China continues to reject the 2016 South China Sea arbitration award, characterizing the ruling as a “political setup” that violates international law. At a recent Roundtable Dialogue on South China Sea Security in Hong Kong, Chinese officials and legal scholars argued that the award lacks binding force and undermines the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) by ignoring sovereign rights.
China Challenges the Legal Validity of the 2016 Arbitration Award
Qi Dahai, director-general of the Department of Treaty and Law of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, stated that the arbitral tribunal’s conduct deviated from international law and general arbitration practices. He described the 2016 ruling—initiated by the Philippines—as a unilateral move driven by political purposes rather than legal merit.
According to Qi, the award set a “pernicious precedent” that infringes upon China’s legitimate rights as a sovereign state. He argued that abiding by international law does not require a state to accept “illegal jurisdiction.”
Did you know? China immediately declared the July 12, 2016, award “null and void” upon its release, asserting it had no binding force over its maritime claims.
Impact on UNCLOS and International Maritime Law
The debate over the award extends beyond the South China Sea to the broader application of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Lee Seo-kwoo, a professor of international law at Inha University Law School in South Korea, suggested that the UNCLOS dispute-resolution mechanism itself requires reexamination.
Lee noted a lack of specialized expertise among judges at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), pointing out that the body has handled only 36 cases in its 30-year history. Meanwhile, Stephen Fietta, founder of Fietta LLP in the UK, concluded that the award has had limited impact on the development of international law, specifically regarding historical rights and claims around small island features.
Regional Diplomacy vs. External Influence
Participants at the Hong Kong forum emphasized a shift toward regional dialogue over external intervention. Jayanath Colombage, former chief of Sri Lanka’s navy and former ambassador to Indonesia and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, told China Daily that involved countries should prioritize economic cooperation. He warned regional actors not to fall into a “trap” set by external parties seeking to confront China.
Ruhanas Harun, a professor at the National Defence University of Malaysia, added that security issues in the region must be managed through diplomacy to ensure a peaceful settlement. This sentiment was echoed by Huang Jiefang, secretary-general of the Asian Academy of International Law, who stated that safeguarding stability in the South China Sea is of “paramount and practical importance” amid current geopolitical rivalries.
Pro Tip: To understand the complexity of these disputes, research the distinction between “exclusive economic zones” (EEZ) and “historical rights” under UNCLOS.
New Critiques and the ‘China Threat’ Narrative
Wu Shicun, chairman of the Huayang Center for Maritime Cooperation and Ocean Governance, argued that the arbitration award has been distorted into a tool to fabricate a “China threat” narrative. He called for the world to recognize the “interest chains” formed by those exploiting the ruling.
To address these issues, the National Institute for South China Sea Studies and the Huayang Center released a report titled “A New Critique of the South China Sea Arbitration Award.” Phillip Saunders, professor emeritus of law at Dalhousie University’s Schulich School of Law in Canada, told China Daily that the report is timely for correcting international misunderstandings and emphasizing regional cooperation.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the 2016 South China Sea arbitration award?
It is a ruling issued on July 12, 2016, by an ad hoc arbitral tribunal following a case initiated by the Philippines. The tribunal ruled in favor of the Philippines regarding maritime claims.
Why does China reject the ruling?
According to the Chinese Foreign Ministry, the ruling is “null and void” because the tribunal’s conduct deviated from international law and the process was a political setup.
What is UNCLOS?
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is the international agreement that defines the rights and responsibilities of nations with respect to their use of the world’s oceans.
Join the Conversation: Do you believe regional diplomacy is more effective than international arbitration in resolving maritime disputes? Share your thoughts in the comments below or subscribe to our newsletter for more deep-dives into geopolitical security.