中国政府关于菲律宾所提南海仲裁案管辖权问题的立场文件
Position Paper of the Chinese Government on the Matter of Jurisdiction in the South China Sea Arbitration Initiated by the Philippines

: 0 Comment(s)打印 E-mail China.org.cn　 2016-05-20

调整字号大小:

五、中国自主选择争端解决方式的权利应得到充分尊重，中国不接受、不参与菲律宾提起的仲裁具有充分的国际法依据	V. China's right to freely choose the means of dispute settlement must be fully respected, and its rejection of and non-participation in the present arbitration is solidly grounded in international law
76. 根据国际法，各国享有自主选择争端解决方式的权利。任何国际司法或仲裁机构针对国家间争端行使管辖权必须以当事国的同意为基础，即“国家同意原则”。基于这一原则，出席第三次联合国海洋法会议的各国代表经过长期艰苦的谈判，作为一揽子协议，达成了《公约》第十五部分有关争端解决机制的规定。	76. Under international law, every State is free to choose the means of dispute settlement. The jurisdiction of any international judicial or arbitral body over an inter-State dispute depends on the prior consent of the parties to the dispute. This is known as the principle of consent in international law. It was on the basis of this principle that the States participating in the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea reached, after extended and arduous negotiations, a compromise on Part XV relating to dispute settlement as a package deal.
77. 《公约》第十五部分规定的强制争端解决程序只适用于有关《公约》解释或适用的争端；缔约国有权自行选择第十五部分规定以外的其他争端解决方式；《公约》第二百九十七条和第二百九十八条还针对特定种类的争端规定了适用强制争端解决程序的限制和例外。	77. The compulsory dispute settlement procedures provided in Part XV of the Convention apply only to disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention. States Parties are entitled to freely choose the means of settlement other than those set out in Part XV. Articles 297 and 298 of the Convention, moreover, provide for limitations on and optional exceptions to the applicability of the compulsory procedures with regard to specified categories of disputes.
78. 《公约》第十五部分这种平衡的规定，也是许多国家决定是否成为《公约》缔约国时的重要考虑因素。在1974年第三次联合国海洋法会议第二期会议上，萨尔瓦多大使雷纳多·佳林多·波尔在介绍关于《公约》争端解决的第一份草案时强调，有必要将直接涉及国家领土完整的问题作为强制管辖的例外。否则，许多国家可能不会批准甚至不会签署《公约》（参见沙巴泰·罗森和路易斯·索恩1989年所编《1982年<联合国海洋法公约>评注》第5卷第88页第297.1段）。因此，在解释和适用《公约》第十五部分的规定时，必须维护该部分的平衡和完整。	78. The balance embodied in the provisions of Part XV has been a critical factor for the decision of many States to become parties to the Convention. At the second session of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, Ambassador Reynaldo Galindo Pohl of El Salvador, co-chair of the informal group on the settlement of disputes, on introducing the first general draft on dispute settlement, emphasized the need for exceptions from compulsory jurisdiction with respect to questions directly related to the territorial integrity of States. Otherwise, as has been noted, "a number of States might have been dissuaded from ratifying the Convention or even signing it" (Shabtai Rosenne and Louis B. Sohn (eds.), United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982: A Commentary, 1989, vol. v, p. 88, para. 297.1). It follows that the provisions of Part XV must be interpreted and applied in such a manner so as to preserve the balance in and the integrity of Part XV.
79. 中国重视《公约》强制争端解决程序在维护国际海洋法律秩序方面的积极作用。中国作为《公约》缔约国，接受了《公约》第十五部分第二节有关强制争端解决程序的规定。但是，中国接受该规定的适用范围不包括领土主权争端，不包括中国与其他缔约国同意以自行选择的方式加以解决的争端，也不包括《公约》第二百九十七条和中国2006年根据《公约》第二百九十八条所作声明排除的所有争端。对于菲律宾所提仲裁事项，中国从未接受《公约》第十五部分第二节规定的任何强制争端解决程序。	79. China highly values the positive role played by the compulsory dispute settlement procedures of the Convention in upholding the international legal order for the oceans. As a State Party to the Convention, China has accepted the provisions of section 2 of Part XV on compulsory dispute settlement procedures. But that acceptance does not mean that those procedures apply to disputes of territorial sovereignty, or disputes which China has agreed with other States Parties to settle by means of their own choice, or disputes already excluded by Article 297 and China's 2006 declaration filed under Article 298. With regard to the Philippines' claims for arbitration, China has never accepted any of the compulsory procedures of section 2 of Part XV.
80. 根据国家主权原则，争端当事国可自行选择争端解决方式，《公约》对此予以确认。《公约》第二百八十条规定：“本公约的任何规定均不损害任何缔约国于任何时候协议用自行选择的任何和平方法解决它们之间有关本公约的解释或适用的争端的权利。”	80. By virtue of the principle of sovereignty, parties to a dispute may choose the means of settlement of their own accord. This has been affirmed by the Convention. Article 280 provides that, "Nothing in this Part impairs the right of any States Parties to agree at any time to settle a dispute between them concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention by any peaceful means of their own choice."
81. 当事国自行选择的争端解决方式优先于《公约》第十五部分第二节规定的强制争端解决程序。《公约》第十五部分第一节的第二百八十一条第一款规定：“作为有关本公约的解释或适用的争端各方的缔约各国，如已协议用自行选择的和平方法来谋求解决争端，则只有在诉诸这种方法而仍未得到解决以及争端各方间的协议并不排除任何其他程序的情形下，才适用本部分所规定的程序。”《公约》第二百八十六条也规定：“在第三节限制下，有关本公约的解释或适用的任何争端，如已诉诸第一节而仍未得到解决，经争端任何一方请求，应提交根据本节具有管辖权的法院或法庭。”可见，只要当事方已经自行选择争端解决方式并且排除其他任何程序，《公约》规定的强制争端解决程序就完全不适用。	81. The means thus chosen by the States Parties to the Convention takes priority over the compulsory procedures set forth in section 2 of Part XV. Article 281(1) of section 1 of Part XV provides that, "If the States Parties which are parties to a dispute concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention have agreed to seek settlement of the dispute by a peaceful means of their own choice, the procedures provided for in this Part apply only where no settlement has been reached by recourse to such means and the agreement between the parties does not exclude any further procedure." Article 286 states that, "Subject to section 3, any dispute concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention shall, where no settlement has been reached by recourse to section 1, be submitted at the request of any party to the dispute to the court or tribunal having jurisdiction under this section." Accordingly, where parties to a dispute have already chosen a means of settlement and excluded other procedures, the compulsory procedures of the Convention shall not apply to the dispute in question.
82. 缔约国自行选择争端解决方式的优先性和重要性在2000年南方蓝鳍金枪鱼仲裁案裁决中得到了进一步肯定。仲裁庭指出，“《公约》远未建立一个真正全面的、有拘束力的强制管辖制度”（裁决第62段），“《公约》第二百八十一条第一款允许缔约国将第十五部分第二节强制程序的适用限定在所有当事方均同意提交的案件”（裁决第62段）。如果第十五部分第一节的规定不能得到有效遵守，就会实质上剥夺缔约国基于国家主权自行选择争端解决方式的权利，从而违反国家同意原则，破坏《公约》第十五部分的平衡和完整。	82. The priority and significance of the means of dispute settlement chosen by States Parties to the Convention have been further affirmed in the arbitral award in the Southern Bluefin Tuna Case. The tribunal recognized that the Convention "falls significantly short of establishing a truly comprehensive regime of compulsory jurisdiction entailing binding decisions", and that "States Parties ... are permitted by Article 281(1) to confine the applicability of compulsory procedures of section 2 of Part XV to cases where all parties to the dispute have agreed upon submission of their dispute to such compulsory procedures" (Australia and New Zealand v. Japan, pp. 102-103, para. 62). Were the provisions of section 1 of Part XV not complied with faithfully, it would result in deprivation of the right of the States Parties to freely choose means of peaceful settlement based on State sovereignty. That would entail a breach of the principle of consent and upset the balance in and integrity of Part XV.
83. 相关司法或仲裁机构在行使确定自身管辖权方面的权力时，也必须充分尊重缔约国自行选择争端解决方式的权利。《公约》第二百八十八条第四款规定：“对于法院或法庭是否具有管辖权如果发生争端，这一问题应由该法院或法庭以裁定解决。”中国尊重相关司法或仲裁机构根据《公约》所享有的上述权力，但同时强调，相关司法或仲裁机构在行使其权力时不应损害缔约国自行选择争端解决方式的权利，不应损害国际司法或仲裁必须遵循的国家同意原则。中国认为，这是仲裁庭在适用第二百八十八条第四款的规定确定自身管辖权时所必须受到的限制。总而言之，“争端当事方是争端解决程序完全的主人”（沙巴泰·罗森和路易斯·索恩1989年所编《1982年<联合国海洋法公约>评注》第5卷第20页第280.1段）。	83. In exercise of its power to decide on its jurisdiction, any judicial or arbitral body should respect the right of the States Parties to the Convention to freely choose the means of settlement. Article 288(4) of the Convention provides that "[i]n the event of a dispute as to whether a court or tribunal has jurisdiction, the matter shall be settled by decision of that court or tribunal". China respects that competence of judicial or arbitral bodies under the Convention. Equally important, China would like to emphasize, the exercise of judicial or arbitral power shall not derogate from the right of the States Parties to choose the means of settlement of their own accord, or from the principle of consent which must be followed in international adjudication and arbitration. China holds that this is the constraint that the Arbitral Tribunal must abide by when considering whether or not to apply Article 288(4) in determining its jurisdiction in the present arbitration. After all, "the parties to the dispute are complete masters of the procedure to be used to settle it" (Shabtai Rosenne and Louis B. Sohn (eds.), United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982: A Commentary, 1989, vol. v, p. 20, para. 280.1).
84. 中国尊重所有缔约国依据《公约》的规定适用强制争端解决程序的权利。同时，需要强调的是，《公约》第三百条规定：“缔约国应诚意履行根据本公约承担的义务，并应以不致构成滥用权利的方式，行使本公约所承认的权利、管辖权和自由。”菲律宾明知其所提出的仲裁事项本质上是岛礁领土主权问题，明知中国从未同意就有关争端接受强制争端解决程序，明知中菲之间存在关于通过谈判方式解决有关争端的协议，还要单方面提起强制仲裁，违反了《公约》的相关规定，无助于争端的和平解决。	84. China respects the right of all States Parties to invoke the compulsory procedures in accordance with the Convention. At the same time, it would call attention to Article 300 of the Convention, which provides that, "States Parties shall fulfil in good faith the obligations assumed under this Convention and shall exercise the rights, jurisdiction and freedoms recognized in this Convention in a manner which would not constitute an abuse of right." While being fully aware that its claims essentially deal with territorial sovereignty, that China has never accepted any compulsory procedures in respect of those claims, and that there has been an agreement existing between the two States to settle their relevant disputes by negotiations, the Philippines has nevertheless initiated, by unilateral action, the present arbitration. This surely contravenes the relevant provisions of the Convention, and does no service to the peaceful settlement of the disputes.
85. 鉴于上述，并基于仲裁庭对本案显然不具有管辖权，中国政府决定不接受、不参与仲裁程序，以捍卫中国自主选择争端解决方式的主权权利，确保中国依据《公约》于2006年作出的排除性声明起到应有的效力，维护《公约》第十五部分的完整性以及国际海洋法律制度的权威性和严肃性。中国的这一立场不会改变。	85. In view of what is stated above and in light of the manifest lack of jurisdiction on the part of the Arbitral Tribunal, the Chinese Government has decided not to accept or participate in the present arbitration, in order to preserve China's sovereign right to choose the means of peaceful settlement of its own free will and the effectiveness of its 2006 declaration, and to maintain the integrity of Part XV of the Convention as well as the authority and solemnity of the international legal regime for the oceans. This position of China will not change.