论文部分内容阅读
2015年10月,菲律宾单方所提南海仲裁案的仲裁庭就管辖权问题作出的裁决中,涉及低潮高地的相关诉求问题。仲裁庭认定诉求所涉争端存在,并对第4项、第6项诉求确立了附带条件的管辖权,将第5项诉求的管辖权问题保留至实体阶段一并审理。本文结合南海仲裁案的相关材料,对本案所涉三类低潮高地法律问题的管辖权问题进行逐一分析,遵循同类国际仲裁案的一般思路,认为中菲之间在低潮高地性质界定、海洋权利和领土属性问题上不存在真实的争端,而且,即便争端存在,领土主权和海洋划界争端亦构成有关争端的先决问题,仲裁庭难以合法地对低潮高地的有关争端确立管辖权。
In October 2015, the Arbitral Tribunal for the South China Sea arbitration brought by the Philippines unanimously raised the issue of jurisdictional issues in relation to the related aspirations of the low tide. The arbitral tribunal determined that the dispute involved in the claim existed and established the condi- tional jurisdiction to claim 4 and 6, leaving the issue of jurisdiction of Claim 5 to the substantive stage. Based on the relevant materials of the South China Sea arbitration case, this article analyzes one by one the jurisdiction issues of the three types of low-lying highland legal issues in this case and follows the general idea of the similar international arbitration case that the maritime rights and There is no real dispute on the issue of territorial property. Moreover, even if the dispute exists, the territorial sovereignty and maritime delimitation disputes also form the preconditions for disputes. It is difficult for the arbitral tribunal to legally establish jurisdiction over the disputes in the low tide heights.