Jurisdiciton of the Arbitral Tribunal

Basis: Annex VII of the UNCLOS

any party to a dispute may submit the dispute to the arbitral procedure provided
for in this Annex by written notification addressed to the other party or parties to
the dispute.

xxx

If one of the parties to the dispute does not appear before the arbitral tribunal or
fails to defend its case, the other party may request the tribunal to continue the
proceedings and to make its award. Absence of a party or failure of a party to
defend its case shall not constitute a bar to the proceedings. Before making its
award, the arbitral tribunal must satisfy itself not only that it has jurisdiction over
the dispute but also that the claim is well founded in fact and law.

The arbitral awards binding effect

Article 288(4), UNCLOS: In the event of a dispute as to whether a court or tribunal

has jurisdiction, the matter shall be settled by decision of that court or tribunal.
Article 296(1) provides: Any decision rendered by a court or tribunal having
jurisdiction under this section shall be final and shall be complied with by all the
parties to the dispute.

The arbitration court decided only on our EEZ, not on the whole disputed
areas involving the other countries

The Philippines only raised the issue of our exclusive economic zone. The other
countries are not parties to the dispute that was brought.
The tribunal could not rule on any question of sovereignty over land territory and
would not delimit any maritime boundary between the Parties.

Illustration: Scarborough Shoal is a high tide elevation. Its above water at high tide
so it is considered a land territory and the tribunal has no jurisdiction over land
territory. But the tribunal has jurisdiction to determine what are the maritime zones
emanating from that land territory and we asked the tribunal to rule that the
Scarborough Shoal as a land territory can generate only 12-nautical mile territorial
sea and not an EEZ of 200 nautical miles. The tribunal upheld that contention. That
means that there is an enclave area of 12 nautical miles around Scarborough Shoal
that is still disputed. The Philippines cannot claim that as undisputed unless it is
submitted to arbitration again with the consent of China because in case of
arbitration on land territory, China must consent.

McKennan Reef, we claimed in our submission to the tribunal that McKennan Reef is
a low tide elevation. In other words, at high tide, its covered with water and the
effect of that is it is not considered a land territory. It has no 12-nautical mile
territorial sea. But the tribunal said it is a high tide elevation just like Scarborough
Shoal so it is entitled to a 12-nautical mile territorial sea. That remains disputed.
McKennan Reef and the 12-nautical mile territorial sea around that remain disputed.
There are two disputed areas in our entire EEZ the Scarborough Shoal and 12
nautical miles around that, and McKennan Reef and 12 nautical miles around that.
Everything else, as far as the Philippines and China are concerned, has been
decided by the tribunal that we have an EEZ free from encroachment by any
Chinese claim. At a high tide elevation, there it is a territory. Since it is territory, the
tribunal has no jurisdiction over it, to rule who owns it.