The Journal of Middle East and North Africa Sciences 2018; 4(11) ___________http://www.jomenas.

org

Decision of the International Arbitration Court toward the lawsuit between Philippines
and China: Legal validity and implications for Vietnam

Nguyen Hung Cuong * • Nguyen Ba Dien

Law School, Vietnam National University, 144 Xuan Thuy, Cau Giay, Hanoi, Vietnam
[email protected]

Abstract: The paper presents an overview of the main contents of the Court's Judgment on 07 December 2016 arbitration
established under Annex VII of UNCLOS in 1982 on the lawsuit between the Philippines and China - a judgment‘s
considered the turning point will create history for the East Sea disputes; analyze the meaning, validity and impact of the
ruling, predicts China's next action and how to force it to comply. The paper also analyzes the impact of this ruling on
Vietnam and initially proposed some solutions to be implemented in the struggle for sovereignty, sovereign rights and
jurisdiction in the East Sea.

To cite this article

[Cuong, N. H., & Dien, N. B. (2018). Decision of the International Arbitration Court toward the lawsuit between Philippines
and China: Legal validity and implications for Vietnam. The Journal of Middle East and North Africa Sciences, 4(11), 1-8].
(P-ISSN 2412- 9763) - (e-ISSN 2412-8937).www.jomenas.org. 1

Keywords: Court of Arbitration, China, Judgment, lawsuit, Philippines, Vietnam.

1. Introduction: 2. Decision of the International Arbitration Court:

Due to its strategic location and special importance Some main contents
to socio-economic, defense-security areas, East Sea has Under Article 9 of Annex VII - Law of the Sea
become subject of serious disputes among countries in the Convention, China's declaration not to participate in
region, especially the ambition to monopolize the East Sea international arbitration procedures initiated by the
with claims "nine-dashed line" absurd Chinese, as well as Philippines cannot be a barrier to the Court of Arbitration
a place of much competition for influence on the world was established under Annex VII of UNCLOS (called the
powers. In the context of the increasingly complex East Sea Court of Arbitration) proceed with the trial of this case. On
dispute with many problems and challenges in many October 29, 2015, the Court of Arbitration issued a
aspects, Republic of the Philippines case to sue the People's Declaration on Jurisdiction and Recognition of the
Republic of China (China) the International Court of Philippines-China, which confirmed the Court of
Arbitration was established under Annex VII of the Arbitration competent resolve this incident. In the
Convention of the United Nations (UN) on the Law of the International Arbitral Tribunal on 12 July 2016, the
Sea 1982 (UNCLOS, hereinafter called the Law of the Sea Arbitral Tribunal decided on matters relating to the role of
Convention or the Convention) in February 2013, is historic rights and the origin of the designated seas in the
considered "historical lawsuit", "lawsuit century". East Sea, regulation of some specific structures and the
According to the July 12, 2012 Report of the ability to generate the coastlines of this structure, and the
International Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), legality of the acts of which the Philippines‘s China
Judgment of Arbitration established under Annex VII of violating UNCLOS. Also, matched with the limits of the
UNCLOS (called the Court of Arbitration) in the dispute settlement mechanism of the Convention required,
Philippines case against China (hereinafter referred to as The Court of Arbitration emphasized that it did not rule on
International Judgment of July 12, 1973, or Judgment) was any sovereign jurisdiction over territories and did not
issued. With 497 pages, the international arbitration award delimit any maritime boundaries between the parties to the
dated 12.07.2016 has contributed explain and clarify issues case. Specifically, the Court of Arbitration had considered
that have not been UNCLOS specifies, simultaneously and decided the following fundamental issues:
exposing the irrationality, illegal Chinese claims in the East
First, the legitimacy of the "nine-dashed line and the claim
Sea. In this article, the authors focus some initial insights
of Chinese historical rights in the East Sea"
on value, the impact of this historic ruling as well as the
Arbitration court concludes that there is no legal
advantages, challenges and solutions for Vietnam.
basis for China's claim historical rights to the resources in

1
The Journal of Middle East and North Africa Sciences 2018; 4(11) ___________http://www.jomenas.org

the seaside of "nine-dashed line". This conclusion is based Since then, the Court of Arbitration concluded that
on the following observations: (1) Law of the Sea legally all floating structure in Changsha (including, for
Convention fairly comprehensive provisions on the rights example, Aba, Thi Tu, West York Island, Spratly, Gemini
to the seas but no clear regulations on the protection of East, Southwest Cay) are "stone" and does not create an
rights related to pre-existing resources of the Convention, exclusive economic zone or continental shelf. Law of the
because in the case of coastal countries can not fully Sea Convention does not provide for such a group of
exploited fish stocks allow, The Convention gives other islands in the Spratly Islands will have the waters as a
States one limited right to fishing in the exclusive single entity. On the basis of the conclusion that wasn’t
economic zone without any right to oil or gas or mineral structure which China claims were capable of creating an
resources; (2) Claims historical rights of China for exclusive economic zone and continental shelf under
resources that do not fit the detailed allocation of the waters UNCLOS Article 121 (artificial island entities may not be
under UNCLOS; (3) Before the Law of the Sea required as natural islands such as Article 121, which do
Convention, the East Sea waters outside the territorial not have territorial waters, EEZs or continental shelves, but
waters legally are part of international waters, at which only "safety belts" of 500m), Arbitration Court does not
ships of any country can cross and freely fish. Historically, need to demarcation of the sea and still be able to declare
beachgoers and fishermen from China and from other that certain disputed waters in the exclusive economic zone
countries have used the islands in the East Sea. China's of the Philippines not overlapping with any maritime rights
reciprocal and historical fishing in the waters of the East that China may have (The Permanent Court of Arbitration,
Sea has shown freedom on the high seas, instead of a 2016b).
historical right, and there is no evidence to suggest that in
Third, the legitimacy and influence of China's activities on
the history of China alone perform the control of the waters
the East Sea
in the East Sea or prevent other countries exploit their
China has violated the Philippine sovereign rights
resources (The Permanent Court of Arbitration, 2016a).
in its exclusive economic zone by (a) interfering in
Second, the legal status of the structure (entity) in the East Philippine oil exploration in the Co Rong beach; (b)
Sea and the geographic entitled waters that China claims Prohibited Philippine vessels fishing in the Philippine EEZ;
as provided for by the Convention. (c) protect and not prevent Chinese fishermen from fishing
UNCLOS classify the geographic structure based on in the Philippines' exclusive economic zone in Vanh Khan
their natural condition. Floating structures at high tide will and Co May beaches, and (d) construction works and
create the least right over the 12 nautical mile territorial artificial islands in Vanh Khan without the consent of the
waters, while structures that sink at high tides will not Philippines (The Permanent Court of Arbitration, 2016b).
create such right. Therefore, the Arbitration Tribunal first Regarding traditional fishing rights at Scarborough
assesses whether some of China's claimed grounds have Shoal, fishermen from the Philippines, China and other
emerged at high tide, then, assess whether or not any of the countries fishing in Scarborough Shoal have long and
structures claimed by China can produce waters beyond 12 traditional fishing rights in the area. Due to the
nautical miles. Scarborough Shoal ‘s above water at high tide, this
According to UNCLOS (Article 121), the island structure has the territorial waters surrounding this
creates an exclusive economic zone of 200 nautical miles structure does not form exclusive economic zone and
and the continental shelf, but the "stone is not suitable for fishing rights traditions are not lost due to the Convention
human habitation and economic life of its own with no on the Law sea. Despite unresolved emphasis on
exclusive economic zones and the continental shelf" sovereignty over Scarborough Shoal, Court of Arbitration
(United Nation, 2018a). This regulation depends on the determined that China had violated obligations to respect
objectivity of the structures when they are in a natural state the rights of traditional fishing Filipino fishermen and
in order to sustain a stable population or economic activity obligations under the Convention on the Prevention of
without relying on external resources. or just the mining Collisions at Sea 1972 and Article 94 of UNCLOS relating
nature. China's claims have been dramatically altered by to maritime safety when attempting to interfere with ships
the buildup, construction and presence of civil servants on Philippines approaching or entering the Scarborough Shoal
structures that rely on external support and do not reflect. in May 2012. However, the Court of Arbitration will also
the ability of structures. To identify the historical evidence have a similar conclusion for the traditional fishing rights
is more meaningful and Spratlys historically used by some of Chinese fishermen if the Philippine action prevents the
small group of fishermen that has some mining operations fishing of Chinese citizens in Scarborough Shoal (The
demarcation, fishing of Japan, The Court of Arbitration Permanent Court of Arbitration, 2016a).
held that such short-term use was not a settlement of stable Its impact on the marine environment of the recent
community and that economic activity in history was activities of China accretion and built 07 artificial
merely mining activity (The Permanent Court of structures on the Spratly Islands, Court of Arbitration
Arbitration, 2016a). stated that China has seriously harmed the environment of

2
The Journal of Middle East and North Africa Sciences 2018; 4(11) ___________http://www.jomenas.org

coral reefs and violated conservation obligations, protect judgment on 12 July 2016, despite China implemented the
ecosystems and vulnerable habitats of species are policy of three no: do not recognize the authority of the
declining, threatened and destroyed. The Chinese Court of arbitration, not join proceedings, does not accept
authorities have been aware of the Chinese fishermen were enforcement of the award. This ruling creates a historic
catching sea turtles, corals and giant clams rare widespread turning point in the East Sea dispute settlement, which’s of
in the East Sea (through measures caused serious damage great political and legal significance.
to the environment the reefs) and did not fulfill the
First, the ruling was a "blow" dealt heavily in legal claims,
obligation carefully under UNCLOS to prevent and
unjustified ambitions of China on East Sea
terminate these operations (The Permanent Court of
By concluding that there was no legal basis for
Arbitration, 2016a).
China's claim historical rights to the resources in the
Fourth, China's activities since the arbitral tribunal began seaside of "nine-dashed line", Arbitration Court has
to consider the case has exacerbated the dispute between dismissed 2 of 3 issues that China defended claims "nine-
the parties. dashed line", claims historical rights of traditional fishing
Although, the lack of authority examines the impact waters and claims, leaving only claims aspects entities
of the confrontation between Philippine navy ships and within "nine-dashed line" Arbitration Court doesn’t have
naval vessels, China's defenses at the Second Thomas jurisdiction.
Shoal Ground because of the dispute involving off-shore China acts to prevent Philippines’fishermen from
military operations compulsory dispute settlement, The fishing in waters within the Philippines' exclusive
arbitral tribunal has reviewed China's recent large-scale economic zone and continental shelf; China's underground
land reclamation and construction of artificial islands at 07 entities renovated in the Spratly Islands become to the
structures in the Spratlys since the start of arbitration and super island that trashy legally.
concluded that China has violated its obligations to curb The ruling has "crushed" China's actions for more
exacerbated and prolonged disputes between the parties than three years in a massive effort to build subterranean
pending the trial process. China has (a) built a large embankments in the Spratly Islands to hopefully place the
artificial island in the Mischief Reef, a submerged structure latter “The Chinese have an island that claims the territorial
within the Philippine EEZ; (b) causes long-term, waters, the exclusive economic zone and the continental
irreversible damage to the coral reef ecosystem and (c) shelf”. Conclusions of the Court of Arbitration based on the
Long-term destruction of the evidence of the natural Law of the Sea Convention does not provide for a group of
condition of these structures (The Permanent Court of islands like the Spratlys will have the waters as a single
Arbitration, 2016b). entity, will contribute to preventing any future attempt to
establish straight lines for the Spratly Islands as a unified
Fifth, behavior of the parties in the future
entity as China did with Paracels in 1996. Thus, the ruling’s
Both the Philippines and China have repeatedly
"blow" against China in pursuing its ambition to expand,
acknowledged UNCLOS and the general obligation of
unjustified hegemony in the East Sea.
good faith in determining and adjusting own behavior. The
core of dispute in this case’s not in the intentions China or Second, the international arbitration award on 12 July
the Philippines in the infringement of legal rights the other 2016 embodies the triumph of justice, confirmed the rule of
party, that’s due to the different understandings basic rights international law (notably the UN Convention on the Law
under the Convention on the Law sea to the East sea waters. of the Sea in 1982)
According to basic principles of international law and on As a subject of international law, China is obliged to
the basis of Article 11 Annex VII provides that "judgment conscientiously implement the international treaties to
... will be the parties to the dispute compliance" Arbitration which it is a party, including the UN Convention on the
Court sees no need to make a public statement about this Law of the Sea-the Charter of the international community
problem (The Permanent Court of Arbitration, 2016b). order at sea. However, with the ambition to monopolize the
East Sea, as a springboard to carry out the oceans, world
3. Legal validity of International Arbitration: hegemony, China claims "U-shaped line" absurd and a
The case of the Philippines against China in variety of operating illegal international in the East Sea.
Arbitration Court established under Annex VII of the In this context, the Court of Arbitration issued a
Convention’s considered "Century Lawsuit", for the first ruling in mind, despite the guise of "three no" (as described
time in history, China - permanent members the Security above) from China, confirmed the rule of law and vitality
Council of the United Nations, members of the Law of the of international law. The ruling confirmed that the subject
Sea Convention, "superpower" with dream become "heart of international law, all countries, big or small, must
of the world" - be reduced to a single country by the behave based on international standards. This shows that
unilateral interpretation and application of the United international law remains in force. In other words, this
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The lawsuit ruling "revive the faith of mankind into a global order
ended by the Court of Arbitration issuing the final based on legal norms" (Thanh Đat, 2016).

3
The Journal of Middle East and North Africa Sciences 2018; 4(11) ___________http://www.jomenas.org

Third, arbitration ruling on 12 July 2016 has contributed Diaoyu Islands dispute, Tokyo Islands, Ryukyu Islands,
to ensure the legitimate interests of stakeholders and also and other disputed rocky islets when applying Article 121
works to prevent the calculations some forces wanted to (United Nation, 2018a) of UNCLOS.
use the environment estate in the East Sea for profiteering
Fifth, the international arbitration on 12 July 2016 made
For the countries of the East Sea, this ruling has
the big role of international law, of international
contributed to changing the "plays" in the East Sea by
arbitration institutions in the settlement of disputes through
clarifying the true and false facts of a dispute over
the peaceful path, opens a new direction in the East Sea
interpretation and misapplication of the Convention to
dispute resolution
make unjustified claims, violates the rights and legitimate
Although the ruling ‘s not the only solution to solve
interests of stakeholders. Judgment contributes
all aspects of the East Sea dispute, but have significant
significantly narrowed the area can be regarded as a dispute
effects contribute to solving fundamental and enduring the
(mostly exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of the Philippines,
complicated disputes in the East Sea by peaceful means.
Malaysia, Brunei and Vietnam no longer be considered as
This historic ruling has contributed to building the
areas of dispute and countries have full jurisdiction in these
confidence of the international community for the tribunal's
areas). The ruling is not only beneficial to the Philippines
role in resolving disputes complex sea-island. Though
but also benefits both Vietnam and its related countries.
smaller countries superpowers can put faith in international
"Based on the judgment of the Court, the EEZ of Vietnam
justice, on legal solutions in peaceful solutions to
does not overlap with the coast. Vietnam has a legal basis
international disputes struggle to protect their national
to carry out mining activities here, where China has
sovereignty and contribute to consolidate a "regional order
traditionally provided the means of expulsion” (People's
based on law", which is the ASEAN countries and powers
army, 2016).
like the US, Japan, Australia repeatedly advocated.
For countries in the world, international arbitration
on 12 July 2016 contribute to protecting the interests of the
4. About effect and the binding verdict of international
United States, Japan, India, Australia, South Korea and
arbitration
many other countries in the East Sea, by overtly appealing
The ruling on 12 July 2016 legal binding and be
the claim of the "U-shaped line" as well as the legacy of
final. Although not recognized the competence of the Court
China's East Sea monopoly. Judgment restores the freedom
of Arbitration, not join proceedings and claims not accept
of navigation, freedom of navigation for the international
enforcement of the judgment but according to international
community on most of the East Sea. For the 12 nautical
law, China’s obliged to abide by and enforce ruling for two
miles territorial waters of the island entities, vessels of
reasons:
other countries are entitled to pass non-destructive right
First, the subject of international law, a member of
and may go near theVanh Khan beach, within 12 nautical
the United Nations Charter, the Vienna Convention of 1969
miles of China runway and the large base on the artificial
on the Law of Treaties and the Convention on the Law of
island in the Spratlys area
the Sea, China’s obliged to adhere to the fundamental
On the other hand, in the context of the South China
principles of international law - the guiding political, legal,
Sea situation becomes more tense and unstable due to the
and judicial ideals of common law (Jus cogens) for every
competition for the influence of the superpower in the
subject of International law that one of the important
world (such as the US, Japan, India ...). The judgment of
principles pacta sunt servanda principle - dedication,
the arbitrator on 12 July 2016 has warned against the
goodwill implementation of international commitments
scourge of "scramble" international law to achieve their
(UN, 2018b).
interests, Typical ruling indirectly prevents plotting set the
China ‘s the signatory and ratification of the
non-recognition of China and any other country in the East
UNLOS Convention, which ‘s bound to adhere to the
Sea.
Convention, including its provisions relating to dispute
Fourth, the views, arguments accurate in ruling on the settlement (except as provided for in Article 298) (Thanh
provisions of UNCLOS would be an important basis for Dat, 2016). Philippines was based on Section XV
countries to use in adjusting its claims in accordance with (Settlement of Disputes), especially Section 2-The
the law internationally while protecting the sovereignty, mandatory procedure leading to the decisions required to
sovereign rights and their jurisdiction at sea. This ruling sue in Court International Arbitration was established and
has created a common understanding of these terms also operated in accordance under Annex VII of the
unspecific, unclear of the Convention. For example, the Convention. When China ratified UNCLOS and accept to
Arbitral Tribunal's statement that no entity in the Spratly be bound by any decision stems from the judgment
archipelago is capable of sustaining human life should not required by third-party offer, This agreement is China's act
have its own exclusive economic zone, continental shelf, of voluntary sovereignty and a commitment to serious
including Ba Binh largest islands, is an important decision international treaties that it must respect and adhere to,
not only for the East Sea but also to the East China Sea,

4
The Journal of Middle East and North Africa Sciences 2018; 4(11) ___________http://www.jomenas.org

regardless of whether the verdict comes from the judicial the "nine-dashed line". In light of this ruling, China may
process (Viet Long, 2016). temporarily reduce aggression, but with China's "dream"
Secondly, the legality and the veracity of the and its expansionist ideology, China will continue to act in
International Arbitration Award’s laid down in the UN the East Sea with sophisticated schemes more dangerous.
Convention on the Law of the Sea (Article 296): “1. The Although there’s no specialized agency for
decision by the court having jurisdiction under this section enforcement, the international arbitration on 12 July 2016
is given ultimate nature, and all parties must comply; 2. has been welcomed by the international community. If
Such decisions are only binding on the parties and in the China wants to become a "big responsible country for the
particular case considered”. At the same time, Article 11, international community," China will soon have to accept
Annex VII of the Convention also stipulates that: "The the verdict, Otherwise, the country will lose and suffer
verdict is final and can not be appealed unless the parties to worse consequences. In the history of international
the dispute must abide by this judgment" (UN, 2018a). So, proceedings had cases some countries do not accept the
in principle, the content that the Court of Justice declared jurisdiction of the Court and not join proceedings as New
competent and judgment will be final, can not appeal (final) Zealand and Australia for the French event in 1974, USA
and this ruling brings legal binding on the parties involved, in 1985 event Nicaragua, event service Netherlands Russia
directly as China and the Philippines. Failure to enforce the in 2013 (Thanh Dat, 2016).
judgment’s considered a violation of international law. At the same time, the deterrence of China's plots and
subsequent aggression and forcing China to adhere to the
5. International Court ruling and sanctions compliance Decision will depend greatly on Vietnam, the Philippines,
force China the littoral states, the United States, Japan, and South
China has been treating it as "goldfish bowls", as "a Korea, Australia ... and the international community. If
lifeline", the "core interests", "shield natural defenses", just these countries do not take drastic measures, China will not
as the "throat" but at the same time as well as the "front stop or only temporarily stop with "postponement".
yard" to countries implement ambitious "hegemony" and Therefore, political-diplomatic, countries around
target large ocean reaching out through claims "U-shaped the world (USA, Japan, India, and other powers) must unite
line". and strong sanctions against China. For example,
The International Arbitration Court Judgment enhancing the presence of naval forces in the East Sea to
historically on 12 July 2016, China has been predicted long deter China, there’re strong "messages" against China's
ago so nearly 04 years, since July 01 2013 when the continued dislocation of submarines, these entities, and
Philippines began to sue, China has accelerated chemical those manipulative behaviors, divided ASEAN. Countries
entities super underground island in the East Sea with the around the world need to help the South China Sea region
intention to put world and international Court of become more militarily and economically free from
Arbitration before “fait accompli”. Together, China and China's influence and influence, causing China to rethink
mobilizes the whole political system (military, economic, itself, curb the reckless actions, defiantly on the field,
trade, diplomacy, science, technology, communication, gradually force it to comply with the UN Charter and
construction force and law enforcement ...) on this. On the international law. The countries in the Association of
one hand, China uses trickery to entice, bribe the Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) related to the East Sea
Philippines and other countries, on the other hand, its should enlist leverage ruling and the validity of it in
threats, lowering the prestige of the judges in the arbitration strengthening unity bloc, especially for the construction,
council to attack the fairness and objectivity of judgment issued by the Code of Conduct in the East Sea (COC) ‘s
decisive. Not only that, the Court of Arbitration issued a currently China sought to oppose with claims "nine-dashed
ruling, Chinese President Xi Jinping declared "China's line" absurd.
territorial sovereignty and maritime interests in the East Besides, under the provisions of the UN Charter, the
Sea will not be affected by the Arbitration Court's decision Philippines may request the intervention of the UN
in all situations", Chinese Foreign Ministry also said it Security Council (UNSC) - political body, the most
"ruled null and non-binding" (Thanh Dat, 2016). important and regular activities of the UN, responsible for
With longstanding programming and ambitions to maintaining peace and international security. The
monopolize the East Sea, it’s difficult for China to resolutions of the Security Council passed fit, the UN
voluntarily execute the arbitral award, stop the activities of Charter obliges UN member states must implement. In case
illegal, return the original state entities (07 entities) that China continues to "ignore" the state of the Arbitration
China had invaded and accretion illegal, making these Court, the Philippines will be entitled to take the case to the
entities into "super-bases" in the East Sea. The arbitration United Nations Security Council and it will be responsible
award may temporarily prevent China from extending for taking action. China's failure to implement international
occupation and super-turbocharging other entities in the arbitration ‘s a serious violation of international law,
field as well as arresting fishing vessels of Vietnamese China's failure to implement international arbitration is a
fishermen, Philippine fishermen and other countries within serious violation of international law. However, the useful

5
The Journal of Middle East and North Africa Sciences 2018; 4(11) ___________http://www.jomenas.org

mechanism of the Security Council will now be difficult to continental shelf of Vietnam's examples mentioned on page
implement when China used the veto (Article 27 of the 89 of the Decision (PetroVietnam, 2012); And the contract
Charter for rights to 05 permanent members are the United of Chinese company Hai Zi Yang signed with Crestone
States, Britain, France, Russia, and China). However, this’s (USA) in 1992 on the beach in the mainland of Vietnam
still to do in order to awaken the responsibility to protect will not be valuable.
the law, justice and international order of UN member - The ruling is the basis for Vietnam and other countries
states. to demand China end its illegal fishing ban in the East Sea
In the history of international proceedings, as stated since 1998. The access to resources of Vietnamese
above, had the powers that the defendant initially refused fishermen in the Paracel and Spratly waters must be
to join the case, but then also to finish manually execute the ensured. At the same time, Viet Nam, as well as related
judgment of the international court, typically in the event countries, has clear claim to the Spratlys on the basis of
the United States to Nicaragua International Court of claims to geological structures in the area.
Justice (ICJ) in 1986, accused the US-backed overthrow of - The Court of Arbitration declared that no other
the government in Nicaragua's leftist Sandanista. Finally, structure of the Spratly Islands is eligible to an island under
the ICJ ruled that the US violated international law with paragraph 3 of Article 121 of UNCLOS should be a
anti-government actions Sandanista and asked the United maximum of just enjoying the territorial waters of 12
States to compensate. Since the United States did not nautical miles without region EEZ and the continental shelf
voluntarily execute the ICJ's ruling, Nicaragua submitted is a significant point is particularly important. This
the case to the United Nations, while enlisting support from statement along with the state claims "historic rights" of
many countries. Finally, the United States was forced to China based on the "dotted line" not consistent with
pay Nicaragua compensation. Therefore, in case China UNCLOS have implications not only for the Philippines
resolutely fails to implement the verdict, the Philippines and China are the two disputants but all other countries now
can take similar action to take advantage of the UN's role claim to the Spratlys, These declarations have significantly
in enforcing the judgment. narrowed the scope of maritime disputes between China
and countries in the East Sea, including Vietnam.
6. Impact of International Arbitral on Vietnam and - Viet Nam may apply the above statement (as a legal
solutions to protect Sovereignty, Sovereignty and precedent) in determining the legal status of geographic
Jurisdiction in the East Sea entities in the Paracels, thereby reject baselines established
As a sovereign coastal state in the East Sea, Vietnam by China around the Paracels in 1996, reducing the sea
enforces a consistent policy of rejecting the "Nine-dashed disputes outside the Tonkin Gulf.
line" and supporting the arbitral tribunal's jurisdiction in - On the basis of the ruling, Vietnam and Malaysia may
the Philippines case. On 5 December 2014, the Ministry of request the United Nations Commission on the Limits of
Foreign Affairs of Vietnam sent a Statement of Notice to the Continental Shelf to review the general dossiers of
the Arbitration Tribunal on Vietnam's position 'to protect continental shelf boundaries submitted by the two countries
its legitimate rights and interests in the East Sea ... which in 2009. The Philippines will withdraw its request that the
may influence in the arbitration process". Viet Nam also Commission does not review the file of Vietnam and
expresses its support for the" States Parties to the Malaysia and that it may join the file. Because, China's and
Convention on the Law Sea seeking the settlement of the Philippines's objections to the joint report of Vietnam
disputes concerning the interpretation and application of and Malaysia will become worthless and the continental
the Convention ... through the procedures provided for in shelf commission has no reason to delay the review of
Part XV of the Convention". On 12 July 2016, after the reports (As the Court of Appeal claims China's "nine-
Arbitration Tribunal finally ruled on the Philippines-China dashed line" does not have a legal basis, it also means that
case, the Foreign Ministry quickly declared its support for most of the exclusive economic zone, the continental shelf
the verdict, strongly support the settlement of disputes in of Vietnam and Malaysia are no longer affected.
the South China Sea by peaceful means, including considered the dispute).
diplomatic and legal processes, not using or threatening to In particular, the Court's judgment on 12 July 2016
use force in accordance with international law; the the referee only solve some problems related to the
principle of the rule of law on the seas and oceans. interpretation and application of the Convention, not ruling
As a country indirectly affected by the above ruling, any issues relating to sovereignty over the territory and do
we need to study carefully for appropriate responses. The not assign any maritime boundaries between the parties.
ruling from the content, we can see the positive impact That also means that the issue of territorial sovereignty,
points to Vietnam as follows: especially with regard to the islands in the Paracel and
- Court ruling arbitration facilitate integrity protection Spratly Islands - the most important issue in the East Sea
legal exclusive economic zone and continental shelf of dispute - remains unresolved. Should be aware that
Vietnam, Because 09 oil and gas fields that the Chinese ambition in the East Sea with the Dahan thought to realize
Offshore Oil Company (CNOOC) called 2012 on the "Chinese dream" of China will no stop which will become

6
The Journal of Middle East and North Africa Sciences 2018; 4(11) ___________http://www.jomenas.org

increasingly larger, more aggressive. Therefore, China will seeking a peaceful solution on the basis of international law
continue to use the mechanism agreed international (Viet Long, 2016). General reason of this opinion ‘s to
jurisdiction in the East Sea dispute resolution and extended avoid causing hostility, instability bilateral relations. These
consolidation of power in the field (actual control of the views are not wrong, but the situation and the urgency of
Paracel Islands and many locations in the Spratly Islands) using legal solutions through international arbitration to
through the exploitation of actual occupation positions, protect Vietnam's sovereignty over the East Sea have not
conducting "Chemical Island", "chemical super-island" been properly assessed.
undermine the sovereignty, jurisdiction, freedom of Besides, the international arbitration ruling on 12
Vietnam and the countries of the East Sea, for example, July 2016 benefit the Philippines, one side is also a
have long lost true sovereignty if they do not fight common victory for Vietnam, on the other hand also puts
vigorously with appropriate legal solutions. Vietnam in some situations need to be voiced and clear
Especially, compared with China, the Philippines attitude to the Philippines and the international community
and other countries in the East Sea, Vietnam has sufficient when ruling also generated some negative impact on claims
evidence (historical, natural, economic and social) and the of Vietnam for Spratlys. Firstly, the Court of Arbitration
legal basis of sovereignty alone for two Paracels and denounce Co May, hereby Vanh Khan beaches (of
Spratlys as well as all legal rights and interests related to Vietnam) is located in the exclusive economic zone and
the geographic features of these archipelagos, sovereignty continental shelf of the Philippines. Secondly, the
over inland waters and territorial waters, sovereignty and Philippines also have territorial sovereignty and maritime
jurisdiction over the exclusive economic zone and delimitation disputes Vietnam that they were the Kalayaan
continental shelf is defined consistent with UNCLOS. (region free) and claimed to be the first discovered nation
Therefore, the arbitral ruling on 12 July 2016 for the archipelago by individuals (Tomas Cloma),
reinforces the belief of justice and the legal basis to oppose developed as a government claim in the early 1970s,
acts of building artificial islands and militarized the rocks claiming sovereignty over the Spratlys on the basis of
in the Spratly Islands, create legal precedent, creating geographical proximity. In the Notification and
"momentum" to the State of Vietnam for consideration and Declaration lawsuit at the Court of Arbitration, the
decision to use legal solutions, especially the mechanism Philippines mentioned some entity they claim in the
of settlement of disputes of international organizations and Spratlys as Vanh Khan (Point 4), Co May (Point 5), Ga-
institutions of international judiciary to struggle to protect ven, Ken Nan and Subi (Score 6), Gac Ma, Chien Vien,
sovereignty in the East sea-island. In accordance with Chu Thap (Point 8) should have touched Vietnamese
international law in the context of the East Sea region’s sovereignty over these entities. Vietnam has sufficient
increasingly complex, with power relationships and limited evidence and legal basis for sovereignty over the Paracel
potential economic, defense and security, human resources and Spratly archipelagos as well as all legal rights and
... , this ‘s the most effective way to successfully defend interests related to the geographic features of these two
firmly and Vietnam's sovereignty over the East Sea. The use archipelagosWhile the part of the arbitration case is tilted
of international arbitration not only demonstrates towards the Philippines, if Vietnam does not take proper,
legitimacy and respect for justice but also facilitates the rapid, and effective steps to gain international recognition
emergence of Viet Nam's legal strengths in proving of sovereignty, it is likely to cause misunderstanding
sovereignty over islands, so as early and thoroughly, the international community that Vietnam has implicitly
struggle effectively protect maritime sovereignty higher, at recognized the Arbitration Court ruling on the entities
the same time, it dispels the skepticism of the international mentioned above so far Vietnam has not clearly stated its
community as Vietnam reluctantly applies these solutions. position on this issue (including in the diplomatic note on
Professor Carlyle A.Thayer said: "The Philippines victory 14 December 2014 of Vietnam Ministry of Foreign Affairs
will open the door for Vietnam to regulate if China sent Arbitration Court lawsuit between the Philippines and
becomes more assertive" (Viet Long, 2016). Therefore, the PRC and Annex 468 additional submissions of the
Vietnam needs to deploy front fighting strong legal, Philippines 08).
specifically, more practical, focused use of mechanisms
tribunals international measures of negotiation, negotiation 7. Conclusion:
not be effective. Although there are many controversial and need
However, there ‘s still mixed opinion about further study and evaluation of content arbitral award on 12
Vietnam's next step after the International Arbitration for July 2016 but basically we need to recognize the ruling ‘s
the Philippines case. Some view that, Vietnam should not historic in nature, contribute to changed the East Sea
sue China this time as the Philippines or instead sue and dispute, in which the most important is the common victory
wait for the verdict in a long time from the international of the countries harmed by claims "Nine-dashed line" (U
tribunals, Vietnam should choose more feasible solutions shaped line) absurdity of China. This ruling not only in the
ahead, in particular by enlisting strong support from world narrow sense of the overlapping areas between the
opinion and calling for ASEAN solidarity to continue countries in the East Sea, ending the ambiguity leads to the

7
The Journal of Middle East and North Africa Sciences 2018; 4(11) ___________http://www.jomenas.org

risk of conflicts and disputes escalate but also encouraging oil blocks in the exclusive economic zone and
the settlement of maritime disputes by peaceful means, continental shelf of Vietnam, access on
through international arbitration tribunals and other http://www.pvn.vn/DataStore/Report/2015/TCBC/2
mechanisms. 7062012.pdf published on 27/6/2012
International arbitration ruling of the Court of 4. Thanh Dat (2016), “Philippine lawyer: The ruling on
Arbitration on 12 July 2016 established under Annex VII the South China Sea lawsuit raises trust in
of UNCLOS in the Philippines for Chinese events bring international law”, http://dantri.com.vn/the-
great advantages but also put Vietnam ahead of hardship gioi/luat-su-truong-philippines-phan-quyet-ve-vu-
should be resolved. We must continue to thoroughly study kien-bien-dong-vuc-day-long-tin-vao-luat-phap-
and evaluate the implications of this historic ruling to make quoc-te-20160715155017358.htm, Published date
good strategic decisions in protecting the sovereignty of the 15/07/2016.
sea and islands in Vietnam in the East Sea. Philippines 5. The Permanent Court of Arbitration (2016a), “The
v.Trung post-lawsuit Nations./. South China Sea Arbitration (The Republic of the
Philippines v.The People’s Republic of China)”,
Corresponding Author: PRESS RELEASE, The Hague, p.10, http://pca-
Nguyen Thanh Minh, Ph.D. cpa.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/175/2016/07/PH-
Military Science Office, Vietnam Coast Guard, No 6 Tay CN-20160712-Press-Release-No-11-English.pdf.
Mo, Tu Liem South District, Hanoi, Vietnam. 6. The Permanent Court of Arbitration (2016b), “The
E-mail: [email protected] South China Sea Arbitration (The Republic of the
Philippines v. The People’s Republic of China)”,
References : AWARD, The Hague,
1. Army’s people (2016), “The Arbitral Tribunal's http://www.pcacases.com/pcadocs/PH-CN%20-
decision significantly reduced the disputed areas in %2020160712%20-%20Award.pdf.
the South China Sea”, http://www.qdnd.vn/thoi-su- 7. United Nation (2018a), UN Convention on the Law of
quoc-te/doi-song-quoc-te/phan-quyet-cua-toa- the Sea.
trong-tai-gop-phan-thu-hep-dang-ke-cac-khu-vuc- 8. United Nation (2018b), The UN Charter.
bi-coi-la-tranh-chap-o-bien-dong-483032, published 9. Van Dan (2016), “East Sea - Why Vietnam has not
on 14/07/2016 sued China??”, http://quochoi.org/bien-dong-vi-sao-
2. International Research Journal, Reason Arbitration viet-nam-chua-khoi-kien-trung-quoc.html,
Court rulings tied to China, published on 15/07/2016
http://nghiencuuquocte.org/2016/07/23/ly-phan- 10. Viet Long (2016), “The lawsuit of the century, the
quyet-toa-trong-tai-rang-buoc-voi-trung-quoc/. turning point of the East Sea”, Journal online
Resources: Jerome A.Cohen, “Like it or not, Vietnamnet,http://vietnamnet.vn/vn/tuanvietnam/31
UNCLOS arbitration is legally binding for China”, 5653/vu-kien-the-ky-buoc-ngoat-bien-dong.html,
East Asia Forum, 11/07/2016 published on 14/07/2016
3. Petro Vietnam (2012), PVN press release at a press
conference on China to open international tender 09

Received August 27, 2018; revised October 14, 2018; accepted October 20, 2018; published online November 01, 2018