India's Foreign Secretary Harsh Vardhan Shringla speaking at the 3rd Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) -India Conference said that upholding international law was central to Indian diplomacy.

"As a strong proponent of a peaceful and rules-based international legal order, it is no surprise that India supports the PCA and its mandate to resolve international disputes. The upholding of international law is central to our diplomacy and in fact our world view," He said.

The comments come even as India's neighbor China has stood out in disregarding international law, including rejecting, PCA's own verdict. China had rejected verdict of a tribunal set up under the PCA in the Philippines vs China case of 2016.&nbsp;

The tribunal rejected China's claim to the South China Sea based on the so-called "nine-dash line". The arbitral tribunal has been constituted under Annex. VII to the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) 1982 at PCA.

India on the other hand has availed the services of the Hague-based court and resolved international disputes with other countries. Well known examples include, Kishenganga Arbitration with Pakistan under the Indus Water Treaty, the Maritime Boundary delimitation with Bangladesh, and the Italian Marines Case.

"Institutions such as the Permanent Court of Arbitration have assisted us....and have played a pivotal role in ensuring that peace among nations is maintained, through a civilized and principled settlement of disputes," said the Foreign Secretary.

"Since its establishment, the PCA has handled many politically significant and interesting cases. It has become a premier institution and first choice for the resolution of international disputes involving States, State entities, Inter-Governmental Organizations as well as private entities," he added.

Permanent Court of Arbitration was established in 1899, and India became its member in 1950. In 1998, India and PCA entered into Host Country Agreement, under which PCA-administered proceedings could be conducted in India. New Delhi under its new Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) has the Secretary-General of the PCA as the appointing authority, for arbitrations under the treaty.

Present during the meet which Foreign Secretary addressed were Chief Justice of India SA Bobde, Justice Indu Malhotra, Secretary-General of Permanent Court of Arbitration Hugo Siblesz, Chairperson of the PCA-India Conference Committee Fali Nariman, India's envoy to Netherlands Venu Rajamony, and Justice Dalveer Bhandari of International Court of Justice. Justice Bhandari is the only Indian member of the International Court of Justice.

India's Foreign Secretary Harsh Vardhan Shringla speaking at the 3rd Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) -India Conference said that upholding international law was central to Indian diplomacy.

India's Foreign Secretary Harsh Vardhan Shringla speaking at the 3rd Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) -India Conference said that upholding international law was central to Indian diplomacy. "As a strong proponent of a peaceful and rules-based international legal order, it is no surprise that India supports the PCA and its mandate to resolve international disputes. The upholding of international law is central to our diplomacy and in fact our world view," He said. The comments come even as India's neighbor China has stood out in disregarding international law, including rejecting, PCA's own verdict. China had rejected verdict of a tribunal set up under the PCA in the Philippines vs China case of 2016. The tribunal rejected China's claim to the South China Sea based on the so-called "nine-dash line". The arbitral tribunal has been constituted under Annex. VII to the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) 1982 at PCA. India on the other hand has availed the services of the Hague-based court and resolved international disputes with other countries. Well known examples include, Kishenganga Arbitration with Pakistan under the Indus Water Treaty, the Maritime Boundary delimitation with Bangladesh, and the Italian Marines Case. "Institutions such as the Permanent Court of Arbitration have assisted us....and have played a pivotal role in ensuring that peace among nations is maintained, through a civilized and principled settlement of disputes," said the Foreign Secretary. "Since its establishment, the PCA has handled many politically significant and interesting cases. It has become a premier institution and first choice for the resolution of international disputes involving States, State entities, Inter-Governmental Organizations as well as private entities," he added. Permanent Court of Arbitration was established in 1899, and India became its member in 1950. In 1998, India and PCA entered into Host Country Agreement, under which PCA-administered proceedings could be conducted in India. New Delhi under its new Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) has the Secretary-General of the PCA as the appointing authority, for arbitrations under the treaty. Present during the meet which Foreign Secretary addressed were Chief Justice of India SA Bobde, Justice Indu Malhotra, Secretary-General of Permanent Court of Arbitration Hugo Siblesz, Chairperson of the PCA-India Conference Committee Fali Nariman, India's envoy to Netherlands Venu Rajamony, and Justice Dalveer Bhandari of International Court of Justice. Justice Bhandari is the only Indian member of the International Court of Justice.

Upholding international law central to Indian diplomacy: Foreign Secretary Harsh Shringla

Australia's parliament voted Monday to implement a maritime border treaty with East Timor, potentially unlocking billions in offshore oil and gas revenue after a bitter decade-long dispute.

The treaty is expected to provide a major boost to East Timor, one of Asia's poorest countries, by establishing new arrangements for sharing revenue from the Greater Sunrise gas fields in the Timor Sea.

It comes just days after East Timor's parliament voted in favour of ratifying the treaty, which the two countries signed at the United Nations in March 2018 and was the first-ever reached under a special conciliation mechanism of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Discovered in 1974, the lucrative Greater Sunrise fields - located 150 kilometres (93 miles) southeast of East Timor and 450 kilometres northwest of Darwin - are estimated to be worth between US$40 and $50 billion.

East Timor plans to develop the gas fields through a pipeline that would reach the country's south coast, with hopes it would provide much-needed employment opportunities, though Australia has cast doubt on the smaller nation's capacity to do so.

Australian Foreign Minister Marise Payne said in the Senate Monday that the treaty "settled a long-running dispute over our maritime boundaries, agreed upon a pathway for the development of Greater Sunrise and laid the foundation for a new chapter in our bilateral relations".

Australia has seen its international reputation damaged by the dispute with its less powerful neighbour, with Dili dragging Canberra to the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague after contesting a previous deal signed in 2006.

East Timor wanted that treaty, which also covered the vast Greater Sunrise fields, torn up after Australia was accused of spying to gain a commercial advantage during the negotiations.

As the dispute escalated, a group of energy companies including Australia's Woodside, ConocoPhillips, Shell, and Osaka Gas decided to mothball plans to develop the fields.

Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese said during the House of Representatives debate on Friday that the lengthy dispute "has not done a great deal for Australia's standing as good neighbours to one of the newest nations on the planet".

Australia has continued to profit from an oil field stake that is set to be handed to East Timor under the treaty, taking an estimated AUS$60 million in the 12 months after the treaty was signed but not ratified, national broadcaster ABC reported.

East Timor was invaded by Indonesia in 1975 before it gained independence in 2002 after a UN-sponsored referendum in 1999, which will be marked by 20th-anniversary celebrations on August 30.

Australia's parliament voted Monday to implement a maritime border treaty with East Timor, potentially unlocking billions in offshore oil and gas revenue after a bitter decade-long dispute.

Australia's parliament voted Monday to implement a maritime border treaty with East Timor, potentially unlocking billions in offshore oil and gas revenue after a bitter decade-long dispute. The treaty is expected to provide a major boost to East Timor, one of Asia's poorest countries, by establishing new arrangements for sharing revenue from the Greater Sunrise gas fields in the Timor Sea. It comes just days after East Timor's parliament voted in favour of ratifying the treaty, which the two countries signed at the United Nations in March 2018 and was the first-ever reached under a special conciliation mechanism of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Discovered in 1974, the lucrative Greater Sunrise fields - located 150 kilometres (93 miles) southeast of East Timor and 450 kilometres northwest of Darwin - are estimated to be worth between US$40 and $50 billion. East Timor plans to develop the gas fields through a pipeline that would reach the country's south coast, with hopes it would provide much-needed employment opportunities, though Australia has cast doubt on the smaller nation's capacity to do so. Australian Foreign Minister Marise Payne said in the Senate Monday that the treaty "settled a long-running dispute over our maritime boundaries, agreed upon a pathway for the development of Greater Sunrise and laid the foundation for a new chapter in our bilateral relations". Australia has seen its international reputation damaged by the dispute with its less powerful neighbour, with Dili dragging Canberra to the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague after contesting a previous deal signed in 2006. East Timor wanted that treaty, which also covered the vast Greater Sunrise fields, torn up after Australia was accused of spying to gain a commercial advantage during the negotiations. As the dispute escalated, a group of energy companies including Australia's Woodside, ConocoPhillips, Shell, and Osaka Gas decided to mothball plans to develop the fields. Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese said during the House of Representatives debate on Friday that the lengthy dispute "has not done a great deal for Australia's standing as good neighbours to one of the newest nations on the planet". Australia has continued to profit from an oil field stake that is set to be handed to East Timor under the treaty, taking an estimated AUS$60 million in the 12 months after the treaty was signed but not ratified, national broadcaster ABC reported. East Timor was invaded by Indonesia in 1975 before it gained independence in 2002 after a UN-sponsored referendum in 1999, which will be marked by 20th-anniversary celebrations on August 30.

Australia ratifies maritime boundaries with East Timor

Russia on Monday objected to a move by Ukraine to drag it before the world's oldest arbitration tribunal over access to coastal waters around annexed Crimea.

Moscow's lawyers said the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague had no jurisdiction over the case brought by Kiev over the Black Sea, Sea of Azov and Kerch Strait.

Russia snatched the Crimean peninsula from Ukraine in 2014, and Ukraine filed a case with the court in 2016, saying Moscow was illegally blocking access to coastal waters around it.

"This tribunal does not have the jurisdiction to determine Ukraine’s claims," Russia's representative Dmitry Lobach told the PCA.

"It is clear that the thrust of Ukraine's claims is over Russia's sovereignty over Crimea and the maritime zones. Despite the high regard with which Russia regards this tribunal, it cannot determine which state is sovereign over Crimea."

Lobach added,&nbsp; "In no way can Russia’s claim to sovereignty over Crimea be characterised as abusive."

Russia cited the tribunal's previous refusal to deal with a case involving the sovereignty of the Chagos Islands, which are owned by Britain but claimed by Mauritius.

That case eventually went to the International Court of Justice, also based in The Hague, with the court ruling that Britain should return control of the islands to Mauritius as soon as possible.

Moscow's lawyers meanwhile argued that another case, in which the PCA ruled in favour of the Philippines in a case over access to the South China Sea in waters claimed by China, was not relevant.

Ukraine's lawyers will respond on Tuesday.

Russia in November fired on and seized three Ukrainian navy vessels, capturing dozens of sailors near the Kerch Strait, as they tried to pass from the Black Sea to the Azov Sea.

The incident was the first open military clash between Kiev and Moscow since 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea and a pro-Russian insurgency erupted in eastern Ukraine.

Set up in 1899, the PCA is the world's oldest court of arbitration. It resolves disputes between countries and private parties by referring to contracts, special agreements and various treaties, such as the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. &nbsp;

Russia on Monday objected to a move by Ukraine to drag it before the world's oldest arbitration tribunal over access to coastal waters around annexed Crimea. Moscow's lawyers said the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague had no jurisdiction over the case brought by Kiev over the Black Sea, Sea of Azov and Kerch Strait.

Russia on Monday objected to a move by Ukraine to drag it before the world's oldest arbitration tribunal over access to coastal waters around annexed Crimea. Moscow's lawyers said the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague had no jurisdiction over the case brought by Kiev over the Black Sea, Sea of Azov and Kerch Strait. Russia snatched the Crimean peninsula from Ukraine in 2014, and Ukraine filed a case with the court in 2016, saying Moscow was illegally blocking access to coastal waters around it. "This tribunal does not have the jurisdiction to determine Ukraine’s claims," Russia's representative Dmitry Lobach told the PCA. "It is clear that the thrust of Ukraine's claims is over Russia's sovereignty over Crimea and the maritime zones. Despite the high regard with which Russia regards this tribunal, it cannot determine which state is sovereign over Crimea." Lobach added, "In no way can Russia’s claim to sovereignty over Crimea be characterised as abusive." Russia cited the tribunal's previous refusal to deal with a case involving the sovereignty of the Chagos Islands, which are owned by Britain but claimed by Mauritius. That case eventually went to the International Court of Justice, also based in The Hague, with the court ruling that Britain should return control of the islands to Mauritius as soon as possible. Moscow's lawyers meanwhile argued that another case, in which the PCA ruled in favour of the Philippines in a case over access to the South China Sea in waters claimed by China, was not relevant. Ukraine's lawyers will respond on Tuesday. Russia in November fired on and seized three Ukrainian navy vessels, capturing dozens of sailors near the Kerch Strait, as they tried to pass from the Black Sea to the Azov Sea. The incident was the first open military clash between Kiev and Moscow since 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea and a pro-Russian insurgency erupted in eastern Ukraine. Set up in 1899, the PCA is the world's oldest court of arbitration. It resolves disputes between countries and private parties by referring to contracts, special agreements and various treaties, such as the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Russia objects to Ukraine sea dispute case in The Hague

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has put the onus of stopping the rapid construction of man-made islands and increasing militarisation in the South China Sea on the US. &nbsp;

According to news agency Reuters, Duterte suggested that the failure by US to stop China from continuing building islands in the South China Sea showed there was no serious concern about the issue. &nbsp;&nbsp;

In July this year, the Permanent Cout of Arbitration in The Hague had ruled in favour of Philippines in an arbitration case against China over territorial rights in the South China Sea contained within an area that China calls the &quot;Nine-Dash Line&quot;.

China refused to acknowledge the verdict.

During Duterte&#39;s presidency, Philippines has gravitated towards China. He has expressed his willingness to mend ties with Beijing to benefit from improved economic relations between the two countries.&nbsp;

(WION with inputs from Reuters) 
&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

The Permanent Court of Arbitration had ruled in favour of Philippines in the arbitration case against China

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has put the onus of stopping the rapid construction of man-made islands and increasing militarisation in the South China Sea on the US. According to news agency Reuters, Duterte suggested that the failure by US to stop China from continuing building islands in the South China Sea showed there was no serious concern about the issue. In July this year, the Permanent Cout of Arbitration in The Hague had ruled in favour of Philippines in an arbitration case against China over territorial rights in the South China Sea contained within an area that China calls the "Nine-Dash Line". China refused to acknowledge the verdict. During Duterte's presidency, Philippines has gravitated towards China. He has expressed his willingness to mend ties with Beijing to benefit from improved economic relations between the two countries. (WION with inputs from Reuters)

Philippine President Duterte sweeps China's militarisation, man-made island issue under rug

An international tribunal has ruled that the Indian government had acted &quot;unfairly&quot; and &quot;inequitably&quot; in annulling a contract between city-based multimedia firm Devas and Indian Space and Research Organisation&#39;s commercial arm Antrix, making it liable to pay financial compensation, possibly to the tune of $1 billion.&nbsp; 
 
A Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) tribunal based in the Hague has found that the Indian government&#39;s actions in annulling the contract and denying Devas commercial use of S-band spectrum constituted an expropriation, Devas Multimedia Private Ltd. Said here. 
 
In its ruling yesterday, the PCA tribunal also found that India breached its treaty commitments to accord fair and equitable treatment to Devas&#39;s foreign investors, the company said in a statement here. 
 
The PCA regularly administers cases involving states, including investment treaty claims brought under arbitration rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL). 
 
ISRO officials said they were yet to get details of the development. 
 
The ruling is the second by an international tribunal arising out of the cancellation of the Devas-Antrix contract. 
 
The unanimous decision included the arbitrator appointed to the tribunal by India, Devas said. 
 
In September 2015, in a jolt to Antrix, the International Chamber of Commerce&#39;s (ICC) arbitration body International Court of Arbitration had asked it to pay damages worth USD 672 million (Rs 4,432 crore then) to Devas Multimedia for &quot;unlawfully&quot; terminating the deal five years ago on grounds of national security. 
 
The Tribunal then had noted that Antrix had no legal justification to terminate the agreement and that Dr K R Radhakrishnan, who at the time of annulment, was Secretary, Department of Space and Chairman of ISRO, Antrix and the Space Commission, could have prevented the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) from approving the annulment. 
 
CCS had annulled the deal based on the recommendation of the Space Commission on the ground that it was not in the security interests of the country.&nbsp; 
 
Under the deal signed in 2005, Antrix was to provide 70 MHz of the scarce S-Band wavelength to Devas for its digital multimedia services by leasing 90 per cent of the transponders in ISROs GSAT-6 and GSAT-6A satellites. 
 
Devas, in turn, was to pay Antrix a total of USD 300 million over 12 years. 
 
&quot;With this PCA award, two international tribunals have now unanimously agreed that financial compensation should be paid after the annulment of Devas&#39;s rights,&quot; said Devas Chairman Lawrence Babbio, former Vice Chairman of Verizon, the largest telecommunications company in the United States. 
 
&quot;Other courts in France and the United Kingdom have agreed that the award against Antrix ought to be enforced. We prefer a mutually agreeable resolution of this matter. 
 
&quot;But until that occurs, Devas and its investors will continue to press their claims before international tribunals and in courts around the world,&quot; he said.&nbsp; 
 
(PTI) 
&nbsp;

Indian government's space arm Antrix faces $1 billion in damages for unlawful cancellation of Devas-Antrix contract

An international tribunal has ruled that the Indian government had acted "unfairly" and "inequitably" in annulling a contract between city-based multimedia firm Devas and Indian Space and Research Organisation's commercial arm Antrix, making it liable to pay financial compensation, possibly to the tune of $1 billion. A Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) tribunal based in the Hague has found that the Indian government's actions in annulling the contract and denying Devas commercial use of S-band spectrum constituted an expropriation, Devas Multimedia Private Ltd. Said here. In its ruling yesterday, the PCA tribunal also found that India breached its treaty commitments to accord fair and equitable treatment to Devas's foreign investors, the company said in a statement here. The PCA regularly administers cases involving states, including investment treaty claims brought under arbitration rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL). ISRO officials said they were yet to get details of the development. The ruling is the second by an international tribunal arising out of the cancellation of the Devas-Antrix contract. The unanimous decision included the arbitrator appointed to the tribunal by India, Devas said. In September 2015, in a jolt to Antrix, the International Chamber of Commerce's (ICC) arbitration body International Court of Arbitration had asked it to pay damages worth USD 672 million (Rs 4,432 crore then) to Devas Multimedia for "unlawfully" terminating the deal five years ago on grounds of national security. The Tribunal then had noted that Antrix had no legal justification to terminate the agreement and that Dr K R Radhakrishnan, who at the time of annulment, was Secretary, Department of Space and Chairman of ISRO, Antrix and the Space Commission, could have prevented the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) from approving the annulment. CCS had annulled the deal based on the recommendation of the Space Commission on the ground that it was not in the security interests of the country. Under the deal signed in 2005, Antrix was to provide 70 MHz of the scarce S-Band wavelength to Devas for its digital multimedia services by leasing 90 per cent of the transponders in ISROs GSAT-6 and GSAT-6A satellites. Devas, in turn, was to pay Antrix a total of USD 300 million over 12 years. "With this PCA award, two international tribunals have now unanimously agreed that financial compensation should be paid after the annulment of Devas's rights," said Devas Chairman Lawrence Babbio, former Vice Chairman of Verizon, the largest telecommunications company in the United States. "Other courts in France and the United Kingdom have agreed that the award against Antrix ought to be enforced. We prefer a mutually agreeable resolution of this matter. "But until that occurs, Devas and its investors will continue to press their claims before international tribunals and in courts around the world," he said. (PTI)

Devas-Antrix deal: International tribunal rules against Indian government

Beijing will close off access to part of the South China Sea for military drills, officials said today, after an international tribunal ruled against its sweeping claims in the waters. 
 
An area off the east coast of China&#39;s island province of Hainan will host military exercises from Tuesday to Thursday, China&#39;s maritime administration said on its website, adding that entrance was &quot;prohibited&quot;. 
 
The area of sea identified is some distance from the Paracel islands and even further from the Spratlys, with both chains claimed by Beijing and several other neighbouring states. 
 
The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague last week ruled that there was no legal basis for Beijing&#39;s claims to much of the sea, embodied in a &quot;nine-dash line&quot; that dates from 1940s maps and stretches close to other countries coasts. 
 
Manila - which lodged the suit against Beijing - welcomed the decision, as China dismissed it as a &quot;piece of waste paper&quot;. 
 
Despite Chinese objections, the European Union weighed in on the subject at a regional summit this weekend, with president Donald Tusk telling reporters that the grouping &quot;will continue to speak out in support of upholding international law&quot;, adding that it had &quot;full confidence&quot; in the PCA and its decisions. 
 
China pressured countries in the ASEAN bloc of Southeast Asian nations not to issue a joint statement on the ruling, diplomats said. 
 
Beijing held military drills in the South China Sea just days before the international arbitration court ruling, state media reported. 
 
China has rapidly built reefs in the waters into artificial islands capable of military use. 
 
In a separate message on its website, the maritime administration said last week that four out of five lighthouses built atop islands and reefs in the sea have been activated, and a fifth would be put into use soon. 
 
(AFP)

The exercises will be held from Tuesday to Thursday, an area off the east coast of Hainan island. 'Entrance is prohibited', warned China

Beijing will close off access to part of the South China Sea for military drills, officials said today, after an international tribunal ruled against its sweeping claims in the waters. An area off the east coast of China's island province of Hainan will host military exercises from Tuesday to Thursday, China's maritime administration said on its website, adding that entrance was "prohibited". The area of sea identified is some distance from the Paracel islands and even further from the Spratlys, with both chains claimed by Beijing and several other neighbouring states. The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague last week ruled that there was no legal basis for Beijing's claims to much of the sea, embodied in a "nine-dash line" that dates from 1940s maps and stretches close to other countries coasts. Manila - which lodged the suit against Beijing - welcomed the decision, as China dismissed it as a "piece of waste paper". Despite Chinese objections, the European Union weighed in on the subject at a regional summit this weekend, with president Donald Tusk telling reporters that the grouping "will continue to speak out in support of upholding international law", adding that it had "full confidence" in the PCA and its decisions. China pressured countries in the ASEAN bloc of Southeast Asian nations not to issue a joint statement on the ruling, diplomats said. Beijing held military drills in the South China Sea just days before the international arbitration court ruling, state media reported. China has rapidly built reefs in the waters into artificial islands capable of military use. In a separate message on its website, the maritime administration said last week that four out of five lighthouses built atop islands and reefs in the sea have been activated, and a fifth would be put into use soon. (AFP)

No access to South China Sea as Beijing holds military drills, despite the Hague ruling

China today threatened a &quot;decisive response&quot; to any provocations in the South China Sea, following an international tribunal ruling against its extensive claims in the disputed area. 
 
The Asian country has reacted furiously to the verdict issued by the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) tribunal in the Hague, which on Tuesday sided with the Philippines in its ruling that China had no grounds for its claims in the strategically vital waterway. 
 
&quot;If anyone wants to take any provocative action against China&#39;s security interests based on the award, China will make a decisive response,&quot; foreign ministry spokesman Lu Kang said today. 
 
He said the tribunal had been &quot;unlawful&quot; and the ruling would &quot;not have any effect on China&#39;s existing policy&quot;. 
 
China has insisted that it will ignore the decision while warning its rivals that increasing pressure on the issue could turn the resource-rich waters into a &quot;cradle of war&quot;. 
 
It justifies its sovereignty claims by saying it was the first to have discovered, named and exploited the sea, and outlines its claims for most of the waterway using a vague map made up of nine dashes that emerged in the 1940s. 
 
Those claims overlap with those of the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan. 
 
China has also in recent years built giant artificial islands capable of hosting military installations and airstrips in the Spratlys archipelago, one of the biggest groups of features in the sea. 
 
The Philippines brought the case against China in 2013, asking the court to find that Beijing&#39;s claims to much of the territory in the sea are invalid and violate the UN&#39;s Convention on the Law of the Sea. 
 
Aside from stating that China&#39;s historical rights were without &quot;legal basis&quot;, the tribunal ruled that its artificial island building and the blocking of Filipino fishermen at Scarborough Shoal were unlawful. 
 
Beijing boycotted the PCA proceedings, saying the court had no jurisdiction to rule on the issues, and has mounted a huge diplomatic and publicity drive to try to discredit the tribunal and its decision. 
 
(AFP)

A foreign ministry spokesman called the international tribunal 'unlawful' and said the ruling wouldn't effect China's existing policy

China today threatened a "decisive response" to any provocations in the South China Sea, following an international tribunal ruling against its extensive claims in the disputed area. The Asian country has reacted furiously to the verdict issued by the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) tribunal in the Hague, which on Tuesday sided with the Philippines in its ruling that China had no grounds for its claims in the strategically vital waterway. "If anyone wants to take any provocative action against China's security interests based on the award, China will make a decisive response," foreign ministry spokesman Lu Kang said today. He said the tribunal had been "unlawful" and the ruling would "not have any effect on China's existing policy". China has insisted that it will ignore the decision while warning its rivals that increasing pressure on the issue could turn the resource-rich waters into a "cradle of war". It justifies its sovereignty claims by saying it was the first to have discovered, named and exploited the sea, and outlines its claims for most of the waterway using a vague map made up of nine dashes that emerged in the 1940s. Those claims overlap with those of the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan. China has also in recent years built giant artificial islands capable of hosting military installations and airstrips in the Spratlys archipelago, one of the biggest groups of features in the sea. The Philippines brought the case against China in 2013, asking the court to find that Beijing's claims to much of the territory in the sea are invalid and violate the UN's Convention on the Law of the Sea. Aside from stating that China's historical rights were without "legal basis", the tribunal ruled that its artificial island building and the blocking of Filipino fishermen at Scarborough Shoal were unlawful. Beijing boycotted the PCA proceedings, saying the court had no jurisdiction to rule on the issues, and has mounted a huge diplomatic and publicity drive to try to discredit the tribunal and its decision. (AFP)

Beijing threatens 'decisive response' to any provocations in South China Sea