口译材料：外交部例行记者会-18

Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying's Regular Press Conference on April 29, 2016

外交部发言人华春莹主持例行记者会(2016年4月29日)

At the invitation of Italian Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation Paolo Gentiloni, Foreign Minister Wang Yi will pay an official visit to Italy and attend the 7th joint meeting of the China-Italy Governmental Committee from May 4 to 5.

应意大利外交与国际合作部长保罗·真蒂洛尼邀请，外交部长王毅将于5月4日至5日对意大利进行正式访问并出席中意政府委员会第七次联席会议。

Q: Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida said yesterday that the Japanese side has lodged a protest with Taipei for not recognizing waters off Okinotori as Japan's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). He said that Okinotori's status as an island has been established under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Japan cannot accept Taiwan's position. What is China's comment?

问：日本外相岸田文雄28日称，日方已就台湾当局不承认冲之鸟礁海域是日专属经济区向台方提出抗议。根据《联合国海洋法公约》，冲之鸟礁的岛屿地位已确立，日无法接受台方主张。中方对此有何评论?

A: Okinotori is an isolated rock in the West Pacific far away from the homeland of Japan. As prescribed in the UNCLOS, rocks like Okinotori which cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own shall have no exclusive economic zone nor continental shelf. In April, 2012, the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf gave its recommendations in regard to the submission made by Japan on the limits of its outer continental shelf,not recognizing Japan's claim of an outer continental shelf based on Okinotori. Japan has violated the UNCLOS by categorizing Okinotori as "island" for the purpose of claiming for EEZ and continental shelf based on that. China does not recognize the illegal assertion by Japan.

答：冲之鸟礁是西太平洋上远离日本国土的孤立岩礁。根据《联合国海洋法公约》有关条款，冲之鸟礁是不能维持人类居住或其本身的经济生活的岩礁，无权主张专属经济区和大陆架。2012年4月，大陆架界限委员会对日本外大陆架划界案作出建议，不认可日本依据冲之鸟礁主张外大陆架。日本自行将冲之鸟礁认定为“岛屿”，并据此主张专属经济区和大陆架，违背《联合国海洋法公约》。中国对日本非法主张不予承认。

Q: US Secretary of State John Kerry and White House National Security Council spokesperson Ned Price expressed concerns about the NPC's adoption of the foreign NGO management law. What is China's comment?

问：4月28日，美国国务卿克里、白宫国安会发言人普莱斯就中国全国人大日前审议通过的《境外非政府组织境内活动管理法》表达关切。中方对此有何评论?

A: The NPC Standing Committee deliberated and passed the foreign NGO management law, meeting China's requirement of pursuing law-based state governance and building a country under the rule of law. It is also an important measure which will guide and regulate foreign NGOs in China and safeguard their lawful rights and interests. While making the law, China has solicited opinions from all sectors both in and outside China, and amended some provisions in the law accordingly. Different countries have different practices in managing and serving foreign NGOs, as their national conditions vary. Only when it meets the national conditions and realities in China, can the relevant legislation play its due role. It is hoped that relevant countries would respect China's legislative sovereignty, and view the legislation in a positive and objective manner.

答：中国全国人大常委会审议通过《境外非政府组织境内活动管理法》，是中国全面推进依法治国、建设法治国家的客观要求，也是引导和规范境外非政府组织在中国境内的活动、保障其合法权益的一项重要举措。中方在立法过程中充分征求了国内外各方面意见建议，并对相关条款作出了修改。我想强调，各国国情不同，对境外非政府组织管理和服务的实际做法不同。相关立法必须符合中国国情和管理实际，才能真正发挥实效。希望有关国家尊重中国立法主权，积极、客观看待中国相关立法。

Q: Will Foreign Minister Wang Yi and Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida jointly meet the press after their talks tomorrow?

问：王毅外长明天与日本外相岸田文雄会谈后是否有共见记者的安排?

A: The two foreign ministers will hold talks tomorrow morning. I have not heard about any arrangement for their joint meeting with the press. We will release the information about their talks in a timely fashion.

答：30日上午，王毅外长将与岸田文雄外相举行会谈。据我了解，目前没有共见记者的安排。会谈有关消息我们会及时发布。

Q: US Deputy Secretary of State Antony Blinken said on April 28 that China cannot have it both ways by being a party to the UNCLOS but rejecting its provisions, including the binding nature of any arbitration decision. What is your response?

问：美国常务副国务卿布林肯28日称，中国不能一方面作为《联合国海洋法公约》缔约国，一方面拒绝公约条款，不承认仲裁决定的约束性质。你对此有何评论?

A: I cannot but say with regret that Mr. Blinken is either knowing nothing about the nature of relevant disputes over the South China Sea and what is said in the UNCLOS or labeling China at will.

答：我不得不遗憾地说，布林肯先生要么是真的不了解有关南海争议的实质以及《联合国海洋法公约》的内容，要么是故意给中国乱扣帽子。

China has stated clearly its principled position on the relevant issue on multiple occasions. I would like to reiterate the following points.

中方已多次就有关问题表明有关原则立场。我愿再重申几点：

First, the nature of the South China Sea issue is territorial dispute over islands and reefs and demarcation dispute over relevant waters. However the Philippine side disguises its claim, it cannot cover up its real intention of negating China's territorial sovereignty over relevant islands and reefs in the South China Sea as well as China's maritime rights and interests. When it comes to issues relating to territorial sovereignty, no country in the world will accept a solution imposed on it by a third party dispute settlement mechanism not of its own choice.

一、南海问题实质是岛礁领土争端和有关海域划界争端。不论菲方对其诉求如何包装，其真实意图都是要否定中国对南海有关岛礁的领土主权和相关海洋权利。对这样涉及国家领土主权的问题，世界上没有任何国家会接受一个并非其自愿选择的第三方机制强加的解决方案。

Second, the UNCLOS has nothing to do with issues concerning territorial sovereignty. As for issues on maritime demarcation, the UNCLOS allows optional exceptions to applicability of compulsory dispute settlement proceedings such as compulsory arbitration. China made a declaration in 2006, excluding disputes concerning maritime delimitation from arbitral proceedings. More than 30 other countries have made similar declarations as well. This kind of declaration has become an indispensible part of UNCLOS dispute settlement proceedings, binding on all state parties.

二、《联合国海洋法公约》根本不涉及领土主权问题，而对于海域划界问题，《公约》允许缔约国排除适用强制仲裁等强制争端解决程序。中国已于2006年作出声明，明确将海域划界等问题排除适用强制程序。另有30多个国家也作出了类似声明。此类声明构成《公约》争端解决程序不可或缺的组成部分，对《公约》所有缔约国都具有法律效力。

Therefore, what the Philippines submitted are not suitable for compulsory arbitration at all. And there is no basis for the formation of the arbitral tribunal. How can it be binding, if the ruling is given by an institution that obviously has no jurisdiction? By not accepting nor participating in the arbitration, China is upholding the sanctity of international law, including that of the UNCLOS, and opposing the abuse of law. If some country or some people say that non-acceptance of the so-called arbitration means violating international law, then it reveals their ignorance of international law. If they keep making an issue of it, their hidden motives are nowhere to hide.

因此，菲律宾的那些所谓诉求，根本不是可以提交强制仲裁的争端，仲裁庭的组建也根本没有依据。对于一个明显没有管辖权的机构作出的裁决，其约束力从何而来?中方不接受、不参与仲裁，正是为了维护包括《公约》在内的国际法的严肃性，反对滥用。而某些国家、某些人表示，不承认、不接受所谓仲裁就是违反国际法，这种说法本身就是不懂国际法的表现。刻意炒作，更是别有用心。

Third, the US is not a state party to the UNCLOS. It neglects the nature of the arbitration case initiated by the Philippines, ignores the fact that the arbitral tribunal acts beyond its authority, selectively forgets what it used to do with international rulings and indulges in talks about the binding nature of arbitral rulings. I think everybody knows well what is really on its mind.

三、美国作为《公约》的非缔约国，无视菲律宾所提南海仲裁案的本质，无视仲裁庭越权裁判的事实，也选择性地忘记自己以往对待国际裁决的做法，奢谈什么仲裁庭裁决的约束性质，真实目的是什么?恐怕大家都很清楚。

Last but not least, the US who is yet to join the UNCLOS took a preemptive move in 1979 before the signing of the UNCLOS and put forward the so-called "freedom of navigation operations" to contend with international law. It makes and dominates the American-style maritime order outside the framework of the UNCLOS, which is nothing but the logic and practice of hegemony. It is an open secret that the US abides by international law only when the law meets its interests. In this connection, the US is in no position to make critical remarks against China.

此外,美国不仅迄今没有加入《公约》，反而在1979年《公约》签订前抢先推出所谓“航行自由计划”，以对抗国际法，在《公约》框架外制订和主导美式海洋秩序，这是赤裸裸的霸权逻辑、霸权行为。美国对国际法合则用，不合则弃，这已是世人皆知的秘密。在这一问题上，美国没有资格对中国说三道四。