Skip to content

Justice Carpio debunks China’s historical claim of South China Sea

Justice Antonio T. Carpio
Justice Antonio T. Carpio
Justice Antonio T. Carpio demolished China’s historical claims on almost the whole of South China Sea by using China’s ancient maps.

In a lecture at De La Salle University “Historical Facts, Historical Lies and Historical Rights in the West Philippine Sea”, Carpio took up China’s invitation to look at the “historical facts” by examining not only Chinese ancient maps but also maps of Philippine authorities and other nationalities.

Carpio said “All these ancient maps show that since the first Chinese maps appeared,the southern most territory of China has always been Hainan Island, with its ancient names being Zhuya, then Qiongya, and thereafter Qiongzhou. ““Hainan Island was for centuries a part of Guangdong Province until 1988 when it became a separate province,” he added.

One of China's ancient maps.
Two of China’s ancient maps.

Carpio said that after the Philippines filed in January 2013 its arbitration case against China before an international tribunal, invoking UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea ) to protect the Exclusive Economic Zone of the Philippines, China stressed “historical facts” as another basis for its maritime claims in the South China Sea.

Carpio said Chinese diplomats now declare that they will not give one inch of territory that their ancestors bequeathed to them.

He quoted General Fang Fenghui, Chief of Staff of the People’s Liberation Army, during his recent visit to the United States saying, “territory passed down by previous Chinese generations to the present one will not be forgotten or sacrificed.”

Carpio said “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 thePhilippine Sea, just because historically these bodies of water have been named after these countries.”

Carpio said 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.

To download Carpio’s complete speech please go to :https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/18010607/The%20Historical%20Facts%20in%20the%20WPS.pdf

Or this: https://www.dropbox.com/s/jzahtbarfazlzdh/The%20Historical%20Facts%20in%20the%20WPS.pdf#sthash.y4IPs1KB.dpuf

The Historical Facts in the West Philippine Sea

Published inForeign Affairs

15 Comments

  1. Joe America Joe America

    Thank you for your series of articles on the China conflict.

    As to this one, I would add that China’s scraping up of sea-sand to expand rocks into islands that can be inhabited is not a legal remedy, either. A stolen car is a stolen car no matter what color you paint it.

  2. Jake Las Pinas Jake Las Pinas

    Any other link to the speech? The site is down for now.

  3. Joe, Malaysia has reclaimed one of the reefs, Swallow Reef (Celerio)filled it with soil and constructed a diving resort. Still, it cannot be considered an island for it is artificial.

  4. Jake, #2,

    Oh. I reported the site being down. It should be back soon.

    Sorry, I did not copy it (I should have copied it without the numerous photos). I just copied the link.

  5. chi chi

    Perhaps Justice Carpio should replace Sec del Rosario as DFA chief, he could very well articulate Pinas stand over at the UN anytime with complete historical maps and facts.

    China will never accept Justice Carpio’s presentation so we expect Beijing’s more aggressive expansion of claims, even the tiniest stone in the disputed territories, aangkinin nila.

    Very nice article, Ellen.

  6. Golberg Golberg

    May nakita akong balita sa Max Defense.

    May Chinese official na tumawag sa Lockheed Martin at pinahihinto yung acquisition ng Pinas ng 12 units ng F35.
    Sumakit tiyan ko sa katatawa dahil di nga kaya ng Pinas na bumili ng ganun pero may kumagat. Masyado na sigurong marami yung nakain niyang vetsin at mga pekeng produkto nila.

    May isa pang balita mula naman sa isa sa mga facebook account ng mga sundalo. Ginagaya nila ang South Korea sa pag bigay nito ng isang retired Pohang class missile patrol boat. Yung pinakita sa balita 3 warship nila na lamang lang 5 paligo sa BRP Sierra Madre. Di na pinansin ng DFA at DND dahil duda sila sa “goodwill” kuno ng mga jiho de puta.

    Mayroon pang kumakalat na advetisement. “Yung di mo na ginagamit ibenta mo na.” Sulit.com.ph – pwedeng pagkakitaan ng Pinas ang ganitong business scheme. Maraming Chinese dito sa atin ang di gumagamit ng utak eh. Ang problema lang eh, may utak nga, gumagana kaya iyon? Mahal ang presyo sa di nagamit.

    Nice article ate Ellen. Ang ganda ng debunking ni Justice Carpio.

  7. Jose Samilin Jose Samilin

    We need Justice Antonio Carpio’s defense strategy against China’s bullying assertiveness and aggression. Many of our young thinkers may further develop and strengthen this defense out of those input. We can depend on the creativity of our youth activist to use them for good purpose to benefit their future generation to come. So mga bata, gear up, you are the hope of this Nation.

  8. Take note that we have posted the whole speech of Justice Carpio in Scribd.

  9. saxnviolins saxnviolins

    Does anybody have a copy of the Philippine Memorial? Bakit tinatago? Baka pag-fiestahan ng comments?

    Is Carpio embarking on his own scholarly pursuit on the matter because, perhaps, the Memorial is not strong enough?

    The Bangladesh v. Myanmar case will affect the Philippine case greatly. That case involved the first delimitation of maritime boundaries, decided by the ITLOS. Romania v Ukraine was decided by the ICJ. The only difference is that Bangladesh and Myanmar both agreed to jurisdiction by the ITLOS, after bilateral negotiations that lasted from 1974 to 2000.

    The separate opinion of Judge Gao (of China) is of particular interest, and may point to the why of China’s actions.

    itlos.org/index.php?id=108&L=1%252527%252560%252528#c964

    Lagyan ng tatlong w sa harap.

    It you do not want to wade through Judge Gao’s opinion, a summary is provided by Ravi Balaram – US Army officer and MA Candidate for Security Studies at the Georgetown University.

    isn.ethz.ch/Digital-Library/Publications/Detail/?lng=en&id=158670

    Three w’s in front please.

    There is also reference to the ICJ not ITLOS case of Romania versus Ukraine. The case also involved an islet/rock, the Snake Island, or Serpent Island. Although Romania claimed that Serpent Island was a mere rock, the rock generated a 12 mile EEZ.

    Is that the ballgame for China? To assert a 200 mile EEZ, but be content with 12 miles? Would 12 miles suffice for exploration and exploitation? Depends on the scientific data.

  10. saxnviolins saxnviolins

    OT.

    DAP resolution deferred. Why? Waiting for the replacement of Abad, to add to the votes; para menos ang gagapangin.

  11. saxnviolins saxnviolins

    Romania v Ukraine is found below:

    icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=3&k=95&case=132&code=ru&p3=4

    Three w’s in front.

  12. Jake Las Pinas Jake Las Pinas

    Im sure Justice Carpio had read Stephan Talmons paper on the South China Sea. That what i was hoping the good justice would write about.

  13. saxnviolins saxnviolins

    The ITLOS granted provisional remedies to the Netherlands in the case of the Netherlands v Russia, despite the refusal by Russia to participate.

    An analysis is provided by Craig Allen in opiniojuris below:

    opiniojuris.org/2013/11/25/itlos-orders-russia-release-arctic-sunrise-greenpeace-protestors/

    Wim Muller, an international law scholar talks about non-participation and walking away from proceedings, as exemplified by the United States in the case of Nicaragua v. US.

    dovjacobs.com/tag/itlos/

    The US example of walking away from a binding resolution of the ICJ seems to have been the template for the behavior of Colombia after the losing in the case of Nicaragua v. Colombia. Read a commentary on states walking away, by the Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law below:

    cjicl.org.uk/2013/11/29/provisional-measures-arctic-sunrise-case/

    Looks like Nicaragua has been stiffed twice – by the US, and now by Colombia.

    The United States refused to participate in the proceedings after the Court rejected its argument that the ICJ lacked jurisdiction to hear the case. The U.S. later blocked enforcement of the judgment by the United Nations Security Council and thereby prevented Nicaragua from obtaining any actual compensation. The Nicaraguan government finally withdrew the complaint from the court in September 1991, following a repeal of the law requiring the country to seek compensation, thus settling the matter.

    That is not from some anti-US publication, but from Princeton (where Einstein taught, and Justice Sotomayo studied).

    princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Nicaragua_v._United_States.html

    Great. Now China knows what to do.

    Undeterred, the twice snubbed Nicaragua filed a new case against Colombia; so reports the BBC.

    bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-24120241

Leave a Reply