五、结论
国际法院在英挪渔权案就挪威划定的直线基线曰：“虽划界行为必为一单方行为，因为只有沿海国才有权力做此行为，但海洋区域划界总有其国际面向，不可能完全依赖表现于国内法的沿海国意志。划界行为之于他国的合法性则依国际法决定。[107]”
因此，他国有权不接受沿海国划定的海域疆界，[108]但须依国际法规范为之。关于划定国家管辖权与《公约》第1(1)(1)条规范的人类共同继承的财产（即“区域”）之间的界限，[109]其他国家依据《公约》第137(1)条更“有义务”拒绝承认侵犯“区域”的海域划界行为。[110]若大陆架的外部界限未能依据《公约》第六部分划定，划界的合法性将因《公约》第十一部分某些条文的适用而贬损，这是第134(4)条的意思。[111]
本论文讨论日本2014年《政令》公布的冲之鸟礁以北外大陆架外部界限的合法性问题。对照《2012年建议》提供描绘SKB区的线条跟《政令》后发现，《政令》画出的长方形海域的北部有一部分，即倒三角形之海域，超越《2012年建议》，出现本文所谓的第一种情况。《政令》画出的长方形海域底部的北部界限（北纬24.5度线），也超越《2012年建议》。因《2012年建议》对SKB海域画出的最南界限系北纬24.5度线，日本却主张北纬24.5度线更往南走的海域，再现第一种情况。此外，长方形海域底部的南部界限使用了冲之鸟礁产生的“有问题的”专属经济区的外围。但冲之鸟礁作为日本所称具备完全权利的岛屿未被《2012年建议》背书，《2012年建议》未能对KPR海域的划界案做出建议即表露无疑——即便当时次级委员会业已草拟出建议。换言之，长方形海域底部的南部界限的法律问题，并非日本超越《建议》，而是不存在《建议》！出现第二种情况。
本论文尝试找出第一种情况（沿海国大陆架外部界限的划定超越《建议》）跟第二种情况（沿海国大陆架外部界限划定前，不存在《建议》）将违反的所有《公约》的条文。本文认为日本《政令》违反了这些条文。吾人应持续观察是否国际社会及国际海底管理局关注这个违反《公约》的划界案。因为，《公约》缔约国不但有权利挑战违反国际海洋法相关原则所划定的海域疆界，且有义务拒绝承认本文指出的非法划界案。本文限于篇幅，无法讨论其他国家如何透过《公约》第十一部分的争端解决机制挑战违反第六部分及第十一部分的大陆架划界案，且待下篇论文为之。
最后，放进“上下文”观察，《公约》第76(8)条第三句中的“以委员会建议为基础”之规定，难以容许沿海国划定外大陆架外部界限时超越《建议》所绘线条。若沿海国在缺乏《建议》之下却划定其外大陆架外部界限，既然缺乏《建议》作为“基础”，也难逃违反《公约》第76(8)条之责难。
注释：
基金项目：本文为国家社科基金重点项目“南海仲裁案后的南海法律问题研究（18AFX026）”的阶段性研究成果。
作者简介：高圣惕（1963—），男，福建长乐人，武汉大学国际法研究所二级教授，博导，国际法博士，主要研究方向：南海问题，国际争端解决。
✽作者感谢《太平洋学报》编辑部和匿名审稿专家的修改意见，感谢唐勇、方银霞及赵英军三位老师协助制图及提供日文资料。本文见解仅为个人意见，不代表其他机构与个人，文中错漏由笔者负责。
[①]外大陆架，指超越200海里的大陆架的部分。英文为outer continental shelf或extended continental shelf。
[②]日本内阁政令第302号，系由日本内阁会议于2014年9月9日通过，于该年10月1日“生效”，原文见日本外务省网站，http://elaws.e-gov.go.jp/search/elawsSearch/elaws_search/lsg0500/detail?lawId=426CO0000000302；日本外务省提供的图，见日本外务省网站，https://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/press/pr/wakaru/topics/vol172/index.html；日本内阁提供的图，见日本内阁网站，http://www8.cao.go.jp/ocean/kokkyouritou/tairikudana/tairikudana.html，访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[③]《日本专属经济区和大陆架法》（法律编号74 of 1996）的英文翻译，FAO，
http://extwprlegs1.fao.org/docs/pdf/jap13392.pdf，访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[④]《联合国海洋法公约》于1982年12月10日议定，原文参见联合国网站，http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/UNCLOS-TOC.htm。
[⑤] Jon Van Dyke, “Speck in the Ocean Meets Law of the Sea”, New York Times, January 21,1988, p. A26,
https://www.nytimes.com/1988/01/21/opinion/l-speck-in-the-ocean-meets-law-of-the-sea-406488.html;
YukieYoshikawa, “The US-Japan-China Mistrust Spiral and Okinotorishima”, TheAsia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus, Vol.5, Issue 10, 2007, https://apjjf.org/-Yukie-YOSHIKAWA/2541/article.html;Ralph Jennings, “Japan Is Quietly Building A Tiny TropicalIslet, But An Angry China Has Noticed” , Forbes, July 17, 2017, https://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphjennings/2016/07/17/japan-is-quietly-building-a-tiny-tropical-islet-but-an-angry-china-has-noticed/#5e3e9af9705b.访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[⑥]日本提交的划界申请及中国、韩国发表的外交照会抗议，可参见联合国相关网站，http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/submission_jpn.htm，访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[⑦] “Progress of Work in the CLCS-Statement by the Chairperson” (CLCS/74)for the 29th Session in New York, 19 March-27 April2012, para. 19 in page 5, https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N12/326/32/PDF/N1232632.pdf?OpenElement. 访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[⑧] Michael Sheng-ti Gau, “Recent Decisions by theCommission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf on Japan’s Submission forOuter Continental Shelf”, Chinese Journal of International Law, Vol.11, No.3, 2012, pp.487-504.
[⑨]Jon Van Dyke, “Speck in the Ocean Meets Law ofthe Sea”, New York Times, January 21, 1988, p. A26,
https://www.nytimes.com/1988/01/21/opinion/l-speck-in-the-ocean-meets-law-of-the-sea-406488.html访问日期：2018年12月11日。;
Jia Yu and Wu Ji-Lu, “The Outer ContinentalShelf of Coastal States and the Common Heritage of Mankind”, OceanDevelopment and International Law,Vol.42, No.4, 2011, pp. 321-322 .
[⑩] Figure 27, entitled“BathymetricMap Showing Outer Edge Formula Lines in the Shikoku Basin Region”, in Summary of Recommendations of CLCSinRegardtotheSubmission Madeby Japanon 12 November 2008, Available in: http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/jpn08/com_sumrec_jpn_fin.pdf.访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[11]《公约》附件二第3(1)(a)条。
[12] Oude Elferink, “The Continental Shelf Beyond200 Nautical Miles: The Relationship between the CLCS and Third Party DisputeSettlement”, in Alex G. Oude Elferink and Donald R. Rothwell, eds., OceanManagement in The 21st Century: Institutional Frameworks andResponses,2004, Leiden (Netherlands) Martinus Nijhoff Pub., pp. 119-122; McDorman,“The Role of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf: A TechnicalBody in a Political World”, The International Journal of Marine and CoastalLaw, Vol.17, No.3, 2002,pp. 313-317; Ron Macnab, “The Case for Transparencyin the Delimitation of the Outer Continental Shelf in Accordance with UNCLOSArticle 76”, Ocean Development and International Law,Vol.35, No.1, 2004,p. 11;
Edwin Egede, “Submission of Brazil and Article76 of the Law of the Sea Convention 1982”, The International Journal ofMarine and Coastal Law, Vol. 21, No. 1, 2006, p.53.
[13]Churchill & Lowe, The Law of the Sea, 1999，Manchester University Press, 3rd ed.p. 149.
David Colson,“The Delimitation of the Outer Continental Shelf Between neighboring States”,in American Journal of InternationalLaw, Vol. 97, 2003, pp. 93, footnote 12.
ØysteinJensen, “The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf: AnAdministrative, Scientific, or Judicial Institution?”, Ocean Development and International Law,Vol. 45, No. 2, 2014, pp. 176 .
ILA, Berlin Conference (2004) - Legal Issues of the Outer ContinentalShelf, 2004, pp. 21-22.
[14]《维也纳条约法公约》第31(1)-(2)条规定：“1. 条约应依其用语按其上下文并参照条约之目的及宗旨所具有之通常意义，善意解释之。2. 就解释条约而言，上下文除指连同弁言及附件在内之约文外，并应包括……”。此条约本文下载于https://treaties.un.org/doc/publication/unts/volume%201155/volume-1155-i-18232-english.pdf访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[15]Richard Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation, 2015, 2nd ed. OxfordUniversity Press, p. 197.
[16]《公约》第318条规定：“各附件为本公约的组成部分，除另有明文规定外，凡提到本公约或其一个部分也就包括提到与其有关的附件。”
[17]《公约》附件二第7条。
[18]《公约》附件二第8条。
[19]截至2018年9月21日，俄罗斯、巴西、巴贝多斯、阿根廷也已提出修正版的划界案，参见http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/commission_submissions.htm访问日期：2018年12月11日。
关于巴西的修正版划界案，参见：
Alexandre Pereira da Silva, “Dealing withArticles 76 and 82 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea:Legal and Political Challenges for Brazil”, Ocean Yearbook, Vol. 28, 2014, p.161;
McDorman, “The Entry into Force of the 1982 LOSConvention and Article 76 Outer Continental Shelf Regime”, International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, Vol.10,No.2, 1995, p.178 .
[20] Richard Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation, 2015, 2nded. Oxford University Press, pp. 179-180.
Ian Sinclair, The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1973, 2nd ed, ManchesterUniversity Press, p.118 .
[21] DavidColson,“The Delimitation of the Outer Continental Shelf Between neighboringStates”, AmericanJournal of International Law, Vol. 97, 2003,p. 102.
Øystein Jensen, “The Commission on the Limitsof the Continental Shelf: An Administrative, Scientific, or JudicialInstitution?”, Ocean Development and International Law,Vol. 45, No. 2, 2014, pp.177.
[22] Huw Llewellyn, “The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf: JointSubmission by France, Ireland, Spain, and the United Kingdom”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly,Vol. 56, July 2007, pp.679-681, 687-690 .
David Colson, “TheDelimitation of the Outer Continental Shelf Between Neighboring States”, AmericanJournal of International Law, Vol. 97, 2003,,p. 93, footnote 11. 另参见McDorman,“The Continental Shelf”, in Rothwell, Oude Elferink, Scott, and Stephens (eds),The Oxford Handbook of the Law of theSea, 2017, Oxford University Press, p.190.
[23]《公约》第76(1)-(7)条。
Ron Macnab, “The Case for Transparency in theDelimitation of the Outer Continental Shelf in Accordance with UNCLOS Article76”, Ocean Development andInternational Law, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2004, pp.5-9.
[24]《公约》附件二第4条。
[25]《公约》附件二的标题。
[26] Richard Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation, 2015, 2nd ed, OxfordUniversity Press, pp.179-180.
Ian Sinclair, The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1973, 2nded., Manchester University Press, p.118 .
[27]《公约》附件二第2条。
[28]《公约》附件二第3(1)(a)条。
Ron Macnab, “The Case for Transparency in theDelimitation of the Outer Continental Shelf in Accordance with UNCLOS Article76”, Ocean Development andInternational Law, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2004, p.9 .
McDorman, “The Entry into Force of the 1982 LOSConvention and Article 76 Outer Continental Shelf Regime”, International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law,Vol. 10, No. 2, 1995,p.178 .
[29]《公约》附件第4条。
Oude Elferink, “The Continental Shelf Beyond200 Nautical Miles: The Relationship betweent the CLCS and Third Party DisputeSettlement”, in Alex G. Oude Elferink and Donald R. Rothwell (eds.), Ocean Management in the 21stCentury: Institutional Frameworks and Responses, 2004, MartinusNijhoff Publishers, p.111.
Huw Llewellyn, “The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf: JointSubmission by France, Ireland, Spain, and the United Kingdom”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly,Vol. 56, July 2007, pp.682-683.
ILA, Berlin Conference (2004) - Legal Issues of the Outer ContinentalShelf, 2004, p. 10.
[30]参见委员会的《议事规则》（Rules of Procedure）第54条。https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N08/309/23/PDF/N0830923.pdf?OpenElement. 访问日期：2018年12月11日。
Alex G. Oude Elferink, “’openness’ and Article76 of the Law of the Sea Convention: The Process Does Not Need to Be Adjusted”,Ocean Development and InternationalLaw, Vol. 40, No. 1, 2009, p.40.
[31]《公约》第77(1)-(2)条。
Ron Macnab,“The Case for Transparency in theDelimitation of the Outer Continental Shelf in Accordance with UNCLOS Article76”, Ocean Development andInternational Law, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2004, p.12.
[32]《公约》第76(4)-(6)条。
Churchill & Lowe, The Law of the Sea,1999, 3rd ed., Manchester University Press, pp. 148-149.另参见Edwin Egede, “Submission of Brazil and Article76 of the Law of the Sea Convention 1982”, TheInternational Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, Vol. 21, No. 1,2006, p.44.
[33]《公约》第76(2)条。
[34]McDorman, “The Role of the Commission on theLimits of the Continental Shelf: A Technical Body in a Political World”,The International Journal of Marine and CoastalLaw, Vol. 17, No. 3, 2002, p. 309.
Alex G. Oude Elferink, “Openness and Article 76of the Law of the Sea Convention: The Process Does Not Need to Be Adjusted”, Ocean Development and International Law,Vol. 40, No. 1, 2009, p.38.
ILA, Berlin Conference (2004) - Legal Issues of the Outer ContinentalShelf, 2004, p. 22 .
[35]参见《公约》附件二第5-6条。另参见《议事规则》附件二第3(2)-(3)、4(1)-(3)条。另参见《议事规则》附件三第2(b)、3-4、5(1)-(2)、8、11条。
Edwin Egede, “Submission of Brazil and Article76 of the Law of the Sea Convention 1982”, TheInternational Journal of Marine and Coastal Law,Vol. 21, No. 1,2006, pp. 50-51.
[36] Oude Elferink, “The Continental Shelf Beyond200 Nautical Miles: The Relationship between the CLCS and Third Party DisputeSettlement”, in Alex G. Oude Elferink and Donald R. Rothwell (eds.), Ocean Management in the 21stCentury: Institutional Frameworks and Responses, 2004, MartinusNijhoff Publishers, p.121 .
[37]《维也纳条约法公约》第26条。另参见《公约》第300条。
Aldo Chircop,“Managing Adjacency: Some LegalAspects of the Relationship Between the Extended Continental Shelf and theInternational Seabed Area”, OceanDevelopment and International Law, Vol. 42, No. 4, 2011, p. 308.
[38]McDorman, “The Role of the Commission on theLimits of the Continental Shelf: A Technical Body in a Political World”, TheInternational Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, Vol. 17, No. 3,2002, pp. 308,324.
[39]《公约》第1(1)(1)条。另参见McDorman, “The Continental Shelf”, in Rothwell,Oude Elferink, Scott, and Stephens (eds), TheOxford Handbook of the Law of the Sea, 2017, Oxford UniversityPress, p.190.
[40]《公约》第187(a)-(b)条。
Delimitation of the MaritimeBoundary in the Bay of Bengal (Bangladesh/Myanmar) (Judgment) [2012] ITLOSReport 4, para. 407.
McDorman, “The Continental Shelf”, in Rothwell,Oude Elferink, Scott, and Stephens (eds), TheOxford Handbook of the Law of the Sea, 2017, Oxford UniversityPress, p.192.
[41]《公约》第136条。
[42]《公约》第137(2)条。
[43]《公约》第137(1)条。
[44]《公约》第137(2)条。
[45]《公约》第187(b)(i)条。
[46]《公约》第187(b)(i)条。
[47] Ron Macnab, “The Case for Transparency in theDelimitation of the Outer Continental Shelf in Accordance with UNCLOS Article76”, Ocean Development andInternational Law, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2004, pp. 1,11.
Oude Elferink, “The Continental Shelf Beyond200 Nautical Miles: The Relationship between the CLCS and Third Party DisputeSettlement”, in Alex G. Oude Elferink and Donald R. Rothwell (eds.), Ocean Management in the 21stCentury: Institutional Frameworks and Responses, 2004, MartinusNijhoff Publishers, pp.110-112.
McDorman, “The Entry into Force of the 1982 LOSConvention and Article 76 Outer Continental Shelf Regime”, InternationalJournal of Marine and Coastal Law, Vol. 10, No. 2, 1995, p.178.
McDorman, “The Role of the Commission on theLimits of the Continental Shelf: A Technical Body in a Political World”, The International Journal of Marine and CoastalLaw, Vol. 17, No. 3, 2002, p. 319.
Aldo Chircop,“Managing Adjacency: Some LegalAspects of the Relationship Between the Extended Continental Shelf and theInternational Seabed Area”, OceanDevelopment and International Law,Vol. 42, No. 4, 2011, p.308.
Øystein Jensen, “The Commission on the Limitsof the Continental Shelf: An Administrative, Scientific, or JudicialInstitution?”, Ocean Development andInternational Law, Vol. 45, No. 2, 2014, p.177.
[48] McDorman, “The Continental Shelf”, inRothwell, Oude Elferink, Scott, and Stephens (eds), The Oxford Handbook of the Law of the Sea, 2017, OxfordUniversity Press, p. 192.
ILA, Berlin Conference (2004) - Legal Issues of the Outer ContinentalShelf, 2004, p. 2.
[49] Ron Macnab, “The Case for Transparency in theDelimitation of the Outer Continental Shelf in Accordance with UNCLOS Article76”, Ocean Development andInternational Law, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2004, pp. 1, 11.
[50] Edwin Egede, “Submission of Brazil and Article76 of the Law of the Sea Convention 1982”, TheInternational Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, Vol. 21, No. 1,2006, p.50.
Ron Macnab, “The Case for Transparency in theDelimitation of the Outer Continental Shelf in Accordance with UNCLOS Article76”, Ocean Development andInternational Law, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2004, p. 9.
Huw Llewellyn, “The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf: JointSubmission by France, Ireland, Spain, and the United Kingdom”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly,Vol. 56, July 2007, p. 692.
[51] McDorman, “The Role of the Commission on theLimits of the Continental Shelf: A Technical Body in a Political World”, The International Journal of Marine and CoastalLaw, Vol. 17, No. 3, 2002, p.320 .
McDorman, “The Continental Shelf”, in Rothwell,Oude Elferink, Scott, and Stephens (eds), TheOxford Handbook of the Law of the Sea, 2017, Oxford UniversityPress, p. 192.
[52] Aldo Chircop,“Managing Adjacency: Some LegalAspects of the Relationship Between the Extended Continental Shelf and theInternational Seabed Area”, OceanDevelopment and International Law, Vol. 42, No. 4, 2011, p. 308.
Oude Elferink, “The Continental Shelf Beyond200 Nautical Miles: The Relationship betweent the CLCS and Third Party DisputeSettlement”, in Alex G. Oude Elferink and Donald R. Rothwell (eds.), Ocean Management in the 21stCentury: Institutional Frameworks and Responses, 2004, MatinusNijhoff Publishers, pp. 119-120.
[53] McDorman, “The Continental Shelf”, inRothwell, Oude Elferink, Scott, and Stephens (eds), The Oxford Handbook of the Law of the Sea, 2017, OxfordUniversity Press, pp.191-192 .
[54] Clive Symmons, “The Irish Partial Submissionto the CLCS in 2005: A Precedent for Future Such Submissions in the Light ofthe ‘Disputed Areas’ Procedures of the Commission”, Ocean Development and International Law, Vol. 37, 2006,pp. 303, 308 .
[55]《公约》附件二，第9条。
[56]《议事规则》附件一第5(b)条。
[57]《议事规则》附件一第1条。
McDorman, “The Continental Shelf”, in Rothwell,Oude Elferink, Scott, and Stephens (eds), TheOxford Handbook of the Law of the Sea, 2017, Oxford UniversityPress, p.196.
Alex G. Oude Elferink, “Openness and Article 76of the Law of the Sea Convention: The Process Does Not Need to Be Adjusted”, Ocean Development and International Law,Vol. 40, No. 1, 2009, p.39.
[58] Edwin Egede, “Submission of Brazil and Article76 of the Law of the Sea Convention 1982”, TheInternational Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, Vol. 21, No. 1,2006, p. 40.
[59] Edwin Egede, “Submission of Brazil and Article76 of the Law of the Sea Convention 1982”, TheInternational Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, Vol. 21, No. 1,2006, p. 38.
[60]《议事规则》附件一第5(a)条。
[61] Oude Elferink, “The Continental Shelf Beyond200 Nautical Miles: The Relationship betweent the CLCS and Third Party DisputeSettlement”, in Alex G. Oude Elferink and Donald R. Rothwell (eds.), Ocean Management in the 21stCentury: Institutional Frameworks and Responses, 2004, MartinusNijhoff Publishers, p. 114.
[62] Edwin Egede, “Submission of Brazil and Article76 of the Law of the Sea Convention 1982”, TheInternational Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, Vol. 21, No. 1,2006, pp. 38-39.
[63] CLCS, “Statement by the Chairman of the CLCSon the Progress of Work in the Commission”, CLCS/42 (September14, 2004), para. 17,
https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N04/510/12/PDF/N0451012.pdf?OpenElement.访问日期：2018年12月11日。
Alexandre Pereira da Silva, “Dealing withArticles 76 and 82 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea:Legal and Political Challenges for Brazil”, OceanYearbook, Vol. 28, 2014, pp.160-161.
Oude Elferink, “The Continental Shelf Beyond200 Nautical Miles: The Relationship betweent the CLCS and Third Party DisputeSettlement”, in Alex G. Oude Elferink and Donald R. Rothwell (eds.), Ocean Management in the 21stCentury: Institutional Frameworks and Responses, 2004, MartinusNijhoff Publishers, p.113.
[64]参见《议事规则》附件一第2(b)、4(b)、6条。
Clive Symmons, “The Irish Partial Submission tothe CLCS in 2005: A Precedent for Future Such Submissions in the Light of the‘Disputed Areas’ Procedures of the Commission”, Ocean Development and International Law, Vol. 37, 2006, p.306.
Huw Llewellyn, “The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf: JointSubmission by France, Ireland, Spain, and the United Kingdom”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly,Vol. 56, July 2007, p. 683.
[65] Clive Symmons, “The Irish Partial Submissionto the CLCS in 2005: A Precedent for Future Such Submissions in the Light ofthe ‘Disputed Areas’ Procedures of the Commission”, Ocean Development and International Law, Vol. 37, 2006,pp. 308, 310.
[66] Edwin Egede, “Submission of Brazil and Article76 of the Law of the Sea Convention 1982”, TheInternational Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, Vol. 21, No. 1,2006, pp. 39, 41.
[67]《公约》第121条（岛屿制度）规定：“1、岛屿是四面环水并在高潮时高于水面的自然形成的陆地区域。2、除第3款另有规定外，岛屿的领海、毗连区、专属经济区和大陆架应按照本公约适用于其他陆地领土的规定加以确定。3、不能维持人类居住或其本身的经济生活的岩礁，不应有专属经济区或大陆架。”
[68]中菲南海仲裁案的实体裁决对于《公约》第121(3)条作出解释。然而，许多知名的国际法学者不同意仲裁庭的解释。
参见Gerhard Hafner, “Some Remarks on the SouthChina Sea Award: Itu Aba versus Clipperton”, Chinese (Taiwan) Yearbook ofInternational Law and Affairs, Vol. 34, 2016, Brill, pp.1-19.
Yoshifumi Tanaka, “Reflections on theInterpretation and Application of Article 121(3) in the South China SeaArbitration (Merits),” Ocean Development and International Law, Vol. 48,No. 3-4, 2017, pp. 373 .
Yann-huei Song (2018) The July 2016 ArbitralAward, Interpretation of Article 121(3) of the UNCLOS, and Selecting Examplesof Inconsistent State Practices, Ocean Development & International Law,49:3, 247-261.
Alex G. Oude Elferink, “The South China SeaArbitration’s Interpretation of Article 121(3) of the LOSC: A DisquietingFirst”, in the JCLOS Blog, (September7, 2016),
site.uit.no/jclos/files/2016/09/The-South-China-Sea-Arbitrations-Interpretation-of-Article-1213-of-the-LOSC-A-Disquieting-First.pdf. 访问日期：2018年12月11日。
Joanna Mossop, “The South China Sea Arbitrationand New Zealand’s Maritime Claims”, in Victoria University of WellingtonLegal Research Papers (Paper No 9/2018) Vol. 8, Issue No 2, 2018, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3123313.
[69]参见两份中国的外交照会，以及两份韩国的外交照会，皆抗议日本使用冲之鸟礁所谓依据主张大陆架，同时参见日本回应的外交照会。http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/submission_jpn.htm访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[70]“... itshall not take action on the part of recommendations prepared by theSub-commission in relation to the area of Oki-no-Tori Shima, until theCommission decides to do so.”参见paragraph 26 of Chairman’s Statement (CLCS/64),24th session, New York, 10 August – 11 September 2009,athttps://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N09/536/21/PDF/N0953621.pdf?OpenElement.
[71]“Progress of Work in the CLCS- Statement by theChairperson” (CLCS/74) for the 29th session in New York, 19 March-27 April 2012, para. 19 in page 5. https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N12/326/32/PDF/N1232632.pdf?OpenElement访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[72] Section 4 (Relevant Maritime Delimitations) ofthe Executive Summary of Japan’s Submission, page 8, http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/jpn08/jpn_execsummary.pdf访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[73] China’s communication dated on 6 February 2009，http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/jpn08/chn_6feb09_e.pdf. 访问日期：2018年12月11日。
Korea’scommunication dated on 27 February 2009,
http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/jpn08/kor_27feb09.pdf. 访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[74] Paragraph 54 of Chairman’s Statement(CLCS/62), 23rd session, New York, 2 March – 9 April2009, https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N09/307/58/PDF/N0930758.pdf?OpenElement. 访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[75]Section 4 (Relevant Maritime Delimitations) ofthe Executive Summary of Japan’s Submission, page 8, http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/jpn08/jpn_execsummary.pdf. 访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[76] Paragraph 54 of Chairman’s Statement(CLCS/62), 23rd session, New York, 2 March – 9 April2009, https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N09/307/58/PDF/N0930758.pdf?OpenElement. 访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[77] Paragraphs 14 of Chairperson’s Statement(CLCS/72), 28th session, New York, 1 August - 9September 2011 https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N11/501/39/PDF/N1150139.pdf?OpenElement访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[78]《议事规则》附件一的标题是“Submissions in case of a dispute betweenStates with opposite or adjacent coasts or in other cases of unresolved land ormaritime disputes”。
[79]“Progress of Work in the CLCS - Statement bythe Chairperson” (CLCS/74) for the 29th session in New York, 19 March-27 April 2012, para. 19 in page 5. https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N12/326/32/PDF/N1232632.pdf?OpenElement访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[80]参见《议事规则》附件一第1条。
[81]“Progress of Work in the CLCS- Statement by theChairperson” (CLCS/74) for the 29th session in New York, 19 March-27 April 2012, para. 19 in page 5. https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N12/326/32/PDF/N1232632.pdf?OpenElement访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[82] ILA, Berlin Conference (2004) - Legal Issues of theOuter Continental Shelf, 2004, p.10.
[83] Oude Elferink, “The Continental Shelf Beyond200 Nautical Miles: The Relationship betweent the CLCS and Third Party DisputeSettlement”, in Alex G. Oude Elferink and Donald R. Rothwell (eds.), Ocean Management in the 21stCentury: Institutional Frameworks and Responses, 2004, MartinusNijhoff Publishers, p.121.
[84] United Nations Seabed Committee,A/AC.138/SR.57, p. 167, 转引自Jia Yu and Wu Ji-Lu, “The Outer ContinentalShelf of Coastal States and the Common Heritage of Mankind”, Ocean Development and International Law,Vol. 42, No. 4, 2011, p. 321.
[85] Paragraph 54 of Chairman’s Statement(CLCS/62), 23rd session, New York, 2 March – 9 April2009, https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N09/307/58/PDF/N0930758.pdf?OpenElement.访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[86] Oude Elferink, “The Continental Shelf Beyond200 Nautical Miles: The Relationship betweent the CLCS and Third Party DisputeSettlement”, in Alex G. Oude Elferink and Donald R. Rothwell (eds.), Ocean Management in the 21stCentury: Institutional Frameworks and Responses, 2004, MartinusNijhoff Publishers, p.113 .
McDorman, “The Entry into Force of the 1982 LOSConvention and Article 76 Outer Continental Shelf Regime”, InternationalJournal of Marine and Coastal Law, Vol. 10, No. 2, 1995, p.177.
McDorman, “The Role of the Commission on theLimits of the Continental Shelf: A Technical Body in a Political World”, The International Journal of Marine and CoastalLaw, Vol. 17, No. 3, 2002, p. 312.
Huw Llewellyn, “The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf: JointSubmission by France, Ireland, Spain, and the United Kingdom”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly,Vol. 56, July 2007, p. 682.
[87] “Statement by the Chairman of the CLCS on theProgress of Work in the Commission” (CLCS/64) for the 24th session in New York,10 August - 11 September 2009, para. 106 in page22. https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N09/536/21/PDF/N0953621.pdf?OpenElement访问日期：2018年12月11日。.
[88] “Progress of Work in the CLCS- Statement bythe Chairperson” (CLCS/74) for the 29th session in New York, 19 March-27 April 2012, para. 19 in page 5. https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N12/326/32/PDF/N1232632.pdf?OpenElement访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[89]参见《议事规则》附件一，第5(a)条。
[90] IanBrownlie, Principles of Public International Law,Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 2008,pp123-162.
[91] Paragraph 59 of Chairman’s Statement(CLCS/62), 23rd session, New York, 2 March–9 April 2009,https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N09/307/58/PDF/N0930758.pdf?OpenElement访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[92] Michael Sheng-ti Gau, “Recent Decisions by theCommission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf on Japan’s Submission forOuter Continental Shelf”, Chinese Journal of International Law, Vol. 11, 2012, , pp.501-502.
[93] Paragraphs 24-25 of Chairman’s Statement(CLCS/64), 24th session, New York, 10 August – 11September 2009, https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N09/536/21/PDF/N0953621.pdf?OpenElement访问日期：2018年12月11日。
Oude Elferink, “The Continental Shelf Beyond200 Nautical Miles: The Relationship betweent the CLCS and Third Party DisputeSettlement”, in Alex G. Oude Elferink and Donald R. Rothwell (eds.), Ocean Management in the 21stCentury: Institutional Frameworks and Responses, 2004, MartinusNijhoff Publishers, p. 111.
Huw Llewellyn, “The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf: JointSubmission by France, Ireland, Spain, and the United Kingdom”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly,Vol. 56, July 2007, pp.683, 692.
Dispute Concerning Delimitation of the MaritimeBoundary Between Bangladesh and Myanmar in the Bay of Bengal(Bangladesh/Myanmar), Judgment, 14 March 2012, para. 411.
[94]《维也纳条约法公约》第31(1)-(2)条规定：“1. 条约应依其用语按其上下文并参照条约之目的及宗旨所具有之通常意义，善意解释之。2. 就解释条约而言，上下文除指连同弁言及附件在内之约文外，并应包括...”。
Oude Elferink, “The Continental Shelf Beyond200 Nautical Miles: The Relationship between the CLCS and Third Party DisputeSettlement”, in Alex G. Oude Elferink and Donald R. Rothwell (eds.), Ocean Management in the 21stCentury: Institutional Frameworks and Responses, 2004, MatinusNijhoff Publishers, pp. 122-123.
[95]《公约》第76(1)条规定：“沿海国的大陆架包括其领海以外依其陆地领土的全部自然延伸，扩展到大陆边外缘的海底区域的海床和底土，如果从测算领海宽度的基线量起到大陆边的外缘的距离不到二百海里，则扩展到二百海里的距离。”。
[96] Huw Llewellyn, “The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf: JointSubmission by France, Ireland, Spain, and the United Kingdom”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly,Vol. 56, July 2007, pp.681, 687.
[97]参见《议事规则》附件一第5(a)条。
[98]《公约》第60(8)条规定：“人工岛屿、设施和结构不具有岛屿地位。它们没有自己的领海，其存在也不影响领海、专属经济区或大陆架界限的划定。”。
[99] Michael Sheng-ti Gau, “Recent Decisions by theCommission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf on Japan’s Submission forOuter Continental Shelf”, Chinese Journal of International Law, Vol. 11, 2012,pp.501-502.
ILA, Berlin Conference (2004) - Legal Issues of the Outer ContinentalShelf, 2004, pp. 2-3, 5-6.
[100]日本划界案当中的ODR海域的部分，参见Executive Summary of Japan’s Submission to theCLCS, Figures 1.1 and 6.6, pp. 6, 21.
http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/jpn08/jpn_execsummary.pdf.
关于委员会建议中，涉及ODR海域的部分，参见Figure 20, 标题为 “Bathymetric map showing outer edge formulalines in the Southern Oki-Daito Ridge”. 参见“SummaryofRecommendationsof The CLCSin Regardtothe SubmissionMadeby Japanon 12 November 2008”, Figure 27,entitled“Bathymetric map showing outer edge formula lines in the Shikoku BasinRegion”,
http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/jpn08/com_sumrec_jpn_fin.pdf访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[101]日本划界案当中的SKB海域，参见Executive Summary of Japan’s Submission to theCLCS, Figures 1.1及 6.7，第6、23页，
http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/jpn08/jpn_execsummary.pdf访问日期：2018年12月11日。
关于《建议》涉及SKB海域的部分，
“SummaryofRecommendationsof The CLCSin Regardtothe SubmissionMadeby Japanon 12 November 2008”, Figure 27,entitled“Bathymetric map showing outer edge formula lines in the Shikoku BasinRegion”,
http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/jpn08/com_sumrec_jpn_fin.pdf访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[102]日本内阁政令第302号，系由日本内阁会议通过于2014年9月9日，生效于该年10月1日，http://elaws.e-gov.go.jp/search/elawsSearch/elaws_search/lsg0500/detail?lawId=426CO0000000302访问日期：2018年12月11日。.
[103]“SummaryofRecommendationsof The CLCSin Regardtothe SubmissionMadeby Japanon 12 November2008”, Figure 27, entitled“Bathymetric map showing outer edge formulalines in the Shikoku Basin Region”,
http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/jpn08/com_sumrec_jpn_fin.pdf访问日期：2018年12月11日。。
[104]日本内阁政令第302号，系由日本内阁会议通过于2014年9月9日，生效于该年10月1日，http://elaws.e-gov.go.jp/search/elawsSearch/elaws_search/lsg0500/detail?lawId=426CO0000000302访问日期：2018年12月11日。.
[105]参见Figure 27，
“SummaryofRecommendationsof The CLCSin Regardtothe SubmissionMadeby Japanon 12 November 2008”, Figure 27, entitled“Bathymetricmap showing outer edge formula lines in the Shikoku Basin Region”,
http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/jpn08/com_sumrec_jpn_fin.pdf访问日期：2018年12月11日。
北纬24.5度，并未被Figure 27所明示。这是方银霞博士计算出来的结果。可以确定的是，委员会对于SKB海域的建议，最南端的界限，跟冲之鸟礁200海里外部界限不同。请比较Figures 1.1以及6.7。参见 Executive Summary of Japan’s Submission to theCLCS，同Figures 1.1及 6.7，第6、23页，下载自http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/jpn08/jpn_execsummary.pdf，第6、23页。访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[106] Jon Van Dyke, Speck in the Ocean Meets Law of the Sea, New York Times, January 21, 1988,p. A26, https://www.nytimes.com/1988/01/21/opinion/l-speck-in-the-ocean-meets-law-of-the-sea-406488.html.访问日期：2018年12月11日。
[107] [1951] I.C.J. Reports, 132.
[108] Alex G. Oude Elferink, “’openness’ and Article76 of the Law of the Sea Convention: The Process Does Not Need to Be Adjusted”,Ocean Development and InternationalLaw, Vol. 40, No. 1, 2009, p.38.
[109]《公约》第1(1)(1)条。
[110]《公约》第137(1)条。
[111]《公约》第134(4)条。