Modules for Online Classes, Assignments of History

Download Modules for Online Classes and more Assignments History in PDF only on Docsity! BATAAN HEROES COLLEGE Roman Superhighway, Balanga City, Bataan General Education Department Name: SARMIENTO, JEMMUEL A. Date: 13/05/2021 Email Address:jemmuelsarmiento@gmail.com Student No. : 2001151 Exercise No. 03 Sources Hunting Direction: Look for the sources used by the Philippines and China in their respective claims of sovereignty over the Scarborough Shoal and identify which are primary sources that help people in making decisions in today’s time. Also, look for the ruling of the Permanent Court of Arbitration and explain the reason for its decision. Present your findings in class. (Note: include all the sources or any references to be used in your work.) Your Findings: Primary Sources about Philippines and China in their Respective Claims of Sovereignty Over the Scarborough Shoal: • Sreenivasa Rao Pemmaraju, The South China Sea Arbitration (The Philippines v. China): Assessment of the Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, Chinese Journal of International Law, Volume 15, Issue 2, June 2016, Pages 265– 307, https://doi.org/10.1093/chinesejil/jmw019 • China’s Claims in the South China Sea (Reviewing the Legal Position of the United States Regarding China's Territorial and Maritime Rights Claims), Sourabh Gupta and Matt Geraci, August 4, 2020 • International court rules in favor of Philippines in South China Sea case, July 12, 2016 by Arirang News, https://youtu.be/ORCE7lsspSY • CO12102 | The Scarborough Shoal dispute: Legal issues and implications, Huy Duong, 18 June 2012 • Duterte Says He Can't Defend Scarborough Shoal PUBLISHED MAR 21, 2017 12:50 PM BY THE MARITIME EXECUTIVE, https://www.maritime- executive.com/article/duterte-says-he-cant-defend-scarborough-shoal Ruling of the Permanent Court of Arbitration: The Permanent Court of Arbitration (the "PCA" or "Tribunal"unanimous )'s decision in the conflict between the Philippines and China is a watershed moment for the United Nations Law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS) and a clear rebuke to China's expansive claims to maritime territories in the South China Sea. The PCA's decision is significant not just because it is a technical legal decision binding on the parties – China and the Philippines – but also because it sends a wider message about the peaceful resolution of conflicts in the South China Sea under a rules-based international order. From a legal standpoint, the Philippines prevailed on almost every count, which is not surprising considering the legal weakness of China's maritime claims. Beijing's breaches of UNCLOS are meticulously recorded in the nearly 500-page ruling, which also highlights the wider policy consequences of Beijing's hostile actions in the South China Sea. Explanation: Importantly, the PCA dismissed China's historic rights and "nine-dash line" argument, concluding that the UNCLOS maritime zones were controlling in deciding maritime entitlements. China's historic claims were essentially superseded by the treaty. Even if a historical right could be claimed, the PCA found no proof that China had exerted "exclusive power" over the South China Sea's seas and resources. The PCA's conclusion, in particular, is consistent with what the US has long said about China's "nine-dash line" claim. It's worth noting that the Philippines' complaint was carefully designed to avoid bringing up questions of jurisdiction and maritime delimitation. To maintain its authority in the event, the PCA behaved cautiously and did not issue any direct conclusions about sovereignty disputes between China and the Philippines in the South China Sea, such as weighing in on competing claims to the Spratly Islands and Scarborough Shoal. Despite this caution, the Tribunal's decision has far-reaching consequences.