“Trident Defense Forum: Final Arbitral Award Philippines v China” explores the 2016 ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) on the South China Sea dispute. The ruling invalidated China’s “Nine-Dashed Line” claim under UNCLOS and affirmed the Philippines’ sovereign rights over its maritime zones, marking a significant moment in international maritime law.

Key Points Discussed:

• Invalidation of China’s Nine-Dashed Line
  The Tribunal categorically ruled that China’s Nine-Dashed Line claim, which encompassed over 80% of the South China Sea, is invalid under UNCLOS. The decision underscored that China has no historic rights to the waters, seabed, and resources within the maritime areas encompassed by the claim. This was a significant affirmation of international law over unilateral assertions of territorial and maritime rights.
• Spratly Islands
  The ruling clarified the status of the Spratly Islands, noting that none of these features are capable of sustaining human habitation or economic life on their own. Consequently, they are not entitled to a 200NM Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Among these features, McKennan Reef and Johnson South Reef were specifically highlighted as high-tide features within the Philippine EEZ, reinforcing the Philippines’ exclusive rights over these areas.
• Scarborough Shoal
  The Tribunal also addressed the legal status of Scarborough Shoal, designating it as a high-tide feature entitled to a 12NM territorial sea but not a 200NM EEZ. The ruling emphasized that China’s actions in preventing Filipino fishermen from accessing Scarborough Shoal were unlawful and violated the traditional fishing rights of the Philippines.

Significance of the Ruling:

This decision marked a pivotal step in upholding the principles of international law in the resolution of maritime disputes. By rejecting China’s claims, the PCA reinforced the importance of UNCLOS as the framework for determining maritime rights and obligations, setting a precedent for similar disputes worldwide.

For a detailed exploration of the implications and analysis of this ruling, you can view the complete document here.