As an "Ocean Charter", the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) plays a crucial role in handling maritime disputes among nations. It has established a complicated and multi-layered system of dispute settlement mechanism that gives nations multiple choices based on respecting the will of the State Party, among which the compulsory conciliation proceedings under Section II of Annex V is undoubtedly one of the most special procedures. Newly-operated Timor Sea Compulsory Conciliation between Timor-Leste and Australia has brought about emphasis of compulsory conciliation mechanism, which was ignored before.
Conciliation has long existed as a means of peaceful dispute settlement, but coercive conciliation seems rare. Unlike the overly voluntary general conciliation and over-enforcing arbitral proceedings under the framework of the UNCLOS, the compulsory conciliation has achieved combination of voluntariness and compulsion, possessing unique values. It is characterized by unilaterality in trigger and proceeding, finality in application sequence, preposition obligation of negotiation in good faith. As a last resort, the compulsory conciliation proceedings nay be triggered by one side and the other is obligated to accept. During the process, the Conciliation Committee’s non-binding proposals and reports can often help the parties to the dispute to open up new ideas and form new solutions to achieve win-win cooperation.
Despite the large number of compulsory conciliation cases, this case, currently initiated under the mandatory conciliation procedure within the framework of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, is well under way and is nearing its end. In the Commission's decision on jurisdiction, a number of details were analysed, such as the question of the interpretation of the "agreement" under article 281, the question of the time of entry into force of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea under Article 298 and the determination of the obligation to fulfil the prior negotiation, and the recognition of the scope of the dispute matters, It provides a lot of valuable reference for the development of compulsory mediation procedure in the future.
Through the research and analysis of compulsory mediation procedure, especially jurisdiction, we can see the advantages of this mechanism, and also enlighten our country to resolve maritime disputes with positive attitude, on the one hand, under the framework of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the dispute over the delimitation of maritime areas between China and Japan and China and South Korea,
China could try to use existing compulsory conciliation procedures to deal with it; on the other hand, outside the framework of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the sea, China could, if necessary, draw on the mechanism of conciliation procedures to focus on compulsory conciliation, combining many different ways of settling disputes.