The anniversary of the arbitral ruling is of particular significance in 2026 as the Philippines is the ASEAN Chair and also coincides with ASEAN’s efforts to conclude a legally binding SCS Code of Conduct. The Philippines also hosts the ASEAN Maritime Centre, whose establishment was approved at the 48th ASEAN Summit in May 2026, held in Cebu.[3] These developments have placed Manila at the centre of regional efforts to strengthen maritime cooperation and manage escalating tensions in one of the world’s most vital waterways.

A Landmark in International Maritime Law

The arbitration was initiated by the Philippines in 2013 to seek clarification regarding maritime entitlements and the legality of China’s maritime claims. The tribunal’s 2016 ruling concluded that China’s claim to historic rights within the nine-dash line had no legal basis under UNCLOS.[4] Furthermore, the ruling clarified that none of the disputed features in the Spratly Islands qualified as entitled islands capable of generating a 200-nautical-mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).[5] The tribunal found that China violated the Philippines’ sovereign rights within its EEZ by intervening with fishing and petroleum exploration activities.

China rejected the ruling and declared it ‘null and void’ and further expanded its maritime military activities and naval presence across the contested waters. Rampant confrontations involving Chinese vessels and the Philippines’ military have been witnessed around Second Thomas Shoal and Scarborough Shoal. Before the ruling, the SCS was often viewed as a context of overlapping historical claims. However, the debate has now become more about defending a rules-based order.

Between 2013 and the current dynamics, China has created around 3,200 acres of artificial islands in the Spratlys.[6] The 2016 ruling also points out that Beijing may disregard international law when it concerns securing its own interests and validate it when it concerns criticising the US.

Ten years after the ruling, the paradox........

© IDSA