兩岸有關南海爭議島嶼主權主張之作為 —以國際法中有效統治原則之探討為核心

The Sovereignty Claims and Exercises Between the People's Republic of China and Republic of China over Disputed Islands in the South China Sea -- Examined by the Principle of Effectivités of International Law

劉千綺(Chien-Chi Liu)

指導教授 ： 范建得

國立清華大學/科技管理學院/科技法律研究所/碩士(2012年)

https://doi.org/10.6843/NTHU.2012.00067

摘要

南海因其豐富之石油與生物資源，及重要之航道與戰略地位，南海海域周圍之國家，包括中華人民共和國、越南、菲律賓、馬來西亞與汶萊無不爭相主張對南海海域島嶼之主權以爭奪資源。我中華民國一向主張，南沙群島、西沙群島、中沙群島及東沙群島，無論就歷史、地理、國際法及事實，向為我國固有領土之一部份，其主權屬於我國。近年來，各國於南海海域之利益爭奪，越演越烈，今年初發生之中華人民共和國與菲律賓於黃岩島（Scarborough Shoal）對峙事件，持續延燒至最近，兩國以休漁之方式，試圖以和平的手段緩和兩國緊張情勢。然而，類似的劇碼在南海海域屢見不鮮，各國對於解決南海海域爭端之手段，基於各自之國家利益，無法達成共識。雖爭端國在排除我國之下，於2002年共同簽署「南海各方行為宣言」，試圖以和平之手段，以共同合作代替衝突，解決南海爭端，從黃岩島事件，可看出在多年的努力之後，成果仍十分有限。
本文基於國際法上「陸地支配海域」（the land dominates the sea）認為，擁有南海海域島嶼主權，才得主張基於島嶼主權衍生之鄰接區、專屬經濟海域及大陸礁層等相關權益。國際法院近代之島嶼爭端相關判決，包括2002年《黎吉丹島和錫巴淡島主權歸屬案》、2007年《尼加拉瓜與洪都拉斯在加勒比海的領土和海洋爭端案》及2008年《白礁、中岩礁和南礁主權歸屬案》中，將有效統治原則（the Principle of Effectivités）作為判決島嶼主權歸屬之重要判準之一，甚至是最重要之判準。有效統治意指，基於主權之意圖，對主張主權之島嶼，所為之實際主權作為，法院在無法找到合法島嶼主權所有者之情況下，依該原則，檢視各國於係爭島嶼上之實際作為，判決主權歸屬。
本文藉由研究2002年《黎吉丹島和錫巴淡島主權歸屬案》、2007年《尼加拉瓜與洪都拉斯在加勒比海的領土和海洋爭端案》及2008年《白礁、中岩礁和南礁主權歸屬案》三案中，法官如何適用有效統治檢視當事國於係爭島嶼之作為與相關之論述，利用該些論述與判準，進一步比較同樣主張南沙群島、西沙群島、中沙群島及東沙群島主權之中華人民共和國與我國，在四群島之作為，是否符合有效統治要件。從比較之結果中，對我國未來在南沙群島、西沙群島、中沙群島及東沙群島應有之作為，提出看法與建議，希望有助於鞏固我國於該些群島之主權。

關鍵字

南海 ； 爭端島嶼主權 ； 有效統治原則 ； 國際法案例

並列摘要

Abstract
The South China Sea area, an important marine channel and strategic location, reserves abundant oil and natural resources. Therefore the surrounding countries, include People’s Republic of China, Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Republic of China（Taiwan）, vie for the benefit from the area. Republic of China (Taiwan) claims that Nansha Islands (Spratly Islands), Shisha Islands (Paracel Islands), Chungsha Islands (Macclesfield Islands), Tungsha Islands (Pratas Islands), without a doubt fall under the sovereignty of the government of the Republic of China (Taiwan) in any aspect —history, geography or international law. The conflicts between South China Sea countries have been intense in recent years. In April 2012, a group of Chinese fishing men expelled by Philippine navy force and since then a standoff between People’s Republic of China and Philippine had been held. In June 2012, the tension between the two countries started to be dissolved after the two countries announced seasonal fishing bans. Events of alike happen recurrently in this area of dispute. In 2002, those dispute-related countries tried to solve the problem by signing the ASEAN-China Declaration of Conduct on the South China Sea. Despite the signing of the declaration the dispute cannot be easily solved due to conflicting interests. The above- mentioned standoff is one of the cases resulting from conflicting interests.
Regarding the principle of the land dominates the sea, once the country owns sovereignty over disputed islands; the country can claim the right of its surrounding waters. In the recent international law cases concerning sovereignty over islands, including” Sovereignty over Pulau Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan “of year 2000, “Territorial and Maritime Dispute between Nicaragua and Honduras in the Caribbean Sea” of year 2007 and” Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge” of year 2008, it can be inferred that the principle of Effectivités is one of the most important criteria applying to the cases.
The Principle of Effectivités means that the sovereignty country exercise real and actual act of sovereignty bases on its sovereignty intention, which is the examination for court to identify the legitimation of ownership on disputed island.
This study thoroughly focus on three case: “the Sovereignty over Pulau Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan”, “Territorial and Maritime Dispute between Nicaragua and Honduras in the Caribbean Sea” and “Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge”. The court opinions and criteria about the principle of Effectivités articulated in those cases are used for the comparisons of the acts of Peoples’ Republic of China and Republic of China（Taiwan）, and the results of the comparisons are strong support for the advice about the solid sovereignty of our country on those islands.

並列關鍵字

South China Sea ； sovereignty of disputed islands ； the principle of Effectivités ； international law cases

參考文獻

江敏華（2009）。〈從南海爭議看中國的南海策略〉。《戰略安全研析》。50期。頁49-53。

宋鎮照（2011）。〈南海風雲再起　充滿詭譎與火藥味--解析中國和越、菲的南海衝突與美國角 色〉。《海峽評論》。頁24-29。

趙國材（1996）。〈論南中國海政策與南沙問題〉。《海峽評論》。71期。頁62-65。

葉錦鴻（2010）。〈印尼．馬來西亞島嶼領有紛爭與國際法——繼承、地圖與有效管理的效力〉《台 灣國際法季刊》。7卷3期。頁7-38。

Maritime Delimitation and Territorial Questions between Qatar and Bahrain(Qatar v. Bahrain),2001 I.C.J.40,118 (Mar. 16).