The Effect of the Judicial Decision of unclos Tribunals on the clcs Procedure: The Case of the South China Sea Dispute

IF 0.5 Q4 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
M. Seta
{"title":"The Effect of the Judicial Decision of unclos Tribunals on the clcs Procedure: The Case of the South China Sea Dispute","authors":"M. Seta","doi":"10.1163/24519391-07020004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nAsia-Pacific States have recourse to the dispute settlement system provided in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (unclos) and rely on the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (clcs) to delineate the extended continental shelf. unclos tribunals are responsible for delimitating maritime zones, and the clcs for delineating the outer limits of the continental shelf. However, the work of the clcs has been suspended at times, owing to other States’ objections. This article investigates the 2019 Malaysian submission to the clcs by reviewing the precedents and existing literature. This submission has become a contentious issue, because of diplomatic note verbales submitted by, among others, China. This article argues that the clcs should handle the Malaysian submission on the premise that the Malaysia–China dispute over the so-called “nine-dash line” can be regarded as resolved, based on a 2016 Arbitral Tribunal decision under Annex vii.","PeriodicalId":29867,"journal":{"name":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24519391-07020004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Asia-Pacific States have recourse to the dispute settlement system provided in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (unclos) and rely on the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (clcs) to delineate the extended continental shelf. unclos tribunals are responsible for delimitating maritime zones, and the clcs for delineating the outer limits of the continental shelf. However, the work of the clcs has been suspended at times, owing to other States’ objections. This article investigates the 2019 Malaysian submission to the clcs by reviewing the precedents and existing literature. This submission has become a contentious issue, because of diplomatic note verbales submitted by, among others, China. This article argues that the clcs should handle the Malaysian submission on the premise that the Malaysia–China dispute over the so-called “nine-dash line” can be regarded as resolved, based on a 2016 Arbitral Tribunal decision under Annex vii.
联合国海洋法委员会仲裁庭的司法裁决对仲裁程序的影响——以南海争端为例
亚太国家可以求助于《联合国海洋法公约》规定的争端解决制度,并依靠大陆架界限委员会划定扩展的大陆架。联合国海洋法委员会法庭负责划定海洋区域,大陆架委员会负责划定大陆架外部界限。然而,由于其他国家的反对,委员会的工作有时被暂停。本文通过回顾先例和现有文献,调查了2019年马来西亚提交给clcs的案件。由于中国等国提交的外交普通照会,该划界案已成为一个有争议的问题。本文认为,根据2016年仲裁庭根据附件七作出的裁决,中马关于所谓“九段线”的争端可以被视为已解决,中马仲裁委员会应在这样的前提下处理马来西亚的划界案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信