❤~眼見心不見~❤

。

---Contrary to the Philippine characterization, the GDX 28 did not ram its vessel and provoke the incident. 廣大興28號並未衝撞菲國公務船，亦未挑釁。菲國說法與事實不符。

---The Philippines used excessive force in carrying out law enforcement procedures, resulting in serious damage to the GDX 28, with 59 bullet holes found in the ship. Moreover, the Philippine vessel sailed away without offering assistance to the stricken boat, in violation of international law and a humanitarian duty. 菲國執法過程中過度使用武力，致廣大興28號嚴重受損，船體計有59處彈孔。此外，廣大興28號遭擊後，菲國公務船未提供受損船隻協助，逕自駛離，違反國 際法及人道責任。

---The attack was carried out by a vessel belonging to the government of the Philippines. 此攻擊事件乃菲國政府所屬之公務船所為。

II. PHILIPPINE "UNITENDED LOSS OF LIFE" CHARACTERIZATION UNACCEPTABLE 中華民國無法接受菲律賓指稱「非蓄意」殺害之說法

---The investigation of the shooting of the GDX 28, and the killing of crew member Hong Shi-cheng, is ongoing. Therefore, it is inappropriate for the Philippines to characterize Hong's death as "unintended." 槍擊廣大興28號致漁民洪石成先生亡故一事仍在調查中，菲方立即將洪石成先生之喪命定位為「非蓄意」，並不恰當。

「非蓄意的人命損失」，我方無法接受。

---The Philippine government vessel's shooting of an unarmed fishing boat is an unconscionable, cold-blooded act of violence. No claim of self-defense can justifiably be made by the Philippines. -菲國公務船槍擊無武裝漁船是過度、冷血的暴力行為，「自衛」之說法無法成立。

III. VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

---The Philippine claim that the incident occurred in its exclusive economic zone (EEZ) is unfounded. The incident occurred in the two countries' overlapping EEZs. -菲律賓宣稱事件發生在其專屬經濟海域內的說法毫無根據，該事件實則發生在兩國重疊專屬經濟海域內。

---The Philippine government vessel's excessive and unnecessary use of force in the overlapping EEZs violates international law and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Such behavior cannot be tolerated by the international community. 菲國公務船於兩國重疊專屬經濟海域非必要地過度使用武力，已違反國際法及聯合國海洋法公約，此一暴行絕無法見容於國際社會。

---The aforementioned Convention and relevant case law from the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea have laid out proper due process, that is, what actions may be taken by a state while enforcing the law in its EEZ. ---Paragraph 1 of Article 73 of the Convention states that these are limited to boarding, inspection, arrest, and judicial proceedings. 聯合國海洋法公約及國際海洋法仲裁法庭之有關判例已明列正當程序，指出一國在其專屬經濟海域執法時所能採取之作為。

---Paragraph 3 of that same Article states that coastal states may not undertake corporal punishment, of which killing is the most extreme type. Shooting and killing are not allowed under any circumstances. 聯合國海洋法公約第73條第3項規定，沿海國不能採取傷害人身的手段，而致人於死更為最極端之處置。在任何情況下，絕不允許槍擊與殺害。

IV. EXCESSIVE USE OF FORCE

---That law enforcement personnel on the Philippine government vessel opened fire with automatic weapons on an unarmed fishing vessel that was not provoking it is an unacceptable act of violence. 菲律賓公務船執法人員以自動武器向未挑釁之我國籍無武裝漁船開火，這是令人無法接受的暴行。

---The attack and the killing of Mr. Hong are not in keeping with principles of proportionality. 該起攻擊漁船及殺害洪石成先生的事件不符合「比例原則」。

V. COMPENSATION

---As the attack was made by a Philippine government vessel, the government of the Philippines is responsible for the death of Mr. Hong. A public commitment to state compensation must be made by the Philippine government. 由於該起攻擊事件係菲律賓公務船所為，因此菲國政府應為洪石成先生的喪命負起責任。菲國政府必須公開承諾提供國家賠償。

---To date, the Philippine government has only expressed a willingness to offer "donations from its citizens" to the victim's family. It has not spoken of accepting full responsibility and providing official compensation. 菲國政府迄今僅表達願對罹難者家屬提供「菲國人民捐贈之慰問金」，並未提及將負起全部責任及提供官方賠償。

VI. CLAIMS OF RAMMING UNFOUNDED

---ROC inspection of the Guang Da Xing No. 28 (G.D.X. 28) has found no evidence of ramming, claimed by the Philippines as their reasoning for shooting in self-defense. The Philippine government vessel involved is some six times the size of the G.D.X. 28, and thus that such an action would have occurred is scarcely conceivable. 中華民國勘驗廣大興28號未發現菲律賓所稱該船衝撞、導致菲方開槍自衛之事證。菲方公務船船隻總重約較廣大興28號大6倍，故指稱該漁船意圖衝撞，令人難 以信服。

VII. INCONSISTENCY IN PHILIPPINE GOVERNMENT POSITION

---The ROC has received five different versions of a response from the Philippine government. This shows an inconsistency in the Philippine position, and suggests a lack of sincerity. 中華民國已自菲律賓政府收到5種不同版本信函，說明菲方立場反覆不定，欠缺誠意。

---The ROC cannot accept such a perfunctory manner from the government of the Philippines. 中華民國無法接受菲國政府如此敷衍的回應。

VIII. MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE

---In its responses to the ROC, the Philippines has committed itself to a thorough, exhaustive, impartial, and expeditious investigation. 菲律賓曾回應承諾中華民國將就此事件進行徹底、完整、公平且迅速的調查。