Recently the Hague based Permanent Court of Arbitration ruled that:
2016
Recently the Hague based Permanent Court of Arbitration ruled that:
- A.
China has no historic rights to resources of waters of the South China Sea.
- B.
China together with Philippines has violated the Sovereign rights of others.
- C.
China's sovereign territory has never been defined.
- D.
China has rightfully claimed its control over South China Sea.
Attempted by 100 students.
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: A
Explanation: The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) issued its award in Philippines v. China (PCA Case No. 2013-19) on 12 July 2016. The tribunal decided key legal questions under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
The tribunal found that China’s claims of historic rights within the 'nine‑dash line' had no legal basis under UNCLOS and therefore China had no historic rights to the maritime resources in areas that overlap with the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone.
The tribunal clarified how different maritime features (for example, low‑tide elevations and rocks) generate (or do not generate) maritime zones; some features claimed by China did not produce entitlement to an exclusive economic zone or territorial sea.
The tribunal concluded that certain actions by China, such as preventing Philippine fishermen from fishing in parts of the Philippines’ EEZ and damaging the marine environment, amounted to unlawful interference with the Philippines’ sovereign rights under UNCLOS.
Why the correct statement matches the ruling:
Saying that China has no historic rights to resources of the South China Sea reflects the tribunal’s finding that historic‑rights claims inside the nine‑dash line cannot override the maritime entitlements established by UNCLOS.
Why the other statements are incorrect or misleading:
A statement that China together with the Philippines violated others' sovereign rights is wrong because the Philippines was the claimant; the tribunal found that China had violated the Philippines’ sovereign rights, not that both states together violated other states.
A claim that China’s sovereign territory has never been defined is misleading: the award addressed maritime entitlements under UNCLOS, not a blanket declaration that China’s land sovereignty is undefined.
A claim that China rightfully controls the South China Sea contradicts the ruling, which rejected China’s broad historical claims to exclusive rights over resources throughout the nine‑dash line area.
Reference: PCA, Philippines v. China, PCA Case No. 2013-19, Award (12 July 2016).