论文部分内容阅读
国际间至少可以找到14个被告不到庭的案例,而此种趋势正在增加中,所以我国在中菲南海仲裁案中选择不到庭并非单一个案。透过案例比较可以得知,仲裁庭应顾及我国在南海海域的历史性权利,争端方在法院判决之后协商签订双边协定以明确彼此的法律地位,应该是可以考虑的选项。仲裁庭应该考虑与案件相关的所有信息,而我国亦可以在仲裁结果发布后找出其错误之处。此外,透过第三方的外交斡旋亦能达到最终解决争端的效果。作为应对,我国可以考虑根据《联合国海洋法公约》附件五来成立调解委员会,以解决判决执行问题与后续争端。
There are at least 14 cases in which the defendants will not be present in the international arena. Such a trend is increasing. Therefore, it is not a single case that China does not choose to attend the tribunal in the South China Sea. A comparison of the cases shows that the arbitration tribunal should take into account China’s historic rights in the South China Sea. The parties to the dispute should negotiate and sign bilateral agreements after the court’s decision so as to clarify each other’s legal status. This should be an option that can be considered. The arbitral tribunal should consider all the information relevant to the case and our country may also find its error after the arbitration result has been published. In addition, the third-party diplomatic mediation can also bring about the final resolution of the dispute. In response, my country could consider establishing a conciliation commission under Annex V of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea to resolve the issue of execution of sentences and subsequent disputes.