7/30/2019 callanta

1/3

The Philippines base their claims of sovereignty over the Spratlys on the issuesof Res nullius and geography. The Philippines contend their claim was Res nullius as there was no effective sovereignty over the islands until the 1930s when France and then Japan acquired the islands. When Japan renounced their sovereignty over the islands according to the San Francisco Treaty, there was a relinquishment of the right to the islands without any special beneficiary. Therefore, argue the Philippines, the islands became Res nullius and available for annexation.

An 1801 map of the East Indies Isles which shows the placement of the Spratly islands. Most of the names have changed since then.In 1956, a private Filipino citizen, Tomas Cloma, unilaterally declared a stateon 53 features in the South China Sea, calling it "Freedomland". As the Republicof China moved to occupy the main island in response, Cloma sold his claim to the Philippine government, which annexed (de jure) the islands in 1978, calling them Kalayaan. On June 11, 1978, President Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines issued Presidential decree No. 1596, declaring the Spratly Islands (referred to therein as the Kalayaan Island Group) as Philippine territory.[27]The Philippine claim to Kalayaan on a geographical basis can be summarized usingthe assertion that Kalayaan is distinct from other island groups in the South China Sea, because of the size of the biggest island in the Kalayaan group.[citation needed] A second argument used by the Philippines regarding their geographical claim over the Spratlys is that all the islands claimed by the Philippines lie within its 200-mile Exclusive Economic Zone according to the 1982 United Natio

ns Convention on the Law of the Sea. This argument still requires that the islands were res nullius, though.[28] The Philippines also argue, under maritime lawthat the People's Republic of China can not extend its baseline claims to the Spratlys because the PRC is not an archipelagic state.

MANILA, Philippines Point by point, the Philippines rebuffed China on Monday, July 15, after the Chinese Foreign Ministry said the Philippines' Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) lied in Belgium about the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea) dispute.

In a press conference, DFA spokesman Raul Hernandez presented 8 facts to belie t

he statement made by Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hua Chunying last Friday, July 12.

Hernandez took exception to this statement by Hua: The Philippines' claim that ithad exhausted almost all political and diplomatic avenues for a peaceful settlement of the dispute is completely not true.

Hua was referring to a speech by Philippine Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosarioin Brussels, Belgium, last July 9, about the maritime dispute between the Philippines and China.

In turn, Hernandez said on Monday, The Chinese statement is baseless. He also blasted Chinas rigid position that goes: Tanggapin ninyo na amin ang buong South China

ea bago tayo mag-usap. (First accept that the whole South China Sea is ours before we start talking.)

8 points vs China

For the record, Hernandez said, we wish to present the facts as follows:

1. As we had previously stated on numerous occasions, the Philippines and China have been exchanging views on these disputes in attempts to achieve negotiated solutions since the first Philippines-China Bilateral Consultations on the South C

7/30/2019 callanta

2/3

hina Sea Issue were held in August 1995. However, despite more than 17 years ofconsultations, no progress has been made.

2. Since intrusions in the Bajo de Masinloc started in April 2012 alone, we havehad nearly 50 consultations with China.

3. On maritime talks indicated by China in the ASEAN meetings in Brunei, we clarify that, in fact, the Philippines invited China to hold informal talks. This washeld early last year, including a two-day session in Manila. Subsequent plans to meet further were overtaken by continuing intrusions by China, especially in Bajo de Masinloc since April last year.

4. We had all along been indicating publicly our 3-track approach of diplomatic,political, and legal tracks, including arbitration.

5. Prior to our filing of the arbitration case, in contradiction with Chinas declaration in the ASEAN meetings in Brunei that we did not signal a possible Philippine arbitration track, we did invite China to join us in bringing the issue to adispute settlement mechanism to resolve the issue on a long-term basis. This was officially communicated through a note verbale dated April 26, 2012. In its official response to our note verbale, China stated that our proposal was a 'noneground' issue and it urged the Philippines 'to refrain from any infringement onChinas territorial sovereignty.'

6. Prior to this, on various occasions, we had verbally invited China to join usin ITLOS. In fact, during the very first official visit of Secretary Albert F del Rosario to China in July 2011, he proposed to Chinese top leaders to jointly bring this issue to ITLOS for adjudication. During the visit, Secretary Del Rosario met at length with Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi who subsequently brought theSecretary to meet with then Vice President Xi Jinping.

7. Secretary Albert F del Rosario visited Beijing 3 times with an invitation forthe Chinese Foreign Minister to visit Manila for consultations. Up to now, we are awaiting a favorable response to our renewed invitations.

8. In all of these dialogues, China has consistently maintained its hard line position of indisputable sovereignty over the South China Sea, including the West Phi

lippine Sea, based on historical facts. The Chinese unequivocal message: Tanggapin ninyo na amin ang buong South China Sea bago tayo mag-usap. It has, therefore, become impossible to continue bilateral discussions on disputes in the West Philippine Sea with China on the basis of this rigid position. This led us to finally resort to arbitration under Annex VII of the UNCLOS.

'Peaceful' move but...

Hernandez added the Philippines remains steadfast in peacefully resolving the dispute before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS). The arbitral tribunal to settle the dispute is now in place, he noted.

China, however, has rejected the proceedings initiated by the Philippines.

We moreover reiterate that the Philippines adheres to the agreement reached between the leaders of the Philippines and China in 2011 not to let the maritime disputes affect the broader picture of friendship and cooperation between the two countries, Hernandez said.

The Philippines and China remain caught in a decades-long dispute over portionsof the West Philippine Sea.

To help settle the issue, Del Rosario has invited Chinese Foreign Minister Wang

7/30/2019 callanta

3/3

Yi to visit the Philippines. This was after reportedly testy exchanges between them in the recent Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) forum in Brunei.

Territorial disputes also drive a wedge between China and other members of the ASEAN Brunei, Malaysia, and Vietnam