LEGAL IMPLICATIONS AND DECISIONS IN SOUTH CHINS SEA DISPUTES WITH SURROUNDING COUNTRIES

The 1982 Law of the Sea Convention is very important because in addition to reflecting the results of the international community's efforts to codify existing international law provisions, it also describes a progressive development in international law. This 1982 Law of the Sea Convention has an effect on economic life, especially for countries that get additional sea areas. This can happen because the potential sources of marine wealth that exist can be utilized from an economic point of view by the countries that are around them. To be able to secure and control its sea, and prevent other countries from exploiting or destroying it, that country can use sea power. The concept of sea power was introduced by Mahan, where Mahan stated the need for six basic elements to build a great sea power, namely namely a government area that has a population, population characteristics, area, physical form and geographical area. A country conducts security and control of the sea because whoever controls the sea will rule the world

territory is a basic source of identity both for state and for the people who live there". If a dispute has occurred, international law plays no small role in its resolution.
The role played by international law in the resolution of international disputes is to provide a way for the disputing parties to resolve their disputes according to international law. In its initial development, international law recognized two ways of settlement, namely peaceful settlement and war. What is meant by Discussing international disputes is an activity that discusses a situation where two countries have different understandings and views that are contrary to what is implemented or at least the obligations contained in international agreements. Therefore, a dispute is not only part of a general dispute but is part of international law through its resolution has no effect on the relationship between the two parties. This research will focus through the process of peaceful settlement of international disputes.
So every country is obliged to settle international disputes peacefully in accordance with article 2 paragraph (3) of the United Nations Charter which reads: "All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered. ". The obligations contained in this article are not seen as passive obligations. This obligation is fulfilled if the country concerned refrains from using violence or threats of violence. This article requires states to actively and in good faith resolve their disputes peacefully commensurate with international peace and security and justice does not threatened.
Further regulation regarding the obligation to settle international disputes peacefully is seen in Article 33 paragraph (1) of the United Nations Charter which reads: "The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice".
In international law there are universally applicable principles regarding the peaceful settlement of disputes. This through these principles can be seen the Declaration of Principles of International Law relating to Friendly Relations and Cooperation with States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations. These principles are: From the provisions of Based on Article 33 paragraph (1) of the United Nations Charter, it appears that arbitration is a method of resolving international disputes that has been recognized by the United Nations. international community. Even if history is drawn, arbitration is the first mechanism and is the forerunner of the emergence of a permanent court mechanism.
The term arbitration comes from the words arbitrare (Latin), arbitrage (Dutch/French), arbitration (English), and schiedspruch (Germany), which means the power to settle something according to wisdom or peace through an arbitrator or referee.
The role of arbitration in resolving national and international disputes is currently increasing.
The role of arbitration here is no longer solely limited by the parties, namely traders, but also resolves disputes between countries, individuals, and companies. Arbitration is a legal action in which a party submits a dispute or difference of opinion between two people (or more) or two groups (or more) to one or several experts mutually agreed upon with the aim of obtaining a final and binding decision.
Arbitration has a definition as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism which is a form of legal action recognized by law where one or more parties submit their dispute with one or more other parties to one arbitrator or more professional experts, who will act as judges. a private court that will apply the applicable state legal procedures or apply the peace law procedures that have been mutually agreed upon by the parties previously to arrive at a final and binding decision. One of the advantages of arbitration lies in the nature of the award where the arbitration award is final Finally, arbitration agreements are relatively more flexible, in contrast to most court procedures".
international policy related to Arbitration, the mechanism or method of international dispute resolution is decided by a third party called an arbitrator. In deciding disputes, the arbitrator plays an important role in seeking a win-win solution. In an effort to seek a win-win solution, this is reflected in the noble purpose of arbitration, namely seeking peace between the parties. With the creation of peace, it will avoid feelings of hostility towards the parties. This emphasis on peace resulted in the theory of the law of peace. If the arbitration used is international arbitration, then this legal theory can be called the legal theory of world peace. The theory of peace is reflected in the will of the creator contained in every holy book of religions, namely the creation of peace in the world.
International arbitration has a narrow definition and a broad definition. International arbitration in a narrow sense is arbitration as a dispute resolution institution that specifically handles and resolves disputes in the trade sector. Arbitration in this sense is arbitration whose arrangements are subject to arrangements under the United Nations Commission International Trade Law (UNCITRAL). Meanwhile, international arbitration in a broad sense is arbitration as a dispute resolution institution to resolve all disputes as stated in in accordance with article 33 paragraph (1)  focuses on the category of international arbitration in a broad sense. This public international arbitration body is an alternative dispute resolution through a third party (arbitration body) appointed and agreed upon by the parties (state) voluntarily to decide disputes that are not civil in nature and the decision is final and binding. Settlement through arbitration can be reached in several ways, namely settlement by an arbitrator in an institutionalized manner or to an ad hoc arbitration body (temporary). An institutionalized arbitration body is an arbitration body that has been established previously and has its procedural law. Meanwhile, What is meant by an ad hoc arbitration body is a body formed to deal with world issues and is trusted by the parties temporarily.. This temporary arbitration body ends its duties after a decision on a certain dispute is issued. Jurisdiction is an important issue in arbitration. With the existence of jurisdiction, an arbitration body cannot carry out its duties beyond the jurisdiction it has. If an arbitral tribunal does not have jurisdiction and continues to examine the dispute and make its decision, one of the parties may submit an application to challenge the arbitral award. Disputing the arbitral award may result in null and void. The legal consequences of the decision were deemed to have been nonexistent from the start. For international arbitral awards, the absence of jurisdiction may result in the award being unenforceable. Or a country may refuse or override an international arbitral award.
The jurisdiction of an arbitration body arises from the legal instrument that underlies the birth of the arbitration body or a legal instrument that provides a legal basis regarding any matters which are its legal authority to decide disputes; or agreement of the parties. International or national legal instruments are the main prerequisite for the birth of legal authority or arbitration jurisdiction.
Meanwhile, the agreement of the parties is also the root that determines the jurisdiction of the arbitration body. The objectives and issues to be resolved by the arbitral tribunal are also determined by the parties. Voluntary factors and mutual awareness are the basis for the validity of the arbitration agreement.
In this SCS dispute case, the PCA has jurisdiction to decide on the application submitted by the Philippines. This is emphasized in the decision on the SCS dispute case in paragraph 4 that: dispute have agreed in advance to an appellate procedure. It shall be complied with by the parties to the dispute". The article contains the phrase final and without appeal, which means that the arbitral award cannot be appealed, appealed, or reviewed. This means that there is no other legal remedy against the arbitral award that has been decided by the arbitration institution. Furthermore, from the article it can also be said that both the Philippines and China to always have an obligation to resolve disputes between countries peacefully by complying with the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention, the PCA's decision in SCS disputes is in good faith from the two disputing countries.
In addition, both the Philippines and China are parties to the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention in it. To have the principle of good faith which implies that the parties to the dispute must carry out the provisions of the international agreement in accordance with the content, spirit, intent and purpose of the agreement itself, respecting the rights and obligations of each party and third parties who may be given rights and or obligations and not take actions that can hinder efforts to achieve the aims and objectives of the agreement itself, either before it takes effect or when the parties are in the process of waiting for the multi-enactment of the agreement or also after the agreement comes into effect.
Especially for China which consistently refuses to recognize the PCA's decision, this can be rebutted by article 9 of Annex VII of the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention that: "If one of the parties to the dispute does not appear before the arbitral tribunal or fails to defend its case, the other party may request the tribunal to continue the proceedings and to make its award. Absence of a party or failure of a party to defend its case shall not constitute a bar to the proceedings. Before making its award, the arbitral tribunal must satisfy itself not only that it has jurisdiction over the dispute but also that the claim is well founded in fact and law".
From the article above, it is clear that the absence of one of the parties does not prevent the process of the arbitration as long as the arbitration concerned has jurisdiction to examine the dispute. In this case, the PCA has jurisdiction to examine SCS disputes.
A country, whether in dispute or not, has an obligation to comply with international law. To foster state compliance with international law, there are two alternatives given by Chayes. First, through an enforcement mechanism that applies many sanctions, such as economic sanctions, membership sanctions to unilateral sanctions. Against this first mechanism, Chayes has concluded that the implementation of this mechanism is ineffective, requires high costs, can lead to legitimacy problems and has many failures. The second alternative that Chayes offers is the management model, in which obedience is not driven by various violence or sanctions but through a model of cooperation in obedience, namely through the interaction process in justification, discourse and persuasion. Sovereignty can no longer be interpreted as free from external intervention, but becomes a freedom to conduct international relations as an international community. Thus the new sovereignty does not only consist of territorial control or government autonomy but also recognition of status as members of the nation's community. Obedience to international law is no longer merely a fear of sanctions but rather a concern about reducing status through loss of reputation as a good member of the community of nations.
Violation of a country against international law is a very serious negligence of a country. This act reduces the trust of countries in the country, especially in terms of entering into agreements with it at a later date. Violations like this can also be categorized as a violation of the principle of pacta sunt servanda in international law.
Therefore, regarding the PCA decision in the SCS dispute, China must need to respect the decision that has been determined because it has become a source of strength for international law.If a country obeys international law, the international community will feel order, order, justice and peace. On the other hand, if China remains consistent in refusing to comply with the PCA's decision and continues to be aggressive in the SCS region, regional instability will occur which could lead to open conflict.
Compliance with regard to dispute resolution was also one of the points of the decision put forward by the PCA, that: The PCA also found that none of the sea features claimed by China are capable of producing the so-called EEZ that gives the country sovereign rights to resources, such as fisheries, oil, and gas within 200 nautical miles. As a result, countries in the SCS region can find out how big their territorial claims are in the region. This ruling will also be useful and referenced by countries in practice as well as by future adjudicatory decisions.
Countries around the SCS region must be able to consistently support the importance of law enforcement and the use of peaceful means, not violence, in seeking resolution of maritime disputes. Due to the final and binding nature of the decision, the international community can encourage the Philippines and China to comply with the PCA ruling.

Conclusions
An international court decision is one of the sources of international law which of course must be obeyed and respected by the international community, especially the state as a subject of international law. Respect for and compliance with international law will lead to international order, order, justice and peace. This is no exception facing the South China Sea (SCS) dispute between the Philippines and China. Then the Permanent policy of the Arbitral Tribunal (PCA) as an institution that handles disputes has issued a decision. The nature of the decision which is final and binding must of course be respected and obeyed by the disputing parties. The decision related to the SCS dispute also has an impact on countries around the region because the PCA interprets the provisions of the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention proposed by the Philippines. The perceived impact is that it can weaken China's argument regarding the nine dash line and can be used by countries around the SCS region to reorganize their maritime claims.