Peace Palace in The Hague (Source : justicehub.org)

China has asked Singapore to respect its decision to ignore the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Hague ruling made on 12 July 2016 .

The court ruled that China has no legal basis to claim historic rights to resources within the sea areas falling within the ‘nine-segment line’. The contested area in the South China Sea includes the Paracel Islands, the Spratly Islands, and various other areas including the Pratas Islands, the Macclesfield Bank and the Scarborough Shoal.

The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Hua Chunying said China had made its position on the issue very clearly.  “The related ruling is illegal, invalid and has no binding force,” she said in a statement on 5 August.

“China hopes that Singapore can maintain an objective and fair position as the coordinator of China and Asean dialogue relations, so as to advance Sino-Singapore relations and healthy and stable China-Asean ties.”

The statement was made in response of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s comments at a reception hosted by the United States Chamber of Commerce and US-Asean Business Council in Washington on Tuesday, Singapore time.

He stated that every claimants, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, Taiwan, and China want to go for a war over the dispute.

Mr Lee said, “They have interests, they have claims, they would want to maintain them, but nobody wants to go to war,” he had told US officials and business leaders.

Despite the fact that Singapore needs to maintain a good relationship with China, the country has to be careful of its stance taken on this matter.

On 14 February 1980, Singapore protested against the publication in 1979 by Malaysia of a map depicting the island as lying within Malaysia’s territorial waters.  It further observes that the dispute as to sovereignty over Middle Rocks and South Ledge crystallized on 6 February 1993, when Singapore referred to the two features in the context of its claim to Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh during bilateral negotiations.

And in 2008, Singapore and Malaysia went to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the Hague, to fight over the sovereignty of Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge.

In its Judgment, which is final, binding and without appeal, ICJ decided on 23 May 2008, that Singapore has sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh; that Malaysia has sovereignty over Middle Rocks; and that sovereignty over South Ledge belongs to the State in the territorial waters of which it is located.

Tommy Koh, Ambassador-At-Large at Singapore’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs wrote in an op-ed at Straits Times, saying that states in South and South-East Asia have settled disputes through the international legal process and China should do likewise, and consider consensual methods such as mediation.

Mr Tommy emphasized that there are three points to conclude in the South China Sea dispute :

First, Asians want their region to be peaceful, stable and prosperous. They want the rule of law to be strong and for all disputes between states to be settled peacefully, in accordance with the law and not on the basis that might is right.

Second, with the exception of China, Asians do not have a negative attitude towards settling their disputes by arbitration or adjudication. China should, therefore reconsider its position in order to conform to the best Asian and international practice.

Third, in addition to arbitration and adjudication, there should be considerations on several consensual, win-win, methods of dispute settlement, such as fact-finding, mediation, conciliation and joint development.

While the bodies that decided on the South China Sea and Pedra Branca are different, although the general principle about the rule of law and accepting international law still stands.

Bear in mind that Singapore was awarded ownership of the reef through ICJ’s decision, therefore if Singapore decides to support China in disregarding the ruling, how would other countries (especially Malaysia) view the ruling that Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh belongs to Singapore?

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

已数次报警 超市连年遭恶痞骚扰

本地超市遭恶痞骚扰,也报警数次,恶痞的骚扰甚至导致主管和员工害怕受到人身威胁而辞职,连网民都看不过眼! 位于宏茂桥8道631栋组屋的本地超市Angel Supermart分行,昨日(9月24日)在脸书发帖并分享一段闭路电视摄像视频,显示在昨日傍晚6时许,一名灰衣男子站在超市外,类似监督者般看着店内的员工。他之后步入店内就开始指责女员工,而女员工在看到他后似乎见怪不怪,直接向旁边类似超市主管的男子投诉。 主管也挺身而出,和灰衣男子沟通。灰衣男子甚至表示自己是其中一名客户的朋友,而被主管要求离去时,男子开始骂着脏话,之后才转身离开。 由Daniel Tan所发出的帖文指出,该名灰衣男子并非首次到店内进行骚扰,甚至导致店内的员工和主管,因为害怕遭到人身攻击而不敢来上班,进而辞职。 该超市表示已经报警数次,也依循警员劝告,禁止该恶痞进入店内,警官上个月甚至和该名男子做出了明确指示,禁止他进入店内,但是显然对方又故态复萌。 Daniel Tan补充道,该名男子在现在的冠状病毒19时期进入店内,也没有戴上口罩,而他们早前已就此报警了。 “难道要等到有人被殴打或丧命了,我们才能够做些什么吗?” 不少网民都对该超市员工的遭遇表示同情,并促请警员采取行动,希望可以制止恶痞的行为。 Amabel…

Passengers up in arms after Scoot flight delayed for more than 21 hours

A 21 hour delay for Scoot flight TZ8 from Singapore to Perth…

印度籍男子涉滨海湾非法集会 警介入调查

印度籍男子在未获得警方批准下,涉及在滨海湾进行公众集会,目前警方已介入调查。 据警方文告表示,该名32岁印度籍男子为了表达自己反对印度《公民法》修正案的立场,在无准证下参与滨海湾举行的公众集会。 该名男子在在滨海湾金沙酒店与会议中心附近举着标语抗议,随后将照片上传到社交媒体上,但已被撤下。 警方也呼吁所有外籍人士应遵守我国法律,若在未获得警方批准下,在国内举办或参与任何公众集会,属于违法行为,已经抵触了《公共秩序法令》。 日前,印度通过《公民法》修正案引起当地穆斯林众怒,全国各地爆发一系列大规模的示威潮。 该修法允许在孟加拉国、阿富汗、巴基斯坦等邻国受迫害的民众可有条件取得印度国籍,但排除穆斯林,被指排斥“穆斯林”的新公民法。 期间更爆出警方曾朝示威民众实弹开枪,截至目前已逮捕超过1500名示威者,24人死亡,包括一名8岁儿童。 目前当局也正试图调节这场风波,实施了紧急法、集会禁令、互联网封锁等措施,然而似乎无法平息纷争,示威行动反而升级了。 在新加坡,一人集会也触法 上月21日,一名43岁男子Yanjun也因涉及在莱佛士坊地铁站发起一人集会,被警方逮捕。 在新加坡,即使是低至一人的小规模集会,也会抵触《公共秩序法》。至于在我国谈论其他国家的政治议题,也同样不为当局容许。 例如香港知名撑警网红“华记正能量”杨官华,在10月因涉嫌在我国无准证聚会谈修例风波,护照遭扣押而一度无法离境。杨官华至少与10人聚会,并以粤语高呼“支持香港警察,保护香港,正义必胜”,因此被指在我国未经许可下公开谈论他国政治,而遭拘留并扣押护照。

SPH's profits down again – it's share price has dropped 30% since Ng came onboard

After the close of the markets last Friday (12 July), it was…