外交部條約法律司司長(zhǎng)徐宏談中國(guó)就菲律賓所提南海仲裁案發(fā)表管轄權(quán)問題立場(chǎng)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，外交部受權(quán)發(fā)表中國(guó)關(guān)于菲律賓所提南海仲裁案管轄權(quán)問題的立場(chǎng)文件。外交部條約法律司司長(zhǎng)徐宏就此接受了記者的專訪。

On 7 December 2014, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China is authorized to release 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. 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.

記者：為什么我國(guó)要針對(duì)菲律賓所提南海仲裁案就管轄權(quán)問題發(fā)表立場(chǎng)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，菲律賓單方面就中菲有關(guān)南海問題提起國(guó)際仲裁。中國(guó)對(duì)此堅(jiān)決反對(duì)，一再申明中國(guó)不接受、不參與仲裁的嚴(yán)正立場(chǎng)。

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.

菲律賓不顧中國(guó)的強(qiáng)烈反對(duì)，執(zhí)意推進(jìn)仲裁程序。一些人士不明真相，對(duì)中國(guó)不接受、不參與仲裁表示疑惑。還有人別有用心，片面或歪曲解讀有關(guān)國(guó)際法規(guī)則，藉此指責(zé)或影射中國(guó)不遵守國(guó)際法，妄稱中國(guó)為國(guó)際規(guī)則的“挑戰(zhàn)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.

針對(duì)這些情況，中國(guó)發(fā)表立場(chǎng)文件，從法律上闡明中國(guó)認(rèn)為仲裁庭沒有管轄權(quán)的立場(chǎng)和理?yè)?jù)，闡明中國(guó)不接受、不參與該仲裁有充分的國(guó)際法依據(jù)，以匡正視聽。

In response to this situation and with a view to clearing up the confusion, the Chinese Government publishes the Position 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.

記者：我國(guó)的立場(chǎng)文件明確指出，仲裁庭對(duì)于菲律賓提起的仲裁沒有管轄權(quán)。這一立場(chǎng)的主要依據(jù)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：仲裁庭對(duì)菲律賓提起的仲裁沒有管轄權(quán)，這是十分明顯的，立場(chǎng)文件主要從三個(gè)方面加以論述。

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.

一是從菲律賓提請(qǐng)仲裁事項(xiàng)的實(shí)質(zhì)來(lái)分析。菲律賓提出的仲裁事項(xiàng)本質(zhì)上是領(lǐng)土問題，而領(lǐng)土問題超出了《聯(lián)合國(guó)海洋法公約》（下稱“《公約》”）的范疇。《公約》框架下的強(qiáng)制爭(zhēng)端解決程序僅限于處理有關(guān)《公約》解釋或適用的爭(zhēng)端，無(wú)權(quán)處理《公約》以外的事項(xiàng)。

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.

二是從中菲之間已經(jīng)達(dá)成的協(xié)議來(lái)分析。中菲兩國(guó)之間通過一系列雙邊和多邊文件，已經(jīng)就通過友好磋商和談判的方式解決在南海的爭(zhēng)端達(dá)成共識(shí)，排除了其他方式。這是雙方之間的國(guó)際法義務(wù)。菲律賓單方面就有關(guān)爭(zhēng)端提起仲裁，違反了兩國(guó)之間的協(xié)議，違反了國(guó)際法。

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.

三是從《公約》本身的爭(zhēng)端解決條款來(lái)分析。即使菲律賓提出的仲裁事項(xiàng)在某些方面可能被認(rèn)為涉及有關(guān)《公約》解釋或適用的問題，但它也是中菲海域劃界不可分割的組成部分，而中國(guó)已于2006年根據(jù)《公約》第二百九十八條作出聲明，將涉及海域劃界等事項(xiàng)的爭(zhēng)端排除適用仲裁等強(qiáng)制爭(zhēng)端解決程序。

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.

從上述三個(gè)方面可以清楚地看出，仲裁庭對(duì)菲律賓提出的仲裁事項(xiàng)明顯沒有管轄權(quán)。

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.

記者：有一種觀點(diǎn)認(rèn)為，菲律賓提起仲裁是依據(jù)《公約》的規(guī)定，仲裁本身也是和平解決爭(zhēng)端的方式；中國(guó)是《公約》締約國(guó)，也一貫主張和平解決國(guó)際爭(zhēng)端，但卻不接受、不參與該仲裁，令人難以信服。請(qǐng)問對(duì)此有何評(píng)論？

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：國(guó)家之間和平解決爭(zhēng)端的方式有很多，其中*主要、*優(yōu)先的方式是當(dāng)事國(guó)直接談判，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.

根據(jù)國(guó)際法，選擇何種方式解決爭(zhēng)端是各當(dāng)事國(guó)的權(quán)利。國(guó)際仲裁只是其中的一種方式，而且這種方式必須遵循“國(guó)家同意”原則，以當(dāng)事各國(guó)的同意為基礎(chǔ)。在一個(gè)雙邊爭(zhēng)議中，如果一方不接受、不參與仲裁，另一方不得強(qiáng)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.

《公約》雖然規(guī)定了強(qiáng)制仲裁等強(qiáng)制爭(zhēng)端解決程序，但適用這類程序是有條件和限制的。這類程序只能用于處理有關(guān)《公約》解釋或適用的爭(zhēng)端；如果當(dāng)事國(guó)之間自行選擇了其他的爭(zhēng)端解決方式，也優(yōu)先于這類強(qiáng)制程序；一方當(dāng)事國(guó)還可根據(jù)《公約》作出聲明，將特定事項(xiàng)排除適用強(qiáng)制爭(zhēng)端解決程序。

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.

對(duì)于菲律賓提起的仲裁，如前所談，仲裁事項(xiàng)的實(shí)質(zhì)是根本不屬于《公約》調(diào)整范圍的領(lǐng)土問題；中菲之間已達(dá)成通過談判解決有關(guān)爭(zhēng)端的協(xié)議；而且中國(guó)從未就有關(guān)爭(zhēng)端接受強(qiáng)制程序。因此，菲律賓單方面提起強(qiáng)制仲裁顯然是濫用《公約》規(guī)定的強(qiáng)制爭(zhēng)端解決程序。國(guó)際上不應(yīng)該提倡這種做法。中國(guó)不接受、不參與菲律賓提起的仲裁，是捍衛(wèi)自主選擇爭(zhēng)端解決方式的權(quán)利，是行使國(guó)際法所賦予的權(quán)利，有充分的國(guó)際法依據(jù)。

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.

記者：菲律賓的核心訴求涉及中國(guó)依據(jù)南海斷續(xù)線所主張的權(quán)利，國(guó)際上也有一些聲音希望中國(guó)依據(jù)國(guó)際法澄清南海斷續(xù)線的含義，而立場(chǎng)文件并未回答這些問題，請(qǐng)問是如何考慮的？

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，中國(guó)在地圖上標(biāo)繪了南海斷續(xù)線。立場(chǎng)文件在敘述有關(guān)南海問題的歷史經(jīng)緯時(shí)提及這一史實(shí)。

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.

中國(guó)在有關(guān)問題上的立場(chǎng)是一貫的、明確的。中國(guó)對(duì)南海諸島及其附近海域擁有無(wú)可爭(zhēng)辯的。中國(guó)在南海的和權(quán)益是在長(zhǎng)期的歷史過程中形成和發(fā)展起來(lái)的，有充分的歷史和法律依據(jù)，一直為中國(guó)所堅(jiān)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、不參與菲律賓所提仲裁的前提下，中國(guó)的立場(chǎng)文件闡明了仲裁庭對(duì)于仲裁案沒有管轄權(quán)，而不就仲裁事項(xiàng)所涉實(shí)體問題作出回應(yīng)。這一點(diǎn)在立場(chǎng)文件的引言部分作了清楚的說明。

Given China’s decision not to accept or participate in the arbitration, the Position Paper of the Chinese Government only 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.

記者：據(jù)了解，仲裁庭要求中國(guó)于今年12月15日前提交辯訴狀。我國(guó)選擇在這個(gè)時(shí)機(jī)發(fā)表立場(chǎng)文件，是否可理解為是對(duì)仲裁庭上述要求的回應(yīng)？立場(chǎng)文件的發(fā)表會(huì)對(duì)仲裁庭發(fā)揮何種作用？

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 Paper be considered as a response to the request of the Arbitral Tribunal? What effect will the Position Paper have on the Arbitral Tribunal?

徐宏：中國(guó)的立場(chǎng)文件不是關(guān)于仲裁案的辯訴狀，也不是針對(duì)仲裁庭的要求作出的回應(yīng)。發(fā)表立場(chǎng)文件，不意味著中國(guó)接受或參與菲律賓提起的仲裁。中國(guó)不接受、不參與該仲裁的立場(chǎng)不會(huì)改變。

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.

中國(guó)發(fā)表立場(chǎng)文件，針對(duì)仲裁案管轄權(quán)問題闡述法律觀點(diǎn)和理?yè)?jù)，從法律上反駁了菲律賓的無(wú)理主張，也彰顯了中國(guó)維護(hù)和促進(jìn)國(guó)際法治的形象。我相信，任何真正秉持法治精神的機(jī)構(gòu)和人士都會(huì)尊重和理解中國(guó)的立場(chǎng)。

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.

記者：我國(guó)發(fā)表立場(chǎng)文件，對(duì)處理南海有關(guān)爭(zhēng)端、維護(hù)南海的和平穩(wěn)定有何積極意義？

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：立場(chǎng)文件從法律上闡明，為什么仲裁庭對(duì)于菲律賓單方面提起的強(qiáng)制仲裁沒有管轄權(quán)，為什么中國(guó)不接受、不參與仲裁于法有據(jù)。立場(chǎng)文件同時(shí)強(qiáng)調(diào)，談判始終是國(guó)際法認(rèn)可的和平解決國(guó)際爭(zhēng)端*直接、*有效和*普遍的方式。它向國(guó)際社會(huì)傳遞一種信息：有關(guān)國(guó)家要妥善解決在南海的爭(zhēng)端，強(qiáng)加于人行不通，磋商談判是正道。

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.

正如立場(chǎng)文件所指出的那樣，通過談判，中國(guó)已與絕大多數(shù)陸地鄰國(guó)徹底解決了邊界問題，也與越南劃定了兩國(guó)在北部灣的海上邊界。事實(shí)證明，存在分歧不可怕，問題復(fù)雜也不可怕，只要相關(guān)國(guó)家秉持善意，在平等的基礎(chǔ)上進(jìn)行友好磋商和談判，就可以增進(jìn)互信、積累共識(shí)，逐步妥善解決領(lǐng)土爭(zhēng)端和海域劃界問題。處理南海問題理應(yīng)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.

中國(guó)敦促菲律賓盡快回到通過談判解決爭(zhēng)議的正確軌道上來(lái)。中國(guó)也愿與有關(guān)各國(guó)一道，在尊重歷史事實(shí)和國(guó)際法的基礎(chǔ)上，通過談判妥處分歧，加強(qiáng)合作追求共贏，共同維護(hù)南海的和平穩(wěn)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.