Latest Forum Discussion
- No posts to display.
Reuters: Phlippines Quietly Reinforcing and Repair Ground Ship
In an exclusive news report published by Reuters on
The report says the Philippines navy used wooden fishing boats and other small craft to move cement, steel, cabling and welding equipment to the BRP Sierra Madre since late last year. The news says two naval officers who have been inside the ship and declined to be indentified revealed the information, witnessed that the repair work has been onging since early 2015, and said the work should finish in end of 2015.
Kyodo News: Philippines to build helipad on stranded ship on Second Thomas Shoal
On 14 July 2015 (Tuesday), a news report orignated from Kyodo News said the according to official sources (an official who declined to be named), the Philippines military plans to build helicopter pad on the stranded naval ship on Second Thomas Shoal. The news said the blockage by the Chinease Coastguard Ship in 2014 was the first time in 15 years since the Filipino navy ship run aground there. It also reported that Philippine officials said the ship was placed in the shoal "to serve as a permanent Philippine government installation in response to China's illegal occupation of Mischief Reef in 1995."
China Foreign Affairs Ministry Protests and Urges the Philippines to Remove the Ship
On 15 July 2015 (Wednesday), China's foreign ministry spokesman Hua Chunying said China hereby strongly protests and firmly opposes to the Philippines’ reinforcement of a military vessel illegally “grounded” on the Ren’ai Jiao. She said the Philippines promised to tow away the illegally “grounded” vessel on many occasions, yet on the other hand, it schemes to permanently occupy the Ren’ai Jiao by reinforcing the vessel. The Philippines’ breach of its own promise to the international community discloses its hypocrisy and duplicity, and stands as another example that the Philippines is the real trouble-maker and rule-breaker in the region. Hua Chunying said China once again urges the Philippines to immediately stop all illegal activities that infringe upon China’s sovereignty and maritime rights, and honor its commitment of towing away the vessel. China reserves the right to take further actions.
Philippines Department of National Defense accused China "twisting the truth", and denied helipad plan
On 16 July 2015 (Thursday), the Philippine Star reported that the National Defense Department of the Philippines threw out another playing victim line by implying that China is "a giant who is taking away the fish of a small child)". In the same time, Armed Forces Western Command chief Vice Adm. Alexander Lopez said “(It’s) not true and there are no plans whatsoever,” when asked to react to the report of helicopter pad.
Philippines Reopens Subic Bay Military Base, to station fighter jets and frigates
On its Thursday 16 July 2015 01.30 BST news report, The Guardian reported that the Philippines will station new fighter jets and two frigates as it reopens the former US naval base in Subic Bay to military use in a further response to Chinese expansionism in the disputed South China Sea.
In the evening of Monday 13 July 2015, the Permanent Court of Arbitration published the 6th Press Release after it concluded the 2nd round of hearing on the same day. The hearing was mainly a Question and Answering session in which the Philippines panel answered the queries from the tribunal and its members.
Not long after that, the PCA website was on and off, until it was put offline and the homepage shows a "PCA-CPA.ORG is offline for technical reason" from around Wednesday onwards until now (Saturday).
The original link to download the PCA's 6th press release is not working, a copy of the document can be downloaded from here.
Based on the news updates from various sources today, here are the major updates on the hearing over PCA's jurisdiction issue over the case of Philippines vs. China:
1. Upon the decision of the Arbitral Tribunal, the Phlippines delegation was requested to answer further questions given by the Tribnual on Monday, 13 July 2015 in Hague. These questions were handed over to them beforehand. This is the final pitch from the Phlippines delegation to the 5-member tribunal before the court decides on whether or not it has jurisdiction on the arbitration case filed against China.
2. Details of the arguments on this 2nd round hearing:
According to the Phlippines' presidential spokesperson Abigail Valte, “It’s really different from what we have. It’s really more of questions, (no argumentation). It’s not an adversarial proceedings kasi. They would just ask questions on your positions I would not call it gisa (argumentation). It’s Q and A, we were given the questions already and then we will be making, presenting the answers today”.  So these additional questions were given before this 2nd round hearing, and the Phlilippines delegation prepared their answers  and presented accordingly.
However, the details are not to be made known to public. No substantive portions of the presentations is supposed to be revealed to the public while the hearing is ongoing. 
However, some news report says "The second round of oral arguments seeks to establish the point that China's claim over almost the entire South China Sea is illegal."  We are not sure the basis this news report makes this remark.
3. Phlippines side responses: "hopeful" and "positive" on the 2nd round of arguments
From the PR (public relations) point of view, all the news reports from the Philippines mentioned the answers were well presented, well explained.
Thus the Phlippines side is expecting a favorable ruling on the jurisdiction issue.
4. Some Filipino media started augment about "provisional measures"
In its case raised against China, the Phlippines reserved a "provisional measures" right, that is the court can be asked to rule a temporary order against China and to request China to stop some activities. , 
The pre-condition is the court has jurisidiction over the case.
Now before the 2nd round of hearing, during a chance interview,  one of the delegation team member, Justice Secretary Leila de Lima, said this is one of the steps being studied by the legal team.
5. The wait on the jurisdiction decision: 1 month, 3 months or 6 months?
In Manila, Foreign Affairs spokesman Charles Jose quoted the contracted American lawyer on the case, Paul Reichler, as saying the decision may come out 90 days later.
Another lawyer in the panel said a ruling on jurisdiction before the end of July. 
However, another news report says this decision might come until end of this year. 
6. The next step:
If PCA decide it has jurisdiction, Manila will then have to prepare for another round of oral arguments on the merits.
One news report  says the Philippines anticipates the final ruling to be either in first quarter or first half of 2016.
Otherwise if the court decides on no jurisdiction over this case, case closed.
According to news published by
Philippines' Deputy Presidential Spokesperson Abigail Valte said the country's lawyers further explained to the UN Arbitral Tribunal how the Philippine case does not constitute specific exemptions under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which would preclude it from having jurisdiction over the case.
On the second day (Wedneseday) of the hearing, during the morning, Professor Philippe Sands briefly addressed questions propounded by a member of the tribunal from yesterday’s hearing.
"Advocates Lawrence H. Martin, Professor Bernard H. Oxman and Paul S. Reichler took turns presenting arguments involving various points on why the Philippines’ claims fall squarely within the jurisdiction of the tribunal," Valte said.
For the afternoon hearing, Professor Alan Boyle presented to the tribunal arguments regarding the strength of the Philippines’ environmental and fishing claims against China.
Valte said that Professor Philippe Sands closed the First Round of Arguments by summarizing the submissions of the Philippines presented in the course of the hearings.
According to news from online news portal of TV5, Philippines (J), the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Netherlands has decided to hold a second round of arguments on jurisdiction and admissibility of Manila’s complaint against Beijing over its claim over the West Philippine (South China) Sea.
Deputy presidential spokesman Abigail Valte, who is with the Philippine legal panel in The Hague, said the lawyers are ready to field clarificatory questions from the five-member arbitral tribunal on Monday, July 13.
“The Philippine side has undertaken sufficient preparation to ensure that the best answers will be provided to the questions expected to be propounded by the Tribunal during the second round,” Valte said in a bulletin he sent to Malacañang reporters.
Speaking over government radio on Saturday, Presidential spokesman Edwin Lacierda echoed Valte’s statement, saying the Philippine panel had extensively prepared for the legal skirmish.
9 July 2015
In its Fifth Press Release regarding the case of The Philippines vs. China, the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in Hague started its hearing on the Jurisdiction and Admissibility issues first on 7 July 2015.
After this hearing ends on or before 13 July 2015, the Court will decide whether it has jurisdiction to rule this case.
The Statement on the South China Sea issued by Taiwan on 7 July 2015
Statement on the South China Sea
Date: 2015/07/07 Data Source: Public Diplomacy Coordination Council
With regard to the South China Sea, which has been in the international spotlight of late, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of China（Taiwan）reiterates its position as follows:
Whether from the perspectives of history, geography, or international law, the Nansha（Spratly）Islands, Shisha （Paracel） Islands, Chungsha Islands （Macclesfield Bank）, and Tungsha （Pratas） Islands, as well as their surrounding waters, are an inherent part of ROC territory and waters. As the ROC enjoys all rights to these island groups and their surrounding waters in accordance with international law, the ROC government does not recognize any claim to sovereignty over, or occupation of, these areas by other countries, irrespective of the reasons put forward or methods used for such claim or occupation.
In his state visit to USA in last week, Chinese President Xi Jinping has repeated the stance of China on the South China Sea.
As the South China Sea issue has troubled China and other claimants as well as other external stake holders for long until now, the standing points of various parties are clearer now as time passes.
Now it is left for the actions to speak for the words.
Refer to the Philippinestar report on Xi Jinping's visit to USA: http://m.philstar.com/314191/show/2df0c2ec856eb8d07cf3d82281b40499/?
Page 1 of 2