评南海案历史性权利诉求的管辖权与可受理性裁决被引量：1

导出

摘要对于菲律宾提出的所谓历史性权利诉求,南海仲裁案仲裁庭作出的《管辖权与可受理性裁决》肯定了中菲之间存在有关争议,并认为有关诉求不具有完全初步性质,其管辖权问题将与实体问题合并审理。仲裁庭对有关争议定性的裁决建立在对中方有关主张的曲解之上,其有关管辖权问题的倾向和态度也值得探讨。仲裁庭的有关做法并没有尽到"查明管辖权且有关主张在事实和法律上确有依据"的义务。仲裁庭不应在无法客观判断争议是否真实存在、无法明确管辖权的情况下强行对有关问题作出裁决。

作者雷筱璐

机构地区武汉大学中国边界与海洋研究院武汉大学国家领土主权与海洋权益协同创新中心

出处《江西社会科学》 CSSCI 北大核心 2016年第3期21-29,共9页 Jiangxi Social Sciences

基金教育部人文社科基金青年项目"南海争端解决司法化问题的国际法分析:挑战及对策"(13YJC820040)

关键词南海仲裁案历史性权利争议真实存在管辖权可受理性

分类号 D993.2 [政治法律—国际法学]

引文网络
相关文献

参考文献12

1The Republic of the Philippines v. The People's Re- public of China, Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 29 Oct. 2015.
2The Republic of the Philippines v. The People's Re- public of China, Transcript of Hearing on Jurisdiction and Ad- missibility of 7 July 2015.
3The Republic of the Philippines v. The People's Re- public of China, Transcript of Hearing on Merits and Remain- ing Issues of Jurisdiction and Admissibility on 24 Nov. 2015.
4中华人民共和国政府关于菲律宾共和国所提南海仲裁案管辖权问题的立场文件[EB/OL].新华网.http://news.xinhuanet.com/wodd/2014—12/07,c_l113547390.htm,2014—12—07.
5Note Verbale from the Permanent Mission of the People' s Republic of China to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, No. CML/8/2011 (14 April 2011).
6Case concerning Application of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Georgia v. Russian Federation), Preliminary Objections, Judgment of 1 April 2011.
7Interpretation of Peace Treaty with Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania, First Phase, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports 1950.
8Note Verbale from the Permanent Mission of the Republic of the Philippines to the United Nations to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, No. 000228 (5 April 2011).
9Fisheries Jurisdiction (Spain v. Canada), Jurisdiction of the Court, Judgment, ICJ Reports 1998.
10ITLOS, The "Arctic Sunrise" Case (the Netherlands v. Russian Federation), Order of 25 Oct. 2013, Separate Opinion of Judge Paik.