Tòa Trọng Tài Thường Trực dự tính sẽ làm vỡ mặt Trung Quốc về vụ Biển Đông (ox tongue)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHEp61j3Ehc

CXN_042815_8743_Ý Lan, Võ Văn Ái dự định học và dùng chiêu lừa bịp của CSVN để bóp méo sự thật là Thích Đôn Hậu hoạt động cho CSVN từ hồi 1965, 66 tại Huế và sau khi hợp tác với CSBV, bị đàn áp sau 1975, một bài học đáng đời cho những kẻ hợp tác với CSVN, như con đường Liên Minh Dân Chủ của Nghị Sĩ Ngô Thanh Hải đang đi (travelling in a very dangerous course): Cuộc đàn áp quy mô Giáo Hội Phật Giáo Việt Nam Thống Nhất sau 30/4
Tòa Trọng Tài Thường Trực (www.pca-cpa.org Permanent Court of Arbitration) tại Hòa Lan, The Hague) vừa ra một thông báo thứ tư, ngày 22/04/2015, cho biết sẽ triệu một cuộc điều trần vào Tháng 7/2015 để xét việc Trung Quốc phủ nhận thẩm quyền của Tòa liên quan đến vụ tranh chấp trên Biển Đông với Phi Luật Tân.

Tòa Trọng Tài Thường Trực dự tính sẽ làm vỡ mặt Trung Quốc về vụ Biển Đông qua cuộc điều trần vào tháng 7 tới. Vì từ hơn 30 năm, trong tất cả các vụ tranh chap về Biển từ lúc có Luật Biển UNCLOS, chưa có quốc gia nào lại phủ nhận thẩm quyền của Tòa. Và nhất về mặt công pháp quốc tế, chưa có một quốc gia, định chế quốc tế lên tiếng hậu thuẫn cho TQ trong đòi hỏi hoàn toàn vô căn cứ, và vô lý là có chủ quyền trên 90% Biển Đông qua Đưởng Lưỡi Bò 9 Điểm.

Gần đây, tình hình đối đầu ngày càng rõ nét. Đại Hàn, Nhật Bản, Phi Luật Tân, Nam Dương, Mã Lai, Tân Gia Ba, Việt Nam liên tục tân trang hải quân, tập trận chung với hải quân Hoa Kỳ, liên tục đưa ra những tuyên bố cứng rắn, đi đôi với hành động về quân sự để bảo vệ chủ quyền trước thái độ xâm lược, đế quốc của TQ. Những biến chuyển về Biển Đông từ nay đến cuối năm 2015 sẽ có nhiều ảnh hưởng đến tương lai dài hạn của Biển Đông, trong đó có Việt Nam. TT Hoa Kỳ, Bộ Trưởng Quốc Phòng Carter, Tư Lệnh Hạm Đội 7 đã lên tiếng rất cứng rắn về việc giải quyết bằng đàm phán, không dùng võ lực vượt trội để chiếm ưu thế. Và mới đây, nhóm G7 họp tại Lubeck, đã lên tiếng ám chỉ hầu như trực tiếp TQ để yêu cầu phải giải quyết tranh chấp về chủ quyền trên biển qua Công Pháp Quốc Tế và không dùng võ lực để chiếm đoạt.
Theo phần tuyên bố chung dưới đây, quyết định của Tòa PCA có tính chất cưỡng chế (binding) bắt buộc phải tuân hành, chứ không phải chỉ là một quyết định chung chung, không có giá trị pháp lý nào.

G7 Foreign Ministers’ Declaration on Maritime Security
Lübeck, 15 April 2015

We continue to observe the situation in the East and South China Seas and are concerned by any unilateral actions, such as large
scale land reclamation, which change the status quo and increase tensions.
We strongly oppose any attempt to assert territorial or maritime claims through the use of intimidation, coercion or force. We call on all states
to pursue the peaceful management or settlement of maritime disputes in accordance with international law, including through internationally recognised legal dispute settlement mechanisms, and to fully implement any decisions rendered by the relevant courts and tribunals which are binding on them. We underline the importance of coastal states refraining from unilateral actions that cause permanent physical change to the marine environment in areas pending final delimitation.
Arbitration between the Republic of the Philippines
and the People’s Republic of China
The Hague, 22 April 2015

The Arbitral Tribunal Sets Dates for Hearing on Jurisdiction and Admissibility
The Arbitral Tribunal in the case submitted by the Republic of the Philippines against the People’s Republic
of China under Annex VII to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea has issued its fourth
Procedural Order, deciding to conduct a hearing in July 2015 on the Arbitral Tribunal’s jurisdiction. This
follows the third meeting of the Arbitral Tribunal, held at the premises of the Permanent Court of Arbitration
in the Peace Palace in The Hague on 20 and 21 April 2015.
*
As the Arbitral Tribunal has previously noted, the Chinese Government has repeatedly stated that “it will
neither accept nor participate in the arbitration unilaterally initiated by the Philippines.” Article 9 of
Annex VII to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea provides for proceedings to continue if
“one of the parties to the dispute does not appear before the arbitral tribunal or fails to defend its case.”
Article 9 further provides that in the event of a non-participating Party, “[b]efore making its award, the
arbitral tribunal must satisfy itself not only that it has jurisdiction over the dispute but also that the claim is
well founded in fact and law.”

In December 2014, China published a “Position Paper of the Government of the People’s Republic of China
on the Matter of Jurisdiction in the South China Sea Arbitration Initiated by the Republic of the Philippines”
in which it set out China’s view that the Arbitral Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to consider the Philippines’
submissions. China has made it clear that the “aforementioned Position Paper shall not be regarded as
China’s acceptance of or its participation in the arbitration.”

On 16 December 2014, the Arbitral Tribunal took note of the fact that China had not submitted a
Counter-Memorial and requested further written argument from the Philippines on certain issues raised in the
Philippines’ Memorial. In response, the Philippines made a Supplemental Written Submission to the
Arbitral Tribunal on 16 March 2015. Pursuant to the procedure anticipated in the Arbitral Tribunal’s Rules
of Procedure and third Procedural Order, China has been requested to provide the Arbitral Tribunal with any
comments it may wish to make in respect of the Philippines’ Supplemental Written Submission by
16 June 2015.

After seeking the views of the Parties, the Arbitral Tribunal has decided in its fourth Procedural Order that it
will treat China’s communications (including the Position Paper) as constituting a plea concerning the
Arbitral Tribunal’s jurisdiction for purposes of Article 20 of the Rules of Procedure, which provides:

1. The Arbitral Tribunal shall have the power to rule on objections to its jurisdiction or to the
admissibility of any claim made in the proceedings.
2. A plea that the Arbitral Tribunal does not have jurisdiction shall be raised no later than in the
Counter-Memorial. A Party is not precluded from raising such a plea by the fact that it has
appointed, or participated in the appointment of, an arbitrator. A plea that the Arbitral Tribunal is
exceeding the scope of its authority shall be raised as soon as the matter alleged to be beyond the
scope of its authority is raised during the arbitral proceedings. The Arbitral Tribunal may, in
either case, admit a later plea if it considers the delay justified.
3. The Arbitral Tribunal shall rule on any plea concerning its jurisdiction as a preliminary question,
unless the Arbitral Tribunal determines, after seeking the views of the Parties, that the objection to
its jurisdiction does not possess an exclusively preliminary character, in which case it shall rule on
such a plea in conjunction with the merits.
4. Prior to a ruling on any matters relating to jurisdiction or admissibility, a hearing shall be held if
the Arbitral Tribunal determines that such a hearing is necessary or useful, after seeking the views
of the Parties.

The Arbitral Tribunal will conduct a hearing in July 2015 to address the objections to jurisdiction set out in
China’s Position Paper. The Arbitral Tribunal will also consider other matters concerning its jurisdiction and
the admissibility of the Philippines’ claims. After receiving any comments that China may make by 16 June
2015 with respect to the Philippines’ Supplemental Written Submission, the Arbitral Tribunal may also pose
further questions to the Parties to be addressed in the course of the July hearing. If, after the July hearing,
the Tribunal determines that there are jurisdictional objections that do not possess an exclusively preliminary
character, then, in accordance with Article 20(3) of the Rules of Procedure, such pleas will be reserved for
consideration and decision at a later stage of the proceedings.

The Permanent Court of Arbitration will publish any further information about the July 2015 hearing as
directed by the Arbitral Tribunal on its website www.pca-cpa.org.
* *
Background to the Case: The Philippines v. China arbitration was commenced on 22 January 2013 when
the Philippines served China with a Notification and Statement of Claim “with respect to the dispute with
China over the maritime jurisdiction of the Philippines in the West Philippine Sea.” On 19 February 2013,
China presented the Philippines with a diplomatic note in which it described “the Position of China on the
South China Sea issues,” and rejected and returned the Philippines’ Notification. The five-member Arbitral
Tribunal is chaired by Judge Thomas A. Mensah of Ghana. The other Members are Judge Jean-Pierre Cot of
France, Judge Stanislaw Pawlak of Poland, Professor Alfred Soons of the Netherlands, and Judge Rüdiger
Wolfrum of Germany. The Permanent Court of Arbitration acts as the Registry in the proceedings.
Further information about the case, including the Rules of Procedure, may be found on the website of the
Permanent Court of Arbitration at http://www.pca-cpa.org/showpage.asp?pag_id=1529.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s