The rule of law at the national and international levels - A/80/99 Criminal accountability of United Nations officials and experts on mission - A/80/239, A/80/270
🇨🇳 China, 🇮🇱 Israel, 🇵🇭 Philippines, 🇮🇷 Islamic Republic of Iran
Thank you, Chair. In response to the Philippines statement yesterday, China must reiterate its position debunk fallacies and set the record straight. The root cause of the South China Sea dispute between China and the Philippines is about territorial sovereignty. Since the 1970s, the Philippines has successfully seized it by force and continues to illegally occupy parts of China and Sha Ting Tao. Since 1999, the Philippines has left its warship illegally grounded on China's Yang Lai Zion. For the peace and stability in the South China Sea, China has always exercised great restraint and stayed committed to peaceful settlement of relevant disputes with the Philippines. On matters of territory and sovereignty, China's positions firm and unequivocal, will not take a single inch that's not ours, we will defend every inch that's rightfully belongs to us if the Philippines is sincere in abiding by the UN Charter and Manila Declaration. It should first return the illegally occupied South Nazi Islands and race to China and withdraw its illegal ground and worship from China's Yang Lai Zio and German return to the right track of resolving disputes through negotiations and act in spirit of peaceful dispute resolution. Territorial issues fall outside the scope of Anclause. The issue of maritime delimitation has been excluded by China's declaration in 2006 from the arbitrary procedures. The South China Sea Arbitral Tribunal has no jurisdiction whatsoever on over the matter. However, the Philippines has betrayed a consensus reached and repeatedly confirmed with China to resolve. the disputes through negotiations, it breached its solemn commitment in the DOC, deliberately framed relevant disputes as matters concerning interpretation or application of ANCLAS, and abused its dispute resolution mechanism to unilaterally initiate the South China Sea arbitration case. It was not an act intended to resolve disputes with China, but to deny China's terror sovereignty and maritime rights interests in the South China Sea. The arbitral tribunal exercised jurisdiction ultra virus and rendered the wood indisregard of law it was It is illegal now and void. Convention makes multiple references to historical base and historic rights, demonstrating respect for historic rights. The tribunal has no authority to deny trust historic rights in the South China Sea. By the tribunal's way of determining the status of islands, many coastal states will not be able to claim EEZs and continental shelves based on right their islands. The award seriously deviates from the Convention's provisions on regime of islands. And from prevailing state practice. The Philippines has allowed other countries to build military bases on the territory, making an enabler of militarization of the South China Sea. China builds necessary reinforcements and defense works on st on its own territory. These are rightful acts of sovereign state. By no means building artificial islands or militarization, China attaches great importance to environmental protection in South China in the South China Sea and established the Huang Yandao Nature Reserve recently. It is Philippines' illegal ship grounding that poses a great threat. To the environment. The South China Sea arbitration is illegal, now in a void, it violates disputed settlement disputes of enclosed and contravenes international maritime law. It's an act, of example, international rule of law, China refusal to accept and recognize arbitration is precisely an act to uphold authority and integrity of international maritime law and safeguard rule of law. We urge the Philippines to act in the spirit of good faith and get back to the right track of resolving disputes through dialogue and negotiation with China. Thank you. Yeah.
Thank you. Uh good morning. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh I'm sorry for taking the floor uh for a second ROR. Most of the times I don't like it and prefer not to do it. But uh after hearing the personal accusations by the Palestinian delegation yesterday, I have no choice but to express my deep concern that over the last few years we have seen the lowering of the standards for the discussion in this room. This encompasses the way we treat, respect, and maintain the pre established norms of the UN, even between us as colleagues. Unfortunately, yesterday we have reached rock bottom. It is a shame that it was a day that should be one of the hope and opportunities that the Palestinian delegate has decided to abuse this forum to stoop to such a low level as to revert to personal accusations. Although she has not once acknowledged nor condemned the October seventh massacre, nor once called for the release of the hostages, I have never resorted to personal accusations against her or personally blamed her or the Palestinian people for killing the innocent Israeli civilians since October 7th. We always differentiate between Palestinian people who are also suffering. We always differentiate between the Palestinian people who are also suffering from Hamas cruelty and the terrorists themselves. The Palestinians need to be brave and to choose on which side they are. The Hamas side is not the right one. With regard to the Iranian regime yesterday, it does not merit a comment. This cruel, fundamentally stero funding regime speaks for itself. I urge you all not to accept such unacceptably low standard in this forum. We also expect from the chair of the meeting and from the Bureau to enforce the rules of law procedure in this committee, especially under the item of rule of law. It is a shame that we need to ask from the chair to make sure we would treat each other professionally and respectfully. But it is what it is. We all deserve more. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We're pleased to see you chairing this meeting. With respect to the intervention made by China, I would like to reiterate that the twenty sixteen South China Sea Arbitration is a testament to the Philippines' unwavering commitment to the rule of law and the peaceful settlement of disputes. At the General Assembly debate, our Secretary of Foreign Affairs emphasized that to maritime nations such as the Philippines, international law, particularly the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea or UNCLOS, is fundamental to our future. We are also committed to diplomacy and other peaceful means to settle disputes. I take this opportunity to address some of the issues raised. The Philippines underscores its sovereignty over its archipelago and other territories, including Bajo de Masinloc or Scarborough Shoal, and the high tide features of the Kalayan Island Group. This sovereignty is incontrovertible and firmly founded on international law, legal principles, effective control, and recognition through international treaties and agreements. Let me point out, for instance, that Bajo de Mysinok is 124 nautical miles from the Philippine mainland, well within our 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone. By contrast, it is roughly 472 nautical miles from the nearest coast of mainland China. China recently established an environmental reserve, the Huanggyan Island National Nature Reserve, that our colleague mentioned over this area. Again, this is around 950 kilometers away from the nearest China's coast and well within the Philippine exclusive economic zone. Mr. Chair, an erroneous opinion has been advanced that intentionally misreads certain treaties upon which the extent of the Philippine territory is partly based. It is useful to recall that the statement of the President of the Philippines at the Shanghila Dialogue in Singapore in 2024, where he says that the Treaty of Paris between Spain and the United States crystallized our islands into a cohesive whole. The Treaty of Washington clarified that the extent of our sovereignty and our patrimony transcends the lines set by international powers. The above treaties, along with other agreements, including the 1930 United States Great Britain Treaty, clearly and firmly state the extent of Philippine territory as well as their meaning derived from the concrete and consistent demonstrations of sovereign authority and jurisdiction exercised by the Philippines over its territory through the centuries. The 1935, 1973, and 1987 constitutions of the Philippines taken together are clear on the legal basis and extent of the Philippine national territory. International law, including the principle of Uti Poseidatis Uris, are of value in this regard. The Philippines will continue to remain vigilant against attempts to misinform the general public. It will continue to assert and preserve its territorial integrity and strongly uphold its sovereignty, sovereign rights, and jurisdiction in accordance with international law. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yeah.
Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. The Israeli regime is a vivid example of terrorism incarnated, perpetuated, and interwoven into a system of genocidal apartheid and prolonged occupation, spanning and intensified now for more than seventy five years, claiming lives of hundreds of thousands of people. Since the previous session of this August meeting, the world has witnessed in anguish and anger the magnitude of terrorist attacks, genocide, and aggressions of the Israeli regime in the region and beyond. The Israeli regime policy and practice of terrorism in the region is brazenly evolved into various forms and manifestations in terms of victims, means, methods, and instrumentalities, which include misusing and exploiting information and communication technologies for terrorist purposes such as weaponization and explosion of handheld communication devices, misuse of unmanned aerial vehicles along with artificial intelligence for conducting mass terrorist attacks, use of chemical agents. Willful and permeditated terrorist attacks against internationally protected persons, including diplomatic representatives, targeting diplomatic premises and diplomatic zones, brutal assassination of civilians, including scientists and academicians, and terrorism by occupying settlers, among others. The mens rea of the Israeli regime criminals in perpetrating terrorism is evident, demonstrating terrorism on the basis of hatred, xenophobia, racism, supremacism in tandem with genocide war crimes, crimes against humanity, and other egregious crimes. The occupying settlers terrorism, which is organized and financed by the Israeli occupying regime, and act as a clear instance of incitement to hostility, hatred, and violence, is one of the emerging forms of terrorism, which had recently compelled many sovereign states to take action in response to this perlist phenomenon. It has been estimated that since two thousand twenty three, more than one thousand eight hundred Acts of terrorism and violence in various forms have been committed by the Israeli occupying settlers. The countless terrorist attacks conducted by the Israeli regime against civilian scientists and officials of member states, and numerous other instances of terrorist attacks, the regime planned, organized, financed, carried out, or otherwise supported and facilitated against the terrorist practice and policy of the Israeli regime. The international community should take effective measures to prevent the occupying regime of Israel from committing terrorist attacks, as the regime is a serious threat to the international peace and security. I thank you, Mr. Chair.
Verbatim from the transcript. A reply is identified from its own words, the Chair's grant, or its place in the right-of-reply sequence; delegations and addressees follow the transcript's attribution.