太平島是島還是礁？——南海仲裁案評析

Is Taiping Island an Island or a Rock?—A Study on the South China Sea Arbitration

系所名稱：法學院法律學系
學位別：碩士
畢業學年：111
指導教授：李念祖
臺灣位處於亞太重要經貿樞紐及戰略位置，與周邊國家在專屬經濟海域存在重疊及部分爭議，尤其在我國最南端太平島附近海域衝突不斷，影響國家利益。自聯合國大陸礁層界限委員會批准日本沖之鳥大陸礁層以北部分之延伸申請案，點開了海洋法公約爭議的開端，並且引起鄰國的不滿。因此，在適用1982年聯合國海洋法公約第121條第3項判斷島嶼的法律要件變得相當重要。然而，2016年南海仲裁判斷將太平島裁定為礁，影響太平島海洋權益甚巨，尤其是在太平島論述及分析之理由過於簡單，有必要重新檢視南海仲裁案，並重新探討太平島是島還是礁的法律問題。
梳理南海仲裁案歷程，2013年1月22日菲律賓向荷蘭海牙常設仲裁法庭提出國際仲裁。關於此次仲裁案，中華人民共和國始終未曾參與，然而，重點在於仲裁審理中，菲律賓、中華人民共和國及利害關係國中華民國均提出了不同主張，於此同時，中華民國國際法學會亦向仲裁庭提出法庭之友意見書，針對太平島是島還是礁的法律問題予以回應，並檢附了太平島相關資訊，然而2016年仲裁判斷以不符合海洋法公約第121條第3項，遭認定為岩礁。
論及島嶼之判斷，有必要探討關於島嶼制度的緣起，本文針對1982年聯合國海洋法公約關於島嶼之構成要件進行了討論，檢視三次國際海洋法會議之立法過程的緣由而形成了現形目前的定義與規則，並進一步探討區別維持人類居住或本身經濟生活，以及具有島嶼資格後擁有的海洋權益及其影響力。
有了島嶼面貌之初探，便針對沖之鳥及人工島嶼進行探討，令人詫異的是，沖之鳥在其如此條件上都可以是島，太平島與其相比，似乎更能突顯真正島嶼地貌之特質，此外，人工島嶼亦是將來出現更為頻繁的問題，其比擬自然形成的島嶼更為宜居，不免讓人思考島礁的法律地位是否會因此改變，另外，因全球暖化，海水上升之問題，導致小島國家恐將有滅頂之災，如嗣後填島造陸是否會變更其原有的海洋權益，如此新興問題都是在考驗著海洋法公約島嶼制度如何在未來的過程中適用法律。
本文針對太平島仲裁部分進行全面評析，論及國際法院判決，也提及包括巴西大陸礁層申請提案及布威島外部界限申請案在內的各項聯合國申請案，從中梳理了關於人類居住的要件與適用，在不能維持本身的經濟生活方面，也舉出克利珀頓小島、克馬德群島為例，對照出仲裁庭未在仲裁判斷中詳細徵引，卻創設了苛刻的仲裁判斷。
本文主要從南海仲裁案各國之主張及海洋法公約緣起的角度出發，並重新整理了學者對海洋法公約第121條第3項之見解及梳理國際法院判決及大陸礁層申請案。對於太平島是島還是礁重新進行了解與認識。

Taiwan is geographically located in a strategically important location in the Asia-Pacific region, making it an important hub for economics and trade, however, there are ares in Taiwan’s exclusive economic zone that overlaps and conflicts with neighboring countries, especially in the waters around Taiping Island at Taiwan’s southernmost point, impacting Taiwan’s national interests. The approval of Japan’s application to extend the northern part of Okinotori Island’s continental shelf by the United Nations Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf has sparked framework disputes in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and has also caused discontent among neighboring countries. As a result, it has become particularly important to apply Article 121, paragraph 3 of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which governs the legal criteria for islands. The 2016 South China Sea Arbitration ruling classified Taiwan’s Taiping Island as a rock which severely impacted the maritime rights and interests of Taiping Island. However, the reasoning and analysis provided in the discussion pertaining to Taiping Island in the arbitration were overly simplistic, and therefore it is necessary to reexamine the South China Sea Arbitration case and reconsider whether Taiping Island should be classified as an island or a rock.
To summarize the timeline of events of the South China sea Arbitration case, on the 22nd of January 2013, the Philippines filed an international arbitration case at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, Netherlands. Throughout the arbitration case, the People’s Republic of China did not participate, however it is important to note that during the proceedings, The Philippines, the People’s Republic of China, and the Republic of China, with which the issue concerns, all presented differing perspectives. During this time, the International Law Association of the Republic of China presented an amicus curiae opinion letter to the court addressing the legal concerns of whether Taiping Island should be considered as an island or a rock. The opinion letter also contained information regarding Taiping Island, however, in the 2016 arbitration, Taiping Island was considered to not meet the criteria specified in Article 121, paragraph 3 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and was therefore classified as a rock.
When it comes to determining what is an island, it is necessary to examine the origins of the insular system, and this paper explores the criteria outlined in the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea for what constitutes islands, and examines the reasons of the legislative processes of the three United Nations Conferences on the Law of the Sea that led to the current definitions and policies. Additionally, this paper also discusses differences between maintaining human habitation or economic life, and the maritime rights and influence that islands have.
Following the exploration of the concept of islands, the paper will then discuss Okinotori Island and artificial islands. What is surprising is that Okinotori is considered an island under these conditions, however, Taiping Island in comparison seems to more accurately demonstrate the characteristics of a genuine Island. Additionally, in the future, artificial islands are likely to become a more significant issue, as in comparison to naturally formed islands, artificial islands can be more habitable which raises concerns regarding whether the legal status of islands may change. Additionally, due to the sea levels rising as a result of global warming, small island nations may have to deal with natural disasters, which leads to questions such
as whether land reclamation in the future will affect their original maritime rights. Such new issues all test how the insular system in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea will be applied in legal proceedings in the future.
This paper will provide a comprehensive analysis of the arbitration of Taiping Island, and will discuss the determinations of the International Court of Justice, citing numerous submissions to the United Nations, including the Brazilian continental shelf proposal as well as the application of outer boundaries for Bouvet Island. Through these cases, the paper examines the criteria and applicability for human habitation, and pertaining to the inability of sustaining its own economy, cases such as Clipperton Island and the Kermadec Islands are highlighted as examples, exemplifying that the arbitral court did provide detailed citations in the the arbitration ruling process yet established strict arbitration rulings.
This paper centers around the examination of the perspectives of various countries in the South China Sea Arbitration case and the origins of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Furthermore the paper addresses the views of various scholars regarding Article 121, paragraph 3 of the Convention and addresses rulings from the International Court of Justice and continental shelf application cases. Finally, a new perspective and understanding of whether Taiping Island should be classified as an island or rock is provided.