MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013879621 · doi:10.25073/2588-1167/vnuls.4251

The Legal Status of Islands and Other Features and the China's Unreasonable Claim on the Nine-dash Line in South China Sea Under the Arbitration Award in the Philippines v. China Case

2020· article· en· W3013879621 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nguyen Tien Vinh

Bibliographic record

VenueVNU Journal of Science Legal Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicInternational Maritime Law Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaArbitrationTreatyUnited Nations Convention on the Law of the SeaVictoryLawContext (archaeology)International lawConventionPolitical scienceGeographyPoliticsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the context of the long, complex disputes in Bien Dong (South China Sea) and the emergence of the use of force risks therefor, a long term solution based on a system of approaches and measures on deferent diplomatic, economic, and legal levels must be available. On the legal level, the Article analyzes the main contents of the Arbitration Award in the Philippines v. China Case regarding the status of islands and other features and the China's unreasonable claim on the nine-dash line and its actions in the South China Sea. Since then, the Article suggests the comments on the effects and consequences of the Award in light of the general perception that this Award is an important victory of international law in general and of the Law of the Sea in particular, this also is the victory of the countries, including Vietnam against China's unjustified unilateral claims and acts in the South China Sea.
 Keywords: South China sea; the arbitration award on South China sea, legal status of islands, the nine-dash line.
 References:
 [1] PCA Case Nº 2013-19, The South China Sea Arbitration, Award of 12 July 2016,https://pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/2086. [2] Nikos Papadakis, The International Legal Regime of Artificial Islands, Sijthoff - Leyden, 1977. [3] Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone, Geneva 29 April 1958, United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 516, p. 205.[4] Convention on the Continental Shelf, Geneva, 29 April 1958, United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 499, p. 311.[5] United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Montego Bay 10 December 1982.[6] Van Dyke, M. Jon and Bennett, Dale (1993), Islands and the Delimitation of Ocean Space in the South China Sea, 10 Ocean Yearbook.[7] Jonathan I. Charney (1999), Rocks That Cannot Sustain Human Habitation, American Journal of International Law, 93 A.J.I.L. 863.[8] Continental Shelf Area between Jan Mayen and Iceland (Jan Mayen Continental Shelf), Report and Recommendations to the Government of Iceland and Norway of the Conciliation Commission of 19-20 May 1981 in 62 International Law Reports (1981), p. 108.[9] D.W. Bowett (1979), The Legal Regime of Islands in International Law; E.D. Brown (1978), Rockall and the Limits of National Jurisdiction of the UK: Part 1, Marine Policy Vol. 2, p. 181 at pp. 206-207; J.M. Van Dyke & R.A. Brooks (1983), Uninhabited Islands: Their Impact on the Ownership of the Oceans’ Resources, Ocean Development and International Law, Vol. 12, , Nos. 3-4, p. 265; R. Kolb (1994), The Interpretation of Article 121, Paragraph 3 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: Rocks Which Cannot Sustain Human Habitation or Economic Life of Their Own, French Yearbook of International Law, Vol. 40, 1994, p. 899; D. Anderson (2002), Islands and Rocks in the Modern Law of the Sea, in United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982: A Commentary, Vol. VI, pp. 307-21; J.L. Jesus, Rocks (2003), New-born Islands, Sea Level Rise, and Maritime Space, in J. Frowein, et al., eds., Negotiating for Peace, p. 579.[10] North Sea Continental Shelf Cases, Para 57.[11] Tunisia Libya Case, Para. 128.[12] Case Concerning Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Gulf of Maine Area, (U.S. v. Canada), I.C.J. Reports 1984, p. 222.[13] PCA Case Nº 2013-19, The South China Sea Arbitration, Award of 12 July 2016. Truy cập tại đường link:https://pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/2086.[14] Note Verbal No. CML/8/2011 (14 April 2011) from the Permanent Mission of the People’s Republic of China to the UN Secretary-General with regard to the joint submission made by Malaysia and Viet Nam to the Commssion on the Limites of Continental Shefl, Annex I, Doc. A23; Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying's Remarks on Relevant Issue about Taiping Dao, 06/03/2016: www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510665401/t1369189.shtml.[15] Daniel Schaerffer, The Legacy of the Nine -Dashed Line: Past, Present and Future in International Workshop Paracel and Spratly Archipelagos History Truth, Danang, 19-21/4/2014: http://pdu.edu.vn/a/index.php?dept=20&disd=&tid=4921.[16] Note Verbal No. CML/17/2009 (7 May 2009) from the Permanent Mission of the People’s Republic of China to the UN Secretary-General with regard to the joint submission made by Malaysia and Viet Nam to the Commssion on the Limites of Continental Shefl: https://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/submissionsfiles/mysvnm33_09/chn_2009re_mys_vnm_e.pdf.[17] Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) Outer limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles from the baselines: Submissions to the Commission: Joint submission by Malaysia and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.[18] http://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/submissiosfiles/submission_mysvnm_33_2009.htm.
 
 

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.684
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVNU Journal of Science Legal StudiesSame topicInternational Maritime Law IssuesFrench-language works237,207