Title Page
ABSTRACT
Contents
ABBREVIATION 11
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 13
CHAPTER TWO: THE BACKGROUND OF THE CASE 18
2.1. The introduction of the South China Sea and disputes in this area 18
2.2. The special disputes between China and Philippines 20
2.3. The simplification of the arbitration procedure and the Award 26
2.4. The status and position of China in the case 30
2.5. The summary requests of Philippines 32
CHAPTER THREE: THE ANALYSIS AND DEMONSTRATION TO THE SUBMISSIONS WHICH ARE CLAIMED HAS JURISTICTION BY THE TRIBUNAL 35
3.1. The summary of submissions No. 3, 4, 6, 7 and the essence of them 35
3.2. Whether the Tribunal has rights to determine the status of maritime features? 38
3.2.1. How to decide the maritime features based on the UNCLOS? 39
3.2.2. The definition of "island", "reefs", "rock", "low-tide elevation" and their status under the UNCLOS 43
3.2.3. The connections and differences between sovereignty disputes, maritime boundary delimitation and the legal status of the maritime features 46
3.2.4. China's statements of the premise of the issue 49
3.3. Article 298 under the UNCLOS 52
3.3.1. The definition of Article 298 under the UNCLOS 52
3.3.2. China's 2006 Declaration 55
3.3.3. The function and the influence of the Declaration 57
3.3.4. The result of the Declaration: excluding the disputes in respect of the sovereignty and maritime delimitation from the compulsory settlement 60
3.4. Jurisdictional defects relating to the submissions No. 3, 4, 6 and 7 63
3.4.1. The insufficiency jurisdiction of the Tribunal 63
3.4.2. The faults of the analysis of the Tribunal 65
3.5. The issue of the traditional fishing rights in the submission No. 10 68
3.5.1. What is the traditional fishing rights (TFRs)? 68
3.5.2. The different claims between China and Philippines 70
3.5.3. The potential connections between Article 297(3) of the UNCLOS and TFRs. 72
3.5.4. The core of the dispute: sovereignty related dispute 74
3.6. The protection and preservation of the marine environment in the submission No. 11 75
3.6.1. Article 192 and 194 of the UNCLOS 76
3.6.2. Article 297(1)(c) 77
3.6.3. The different claims between China and Philippines 78
3.6.4. The potential defects of the analysis by the Tribunal of the submission No. 11 79
3.7. Whether China breached UNCLOS obligation by dangerous operation of law enforcement vessels around Scarborough Shoal? 81
3.7.1. Article 298 (1)(b) 81
3.7.2. The essence of the dispute 82
3.7.3. The potential legal rights of China under the UNCLOS 85
CHAPTER FOUR: PRECONDITIONS TO THE TRIBUNAL'S JURISDICTION 86
4.1. The analysis of Article 281 and 282 of the UNCLOS 86
4.1.1. Article 281 and Article 282 86
4.1.2. The negotiation history between China and Philippines in respect of solving the disputes in South China Sea 89
4.1.3. Whether no settlement has been reached between China and Philippines? 92
4.1.4. The analysis of the DOC and its characters 94
4.2. Whether China and Philippines had exchanged the views in respect of the disputes which embodied in the Submissions? 101
4.2.1. Article 283 of the UNCLOS 101
4.2.2. The analysis of the Note Verbales between China and Philippines during 2009-2011 103
4.2.3. Whether Philippines had exchanged the views which are embodied in the submissions with China? 108
CHAPTER FIVE: THE "NINE-DASH LINE" AND THE HISTORIC RIGHTS 113
5.1. What is the "nine-dash line" and "historic rights"? 113
5.1.1. The background of the "nine-dash line" 114
5.1.2. Historic rights and "historic bay and titles" 117
5.1.3. Different understanding of historic rights between China and Philippines 119
5.2. The legal status of the historic rights, from the perspective of customary law and UNCLOS 121
5.3. The defects of the Tribunal's analysis to Submission No. 2 125
CONCLUSION 130
REFERENCES 135