Research On The Proving Power Of Map Evidence Of Diaoyu Island Sovereignty In China

In recent years,the dispute over sovereignty of the Diaoyu Islands has intensified.It is beyond doubt that China has the sovereignty of Diaoyu Islands since ancient times.In terms of the dispute over the sovereignty of the Diaoyu Islands,Japanese officials and academics successively put forward such doctrines as "the Theory of the affiliated islands and boundary of the Ryukyu Islands","the Theory of Prescription Acquisition","the Doctrine of Prohibition of Estoppels and Acquiescence","the Doctrine of Effective Rules" and "the Doctrine of No Ownership",which are obviously conflicting with international legal principles and are fallacies proposed by Japan in its attempt to steal.For the Diaoyu Island dispute,a large number of historical evidence clearly proves that its sovereignty belongs to China,and the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation confirm the return of the Diaoyu Island sovereignty to China.Our country has a large number of map evidence published by the parties and third parties to prove that the Diaoyu Islands have always been China's inherent territory.Dealing with territorial sovereignty disputes,the international judicial organizations have formed a set of rules to determine the proof power of the evidence submitted by the two parties.Specifically,relevant treaties or clear historical evidence signed between the parties to a dispute have decisive weight.For colonial countries,the lack of a valid treaty would give greater proof to the law of maintaining possession.Subsequently,the evidence of effective control should be considered.For maps submitted by both parties,except maps constituting an inseparable part of the territorial boundary or having the nature of estoppel,they are generally of supplementary proof value.The determination of the proof power of the above-mentioned map evidences is usually based on such factors as whether the map is officially drawn,its accuracy,its consistency with other maps,the application of the country concerned,its popularity,whether the map is used by an adversely affected party and whether it belongs to a map of non-self-interest.For the evidence of the Diaoyu Islands Map submitted by China and Japan,we should draw lessons from the International Court of Justice and the International Arbitration Tribunal to determine the magnitude of the map evidence,review and judge the map evidence advocated by both sides,and thus construct a map evidence chain of sovereignty over the Diaoyu Islands:With abundant historical materials,consistent knowledge,the highest credibility and the greatest proof,the earliest is the officially published map in China.The map published by the Japanese government after the key date has little proof power.The map published before the key date has certain proof power,and its proof power is less than the map evidence published by the Chinese government.The map of the Diaoyu Islands published by the third party belongs to the map evidence of China.Because of their neutral position,accuracy and consistency of cognition,they have certain proving power,and their proving power is less than the map evidence published by China and Japan.Compared with the first three types of map evidence,the private map evidence has the smallest proof power and can only plays a supplementary role.Thus,the chain of map evidence that has the sovereignty of the Diaoyu islands in China is constructed.In short,the map published by the Chinese government constitutes the first evidence link of the map evidence chain;the official map evidence published by the Japanese government is in the second evidence link;the map evidence published by the neutral third party is used as a "recognized view" for side evidence,constituting the third evidence link;and the map evidence drawn by the private sector is the fourth evidence link.