中國政府關于菲律賓所提南海仲裁案管轄權問題的立場文件
Chinese government's position paper on matter of jurisdiction in South China Sea arbitration initiated by Philippines
0 
調(diào)整字號大小: 
| 五、中國自主選擇爭端解決方式的權利應得到充分尊重，中國不接受、不參與菲律賓提起的仲裁具有充分的國際法依據(jù) | V. China's right to freely choose the means of dispute settlement must be fully respected, and its rejection of and non-participation in the present arbitration is solidly grounded in international law |
| 76. 根據(jù)國際法，各國享有自主選擇爭端解決方式的權利。任何國際司法或仲裁機構針對國家間爭端行使管轄權必須以當事國的同意為基礎，即“國家同意原則”?；谶@一原則，出席第三次聯(lián)合國海洋法會議的各國代表經(jīng)過長期艱苦的談判，作為一攬子協(xié)議，達成了《公約》第十五部分有關爭端解決機制的規(guī)定。 | 76. Under international law, every State is free to choose the means of dispute settlement. The jurisdiction of any international judicial or arbitral body over an inter-State dispute depends on the prior consent of the parties to the dispute. This is known as the principle of consent in international law. It was on the basis of this principle that the States participating in the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea reached, after extended and arduous negotiations, a compromise on Part XV relating to dispute settlement as a package deal. |
| 77. 《公約》第十五部分規(guī)定的強制爭端解決程序只適用于有關《公約》解釋或適用的爭端；締約國有權自行選擇第十五部分規(guī)定以外的其他爭端解決方式；《公約》第二百九十七條和第二百九十八條還針對特定種類的爭端規(guī)定了適用強制爭端解決程序的限制和例外。 | 77. The compulsory dispute settlement procedures provided in Part XV of the Convention apply only to disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention. States Parties are entitled to freely choose the means of settlement other than those set out in Part XV. Articles 297 and 298 of the Convention, moreover, provide for limitations on and optional exceptions to the applicability of the compulsory procedures with regard to specified categories of disputes. |
| 78. 《公約》第十五部分這種平衡的規(guī)定，也是許多國家決定是否成為《公約》締約國時的重要考慮因素。在1974年第三次聯(lián)合國海洋法會議第二期會議上，薩爾瓦多大使雷納多·佳林多·波爾在介紹關于《公約》爭端解決的第一份草案時強調(diào)，有必要將直接涉及國家領土完整的問題作為強制管轄的例外。否則，許多國家可能不會批準甚至不會簽署《公約》（參見沙巴泰·羅森和路易斯·索恩1989年所編《1982年<聯(lián)合國海洋法公約>評注》第5卷第88頁第297.1段）。因此，在解釋和適用《公約》第十五部分的規(guī)定時，必須維護該部分的平衡和完整。 | 78. The balance embodied in the provisions of Part XV has been a critical factor for the decision of many States to become parties to the Convention. At the second session of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, Ambassador Reynaldo Galindo Pohl of El Salvador, co-chair of the informal group on the settlement of disputes, on introducing the first general draft on dispute settlement, emphasized the need for exceptions from compulsory jurisdiction with respect to questions directly related to the territorial integrity of States. Otherwise, as has been noted, "a number of States might have been dissuaded from ratifying the Convention or even signing it" (Shabtai Rosenne and Louis B. Sohn (eds.), United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982: A Commentary, 1989, vol. v, p. 88, para. 297.1). It follows that the provisions of Part XV must be interpreted and applied in such a manner so as to preserve the balance in and the integrity of Part XV. |
| 79. 中國重視《公約》強制爭端解決程序在維護國際海洋法律秩序方面的積極作用。中國作為《公約》締約國，接受了《公約》第十五部分第二節(jié)有關強制爭端解決程序的規(guī)定。但是，中國接受該規(guī)定的適用范圍不包括領土主權爭端，不包括中國與其他締約國同意以自行選擇的方式加以解決的爭端，也不包括《公約》第二百九十七條和中國2006年根據(jù)《公約》第二百九十八條所作聲明排除的所有爭端。對于菲律賓所提仲裁事項，中國從未接受《公約》第十五部分第二節(jié)規(guī)定的任何強制爭端解決程序。 | 79. China highly values the positive role played by the compulsory dispute settlement procedures of the Convention in upholding the international legal order for the oceans. As a State Party to the Convention, China has accepted the provisions of section 2 of Part XV on compulsory dispute settlement procedures. But that acceptance does not mean that those procedures apply to disputes of territorial sovereignty, or disputes which China has agreed with other States Parties to settle by means of their own choice, or disputes already excluded by Article 297 and China' s 2006 declaration filed under Article 298. With regard to the Philippines' claims for arbitration, China has never accepted any of the compulsory procedures of section 2 of Part XV. |
| 80. 根據(jù)國家主權原則，爭端當事國可自行選擇爭端解決方式，《公約》對此予以確認?！豆s》第二百八十條規(guī)定：“本公約的任何規(guī)定均不損害任何締約國于任何時候協(xié)議用自行選擇的任何和平方法解決它們之間有關本公約的解釋或適用的爭端的權利?！?/td> | 80. By virtue of the principle of sovereignty, parties to a dispute may choose the means of settlement of their own accord. This has been affirmed by the Convention. Article 280 provides that, "Nothing in this Part impairs the right of any States Parties to agree at any time to settle a dispute between them concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention by any peaceful means of their own choice." |
| 81. 當事國自行選擇的爭端解決方式優(yōu)先于《公約》第十五部分第二節(jié)規(guī)定的強制爭端解決程序?！豆s》第十五部分第一節(jié)的第二百八十一條第一款規(guī)定：“作為有關本公約的解釋或適用的爭端各方的締約各國，如已協(xié)議用自行選擇的和平方法來謀求解決爭端，則只有在訴諸這種方法而仍未得到解決以及爭端各方間的協(xié)議并不排除任何其他程序的情形下，才適用本部分所規(guī)定的程序?！薄豆s》第二百八十六條也規(guī)定：“在第三節(jié)限制下，有關本公約的解釋或適用的任何爭端，如已訴諸第一節(jié)而仍未得到解決，經(jīng)爭端任何一方請求，應提交根據(jù)本節(jié)具有管轄權的法院或法庭。”可見，只要當事方已經(jīng)自行選擇爭端解決方式并且排除其他任何程序，《公約》規(guī)定的強制爭端解決程序就完全不適用。 | 81. The means thus chosen by the States Parties to the Convention takes priority over the compulsory procedures set forth in section 2 of Part XV. Article 281(1) of section 1 of Part XV provides that, "If the States Parties which are parties to a dispute concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention have agreed to seek settlement of the dispute by a peaceful means of their own choice, the procedures provided for in this Part apply only where no settlement has been reached by recourse to such means and the agreement between the parties does not exclude any further procedure." Article 286 states that, "Subject to section 3, any dispute concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention shall, where no settlement has been reached by recourse to section 1, be submitted at the request of any party to the dispute to the court or tribunal having jurisdiction under this section." Accordingly, where parties to a dispute have already chosen a means of settlement and excluded other procedures, the compulsory procedures of the Convention shall not apply to the dispute in question. |
| 82. 締約國自行選擇爭端解決方式的優(yōu)先性和重要性在2000年南方藍鰭金槍魚仲裁案裁決中得到了進一步肯定。仲裁庭指出，“《公約》遠未建立一個真正全面的、有拘束力的強制管轄制度”（裁決第62段），“《公約》第二百八十一條第一款允許締約國將第十五部分第二節(jié)強制程序的適用限定在所有當事方均同意提交的案件”（裁決第62段）。如果第十五部分第一節(jié)的規(guī)定不能得到有效遵守，就會實質(zhì)上剝奪締約國基于國家主權自行選擇爭端解決方式的權利，從而違反國家同意原則，破壞《公約》第十五部分的平衡和完整。 | 82. The priority and significance of the means of dispute settlement chosen by States Parties to the Convention have been further affirmed in the arbitral award in the Southern Bluefin Tuna Case. The tribunal recognized that the Convention "falls significantly short of establishing a truly comprehensive regime of compulsory jurisdiction entailing binding decisions" , and that "States Parties ... are permitted by Article 281(1) to confine the applicability of compulsory procedures of section 2 of Part XV to cases where all parties to the dispute have agreed upon submission of their dispute to such compulsory procedures" (Australia and New Zealand v. Japan, pp. 102-103, para. 62). Were the provisions of section 1 of Part XV not complied with faithfully, it would result in deprivation of the right of the States Parties to freely choose means of peaceful settlement based on State sovereignty. That would entail a breach of the principle of consent and upset the balance in and integrity of Part XV. |
| 83. 相關司法或仲裁機構在行使確定自身管轄權方面的權力時，也必須充分尊重締約國自行選擇爭端解決方式的權利?！豆s》第二百八十八條第四款規(guī)定：“對于法院或法庭是否具有管轄權如果發(fā)生爭端，這一問題應由該法院或法庭以裁定解決?！敝袊鹬叵嚓P司法或仲裁機構根據(jù)《公約》所享有的上述權力，但同時強調(diào)，相關司法或仲裁機構在行使其權力時不應損害締約國自行選擇爭端解決方式的權利，不應損害國際司法或仲裁必須遵循的國家同意原則。中國認為，這是仲裁庭在適用第二百八十八條第四款的規(guī)定確定自身管轄權時所必須受到的限制?？偠灾盃幎水斒路绞菭幎私鉀Q程序完全的主人”（沙巴泰·羅森和路易斯·索恩1989年所編《1982年<聯(lián)合國海洋法公約>評注》第5卷第20頁第280.1段）。 | 83. In exercise of its power to decide on its jurisdiction, any judicial or arbitral body should respect the right of the States Parties to the Convention to freely choose the means of settlement. Article 288(4) of the Convention provides that "[i]n the event of a dispute as to whether a court or tribunal has jurisdiction, the matter shall be settled by decision of that court or tribunal" . China respects that competence of judicial or arbitral bodies under the Convention. Equally important, China would like to emphasize, the exercise of judicial or arbitral power shall not derogate from the right of the States Parties to choose the means of settlement of their own accord, or from the principle of consent which must be followed in international adjudication and arbitration. China holds that this is the constraint that the Arbitral Tribunal must abide by when considering whether or not to apply Article 288(4) in determining its jurisdiction in the present arbitration. After all, "the parties to the dispute are complete masters of the procedure to be used to settle it" (Shabtai Rosenne and Louis B. Sohn (eds.), United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982: A Commentary, 1989, vol. v, p. 20, para. 280.1). |
| 84. 中國尊重所有締約國依據(jù)《公約》的規(guī)定適用強制爭端解決程序的權利。同時，需要強調(diào)的是，《公約》第三百條規(guī)定：“締約國應誠意履行根據(jù)本公約承擔的義務，并應以不致構成濫用權利的方式，行使本公約所承認的權利、管轄權和自由?！狈坡少e明知其所提出的仲裁事項本質(zhì)上是島礁領土主權問題，明知中國從未同意就有關爭端接受強制爭端解決程序，明知中菲之間存在關于通過談判方式解決有關爭端的協(xié)議，還要單方面提起強制仲裁，違反了《公約》的相關規(guī)定，無助于爭端的和平解決。 | 84. China respects the right of all States Parties to invoke the compulsory procedures in accordance with the Convention. At the same time, it would call attention to Article 300 of the Convention, which provides that, "States Parties shall fulfil in good faith the obligations assumed under this Convention and shall exercise the rights, jurisdiction and freedoms recognized in this Convention in a manner which would not constitute an abuse of right." While being fully aware that its claims essentially deal with territorial sovereignty, that China has never accepted any compulsory procedures in respect of those claims, and that there has been an agreement existing between the two States to settle their relevant disputes by negotiations, the Philippines has nevertheless initiated, by unilateral action, the present arbitration. This surely contravenes the relevant provisions of the Convention, and does no service to the peaceful settlement of the disputes. |
| 85. 鑒于上述，并基于仲裁庭對本案顯然不具有管轄權，中國政府決定不接受、不參與仲裁程序，以捍衛(wèi)中國自主選擇爭端解決方式的主權權利，確保中國依據(jù)《公約》于2006年作出的排除性聲明起到應有的效力，維護《公約》第十五部分的完整性以及國際海洋法律制度的權威性和嚴肅性。中國的這一立場不會改變。 | 85. In view of what is stated above and in light of the manifest lack of jurisdiction on the part of the Arbitral Tribunal, the Chinese Government has decided not to accept or participate in the present arbitration, in order to preserve China' s sovereign right to choose the means of peaceful settlement of its own free will and the effectiveness of its 2006 declaration, and to maintain the integrity of Part XV of the Convention as well as the authority and solemnity of the international legal regime for the oceans. This position of China will not change. |
| 跳轉至目錄 >> | Back to Contents >> |
Go to Forum >>0 Comment(s)
No comments.
