The Chinese Embassy in Manila has pushed back against statements made by Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) spokesperson Jay Tarriela on the West Philippine Sea (WPS), insisting that Huangyan Dao, internationally known as Bajo de Masinloc, is “China’s inherent territory” and that Beijing will not recognize the 2016 arbitral ruling.

In a statement, Chinese Embassy deputy spokesperson Guo Wei described Tarriela’s arguments as “categorically wrong,” saying that territorial sovereignty under international law is determined not by proximity but by a state’s “continuous and effective administration.”

“Huangyan Dao is China’s inherent territory over which China has continuously, peacefully, and effectively exercised sovereignty and jurisdiction,” Guo said. He added that before 1997, the Philippines had not raised objections to China’s claim and that Beijing possesses “solid evidence” to support its position.

Guo also maintained that China’s Zhongsha Islands, which include Huangyan Dao, are entitled to an exclusive economic zone and continental shelf status under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and established international practice.

Negotiation essential

He acknowledged the overlapping maritime claims of China and the Philippines. He said such disputes should be resolved through negotiation and consultation in line with bilateral agreements and the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea.

“In any case, Chinese vessels operating in the relevant waters are acting lawfully and legitimately, and their activities are beyond reproach,” he said.

In the 2016 arbitration case initiated by the Philippines, Guo reiterated Beijing’s longstanding rejection of the award. He said the Philippines had unilaterally initiated arbitral proceedings “without China’s consent,” despite China’s declaration excluding compulsory dispute settlement procedures.

“Such action is unlawful and null and void,” he said, adding that China will neither recognize nor accept the arbitration, “still less implement it on the ground.”

Guo argued that UNCLOS does not address questions of territorial sovereignty and questioned whether the arbitral award explicitly stated that Huangyan Dao belonged to the Philippines.