China’s Claim on Traditional Fishing Grounds Located in the South China Sea

2020 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 243-250
Author(s):  
Intan Novia Putri ◽  
Dina Sunyowati ◽  
Enny Narwati

The government of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has strongly protested Indonesian fishing in the South China Sea, stating that it considered these waters to be a traditional Chinese fishing area. In fact, however, the area in question is within the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of Indonesia. This study aims to determine whether the determination of the boundaries of that EEZ was in accordance with the rights and obligations of Indonesia. The research method used was a normative law research, applying statutory and conceptual approaches. This article determines that a State’s right within its EEZ is a sovereign right and that the claims of the traditional fishing ground of the South China Sea is not justifiable, from the perspective of international maritime law. The term “traditional fishing ground” is not used in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The determination of fishing rights in a country’s territorial waters or EEZ should be based on license by the State that has declared the EEZ. This analysis concludes that China’s claims to the South China Sea as a traditional fishing ground has no legal basis. It also states that where a coastal country’s EEZ includes a sea border with another country, the two should negotiate a bilateral agreement in accordance with applicable international law and make a commitment to mutual understanding and cooperation.

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 176
Author(s):  
Ardina Kartikasari

This paper discusses the image of Indonesia in the eyes of China on the South China Sea (SCS) dispute. China circulated the map of Nine-dotted lines in 1993 and since then China has behaved ambiguously towards Indonesia as the dotted lines encompasses some part of Indonesia’s North Natuna waters. China insists two countries have overlapping interests over some of Indonesia’s Natuna Exclusive Economic Zone which China claims as it traditional fishing ground. China, however recognizes Indonesia’s sovereignty over the Natuna Islands and has been cautious when dealing with Indonesia on the Natuna issue. This behavior continues until the last three incidents occurred in Natuna waters in 2016. Although there are many studies on the South China Sea dispute and China’s policy towards Indonesia, few if any of them discuss specifically on China’s perspective towards Indonesia.  Adopting image theory as an analytical framework, this paper figures Indonesia’s image on the eyes of China, which then shaped China’s perception toward Indonesia on SCS dispute. The main argument in this paper is China captures Indonesia’s image as an ally image. In this image, Indonesia is seen as an actor who can work together, has similar capabilities and cultural dimensions with China.


2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 298-315 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ted L McDorman

The numerous insular features (islands/rocks) and low-tide elevations (reefs, shoals, etc.) within the South China Sea have long been the centre of attention and dispute involving Brunei, China (the People’s Republic of China and the Republic of China (Taiwan)), Malaysia, the Philippines, and Vietnam. This contribution focuses on said maritime features from the perspective of the law of the sea. A general overview is provided of the international legal rules that apply to islands, rocks and low-tide elevations with reference to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, customary international law and international adjudications. The article then examines what the littoral states have said and done respecting the insular features in the South China Sea and offers some reflections in the context of the Philippine-China arbitration.


2013 ◽  
Vol 107 (1) ◽  
pp. 124-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florian Dupuy ◽  
Pierre-Marie Dupuy

The recent turmoil created by the competing sovereignty claims of several countries over islands and waters in the South China Sea has caused the resurgence of the concept of “historic rights.” Although the term historic rights (sometimes confusingly used in this context in combination with other germane notions, such as historic waters and historic title) has often been imbued with a certain degree of confusion and controversy in international law, it seems bound to play an important part inthe arguments brought by states claiming sovereignty in this region and, in particular, by the People’s Republic of China (China). The vagueness of the legal terminology used by China raises the issue of whether that very vagueness is being used as an element of political strategy.


2014 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 204-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jingxi Li ◽  
Li Zheng ◽  
Xiaofei Yin ◽  
Junhui Chen ◽  
Bin Han ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 107 (1) ◽  
pp. 98-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhiguo Gao ◽  
Bing Bing Jia

The South China Sea has generally been a calm area of sea since ancient times. Until the late twentieth century, it had provided a fertile fishing ground for local fishermen from China and other littoral states, and a smooth route of navigation for the nations of the region and the rest of the international community. This tranquility has been disturbed, however, by two recent developments. The first was the physical occupation of the Nansha, or Spratly, Islands by some of the coastal states in the 1970s. This process continued through the rest of the century. Now, nearly all the islands and insular features within the Spratly Islands have been subjected to physical control by one littoral state or another.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document