<P> Philippine Justice Antonio T. Carpio states that the case is solely a maritime dispute, and not territorial in nature . The Philippines seeks clarification from the tribunal as to whether China's 9 - dashed line can negate the Philippines' Exclusive Economic Zone as guaranteed under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), of which China is a signatory . As part of the case, the Philippines also seeks clarification on whether rocks barely (1.8 meter) above water at high tide, (such as Scarborough Shoal), generate a 200 - nautical - mile (370 km; 230 mi) EEZ, or only a 12 - nautical - mile (22 km; 14 mi) territorial sea . Clarification of whether China can appropriate low - tide elevations, such as the Mischief Reef and the Subi Reef within the Philippines' EEZ, have also been included in the case . "The Philippines is not asking the tribunal to delimit by nautical measurements overlapping EEZs between China and the Philippines . The Philippines is also not asking the tribunal what country has sovereignty over an island, or rock above water at high tide, in the West Philippine Sea ." </P> <P> According to a PCA press release on 12 July 2016 "(The) Tribunal concluded that, as between the Philippines and China, there was no legal basis for China to claim historic rights to resources, in excess of the rights provided for by the Convention, within the sea areas falling within the' nine - dash line'," </P> <P> On 22 July 1992, ASEAN issued a declaration on the South China Sea, emphasising that the dispute should be solved peacefully without resorting to violence . </P> <P> Following a 1995 dispute between the PRC and the Philippines, an ASEAN - brokered agreement was reached between the PRC and ASEAN member nations whereby one country would inform the other of any military movement within the disputed territory, and that there would be no further construction . </P>

Where does commercial fishing take place according to the map