UN distancing itself from the kangaroo court

These are the comments from the UN on the Permanent Court of Arbitration.

The United Nations said on Wednesday it has nothing to do with the Permanent Court of Arbitration, which set up a tribunal that handled the South China Sea arbitration case the Philippines filed unilaterally in 2013.

In a post on its Sina Weibo micro blog, the UN said the PCA is a "tenant" of the Peace Palace in The Hague, "but has nothing to do with the UN".

The UN said the International Court of Justice, its principal judicial organ set up according to the Charter of the UN, is also located in the Peace Palace.

The construction of the palace was managed by the Carnegie Foundation, which is still the building's owner and manager, according to the Peace Palace website.

The UN said it makes an annual donation to the foundation for using the Peace Palace.

When asked about the Arbitral Tribunal's case's ruling on Tuesday, Stephane Dujarric, spokesman for UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said on Tuesday "The UN doesn't have a position on the legal and procedural merits" of the South China Sea arbitration case.’ China Daily

The UN’s comments are a clear indication that the kangaroo court is a can of rotten fish and did not wan to have anything to do with it. The UN simply did not want to have anything to do with the PCA and did not want its good reputation to be tarnished by kangaroos running the circus.

The Permanent Court of Arbitration is not a court per se but a tribunal where willing parties brought their cases to be arbitrated, with each side choosing a judge and has the right to reject the judges appointed by the PCA. It was meant to be a tribunal that is neutral but not in this case. The judges were appointed by one party, paid by one party, to arbitrate on a territorial issue that it has no jurisdiction and with the other party not participating.


Ⓜatilah $ingapura⚠️ said...

The Philippines and China are Asian cuntries populated and run by Asian cunts.

One bunch of Asian cuntry folks are "not satisfied" with the territorial claims of the other so they "complain" to the white man, who then arbitrates the matter in a whiteman's court/ tribunal / cocktail party / tax-funded junket / whatever in a whiteman land.

Apparently Asians still believe that they are an inferior sub-species of humanity, and therefore will invariably gravitate to Mr White-Is-Right, who will judge INDUBITABLY who is right and who is wrong when there is an Asian-to-Asian CONFLICT.

And quite rightly so. The balls deficient Asian cuntries---one in particular---refuses to take sides, so the only recourse for a disgruntled bunch of Asian cuntry folk is to run to Big Daddy Whiteman and kneel at his altar and beg for "justice".

Times have not changed. Asians still lack identity, and self reliance. No wonder many of these fuckers emigrate to the west.

Anonymous said...

RB Bagus. This is the best post to clarify the position of the confusing "tribunal or court" on main media and social media.

Many thot that pinoys stage show was really a court cast on international laws. Even one ministar said China should follow "international law".. in main media. This kind of opinion is damaging to our children on world view. It was not a court, not a real tribunal. It was a paid show by pinoys and US.

My opinion is: in any arbitration, a clause we negotiate on commercial contract, both sides must agree on the chosen tribunal before it is valid and binding. This kind of position is well built in any negotiator s mind. I was doubtful why China refused, and yet pinoys could go ahead with a "tribunal".

Now it is clear cut. That tribunal was never under the PCA at all. China said, it used Humburg s secretarial service.

Humburg has Ocean law courts. But the Ocean Laws spelled out that in case of dispute, both side must agree with the selection of tribunal.

Pinoys did not follow this rule. It used Ocean Laws to stage its own tribunal with selected judges and manipulated the expert witnesses to testify that ALL islands in Scs are rocks and reefs. It means there is no 200 nmile rights.
That put the biggest island inhabited with Taiwanese soldiers at risk, after 2nd world war. And those islands occupied by the PLA, and also those occupied by pinoys and vietnamese.

What about the tioyudia/senkaku rock or island?

So by looking at the arrangement of "tribunal" and the rotten judgement. UN will be at great risk to be targeted by countries contributing money to UN, is UN a setup to serve US s interest?

It is important for UN to clarify it has nothing to do with the "tribunal".

I would be very disappointed with China and Taiwan for not creating sanction to at least ban import of banana from Philippine. They both should ban import of electronic parts from Philippines to punish it for creating such a big fraud to bluff the world readers and help US to stir up war tension at Scs.

The worst is, when it time for war, pinoys back down to the disappointment of the PLA. US also reluctant and did not pull trigger, but putting some pinoys marines on board.
Its a shameful scheming from US and pinoys politicians.

No politicians have real credibility. eg G Osborne the chancellor of UK threaten Brexit that he needed to impose taxes to cover 31billions pound if Brexit. Now Brexit happened, he said no need. But he was cleverly fired by Teresa May, the new PM.

No credibility is the hall mark of politicians. Stir up shits like Iraq war did by G Bush and T Blair, had evidence from Chilcot reports. Scs is just another shit stir up by US politicians and Pinoy president.

Veritas said...

One salient thing is this Taiwan attitude who can give big damage to China's claim on S China Sea. While Lee Teng Hui have traded Diaoyu Island to Japan, he have NOT give up Taiwan claim on SCS.

And even the pro independence DPP seems eager to sabotage USA harm towards China in Spratley issues. The pro Independence anti China DPP Chen Shui Bian actually contruct an airbase in Taiping Island.

Below is wiki

In 2006, the government of the Republic of China revealed plans for constructing an airbase on Taiping Island, commissioned by the ROC Ministry of National Defense. Construction completed on 12 December 2007, and 2 February 2008, (then) ROC president Chen Shui-bian visited the airport, travelling via a C-130 transport plane.

I have research on Taiwan SCS stance. Basically Taiwan is under USA pressure but ALL her elites have been adamant to defend Taiping, including the current president Tsai Ing Wen who is anti China.

Anonymous said...

People just need to go to the PCA website to find truth and judge for themselves.


Who were the member states? and what cases are being dealt with? What did they say they are?

Even who administered the arbitration of the Railway Land Arbitration (Malaysia/Singapore)?

Anonymous said...

This is only 1st step. More to follow.

Now Pinoy bring out their new calculator to check which option bring in more money.

If Chevron, Exxon giants go in...... the nearest supply base town property will boom so will "all" the accompany services.

Anonymous said...

whole South China Saga had sets an unusual legal precedent - it raise red flag for those nation who who want to join US Led TPP.

There are similar mechanism - Arbitration to solve the dispute among TPP members.

In the past, TPP members seem to think that they had freedom to reject arbitration because every nation possess have sovereignty. (judicial sovereignty) - According to the international law.

Today, USA have created new international law.

Even if Singapore does not agree to take in the arbitration (TPP), they can bring the arbitration against you .

The ruling is legally binding on Singapore despite it had violate Singapore law, Constitution and Sovereignty.

There are no need to file the award with Singapore court to determine whether or nor the arbitration had jurisdiction to hear the case and have legal effect on Singapore.

Once the arbitration make their decision, Singapore are bound to follow it even if Singapore had boycott or reject the arbitration

In other word, Singapore had lost their judicial independence and sovereignty.

Singapore had become a city state of USA - subjected to USA made law.

TPP members should think twice before signing the TPP.

USA just demonstrate that US led arbitration have more legal power than ICJ and national sovereignty (international law)

Western media certainly wont tell you about such possible ramification.

Anonymous said...

USA could bring similar arbitration cases against Singapore under TPP

if Singapore govt try to block any materials under Singapore law - porn ,drug,gun

Singapore reject these arbitration . The President of tribunal would insist to allow the case to proceed without any participation of Singapore legal team. The President would appoint two arbitrator on the behalf of Singapore govt.

3 year later, the tribunal would make one sided judgement in favor of USA against Singapore.

USA would tell the world that the ruling is legally binding on TPP member and SIngapore.

USA media would tell the international communities that International court had invalidate Singapore claims.

Singapore is a signatory to TPP charter. Singapore cant pick and choose which law they want to follow.

Singapore would become an Outlaw state if they ignore international law. Singapore would harm their international image if they ignore international law.

The Ruling would supersede any Singapore law , Singapore constitution.

USA New World Order.... had just started under TPP.

Singapore govt support Philippine arbitration.

Nobody would support Singapore when they become the next victim.

Be ware of TPP!!!

Anonymous said...

Correction on 1:12pm
ICJ is international court of justice, not "internal"

Anonymous said...

My post at 1:15pm was deleted.
I repeat the points.

The tribunal judgment was legally binding according to US spokesman. Journalist asked him why states department list Taiping island and not Taiping reef? He was shocked.

US did not comply with International Court of Justice ICJ judgment in 1984. US wanted China to comply with a tribunal setup by a right wing japanese judge?

ICJ is a setup by UN. ICJ stated on 13 July that PCA is not related to UN. According to china PCA s tribunal judges are paid by Philippines and might be others.

in 1984 Nicaragua vs USA, US was judged to pay compensation to Nicaragua, and US lost in the case for supporting rebels in Nicaragua and putting mines. ICJ asked US to pay Nicaragua compensation. It refused and also not accepted the judgment.
Nicaragua complained to UN, US still refused to pay.

US refused to accept the court judgment set up by UN. And US wanted China to accept the judgment from a tribunal setup by Japanese judge and judges paid by pinoys.

ICJ had said PCA is not a setup of UN and not related to ICJ.

The whole Scs tribunal is paid show by US and pinoys to discredit China and forcing China to give up lands to Pinoys.
Will China do it? Will other countries accept it? If they do, their own land will be taken away someday with this kind of "tribunal".

Anonymous said...

So what you are trying to say China is the same like US who refuse to participate in the dispute with our Asean countries. Then what is next? Why should i trust one tyrant over the other?

Do you know who is the lawyer and law firm that represented Nigaragua in that ICJ case? Go and check 1st before making a fool of yourself.

Will China allow the same?

Isnt US smart? You have to agree on this. They learn from mistakes.

Anonymous said...

anonymous 1.29

Go and check 1st before making a fool of yourself. about Nicaragua case

1. USA give consent to ICJ and take part in the trial
2. When the judge rule that they had jurisdiction to proceed with the case.
3. USA refuse to recognise the result and quit the Court.

It is very different from China situation

1. China boycott whole proceeding.
2. China did not give consent to the arbitration - ( refusal to appoint 2 arbitrator or send any legal team during the preliminary hearing - whether the court have a jurisdiction)

ICJ is an International Court.
Philippine tribunal is not a court - it is simply a private arbitration ( like a TPP mechanism to resolve the dispute)

USA had consent to the Court and quit in middle of trial when they was losing. ( big damage to their reputation)

None of this factors apply to China situation.

If China have take part in the trial and lost the case, it is legally binding on China.

USA are trying to force China to take part in the case from the early beginning. -
- Forcing them to appoint 2 arbitrator

Now, those critics try to argue that China cede their right away by not appointing 2 arbitrator. China dont have right to complain about the neutrality of Judge. LOL

Apparently, they dont understand the meaning - Boycott.

If you boycott the trial as sign of protest, would you continue to appoint 2 arbitrator on behalf of you?

Anonymous said...

Hi Anon 2:11, no need to waste your breath on that nut Anon 1:29. He is so thick that a bullet from a magnum would not be able to penetrate his thick skull.

Save your time and breath. Those who can, see. The duds would see nothing.

Anonymous said...

@ Anon 2:11 pm

Did you bother to check first who are the lawyers who represented Niga and even PCA website on member states and the released PCA documents?

Read both sides and then see for yourself.

There are no judges in this case. It is the title of the arbitrator that are called judges.

See so much confusion from this simple example.

Your statement already contradict each other.
As per what you write
How does US consent to ICJ and take part in the trial while the judge rule that they had jurisdiction to proceed with the case.

Like in Pinoy case, the court has to determine whether they can accept the case 1st before make ruling. One party will argue the case that it is under this court jurisdiction while the other will argue it is not.

You see this is the critical difference where China dont even bother to use law to dispute the jurisdiction of the case. This is 100% disregard for law. Law is something you need to argue. Things would be different if China participated the jurisdiction case, if PCA finds that PCA is within jurisdiction to rule, then China can quit siting US and ICJ example. Got it? Then people especially US shut up liao. Remember China also UN security member same like US which has vetto powers.

Never study never mind. Again i give hint to you to find out the CV of the lawyer who fought for the pinoys. A lot of things would be clearer.

At the end of the day, China got no talent.

Anonymous said...

@ Anon 2:21 pm

China has a lot of parrots like you but not single one can fight in international court which is a reality.

Anonymous said...

Anon 2:11pm
Your points are excellent and convincing. I put up ICJ Nicaragua case to illustrate the attitude towards "binding" from international court of justice.
It is a UN setup and should be respected.
Furthermore, this is important to US:
In ICJ, there must be permanent judges paid by UN and from USA.

That should have secured US s own interest. Yet US lost the case, and US refused to be bound by the judgment.

Some naive answer said readers must look at the law firms representing Nicaragua. That kind of answer is only stating the writer own opinion. It did not state the fact that UN judges are more professional as they are permanent judges on UN salaries. They have to judge the case by facts and laws, not opinion of which law firm Nicaragua had hired.

If judging by looking at the facts of arranging the PCA setup as a "special tribunal", the whole setup itself avoided using PCA s permanent judges.

I repeat, in PCA, there are permanent judges, why the Japs did not take judges from PCA permanent judges in which, there are China permanent judges. At least i think, the Japanese judge should have done, was to put an Asian into the team, a chinese judge so that the judgment will be more relevant to Asia context and historic development.

Even this small attempt to reach objective judgment was avoided to create a kind of useless judgment. It said Taiping island is not an island which can have inhabitants. But it has water, soldiers living inside, with airport and hospital. The judgment also did not consider how China and Taiwan ended up with the islands. In my view, when countries like Pinoy and Malaysia claiming the islands. Pinoys allwed by US to be independent in 1946, Malaysia in 1957.

After the war in 1945, the islands were handed over for china. Basically was to keep out criminal and pirates, what else? UK US dont want those islands. Pinoys malaysia even worst, they were fighting for independent.

So the tribunal judges are not useful to decide on Scs issues on such a broad way to disqualify 9 dash lines and judgment Taiping island as reef. Taiping island had warship anchored there during 2nd world war time, cannot be considered no man reef.

Anonymous said...

If i reclaim 1000x from a reef.

Build airport and hospital, throw in a swimming pool, build a mini power station, grow rice, water distillation plant etc, put dogs and cats, put soldiers in, telephone pole.

Can my "reef" enjoy a 200km EEZ? If yes, then it is about how much money i have in my pocket.

Everybody then can go ahead and start anyhow reclaim and enjoy 200km EEZ. Sg can reclaim all the way to Natuna and start drilling for gas since it is inside our 200km EEZ. Indo airforce is no match for ours as to reach Natuna.

Anonymous said...

Things would be different if China participated the jurisdiction case, if PCA finds that PCA is within jurisdiction to rule, then China can quit siting US and ICJ example. Got it
stop embarrassing yourself!!!

If China does that (take part in the preliminary hearing),

China cant say that they dont recognise the legitimacy or legality of the tribunal.

Get the point!!

It prove that USA is a hypocrite.

Secondly, learn about Archipelago doctrine invented by Philippine and accepted as UNCLOS provision which allow Philippine to steal more islands , reef, shoal as theirs ( it exist outside the Philippine original territories- 3 treaties)

By using such doctrine(accepted by UNCLOS ) , Philippine had basically claim whole Sulu Sea as their own territorial water ( akin to China 9 dash line in whole South China Sea)

The only reason why Philippine had stake claim over Spratly due to their close proximity to Philippine island simply based on such same Doctrine invented by Philippine and been accepted as " International law"

After ww2 ended, only Philippine able to expand their territories by stealing more lands by international law. ( Archipelago doctrine)

There are more continental nations , landlocked nation than these archipelago
Why are there 2 different standard rules apply to those nation regarding their entitlement to International water?

Archipelago nations are entitled to make wide claim (huge chunk)of territorial water, and EEZ over International water.

Continental nation could only make narrow claim over territorial water and EEZ.

How did UNCLOS been passed especially the Archipelago doctrine?

If China claim over south china sea is totally outrageous and ridiculous, then
Philippine claim over whole sulu sea and Spratly belongs to same category - Archipelago doctrine ( approved by UNCLOS)

Anonymous said...

@ Anon 2:21 pm

China has a lot of parrots like you but not single one can fight in international court which is a reality.
You dont waste your time in the kangaroo court.

Even if you have tons of legal documents and evidence to prove the claim, the tribunal would overrule your case.

Because the result of such tribuanl already been predetermined. Your participation only legitimize their scheme.

It is not free and fair trial.

Do Indonesia need to prove " legal evidence " before the international court to justify their sovereignty over 17,000 islands?

Maybe some of islands belongs to Singapore ( Riau Lingga archipelago).

Singapore could follow the Philippine argument - Archipelago doctrine - to claim all nearby island as theirs

Singapore is also a island nation ( archipelago) - similar to Indonesia, Philippine

Do you think that Indonesia would appear before the Court and take huge risk over their sovereignty on those Islands?

Anonymous said...

Philippines ordered warship from a Japanese manufacturer.

Half way of manufacturing, Philippines asked the Japanese if the warship can be a gift because pinoys have no funding.

To deal with the Chinese, Philippines requested US to give them warships. US gave them old warships.

If US intends to boost pinoys capabilities, they should give pinoys brand new anti carrier missile ships. US is so rich.

Abe should also give pinoys brand new war ships to counter China s new weapons. But no deal to pinoys when they ask the Japanese for free. How can US and Japan expect Pinoys to fight with China?

The new President had no choice, he said he will not fight with China. Now US and Japan must do it alone or in pair.
Will they do it?

Anonymous said...

The islands occupied by Vietnam and Malaysia and Indonesia's Natunas must also be reefs.

To whose advantage or interest is this ruling that all are reefs? Silly Indons and Malaysians and Viets and Pinoys still cannot smell the rat shit on their noses.

Anonymous said...

If the new ruling that some islands are called reefs, will Philippines re define their own islands to be called reefs?

That will affect the 200n mile rights in fishing against Sabah. Malaysians can go nearer now.

Same apply to indonesia, with thousands of islands.

Tekong big and small are reefs? Sister islands or reefs? St John islands reefs?

Those support US to make China comply with new rule must not forget their very own shores will be shorten from 200 nmiles to 12 n miles.

DO or do not be traitors.

Anonymous said...

Why people so stupid?

Exactly it is about the argument on jurisdiction of the court to rule over the case.
UNCLOS cant even be apply here if PCA is not the recognized court.

Argument on Jurisdiction of PCA over SCS is much easier than arguing on UNCLOS which is just a set of guidelines which are fixed.

Same thing that happen on US case on Niga.

In anycase, US back out when ICJ accepted the case. US is telling people that it is willing to participate in law but back out as it felt it is not fair. China case is none of my business whatsoever, You all can proceed own time own target. Exactly reflecting the rude behavior of any China man and also the behavior of own time own target go and reclaim in big quantity. Some more there is a precedent case some more by US itself!

If waste time in court, then everything back out liao. Why need to sign contract/agreement? who do i know who will protect my interest when doing business with China? Everything you say you win right ? Absolute nothing to rely on? Then this world become what?

It is not a perfect world now already.

Anonymous said...

I am not sure about other islands.

But Tekong i think even without SAF going in yet already got people living there and is self sufficient. Even got fountain (i think) and durain tree.

During my times, it was rumored that there is malay cementary so cannot bring in pork for my camp.

I think Tekong is very different story.

200km EEZ is exclusive rights to your continental shelf (main land) under UNCLOS. China is saying these pinoy whatever reefs are China one because of 9 dash line. Pinoy is saying 9 dash line contravene UNCLOS where all these reef, rock are within Pinoy Palawan or other pinoy mainland EEZ 200km.So the result is you know lah..... Island is an exclusion so UNCLOS is something like your ASME or API specs.

Anonymous said...

Those vessels from Japan or US for pinoy are meant for scaring fishing boats or take photos that they are there. Maybe can even do resupply mission anywhere.

Last time, got nothing. Really nothing. Like from F-5 jets to nothing than to propeller now to KA50 (korea jets) - not bad!!

Consider improvement already!!

Anonymous said...

You see that is the problem with people.

Indonesia have 17000 islands. Most are self sufficient.

So how to dispute? Show some technical information that it is not an island or not lying within 200km EEZ of its mainland.

What happen to 2014 May where Pinoy and Indonesia agree on?

Anonymous said...

Anon 4:23pm

I can tell you have never done business in china. You are trying to discredit china.
I give you example, china and vietnam.
If the sea has dead fish for example, china want to charge a firm with drains to sea, there is court case you can take. In vietnam, no way. The vietnam official will ask you to pay the penalty, can be huge sum depending on the size of company and the volume of damages. If you say sorry no deal, the official tell you: you may not leave vietnam.

ICJ is a court with professional judges. PCA is NOT a court but arbitration only.

If Ocean Laws were to be applied, the laws require disputes must be settled with a arbitration that both dispute parties agree upon before it can proceed.
Philippine did not care about this requirement but still claim on Ocean laws.

You told lie on this part and alleged China back out, that is not truful. In real fact, the arbitration CANNOT proceed without China agreeing to the tribunal. China s rights to the tribunal must exist, according to the Ocean laws.

You told another lie. The Philippines actually had signed agreement in 2002, must earlier to settle Scs dispute between both sides through negotiation.
Yet it did not seek China s agreement and in 2013 it proceeded to setup the tribunal.

This step itself violate Philippines s own sign agreement. Philippines had signed with China as Asean member to talk privately without third party like US or arbitration.

It was philippines that did not follow agreement, and people must be careful to do business with pinoys. They can be cheated by pinoys and end up they get played out. Pinoys cannot be trusted. Those were the facts to prove pinoys credibility problem.

You lied and told readers the opposite side of the story that China has no credibility. Your words are not trustworthy because you use facts only useful to your arguement.

Anonymous said...

If China does that (take part in the preliminary hearing),

China cant say that they dont recognise the legitimacy or legality of the tribunal.

What the other guy is saying is there are two different cases here. One is agreeing whether this court has jurisdiction over the case. If yes, then you can proceed to the next case which is the UNCLOS thing.

Total different issue here where it is avoiding the question of whether China abides UNCLOS.

It is something like, you want me to participate to go to court, all list out all the conditions, tools, resources needed to proceed. Otherwise one part missing, the whole thing is pulled off. This is about setting up bargaining chips which is quite normal during negotiations even in our normal life. The ball will be in the court of the one who wants the other to go to court.

Anonymous said...

@ Anon 6:10pm

I have work in China. Business contracts with China always state arbitration country to be in China.

When Chinese own you money or delay payment, they will always say see you in china court. Go and ask around.

For you case, i think you got it wrong. Under new law as implemented in China food safety law. Those found guilty of poison food in this case fish poison , offenders can be sentenced to death or life time imprisonment. So no need to do anything also.

Hello, you wake up oredi or not. We are comparing the west and China and not vietnam. Why do you think vietnam also a communist country is growing? Should you compare with NK then?

Ok fine, the point is that you can still participate in PCA court or whatever kangeroo court to say you are only arbitration only (or whatever kangeroo reasons) and not ICJ, so i dun recognize your authority. It still means i abide UNCLOS.

2014 is Pinoy and indonesia case, nothing to do with china.

Get it?

I dun know who sign what or whatever, but P8 captured the video that China went ahead to reclaim the islands with a lot of ships, also captured was the rude warnings from China naval personnel. Aus and BBC also reported the same.

Why china media and military never do the same?

Other people can plan one..... while i got another baby girl who only knows how to cry on one corner keep shouting lying, lying......? Other party just laugh louder.

You are outdated.... that is all. Nowadays you need to think out of the box to solve complex issues.

If china got the same pinoy represented lawyer level what would be the outcome?

Anonymous said...

You seow or not?

Anonymous said...

Welcome to the club?

You must be new, look at other thread. This blog is not for the faint hearted.

Anonymous said...

The lawyer and law firm who represented the Nicaragua govt in its law suite against US govt is the SAME person and company who represented the pinoy govt against China.

What a coincidence!

Anonymous said...

The US is behind the whole scam with Japan. They foot the bills. Pinoys just went along like silly asses. You look at the face of Aquino you would know what an ass looks like.