菲國大法官重砲：〈西菲律賓海的歷史事實、歷史謊言與歷史權利〉○雲程譯— 1/2 revised on 20140618

菲國大法官重砲：〈西菲律賓海的歷史事實、歷史謊言與歷史權利〉○雲程譯— 1/2    revised on 20140618

【Comment】

文章最重要的是觀點是：

「西葡兩國已放棄其1481年起得合法分享全世界海洋的權利。」以及

「即便推論假設中國擁有此『歷史權利』，當1994年〈聯合國海洋法公約〉生效，中國也喪失此『權利』。基於〈聯合國海洋法公約〉，沿岸國不得對他國專屬經濟海域、大陸棚等主張『歷史權利』。」

感謝 路人假 網友報知。

此文必定引起「老朋友」出頭。

HISTORICAL FACTS, HISTORICAL LIES, AND HISTORICAL RIGHTS IN THE WEST PHILIPPINES SEA by JUSTICE ANTONIO T.  CARPIO○Malaya Business Inside (2014.06.12) http://www.malaya.com.ph/business-news/opinion/historical-facts-historical-lies-and-historical-rights-west-philippines-sea

by JUSTICE ANTONIO T.  CARPIO Supreme Court of the Philippines

(Excerpted from a lecture at De La Salle University on June 6, 2014)

TODAY, I shall discuss China’s assertion to so-called “historical facts” that now appear to be driving China’s maritime claims in the West Philippine Sea.

China had always asserted that its 9-dash line claim is based on international law.  Thus, in the 2002 Asean-China Declaration of Conduct, China agreed that the maritime disputes in the South China Sea shall be resolved “in accordance with universally recognized principles of international law, including the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.”  There is no mention whatsoever in the 2002 Asean-China Declaration of Conduct that “historical facts” shall also be a basis in resolving the maritime disputes for its maritime claims in the South China Sea.  China’s mantra now states that China’s 9-dash line claim is based, in the words of Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, on “historical facts and international law.”

中國先說其所根據「九段線」所主張的南海權利是基於「國際法」，後來改為基於「歷史事實與國際法」。

China’s spokesperson, former deputy Foreign Minister Fu Ying, declared that the islands in the South China Sea were “first discovered by China hundreds of years before they were occupied by Japan during World War II.”  Fu Ying stressed that “China has a very clear claim to these islands,” without, however, giving any specifics. 

中國外交部先說南海新由中國所發現，後在二戰中被日本佔領。中國對此區域的島嶼擁有無可置疑的主權。

There are, of course, Chinese scholars who realize that China’s 9-dash line claim cannot stand impartial scrutiny based on actual historical facts.  Professor Jin Canrong of Renmin University in Beijing, who attended the Shangri-La Regional Security Forum in Singapore, said that China should be given more time to clarify its 9-dash line claim because if it clarifies its claim now, it will face domestic political pressure. 

中國學者自知「九段線」不合理。北京人民大學國際研究教授金燦榮在香格里拉對話中表明：中國需要更多時間釐清「九段線」。假使貿然釐清，會面臨國內政治壓力。

Historical facts, even if true, relating to discovery and exploration in the Age of Discovery (early 15th century until the 17th century) or even earlier, have no bearing whatsoever in the resolution of maritime disputes under UNCLOS.  Neither Spain nor Portugal can ever revive their 15th century claims to ownership of all the oceans and seas of our planet, despite the 1481 Papal Bull confirming the division of the then undiscovered world between Spain and Portugal.  The sea voyages of the Chinese Imperial Admiral Zheng He, from 1405-1433, can never be the basis of any claim to the South China Sea.  Neither can historical names serve as basis for claiming the oceans and seas.  The South China Sea was not even named by the Chinese but by European navigators and cartographers.  The Song and Ming Dynasties called the South China Sea the “Giao Chi Sea,” and the Qing Dynasty, the Republic of China as well as the People’s Republic of China call it the “South Sea” without the word “China.”  India cannot claim the Indian Ocean, and Mexico cannot claim the Gulf of Mexico, in the same way that the Philippines cannot claim the Philippine Sea, just because historically these bodies of water have been named after these countries. 

即便在大航海時期 (15-17世紀) 中國發現南海，在〈聯合國海洋法公約〉下也無效力——西葡兩國已放棄其1481年起得合法分享全世界海洋的權利。[1] 因此，1405-1433年間的鄭和航行根本無宣稱南海的效力。「南中國海」之名，實際上並非中國人所命，而是歐洲航海家與地圖學家所命名。宋明兩代稱此為「交趾海」，清與ROC則單稱「南海」，沒有「中國」兩字。印度不可以主張印度洋、墨西哥也不能主張墨西哥灣，同樣的菲律賓也不可主張菲律賓海。這些海域並非以其所屬國家而命名。

Neither can ancient conquests be invoked under international law to claim territories.  Greece cannot claim Egypt, Iran, Turkey and the land stretching up to Pakistan just because Alexander the Great conquered that part of the world from 334-323 BC.  Neither can Mongolia claim China just because Genghis Khan and Kublai Khan conquered China, with Kublai Khan founding the Yuan Dynasty that ruled China from 1271 to 1368 AD.  Neither can Italy claim the land conquered and ruled by the Roman Empire from 27 BC to 476 AD, stretching from Europe to the Middle East. 

如今的希臘，不可因為亞力山大的征服而主張埃及、伊朗、土耳其與巴基斯坦。蒙古也不可因成吉思汗與忽必烈汗的征服而主張中國。義大利也不能因羅馬帝國的征服而主張歐洲到中東的領土。

Under international law, as held in the famous 1928 Island of Palmas case between the United States as the colonial power in the Philippines and the Netherlands as the colonial power in Indonesia a state cannot maintain title to territory based on discovery alone where subsequent to such discovery another state has shown “continuous and peaceful display of territorial sovereignty” over the same territory.  While mere discovery may have been sufficient to acquire valid title to territory in the 16th century, the continued validity of such title over the centuries requires compliance with new conditions required by evolving international law for the acquisition of such title.  Besides, since the time of decolonization after World War II, the consent of the people in the disputed territory is now paramount to any territorial claim as embodied in the right to self-determination of nations that were conquered and colonized by other states. 

1928年國際法院美國與荷蘭針對帕馬斯島 (Island of Palmas) 的主權歸屬案判定：僅僅發現並不成為擁有領土主權的依據。必須有對領土主權連續不斷與和平的（對其他國家是和平的）表現才成為真正的所有權。二戰後脫殖民化的時代中，爭議領土上人民的同意（被他國所征服與殖民的民族之自決）成為領土主張的最高原則

In the early 17th century, Hugo Grotius, the founder of international law, wrote that the oceans and seas of our planet belonged to all mankind, and no nation could claim ownership to the oceans and seas.  This revolutionary idea of Hugo Grotius later became the foundation of the law of the sea under international law.  Coastal nations could claim as their territorial sea only a narrow belt of coastal waters extending to three miles from their shore, the distance that a cannon ball could travel.  The maritime space and resources beyond this three-mile territorial sea belonged to all nations. 

17世紀國際法之父格勞秀斯確認海洋自由，屬於全人類，任何國家不得主張大洋或海洋主權（國際法僅賦予沿岸國擁有離岸三英里狹窄的領海）。這是現代海洋國際法的基礎。

China points to ancient Chinese maps as “historical facts” to claim the islands, rocks, reefs and waters within its 9-dash line claim in the South China Sea.  At the outset, we must stress that under international law a map per se does not constitute a territorial title or a legal document to establish territorial rights. 

一份古老的地圖，不構成領土名義或領土權利的法律文件。

Of course, in some cases maps may acquire such legal force, but where this is so the legal force does not arise solely from their intrinsic merits: it is because such maps fall unto the category of physical expressions of the will of the State or States concerned.  This is the case, for example, when maps are annexed to an official text of which they form an integral part.  Except in this clearly defined case, maps are only extrinsic evidence of varying reliability or unreliability which may be used, along with other evidence of a circumstantial kind, to establish or reconstitute the real facts. 

某些狀況下，地圖也有法律效力，譬如構成正式文件的一部分。光是地圖一項是不夠的。

Thus, for maps to constitute material and relevant evidence, the contending parties must agree to such maps.  This is a matter of common sense, as one state cannot just unilaterally draw a map to claim an entire sea or territory and use such map as evidence of title against another state or the whole world. 

這是常識：一國不得在地圖上隨便畫畫就可據之主張整個海洋或領土。

---

[1]  指的是1479年9月4日，「亞拉岡＋卡斯迪爾」與「葡萄牙國王阿方索＋約翰王子」在「卡斯迪爾繼承戰爭」之後的和約 (Treaty of Alcáçovas) 中，兩國劃分大西洋與海外領土為兩勢力圈。1481年6月21日教宗思道四世發佈「Aeterni regis 教皇詔書」 (Papal Bull) (Eternal king's) 承認此劃分並同意葡萄牙可得到加那利群島以南所有土地。

隨著新領域被發現，此詔書演承認葡萄牙可取得由基督教徒在非洲並遠及印度所發現的領土。實際上糾紛繼續存在。

1493年5月4日教皇亞力山大六世 (Pope Alexander VI) 透過「教皇詔書」立下的「教皇子午線」 (Inter caetera) ——西葡兩國並在1494年6月7日的〈托爾德西里亞斯條約〉(Treaty of Tordesillas)，兩國以西經46°37'的南北經線，為兩國的勢力分界線瓜分歐洲以外的地球：分界線以西歸西班牙，以東歸葡萄牙。