲南海争端并未提交至国际海洋法法庭,而是遵照《联合国海洋法公约》的规定,并在争端一方菲律宾的要求下,进入到争端解决机制之一的“仲裁”程序中。中菲南海问题的性质如何,菲律宾是否可以将中菲南海争端提交国际海洋法法庭,这一切的法律问题都需要解决,这一切的问题都是由于未能明确强制争端解决机制的适用对象而导致的。中方坚持认为:菲律宾提请仲裁事项的实质是南海部分岛礁的领土主权问题,超出《公约》的调整范围,不涉及《公约》的解释或适用;以谈判方式解决有关争端是中菲两国通过双边文件和《南海各方行为宣言》所达成的协议,菲律宾单方面将中菲有关争端提交强制仲裁违反国际法;即使菲律宾提出的仲裁事项涉及有关《公约》解释或适用的问题,也构成中菲两国海域划界不可分割的组成部分,而中国已根据《公约》的规定于2006年作出声明,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。明确国际仲裁庭的管辖范围,确定国际仲裁庭的行为是否违反了《联合国海洋法公约》的规定是判定中菲南海仲裁是否合法的前提和依据,也是中国应对提供了参考。根据国际法,各国享有自主选择争端解决方式的权利。任何国际司法或仲裁机构针对国家间争端行使管辖权必须以当事国的同意为基础,即“国家同意原则”。在具体的国际争端解决中,国际仲裁法院对中菲南海争端不具有管辖权,国际仲裁法院的仲裁也无法为中方所接受。本文探讨的一个重要话题就在于国际仲裁法院的管辖边界在哪里?对于此次中菲南海争端究竟是否有管辖权。只有明确了这个问题才可以为我国的领土争端提供有价值的参考,也可以为今后类似问题的解决提供学理上的支持,使得相关理论更加的完善,为同类国际争端的解决提供参考。
[Abstract]:The dispute over the South China Sea between China and the Philippines is mainly caused by disputes over the sovereignty of islands and reefs and the delimitation of maritime areas. The dispute began in the early 1950s, when American troops in Subek Bay, Philippines, ignored Chinese sovereignty and opened Huangyan Island as a shooting range. For more than half a century since then, China and the Philippines have repeatedly negotiated the South China Sea issue, but have never achieved substantial results, and the Philippines has repeatedly violated China's sovereignty despite China's dissuasion. The establishment of a long-term and stable legal mechanism for the South China Sea issue is the only way to resolve the South China Sea issue and also a common need for both sides. On 26 March 2013, the Philippines unilaterally referred the dispute in the South China Sea to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. In early April 2013, the South China Sea dispute between China and the Philippines was not referred to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, but in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and at the request of the Philippines, one of the parties to the dispute, Enter into the "arbitration" procedure of one of the dispute settlement mechanisms. What is the nature of the South China Sea issue between China and the Philippines and whether the Philippines can refer the dispute between China and the Philippines to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea? all these legal issues need to be resolved. All these problems are due to the failure to clarify the subject of the compulsory dispute settlement mechanism. China maintains that the substance of the matters submitted by the Philippines for arbitration is the territorial sovereignty of some islands and reefs in the South China Sea, which goes beyond the scope of adjustment of the Convention and does not involve the interpretation or application of the Convention; The settlement of the dispute through negotiation is an agreement reached between China and the Philippines through bilateral documents and the Declaration on the Conduct of the parties in the South China Sea. The Philippines unilaterally submitted the related dispute between China and the Philippines to compulsory arbitration in violation of international law; Even if the arbitration matter raised by the Philippines concerns issues relating to the interpretation or application of the Convention, it constitutes an integral part of the delimitation of maritime areas between China and the Philippines, and China has made a declaration in 2006 in accordance with the provisions of the Convention, Exclusion of disputes involving maritime delimitation and other matters subject to compulsory dispute settlement procedures such as arbitration. Clarifying the jurisdiction of the international arbitral tribunal and determining whether the conduct of the international arbitral tribunal is in violation of the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea is the premise and basis for determining whether the arbitration in the South China Sea between China and the Philippines is lawful, and it is also a reference for China's response. Under international law, States have the right to choose their own dispute settlement methods. The exercise of jurisdiction by any international judicial or arbitral body in respect of disputes between States must be based on the consent of the parties, namely the principle of State consent. In the specific international dispute settlement, the International Arbitration Court has no jurisdiction over the South China Sea dispute between China and the Philippines, and the arbitration of the International Arbitration Court cannot be accepted by China. One of the important topics discussed in this paper is where is the jurisdictional boundary of the International Court of Arbitration? Whether or not there is jurisdiction over the Sino-Philippine dispute in the South China Sea. Only by clarifying this issue can we provide valuable reference for the territorial dispute in our country, and can also provide theoretical support for the settlement of similar problems in the future, so as to make the relevant theories more perfect. To provide reference for the settlement of similar international disputes.
【学位授予单位】：上海师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D993.5

【相似文献】