s*******l
发帖数: 8210 | 1 判决一出笼，判例一旦形成，不光南海主权有中国白纸黑字签署的公约典证，而且又有
经由法律形式判决的结果定案。 到时候，不仅仅是菲律宾赢了南海，接下来的越南，
印尼，马来西亚，日本，南韩全他妈的照此claim他们的海上主权。南海，东海就tmd被
彻底卖光，卖彻底了。
至于你装死狗认不认帐，那已经不重要了。 | y*******x
发帖数: 570 | 2 操他妈的，谁敢卖？？？老祖宗留下来的地，我看他妈谁敢卖，谁卖操他全家18倍祖宗
！！！！ | I*******g
发帖数: 7600 | 3 谁决定7.7 判例？
谁有权力判？
【在 s*******l 的大作中提到】
: 判决一出笼，判例一旦形成，不光南海主权有中国白纸黑字签署的公约典证，而且又有
: 经由法律形式判决的结果定案。 到时候，不仅仅是菲律宾赢了南海，接下来的越南，
: 印尼，马来西亚，日本，南韩全他妈的照此claim他们的海上主权。南海，东海就tmd被
: 彻底卖光，卖彻底了。
: 至于你装死狗认不认帐，那已经不重要了。
| s**********e
发帖数: 33562 | | w*********r
发帖数: 42116 | 5 楼主代表了很大一部分中国人。
【在 s**********e 的大作中提到】
: 呵呵，我看也就楼主承认吧。
| h*********n
发帖数: 11319 | 6 代表了很大一部分洋大人放个屁都要跪舔的中国人
这个国际仲裁法庭狗屁权威都没有，和海牙国际法庭不是一回事儿。
【在 w*********r 的大作中提到】
: 楼主代表了很大一部分中国人。
| s*******l
发帖数: 8210 | 7 你懂个屁！ 共产党拉的屎，不论是干的湿的，稠的黏的，你哪个不是扑着身子忘我的
给舔干净？一把年龄的人了，你丫舔逼的精神简直惊天地，泣鬼神，不要脸的程度简直
让人叹为观止！
【在 s**********e 的大作中提到】
: 呵呵，我看也就楼主承认吧。
| s*******l
发帖数: 8210 | 8 这个日本外交官出身的法庭庭长，将在77事变当天宣布南海审判结果。抗日战争打了8
年没有实现的瓜分太平洋的目的，这下经由“联合国海洋法公约”把太平洋从南海到东
海彻底瓜分了。
Tensions over competing territorial claims in the resource-rich South China
Sea have spiked in recent months as claimant countries, including China and
the Philippines, await an upcoming decision by an international tribunal.
That body, located at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Hague, is
widely expected to rule in the Philippines’ favor. But China has repeatedly
stated that it will not accept the upcoming ruling, and has recently
engaged in a public relations blitz to gain international support for its
position. Now, Beijing is raising an objection unique in the history of
arbitration cases of this type: the nationality of the person who oversaw
the tribunal’s formation.
In January 2013, the Philippines filed a case with the International
Tribunal on the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) challenging some of China’s land
reclamation actions and claims in the South China Sea, through which over $5
trillion in trade flows annually. In the five-judge tribunal formed to hear
the case, each side has the right to select two judges, and the president
of ITLOS chooses the fifth. But China declined to participate in the
arbitration, ceding its right to select two of the five panel judges. As a
result, then-president Shunji Yanai, a Japanese citizen, chose judges on
China’s behalf, according to standard procedure. Chinese officials have
objected to Yanai’s having played that role, claiming that Japan’s own
maritime disputes with China in the East China Sea make a Japanese national
unfit to play a role in a case involving other, unrelated maritime disputes
with China. Yanai himself does not sit on the tribunal.
Objections due to Yanai’s nationality first surfaced in 2013, and have
recently become more prominent. “Considering the East China sea dispute
between China and Japan,” argued a May 11 commentary in Chinese Communist
Party mouthpiece People’s Daily, “Shunji Yanai should have avoided [
participation] according to the law. But he deliberately ignored this fact
and clearly violated procedural justice requirements.” The commentary,
written by “Zhong Sheng,” a pen name often employed to present the paper’
s official position, did not specify which law had been violated. It claimed
that the selected tribunal judges were biased and had “deliberately
ignored the rights and interests of China.” On June 8, the Chinese
ambassador to Indonesia, Xie Feng, penned an op-ed in English-language daily
Jakarta Post noting the tribunal’s president was “a Japanese national”
who “went to great pains to form a temporary tribunal,” adding that the
panel of five judges, with four from Europe and one from Ghana, “can hardly
be considered as universally representative.”
Wang Xining, deputy-director general at the information department at the
Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, confirmed that Xie’s perspective
mirrors Beijing’s. “We hope there should be no self interest involved in
forming an instrument of international justice,” Wang told Foreign Policy
via email. He added, somewhat ambiguously, that a “Japanese candidate would
be an easy breach of impartiality the existing disputes between China and
Japan over certain territorial and maritime issues.”
Emphasizing Yanai’s nationality could serve to further delegitimize the
tribunal in the eyes of China’s populace. Many Chinese feel Japan has not
sufficiently distanced itself from its militarism and wartime atrocities
during World War II, when Chinese suffered under brutal Japanese occupation.
Anti-Japanese sentiment in China has flared up in recent years over
perceived attempts to whitewash history in Japanese textbooks, visits by
government officials to a Tokyo shrine which commemorates dead war criminals
, and competing claims over rocks in the East China Sea. Grassroots
nationalism also flourishes in China’s online spaces, fueled in part by
state-run media, with netizens occasionally lashing out to chastise Japan —
or to criticize their own government when it doesn’t take a hardline
stance. Lingering fear of Japanese aggression has manifested in the context
of the South China Sea as well. In March, Chinese Foreign Ministry
Spokesperson Hong Lei invoked Japanese wartime actions to express
disapproval of Japanese military cooperation with the Philippines, stating,
“Japan once illegally occupied China’s islands in the South China Sea
during WWII. We are on high alert against Japan’s attempt to return to the
South China Sea through military means.”
U.S.-based South China Sea commenters have dismissed the claim that Yanai’s
Japanese nationality influenced the formation of the tribunal. “It’s not
a serious argument,” said James Kraska, a professor of international law
and research director in the Stockton Center for the Study of International
Law at the U.S. Naval War College in Rhode Island. “It bears about as much
weight as what Donald Trump said about the judge of Mexican heritage” –
referring to the presumptive Republican presidential nominee’s widely-
ridiculed claim that a Mexican-American judge could not be trusted to render
an impartial decision on a case related to the failed Trump University, due
to Trump’s strong stance against illegal immigration. There have been 25
ITLOS cases since the organization ruled on its first case in 1997; but this
is the first time, said Kraska, that the nationality of a judge has been
used to question a tribunal’s impartiality.
Kraska knew of no evidence that the five judges on the panel are biased
towards any party. “None of the guys on the panel have had any sort of
obvious political leanings throughout their career,” Kraska told FP. “They
are legal technicians. They have spent their entire lives championing the
rule of law in the oceans. There is no predictable pattern to their
decisions.” He continued, “They are committed, true believers in the value
of international law and the law of the sea,” calling them “purists, to a
fault.”
Analysts have widely predicted that the tribunal will rule against China;
the claim against Yanai is a last-ditch effort to try to discredit the legal
proceedings, according to Bonnie Glaser, senior advisor for Asia and
director of the China Power Project at the Center for Strategic and
International Studies in Washington, DC. Glaser said that she had heard this
argument as early as 2013, when the tribunal was formed, but that only
recently had it been more widely discussed. “China has tried every possible
angle to oppose the tribunal,” she wrote in an email. “First they
challenged its jurisdiction. Then they said it was a violation of the [
Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea]” – a 2002
agreement between China and ASEAN nations. “They argued that China excluded
dispute settlement so it has no obligation to participation. None of these
worked,” hence the latest tack. Glaser said she found the latest objection
“the most detestable,” and said she considers the tribunal’s judges “the
best in the world.”
The judge in question has worked in the international sphere for 45 years.
Yanai became an ITLOS member in 2005 and served as its president from 2011
to 2014. Prior to that, he was a career diplomat. He joined the Japanese
Foreign Ministry in 1961 and served as ambassador to the United States from
1999 to 2001. The Wall Street Journal described him in 1999 as “blunt-
speaking” and “fun-loving,” noting his second marriage to a former geisha
. He has also taught international law at Chuo University in Tokyo and
lectured on maritime dispute resolution.
Beijing-backed analysts have recently doubled down on their arguments
against Yanai. Wu Shicun, president of the National Institute for South
China Sea Studies in China’s southernmost island province of Hainan, told
FP via email that there is evidence demonstrating Yanai’s bias in favor of
the Philippines. “In April 2013, [Yanai] appointed Chris Pinto as the
president of the Arbitral Tribunal. Mr. Pinto is [of Sri Lankan] nationality
, but his wife is a Filipino,” Wu wrote. Wu also argued that a ruling
against China in the Philippines case could be good for Japan because “
Japan, through joining the chorus and bashing China, could make itself seem
like a ‘good guy’ in East Asia.”
Regardless of how the tribunal rules, China has emphasized that it will not
recognize the legitimacy of the decision. ITLOS has no mechanism for
enforcement, meaning that China is unlikely to change its behavior in the
South China Sea. The only cost China will pay will likely come in the form
international censure and a resulting dent in its soft power. By working to
discredit the tribunal, Beijing is hoping to reduce that toll as much as
possible |
|
