The Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) has strongly rejected assertions made by the Chinese Embassy in Manila questioning the validity of the 2016 South China Sea Arbitral Award, reiterating that the ruling is final and binding and already forms an “unassailable” part of international law.

In a statement on Monday, the DFA stressed that the arbitral award was issued by a tribunal constituted under Annex VII of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), a treaty to which both the Philippines and China are States Parties.

“The award is final and binding and has become an unassailable part of the corpus of international law, providing legal clarity regarding maritime rights and entitlements in the South China Sea. It is not and will never be illegal, null and void,” the DFA said.

The department underscored that in its Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, the Arbitral Tribunal rejected China’s objection that the disputes involved issues of territorial sovereignty in the South China Sea and were therefore outside the tribunal’s jurisdiction.

It also noted that the “tribunal also rejected the argument” set out in China's Position Paper that the “parties' disputes concern maritime boundary delimitation and are therefore excluded” from the Tribunal's jurisdiction by virtue of China's Declaration under Article 298 of the Convention.

“There should be no confusion that the 2016 Arbitral Award is focused on issues concerning the interpretation and application of UNCLOS, including the legal status of maritime features, maritime entitlements under the Convention, and the compatibility of certain maritime claims with international law,” the DFA said.

The statement was issued in response to remarks from Chinese Embassy Deputy Spokesperson Guo Wei, who reiterated Beijing’s position that the South China Sea arbitration was a “political farce disguised in legal clothing” and maintained that the arbitral award is “illegal, null and void.”

The DFA further rejected claims that the Philippines violated any obligation to settle disputes exclusively through bilateral negotiations before initiating arbitration. It said the tribunal had already dismissed China’s position that both parties had agreed to resolve South China Sea disputes solely through negotiations.

It also pointed out that the “tribunal confirmed that the Philippines has met the requirement under Article 283 of the Convention that the parties exchange views regarding the settlement of their disputes.”

The foreign affairs department emphasized that the Philippines acted within its rights under UNCLOS to pursue arbitration after years of consultations failed to resolve the dispute, while maintaining its commitment to diplomacy.

“While the Philippines remains committed to dialogue and diplomacy, it is not precluded from availing itself of dispute-settlement mechanisms under UNCLOS when disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention cannot be resolved through consultations,” the DFA said.

“The Philippines acted within its rights and obligations as an UNCLOS State Party, especially when years of dialogue with China failed to achieve progress,” it added.

As the Philippines prepares to mark the 10th anniversary of the arbitral ruling in July, the DFA highlighted its continuing importance in reinforcing a rules-based international order and promoting peaceful ocean governance.

“As we commemorate the Award's 10th anniversary this July, we highlight its resounding affirmation of UNCLOS and of the Convention's dispute-settlement mechanisms,” the DFA said.

It added that judicial decisions and arbitral awards under UNCLOS benefit all states, not only the parties involved in a dispute.

“Indeed, judicial decisions and arbitral awards rendered under UNCLOS benefit all States - not just the parties to a dispute. By clarifying the content of international law, they provide guidance, strengthen legal certainty, and support the peaceful and predictable governance of the oceans,” it said.

The DFA stressed that "respect" for such rulings is essential to preserving the integrity, credibility, and universality of UNCLOS and the broader rules-based order it supports.

It further described the 2016 ruling as a key guidepost on issues such as the invalidity of excessive or historical claims, the legal status of maritime features, conduct at sea affecting coastal State rights, and State obligations to protect and conserve the marine environment.

“The 2016 Arbitral Award stands as a clear guidepost for all States on the invalidity of excessive or historical claims, the proper assessment of the status of maritime features, the activities at sea deemed prejudicial to the rights of the relevant coastal State, and the obligations of States Parties for the protection and conservation of the marine environment,” the DFA said.

“The Award has since been cited in several international decisions and judgments.”

The DFA also highlighted that the ruling clarified obligations under UNCLOS relating to marine environmental protection, including duties concerning fragile coral reef ecosystems, biodiversity conservation, and the prevention of severe environmental harm.

It added that the "tribunal’s findings on marine environmental protection continue to resonate within the evolving body of international law governing the oceans."