[av_one_full first min_height=” vertical_alignment=” space=” custom_margin=” margin=’0px’ padding=’0px’ border=” border_color=” radius=’0px’ background_color=” src=” background_position=’top left’ background_repeat=’no-repeat’ animation=”]
[av_heading heading=’ ABOVE THE LAW ‘ tag=’h3′ style=’blockquote modern-quote’ size=’30’ subheading_active=’subheading_below’ subheading_size=’15’ padding=’10’ color=” custom_font=”]
BY AYIN DREAM D. APLASCA
[/av_heading]
[av_textblock size=’18’ font_color=” color=”]
WHILE I browse the internet, I read a few news reports regarding China-Philippines issues. Just recently, the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson said in a press briefing that some individuals in the Philippines who made irresponsible condemnation against China were nothing but stirring up disputes between China and the Philippines.
The issue sourced from the warning advised by Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio. He said the Philippine government should lookout the disputed West Philippine Sea because China is guarding Sandy Cay located some 2.5 nautical miles of Pag-asa Island.
The President, however, said the Chinese are indeed there but do not claim anything.
Despite this, a Chinese flag has reportedly been mounted on a sandbar near the Philippine-controlled Kota Island.
Why would China want to claim Sandy Cay?
When this happens, China might acquire sovereignty over Sandy Cay. It can now claim Subi Reef as part of the territorial sea of Sandy Cay. It will legitimize China’s claim over Subi Reef and removing Subi Reef from the continental shelf of the Philippines.
Now what? I decided to revisit the historic award by The Hague on maritime entitlements in the South China Sea to “justify” the actions of China.
The decision of the Tribunal exposed China shooting itself in the foot. First, China did not state that they had military applications in certain artificial island-bearing features. Second, China did not eschew framing its entitlement to continental shelf rights in terms of the language of historic rights and used language consistent with UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLO). Lastly, China declared baselines in the Paracels and around Hainan. This declaration contradicts its ambiguous claim to a territorial sea or internal waters within the area claimed by the nine-dash line.
These three takeaway reasons only show that China is definitely claiming the West Philippine Sea including the recently controlled Sandy Cay. This fact cannot be ignored by the government.
Of course, as usual, China will just disregard whatever Tribunal decision and claim it to be invalid. And in the case of Sandy Cay, China’s strategy may amount to little more than the latest iteration of its attempts at law fare.
Perhaps the Philippine government will soon offer a more convincing rationale for the ongoing activities before it’s too late.
(Atty. Ayin Dream D. Aplasca practices her profession in Iloilo City. She may be reached thru ayindream.aplasca@gmail.com/PN)
[/av_textblock]
[/av_one_full]
