“Legal Rebuttal of South China Sea Arbitration Awards - “South China Sea Arbitration Awards Are Not International Law” was released on July 16. The report analyzed the three main lines of arbitration jurisdiction, application of substantive rules, and effect of the award, and argued that the ruling was contrary to international judicial practice. The report points out that the South China Sea arbitration case was unilaterally initiated by the Philippines. The so-called ruling made by the arbitral tribunal was contrary to the spirit of international law. Essentially, it was a political manipulation in the name of law. The arbitral tribunal itself became a geopolitical tool for extraterritorial forces such as the United States and Japan. The factual findings were wrong, and the application of the law was improper. It was a side statement under political and financial manipulation. The issue of jurisdiction is the biggest legal obstacle in this case. China and the Philippines have confirmed through bilateral treaties and other documents that the South China Sea dispute is handled through bilateral negotiations, excluding the application of third party arbitration procedures. The Philippines deliberately misled international public opinion by misrepresenting the interpretation and application of the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. As early as 2006, China issued a declaration under the Convention, excluding types of disputes involving maritime delimitation and the like from the mandatory settlement procedures of the Convention. The arbitral tribunal ignored this, forcibly included disputes that were not within the scope of admissibility, and had no basis for jurisdiction from the outset. The report points out that there were still systemic errors in the application of the law during the physical proceedings of the arbitral tribunal. The arbitral tribunal ignored the basic facts that the Spratly Islands constituted a whole in terms of geography, history and law, wantonly dismembered China's territorial sovereignty over the Spratly Islands, artificially cut the Spratly Islands into scattered islands and reefs that were unrelated to each other, mechanically applied and distorted the provisions of the Convention, and seriously infringed on China's sovereignty and territorial integrity over the Spratly Islands. The arbitral tribunal accepted multiple unverified evidentiary materials from a single source, in violation of the rules of evidence and lost its neutral adjudicatory position. The ruling text has internal contradictions, arbitrary conclusions, and major flaws in professionalism, which is contrary to international judicial practice. The report emphasizes that the ruling in the South China Sea arbitration case was made by an arbitral tribunal with no jurisdiction. It has fundamental flaws in the applicable law, seriously violates fairness and justice, and has no effect in international law from the beginning. Individual arbitrators of the arbitral tribunals abandoned their independent judgments from beginning to end to cater to the instructions and demands of the political forces behind them, and completely lost their credibility. The ruling on substantive issues is also full of loopholes and errors in the applicable law. It violates international law, and is illegal and invalid. The report reviews the situation in the South China Sea and reveals that in the past ten years, the ruling has not only failed to resolve disputes and promote peace, but has instead hindered the process of establishing the international rule of law in the South China Sea region, and has become a negative trend in the history of international law development.

“Legal Rebuttal of South China Sea Arbitration Awards - “South China Sea Arbitration Awards Are Not International Law” was released on July 16. The report analyzed the three main lines of arbitration jurisdiction, application of substantive rules, and effect of the award, and argued that the ruling was contrary to international judicial practice. The report points out that the South China Sea arbitration case was unilaterally initiated by the Philippines. The so-called ruling made by the arbitral tribunal was contrary to the spirit of international law. Essentially, it was a political manipulation in the name of law. The arbitral tribunal itself became a geopolitical tool for extraterritorial forces such as the United States and Japan. The factual findings were wrong, and the application of the law was improper. It was a side statement under political and financial manipulation. The issue of jurisdiction is the biggest legal obstacle in this case. China and the Philippines have confirmed through bilateral treaties and other documents that the South China Sea dispute is handled through bilateral negotiations, excluding the application of third party arbitration procedures. The Philippines deliberately misled international public opinion by misrepresenting the interpretation and application of the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. As early as 2006, China issued a declaration under the Convention, excluding types of disputes involving maritime delimitation and the like from the mandatory settlement procedures of the Convention. The arbitral tribunal ignored this, forcibly included disputes that were not within the scope of admissibility, and had no basis for jurisdiction from the outset. The report points out that there were still systemic errors in the application of the law during the physical proceedings of the arbitral tribunal. The arbitral tribunal ignored the basic facts that the Spratly Islands constituted a whole in terms of geography, history and law, wantonly dismembered China's territorial sovereignty over the Spratly Islands, artificially cut the Spratly Islands into scattered islands and reefs that were unrelated to each other, mechanically applied and distorted the provisions of the Convention, and seriously infringed on China's sovereignty and territorial integrity over the Spratly Islands. The arbitral tribunal accepted multiple unverified evidentiary materials from a single source, in violation of the rules of evidence and lost its neutral adjudicatory position. The ruling text has internal contradictions, arbitrary conclusions, and major flaws in professionalism, which is contrary to international judicial practice. The report emphasizes that the ruling in the South China Sea arbitration case was made by an arbitral tribunal with no jurisdiction. It has fundamental flaws in the applicable law, seriously violates fairness and justice, and has no effect in international law from the beginning. Individual arbitrators of the arbitral tribunals abandoned their independent judgments from beginning to end to cater to the instructions and demands of the political forces behind them, and completely lost their credibility. The ruling on substantive issues is also full of loopholes and errors in the applicable law. It violates international law, and is illegal and invalid. The report reviews the situation in the South China Sea and reveals that in the past ten years, the ruling has not only failed to resolve disputes and promote peace, but has instead hindered the process of establishing the international rule of law in the South China Sea region, and has become a negative trend in the history of international law development.