Headline
Carpio: West Philippine Sea is not ‘disputed’
FILE: West Philippine Sea (PNA Photo)
Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio stressed on March 5 that areas in the West Philippine Sea (WPS) should not be referred to as “disputed areas” since the legal owner is the Philippines.
In an interview with ANC, Carpio clarified that the real issue is ‘compliance’ from the Chinese country and not ownership.
According to Carpio, the WPS is within the exclusive economic zone of the Philippines, but it is also within China’s nine-dash-line.
However, he was part of the team that contested for the country’s ownership before the International tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) – in which the Philippines won.
“The term was set, the resources – all the fish, oil, [and] gas belong to the Philippines exclusively,” he said.
“There is no more dispute on legal ownership. The question of ownership is finished. It’s terminated already. It’s a question of compliance. That is the situation in the West Philippine Sea,” Carpio added.
This is why he was emphasizing that people and media should not refer to the areas as “disputed.
”
“We should not say that the area is disputed because the moment that you say that the area is disputed, China will say ‘You see, it’s still disputed.’ The only problem is how to get China to comply,” Carpio said.
Earlier in February, an international expert on WPS branded the Duterte administration’s tactics and moves on the WPS issue “naïve.”
(Read: West PH sea expert calls Duterte admin ‘naïve’)
In a February 2 interview with Rappler, Gregory Poling, Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative (AMTI) Director called the government “well-intentioned but naïve,” adding that “the facts on the ground don’t support the notion that China’s acting in good faith.”
Poling was referring to how the Palace has been handling China’s militarization, in which Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque, Jr. has reiterated in several statements that the Philippine government is relying on good faith.
Apart from this, he also countered defenses that Duterte was only being ‘practical’ in his administration’s stance.
“I don’t think that’s practicality. I think that’s defeatist,” Poling told Rappler.
(Read: PH to thank China for man-made islands when they ‘leave’ – Roque)
(Read: Report negates Palace statement on China militarization)
President Rodrigo Duterte chose to distance himself from China’s militarization moves as well, saying that it is not intended for the Philippines.
(Read: Duterte on China artificial isle militarization: Not intended for PH)
Steve
March 5, 2018 at 4:10 PM
The Philippines always says that the Arbitral Tribunal on the South China Sea Case ruled China does not have legal base to claim the sovereign rights on SCS. However, in China’s perception, according to UNCLOS Article 3, Article 56, Article 283 and Article 298, the Arbitral Tribunal does not have the jurisdiction on SCS case. The fact is according to AMTI CSIS (a US Think Tank); there are only 7 states (United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Vietnam, and Philippines) that recognize the rules. Before the ruling, there were 41 countries publicly supporting Arbitral Proceedings as Binding; however, after the ruling, only 7 states recognize the rule. Why? Because international societies know the SCS arbitration does not follow the procedures set up in UNCLOS, the tribunal expands it authority to make a ‘law’ and does not respect the earlier precedent. There is no sense to recognize this kind of rules.