FINDING ANSWERS
It’s an idea whose time has come – not only today but years ago. And nothing can be more powerful, as the renowned French novelist Victor Hugo said, than an idea whose time has come.
At last week’s Kapihan sa Manila Prince Hotel media forum, former Supreme Court Justice Francis Jardeleza bared what could lessen China’s continued aggression in the Philippines’ territorial sea: File a multi-billion-dollar case in court.
He said suing China for all the environmental destruction, damage to Philippine vessels, physical injuries, and other atrocities resulting from its persistent intrusions into our country’s exclusive economic zone known as the West Philippine Sea, could hurt China’s pockets.
If the case is filed in New York, for instance, and a favorable verdict is rendered whereby the court decides on indemnity running into billions of dollars, enforcement is possible by attaching China’s assets, to include even the Chinese Embassy structure, Justice Jardeleza explained.
With the incursions of China Coast Guard ships and maritime militia vessels in the West Philippine Sea, the damage costs would be piling up inevitably. Therefore, the Philippines needs to keep amending its court case to cover all damages resulting from every incident that occurs in our EEZ until the court renders its decision, he said.
The retired SC justice surmised the Philippines has a very strong case if it decides to sue China in court. He said that a new case, this time for damages, ought to have been filed years ago after The Hague tribunal ruled in favor of the Philippines. He expressed hope President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. makes an announcement on a new case in the upcoming SONA.
Justice Jardeleza shared his invaluable insights anew a couple of days before the 8th anniversary of the historic decision of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague that invalidated China’s nine-dash line claim in the South China Sea and over three-fourths of our country’s EEZ.
July 12, 2016 was certainly a watershed moment in international maritime law and geopolitics when the Philippines showed the world how a tiny developing country can stand up to a powerful country and win a landmark case in an international tribunal.
The nation owes a debt of gratitude to Justice Jardeleza for all his efforts that led to the historic ruling, as he was head of the Philippine legal panel as solicitor general then who prepared the arbitral case from the very beginning, prior to his appointment to the Supreme Court.
The Arbitral Award handed down by the United Nations-backed tribunal recognized the sovereign rights of the Philippines to exclusively explore and develop the natural resources in its EEZ which is 200 miles beyond the country’s 12-mile territorial sea.
The tribunal said it “found that China had violated the Philippines’ sovereign rights in its exclusive economic zone by (a) interfering with Philippine fishing and petroleum exploration, (b) constructing artificial islands and (c) failing to prevent Chinese fishermen from fishing in the zone.”
The Hague tribunal added that it “considered the effect on the marine environment of China’s recent large-scale land reclamation and construction of artificial islands at seven features in the Spratly Islands and found that China had caused severe harm to the coral reef environment and violated its obligation to preserve and protect fragile ecosystems and the habitat of depleted, threatened, or endangered species.”
While the landmark ruling was a legal victory for the Philippines, it was an immense defeat for China. It can be recalled the Arbitral Award enraged China’s government, prompting a barrage of toxic rhetoric designed to discredit the decision and undermine the international tribunal and the Philippines as well.
China’s propaganda blitz denounced as illegal the arbitration court, with Chinese ambassadors around the world writing adverse opinion pieces about it and sending to local newspapers in the days before and after the ruling was announced. China tried desperately to get support from many countries to rally to its side.
But while China claims it did not participate in the arbitral proceedings it desperately tried to discredit, it cannot be denied it participated indirectly—through the submission of voluminous documents containing counterarguments through the Dutch government.
It also cannot be denied that China is a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) that was adopted in 1982 and which “lays down a comprehensive regime of law and order in the world’s oceans and seas establishing rules governing all uses of the oceans and their resources.”
With the Philippines’ legal arguments based on the Arbitral Award and UNCLOS, Justice Jardeleza believes that we have a very strong case when our country decides to sue China over its transgressions in our EEZ. ([email protected])