2013 年 1 月 22 日,菲律賓依據聯合國海洋法公約第 15 部分第 287 條與 附件 7 之規定,片面對中國啟動關於南海海洋管轄權爭端的強制仲裁程序。 在中國聲明拒絕接受及參與此一程序的情況下,仲裁庭在 2015 年 10 月 29 日宣判對本案之管轄權成立,並於同年 11 月完成實質問題階段的開庭審理,預定 2016 年 6 月以前作出判決。菲律賓有計畫地設計對中國九段線及歷史性權利主張的法律戰,試圖瓦解中國的南海主張,對該主張的合法性帶來極大的..
On January 22 2013, Philippines unilaterally initiated compulsory arbitral procedure against China, in accordance with Part XV, Article 287 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea ( UNCLOS ), concerning matters relating to their disputes over maritime jurisdiction in the South China Sea. China formally declared its objection against the procedure and refused to participate. Notwithstanding this circumstance, the Arbitral Tribunal established its jurisdiction on October 29 2015, and conducted hearings on merits ..
本文主要研究問題是:中國大陸對於衝突預防的原則性立場與態度為何?在身為當事國與第三方行為者兩種不同身分時,其在實踐上有何不同?本文藉由南蘇丹危機與南海衝突兩個案例分析中國大陸在衝突預防實踐上,面對事關自身主權與國家利益以及與自身主權無關之衝突事件時,在衝突預防作為上有何差異?其宣示與實際作為有何落差?此外,為何中 國大陸在南海議題上,會由堅持雙邊對話,轉變為也同意透過多邊機制,作為處理南海主權爭議途徑的立場與作為?在這樣的雙邊與多邊機制下,呈現出怎樣的「中國..
The main research questions of the paper are as follow: first of all, what are China’s position, attitude, and actions in conflict prevention, second question is what is the difference between China’s action and statement on the issue of the South China Sea dispute and the South Sudan Crisis when China is one of the parties who faces sovereignty and national interest, and as a third- party in the practice of conflict prevention. Third question is why China is willing to change her position from insisting bilateral..
請輸入想查詢的期刊標題、關鍵字、作者相關資訊. Please enter the journal title, keywords, and author-related information you want to query.