| Welcome to Philippines Defense Forces Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| PH Files Case vs China Before UNCLOS Tribunal; Ph challenges China's 9-dash claims in WPS at UN Tribunal | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 22 2013, 05:03 PM (50,592 Views) | |
| icefrog | Jan 24 2013, 04:48 PM Post #51 |
![]()
|
And the absolute worst thing China can do now is to choose to ignore it and not be subjected to the arbitration. That is not only moral victory but a slap on their face as they cannot file a similar case on their behalf to legally claim other disputed territories from other countries. This is why it complicates things but only for them. :-) They will probably make another last ditch-attempt (if not already) to have a dialogue w/ the Philippines to retract the case but this time around they might concede some things in our favor. Once we hear news that the Phils. is retracting the case then we know they have made a new offer and conceded a few things in our favor. Let's wait and see. |
|
Sign up for the Philippines' first E-wallet via this referral and get PHP 24.00 as a gift credited to your account: https://coins.ph/invite/gphUpV | |
![]() |
|
| Santi Kampilan | Jan 24 2013, 04:59 PM Post #52 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well, they tried chasing Lacierda to see if a bilateral talk could still be a possibility. But Lacierda responding in Mandarin,"too late see you in UNCLOS"!
Edited by Santi Kampilan, Jan 24 2013, 05:03 PM.
|
| |
![]() |
|
| gammy322 | Jan 24 2013, 05:57 PM Post #53 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Anybody who is a Mistah of Capt. Faeldon??? Baka pwede sya paabisuhan na ituloy n ung plan nya dati na maglayag sa SCS together with the other fishing boats and stay there.... |
![]() |
|
| raider1011 | Jan 24 2013, 06:32 PM Post #54 |
![]()
|
They will not take Japan to arbitration because they do not recognize the authority of the arbitral tribunal.
Period. As far as they're concerned, the evidence is moot.
You should be looking at Article 76:6. 6. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 5, on submarine ridges, the outer limit of the continental shelf shall not exceed 350 nautical miles from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured. This paragraph does not apply to submarine elevations that are natural components of the continental margin, such as its plateaux, rises, caps, banks and spurs. Compare it to what they say:
They are invoking Article 76 but they are also defining the starting point ("baselines") for invoking it. These people are not fools. "My point is at least the Chinese recognizes the authority of UNCLOS over this matter." Which matter? Anyone can exempt themselves from arbitration, that is open to anyone under Article 298 and Del Rosario knows this. It is the heart of the matter, can the tribunal hear the case knowing China's exempted themselves from arbitration? That is the first hurdle, anything else is a distraction. Explain how we can overcome it, then make this a productive discussion. Edited by raider1011, Jan 24 2013, 06:37 PM.
|
|
God grant me the courage not to give up what I think is right even though I think it is hopeless. || Chester W. Nimitz Loyalty to the Nation ALL the time, loyalty to the Government when it deserves it. || Mark Twain | |
![]() |
|
| raider1011 | Jan 24 2013, 07:27 PM Post #55 |
![]()
|
Annex VII UNCLOS According to Article 3 we get to appoint the first out of five members of the arbitration panel. China has 30 days to pick the next member, then we come to an agreement on the final three. Every member is taken from a list kept by the UN Sec-Gen. China will definitely participate in this initial step, obviously manok nila ang ilalagay dito. That person's only job will be to vote: "This tribunal has no jurisdiction. TAPOS." Obviously dun na magsisimula ang rambol.
|
|
God grant me the courage not to give up what I think is right even though I think it is hopeless. || Chester W. Nimitz Loyalty to the Nation ALL the time, loyalty to the Government when it deserves it. || Mark Twain | |
![]() |
|
| AVBsupersonic | Jan 24 2013, 07:47 PM Post #56 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
@Icefrog-This case should be non negotiable to the Philippines period. Wala tayo pakialam kung mag retract or ano pa gawin nila tungkol sa kaso nila, iyan ang dapat tulad ng ginagawa ng Japan! "They (China) have no business being there, so there's nothing to talk about involving them." The Philippines filing the case to UNCLOS Tribunal was a big bold move, for we are already forced into a corner, it comes as a legal advantage for us to our claim, of course technically as the rightful owner. Yes, it also complicates and contradicts China's case protest against Japan and at the same time, an advantage to us. (our case) In my opinion they (China) can easily give up or play it down with the Senkakus dispute because of too much complications, not to mention the US backing.. the danger here lies with the PHILIPPINES, an easy prey, targets like "Scarb", "Recto" "KiG PH occupied/ controlled Islands and without US backing like Japan's, although we have MDT, but that remains to be seen, for we saw already and can compare our importance to them with Japan's.. so that's something to think about. Filing the case to UN Tribunal also shows to the World that the Philippines as the legal owner, especially if they (China) doesn't show up and loses by default, this will even give us upper hand even if we try to secure and defend our territories, it justifies even us, "firing the first shot" would be seen exercising our rights as the rightful owner. -(like just if we try to redeploy our ships back to "Scarb" and the Chicoms tries anything brilliant, we have the right to defend ourselves) -Cool heads first and let's wait for the "Maestrales" and more, just in case. Example scenario- SHOT'S FIRED, Russia teaching Chinese illegal fishermen a lesson In the meantime redeploy PCG just to support our claim. (stand ground) and then we cordon some of the parts behind, under the protection of our PCG's with PN in the horizon and exercise our rights that were taken away from our local fishermen and let those Filipino Fisher folks back to fish for their livelihoods. Like what I've said based on the International Community analysis, the main reason why we are being treated like this because of our Weakness Militarily! So those who are contented to the kind of capability plans the AFP/ DND and the Govt are aiming na "Modest" credible defense lang won't solve these problems, there's high probability that it will just end up "prolonging" the issue. OT Chaps, we are all in one boat here, so let's avoid unnecessary attack and be civil with each other for we are one... We're here to help and suggest possible options that may/ can work for the best, our suggestions, comments maybe simple, common, unrealistic and maybe funny sometimes, but pretty sure marami or meron din sila nakukuha sa atin dito. For these represents the voice of the Filipino People at kung wala tayo (taxpayers, voters) wala sila. The only way that can/will make China heed and desist from grabbing Philippine territories is for us to have a FORMIDABLE Military. If China copied the west for it's "Might is right" mentality, the Philippines should adapt "PEACE means having a bigger stick" approach in order to be respected by the World. -And goes the same of course with having a strongman and intelligent leader. For our allies have their own interests to consider, to look after and so as the Philippines. We really need to be strong to look after our own. TO MAKE THE LONG STORY SHORT REGARDLESS OF WHATEVER THE OUTCOME OF OUR CASE, WHETHER IT BE A FAILURE OR SUCCESS, ENFORCING THEM WILL BE THE BIGGEST PROBLEM? So it will be up to us in the end. Edited by AVBsupersonic, Jan 24 2013, 08:16 PM.
|
| "Some are just lucky that they're not under oath and are not classified!"- Blue badge | |
![]() |
|
| Mckoyzzz | Jan 24 2013, 07:52 PM Post #57 |
|
Ipsa Scientia Potestas Est
![]()
|
Can you cite where exactly in the articles or sub-paragraphs within the Annex VII this falls under, where one of the arbitrators will have the power to sort of "dissolve" the tribunal once created? |
![]() "Do not condemn the judgment of another because it differs from your own. You may both be wrong -- Dandemis" | |
![]() |
|
| raider1011 | Jan 24 2013, 08:00 PM Post #58 |
![]()
|
^That's not what's being said, "vote" nga e. |
|
God grant me the courage not to give up what I think is right even though I think it is hopeless. || Chester W. Nimitz Loyalty to the Nation ALL the time, loyalty to the Government when it deserves it. || Mark Twain | |
![]() |
|
| Mckoyzzz | Jan 24 2013, 08:08 PM Post #59 |
|
Ipsa Scientia Potestas Est
![]()
|
You cited an article in the Annex VII of UNCLOS regarding choosing one arbitrators out of five from a list... and you said that China will certainly pick their own "manok" and the job of this person is to "vote" that this tribunal has no jurisdiction... is that correct? If so, my question was will this person or arbitrator, have the power mandated by UNCLOS to vote in such case? Baka naman ang gusto mong sabihin is "veto", which is totally another matter... |
![]() "Do not condemn the judgment of another because it differs from your own. You may both be wrong -- Dandemis" | |
![]() |
|
| raider1011 | Jan 24 2013, 08:12 PM Post #60 |
![]()
|
^Obviously he has the power to vote, he is a member of the tribunal. Kaya nga lima para may tiebreaker. |
|
God grant me the courage not to give up what I think is right even though I think it is hopeless. || Chester W. Nimitz Loyalty to the Nation ALL the time, loyalty to the Government when it deserves it. || Mark Twain | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · West Philippine Sea · Next Topic » |









![]](http://z1.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)




8:33 AM Jul 11