International Court of Justice Arbitral Award in the Case of the Republic of the Philippines v. the People’s Republic of China: A Daniel Come to Judgement?

Abstract

On 26 July 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague released the International Court of Justice Arbitral Award in the case of the Republic of the Philippines v. the People’s Republic of China upholding the “Submissions” made by the Philippines and invalidating China’s “nine-dash line.” Almost ten months thereafter, and in response to the decision of the present administration not to include the discussion of the said award in the agenda for the 30th ASEAN Summit and Related Meetings on April 26-29, 2017 in Manila, Philippines, the former Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) Secretary Albert del Rosario, who led the Philippines in filing the arbitration case against China in the international tribunal, criticized the inaction of the present administration in “asserting the ruling of a United Nations-backed arbitral tribunal over the South China Sea.” We cannot wait for a ‘better time’ to come — we must create that time ourselves lest that opportunity be lost forever, Del Rosario said in a speech during a South China Sea forum organized by Stratbase ADR Institute on 4 May 2017. Was the former DFA Secretary correct? Has the Philippines lost any opportunity that the said award had given it in exercising its rights over the South China Sea? What other options does the Philippines have on the issue, and how would this affect the implementation of the arbitral award? These are some of the questions that this paper tries to answer. More particularly, this tries to evaluate the Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA), including WATNA (Worst Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement) of the Philippines arising from the said decision using the Social Impact Assessment Framework for Expanded Stakeholder Analysis.