导语

  

内容提要

  

    中国国际法学会著的《南海仲裁案裁决之批判（英文版）（精）》是我国首部、从国际法学角度出发、由多位法律、国际关系、历史、地理等领域的专家学者耗时一年多时间完成的驳斥、批判南海仲裁案裁决的权威著作。由外文社以中文、英文双语推出，在国际社会再次庄严宣告我国自始坚持不接受、不参与菲律宾所提仲裁，始终反对推进仲裁程序，其裁决是无效的，没有拘束力，中国不接受、不承认。本书从法理的角度逐条分析出仲裁庭对菲律宾述求没有管辖权，裁决缺乏事实和法律依据，是无效的；此外本书还阐述了仲裁庭枉法裁判给国际法治带来的负面影响，表明了中国维护《联合国海洋法公约》完整性和权威性的坚定立场和推动建设和平、稳定的地区海洋秩序的一贯决心和行动。

ABBREVIATIONS
GLOSSARY OF GEOGRAPHIC NAMES
  Introduction
  Chapter One: Background to and Course of the South China Sea Arbitra-
  tion and the Position of the Chinese Government
  Chapter Two: Jurisdiction
Ⅰ.The Tribunal had no jurisdiction over the Philippines' submis-
  sions which reflect a territorial and maritime delimitation dispute
  between China and the Philippines
  1.1.There exists a territorial and maritime delimitation dispute
  between China and the Philippines in the South China Sea
  1.2.The essence of the Philippines' submissions is the territo-
  rial and maritime delimitation issue between China and the
  Philippines
Ⅱ.The Tribunal erroneously found that the Philippines' submissions
  do not relate to the territorial and maritime delimitation dispute
  between China and the Philippines and erroneously exercised ju-
  risdiction over these submissions
  Ⅱ.1.The Tribunal erred in characterizing the dispute reflected in
  the Philippines' submissions by adopting a fragmentation
  approach and failed to objectively and properly identify
  the territorial sovereignty and maritime delimitation es-
  sence of the Philippines' submissions
  Ⅱ.2.The Tribunal, on the basis of subjective assumption in-
  stead of fact, erroneously found that the Philippines' sub-
  missions do not relate to territorial sovereignty
  Ⅱ.3.The Tribunal misconstrued maritime delimitation, misin-
  terpreted Article 298 of the Convention, and erroneously
  determined that the Philippines' submissions do not relate
  to maritime delimitation
  Ⅱ.4.The Tribunal erred in finding that the Philippines' Submis-
  sions No.1 and 2 did not involve "historic rifle" and failed
  to consider whether "historic rights" constitute relevant
  circumstances of maritime delimitation
Ⅲ.The Tribunal erred in finding that the Philippines' submissions
  reflected the disputes as it identified between China and the Phil-
  ippines concerning the interpretation or application of the Con-
  vention
  Ⅲ.1.International judicial practice in respect of determining
  the existence and nature of a dispute
  Ⅲ.2.The Tribunal erred in identifying and characterizing a dis-
  pute with respect to the Philippines' Submissions No.1
  and 2
  Ⅲ.3.The Tribunal's identification and characterization of dis-
  putes with respect to the Philippines' Submissions No.3
  through 7 are not well founded in fact or law
  Ⅲ.4.The Tribunal failed to ascertain there exist disputes be-
  tween China and the Philippines concerning the interpre-
  tation or application of the Convention with respect to
  the Philippines' Submissions No.8 to 14
Ⅳ.The Tribunal erred in its decision on the choice of means made
  by China and the Philippines for the settlement of disputes and
  its effect
  Ⅳ.1.The Tribunal erred in finding no agreement between
  China and the Philippines to settle their dispute through
  negotiations
  Ⅳ.2.The Tribunal erred in determining that China and the Philip-
  pines had resorted to negotiation but reached no settlement
  Ⅳ.3.The Tribunal erred in finding that China and the Philip-
  pines had not excluded the compulsory dispute settlement
  procedures even if there existed an agreement
  Ⅴ.The Tribunal erred in finding that the Philippines and China had
  exchanged views as required by Article