

NOTE: Mu agree mo to assert our rights over West Philippine Sea pero need mag change

sa Constitution. Regardless, focus on assertion of rights. Ang first article ang basaha ug

sabta kay mao na ang mu support sa inyong stand.

Tribunal ruled in favor of the Philippines

Filed under: Duc in Altum - Atty. Aurora A. Santiago |
Atty. Aurora A. Santiago
Duc in Altum

The Permanent Court of Arbitration (the Tribunal) ruled in favor of the Philippines in
the dispute between China and the Philippines over the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea). It was
released on July 12, 2016 at the Peace Palace in The Hague, Netherlands.
Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), “a coastal state needs to have
land before they can claim rights to the sea. The international treaty has been signed and ratified by both
the Philippines and China.”
China asserts it has ‘indisputable sovereignty’ and ‘historic rights’ to over two-thirds of the 3.5 million
square kilometers South China Sea using its “nine-dash line” claim that overlaps with the UNCLOS-
mandated 200-nautical-mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). The line, encircling an area roughly the
size of Mexico, overlaps territories claimed by the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan.
The Philippines, on the other hand, claims that China’s assertion cannot be used to define sea borders
since South China Sea is mostly sea, there is no land mass or clumps of islands and rocks large enough
to generate sea borders that will span the over 2 million square kilometers China is claiming with its nine-
dash line.
The Philippines brought the issue to the International Tribunal for decision when China did massive land
reclamation in the West Philippine Sea near the Spratly Islands, turning submerged reefs into artificial
islands capable of hosting military equipment and structures.
In its decision, the Tribunal stated that UNCLOS does not recognize artificial islands and states that these
are not entitled to a 12 nautical mile territorial sea nor a 200 nautical miles of EEZ.
We are quoting below the key points of the Tribunal’s verdict on Philippines-China dispute:
Historic Rights and the ‘Nine-Dash Line–The Tribunal ruled that “China has no legal basis to claim historic
rights to resources within the sea areas falling within the ‘nine-dash line’. Such rights were extinguished to
the extent they were incompatible with EEZ provided by the UNCLOS. The Tribunal noted that, although
2 Chinese navigators and fishermen, and those of other States, had historically made use of the islands
in the South China Sea, there was no evidence that China historically exercised exclusive control over the
waters or their resources.”
Status of Features–The Tribunal noted that “the reefs have been heavily modified by land reclamation
and construction”. The UNCLOS classifies features on their natural condition, found historical evidence
more relevant and “noted that Spratly Islands were historically used by small groups of fishermen and that
several Japanese fishing and guano mining enterprises were attempted. The Tribunal concluded that
such transient use does not constitute inhabitation by a stable community and that all of the historical
economic activity had been extractive. Accordingly, the Tribunal concluded that none of the Spratly
Islands is capable of generating extended maritime zones and declares that certain sea areas are within
the EEZ of the Philippines, because those areas are not overlapped by any possible entitlement of
China.”
Lawfulness of Chinese Actions–The Tribunal ruled that “since certain areas are within the EEZ of the
Philippines, China had violated the Philippines’ sovereign rights in its EEZ by (a) interfering with
Philippine fishing and petroleum exploration, (b) constructing artificial islands and (c) failing to prevent
Chinese fishermen from fishing in the zone. The Tribunal also held that fishermen from the Philippines
(like those from China) had traditional fishing rights at Scarborough Shoal and that China had interfered
with these rights in restricting access.”
The Tribunal also ruled that Chinese law enforcement vessels had unlawfully created a serious risk of
collision when they physically obstructed Philippine vessels.
Harm to Marine Environment–The Tribunal further held that China’s large scale land reclamation and
construction of artificial islands had caused great damage to “the coral reef environment and violated its
obligation to preserve and protect fragile ecosystems and the habitat of depleted, threatened, or
endangered species. The Tribunal also noted that Chinese fishermen harvested endangered sea turtles,
coral, and giant clams on a substantial scale using methods that inflict severe damage on the coral reef
environment and had not fulfilled their obligations to stop such activities.”
Aggravation of Dispute–The Tribunal found that “it lacked jurisdiction to consider the implications of a
stand-off between Philippine marines and Chinese naval and law enforcement vessels at Second
Thomas Shoal, holding that this dispute involved military activities and was therefore excluded from
compulsory settlement. The Tribunal found, however, that China’s recent large-scale land reclamation
and construction of artificial islands was incompatible with the obligations on a State during dispute
resolution proceedings, insofar as China has inflicted irreparable harm to the marine environment, built a
large artificial island in the Philippines’ EEZ, and destroyed evidence of the natural condition of features in
the South China Sea that formed part of the Parties’ dispute.”
 Con-Com asserts claims
on WPS, Sabah
posted April 20, 2018 at 01:15 am by Manila Standard and PNA





THE first article in the Constitution that the Consultative Committee or Con-Com will
propose firms up the Philippines’ stance on the West Philippine Sea and its claim to
Sabah, the online news site Rappler said Thursday.

The new site said the Con-Com on Thursday finalized its wording of Article 1 of its draft
charter. The article, compared to its counterpart in the 1987 Constitution, has two
paragraphs and refers specifically to international courts, laws of the sea and sovereign
rights.

Meanwhile, as part of its efforts to make its proposed presidential-federal form of

government “uniquely Filipino,” the Con-Com, which is tasked to review the 1987
Constitution, has dubbed its version of the system as “bayanihan” or working- together
federalism.

“What we are trying to evolve is a federal system that is uniquely Philippine in character.
We are not copying a federal system in any part of the world,” Con-Com Senior
Technical Assistant and spokesman Ding Generoso told reporters.

Retired Chief Justice and Con-Com Chairman Reynato Puno earlier urged the members
of the body to make sure they do not plagiarize any federalism model as it should be
distinctly Filipino.
“There are different models of this structure available off the shelf, but there is no model
that will perfectly fit the Philippines,” Puno said during the first Con-com en banc
session in February.

The proposed Article 1 reads:

Sovereignty Over Territory and Sovereign Rights

Section 1: The Philippines has sovereignty over its territory, consisting of the islands
and waters encompassed by its archipelagic baselines, its territorial sea and its
airspace.

It has sovereignty over islands and features outside its archipelagic baselines pursuant
to the laws of the Federal Republic, the law of nations, and the judgments of competent
international courts or tribunals. It likewise has sovereignty over all the other territories
belonging to the Philippines by historic right or legal title.

Section 2. The Philippines has sovereign rights over that maritime expanse
beyond its territorial sea to the extent reserved to it by international law, as
well as over its extended continental shelf including the Philippine
(Benham) Rise. Its citizens shall enjoy the right to all resources to which
they are entitled by historic rights.

In comparison, Article I of the 1987 Constitution reads:

National Territory

The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and
waters embraced therein, and all other territories over which the Philippines has
sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial, and aerial domains,
including its territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular shelves, and other
submarine areas. The waters around, between, and connecting the islands of the
archipelago, regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form part of the internal waters
of the Philippines.

The difference: Fr Ranhilio Aquino, the Con-Com member who sponsored the final
wording of the proposed article, said the article harmonizes the Philippine constitution
with existing international laws on the sea.

This firms up, among other things, the Philippine position with regards to the Permanent
Court of Arbitration’s ruling on the West Philippine Sea, declaring China’s claim to it as
invalid.

“It gives constitutional status to the arbitral judgment,” said Aquino.

The proposed article also introduces the concept of “sovereign rights” to the Philippine
constitution. With PNA

Sovereign rights are the type of rights the Philippines has over areas like Benham
(Philippine) Rise and the West Philippine Sea.

It was the country’s sovereign rights which China violated through its
reclamation activities and harassment of Filipino fishermen in the
West Philippine Sea, according to the arbitral ruling.

Aquino said the arbitral ruling and the United Nations (UN) ruling that states Benham
Rise is part of the country’s extended continental shelf were the “prime considerations”
in the wording of Article 1.

“Number one is that the new article on the national territory should be in conformity with
the UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea), the arbitral decision in
favor of the Philippines, and also our claims to the Benham Rise, as well as other
provisions of international law,” said Aquino.
Effect on Sabah, West PH Sea claim: The Sabah claim, meanwhile, will be backed by
the line, “It likewise has sovereignty over all the other territories belonging to the
Philippines by historic right or legal title.”

Aquino said this gives “ample room for [the] Philippines to assert its claim to Sabah,” if it
decides to do so in the future.

The claim to the Kalayaan Group of Islands, meanwhile, will be bolstered by the line, “It
has sovereignty over islands and features outside its archipelagic baselines pursuant to
the laws of the Federal Republic, the law of nations, and the judgments of competent
international courts or tribunals,” said Aquino.

As for Scarborough Shoal, while the Hague court did not decide on the country’s
sovereignty over it, it upheld the “traditional fishing rights” of Filipino fishermen there.

This, said Aquino, is recognized in the line, “Its citizens shall enjoy the right to all
resources to which they are entitled by historic rights.”

Impact on Philippines-China ties: All decisions made by the Con-Com are mere
proposals at this point. Because the group is only recommendatory in nature, it’s not
certain if Congress will adopt its proposals.

Aquino said their proposed provisions “don’t necessarily contradict the conduct of
foreign policy at the moment.”

China has long ignored the arbitral ruling and continued its military buildup in the West
Philippine Sea.

But if their proposed article makes it to a new constitution, Aquino said it would firm up
the government’s responsibility to defend not only the Philippines’ sovereignty but its
sovereign rights as well.
“The Philippines will be obligated to assert our sovereign rights. We are obligating the
government also to assert our sovereign rights,” he said.

\
‘IS THE PHILIPPINES NOW BECOMING A VILLAGE OF CHINA?’

Assert arbitration ruling on

West PH Sea now, LP tells
gov’t
By: Jhoanna Ballaran - Reporter / @JhoannaBINQ
INQUIRER.net / 09:50 AM April 19, 2018

AERIAL IMAGES Two Xian Y-7 Chinese military transport planes were spotted on
Panganiban Reef (Mischief Reef) in these enlarged surveillance photos taken last Jan. 6
and given to the Inquirer by a source. It is believed to be the first known presence of
military aircraft on the artificial island within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone.
Security experts say fighter planes are likely to be deployed there eventually.
The Liberal Party (LP) is demanding the Duterte administration to now firmly assert the
nation’s rightful claims on the West Philippine Sea amid fresh reports that two planes of
China landed on the reef already ruled to belong to the Philippines.

The opposition group criticized anew the government’s seeming inaction on the
country’s territorial claims in the disputed area despite the victory that the government
already obtained from the Permanent Court of Arbitration under the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

Senator Benigno “Bam” Aquino IV said the Duterte administration should be

transparent in its dealings with China to know what else the country is giving up to its
“new friendship” with Beijing.
ADVERTISEMENT

“Hindi ba dapat ipaglaban ang ating teritoryo, lalo na para sa mga mangingisda natin?
Sinayang lang ng administrasyon ang panalo natin sa Permanent Court of Arbitration
(PCA),” Aquino said, referring to the PCA decision in July 2016, which ruled
that the Philippines has exclusive sovereign rights over the West
Philippine Sea (in the South China Sea) that included the Panganiban
Reef or Mischief Reef, among others.

(Shouldn’t we defend our territory, especially for our fishermen? The administration
just put to waste our victory at the PCA.)

READ: Philippines wins arbitration case vs. China over South China Sea
According to Aquino, if the government is determined and sincere in protecting the
country’s territory, then it should assert the country’s victory in the PCA.

On Wednesday, the Inquirer came out with a story and photo, indicating two Chinese
military transport planes have landed on Panganiban Reef, marking the first reported
presence of this type of aircraft of China in a Philippine territory in the South China
Sea, and raising the prospect that Beijing might soon base their warplanes there.

READ: China military planes land on PH reef

LP President Senator Francis Pangilinan said the Philippine government’s obliging
attitude and behavior toward China amid the escalating militarization of the West
Philippine Sea is unacceptable.

“Nagiging barangay na ba ng China ang Pilipinas?” he asked.

ADVERTISEMENT

(Is the Philippines now becoming a village of China?)

Pangilinan also pointed out that sovereignty and security issues should have been
discussed during President Rodrigo Duterte’s recent visit to China.

Former lawmaker Erin Tañada, LP’s vice president for external affairs, said that if
Duterte cannot fulfill his campaign promise to ride a jet ski and plant a Philippine flag
in the disputed territory, he must at least fight for it through the PCA decision.

“Ipakita sana ni Duterte ang tapang na ipinakita niya noong kampanya, laban sa China
at hindi ang pagtikum-bibig habang nilalabag ang ating kasarinlan,” Tañada said.

(Hopefully Duterte shows the courage against China he showed during the campaign
and not become tight-lipped while our sovereignty is being trampled upon.)

Tañada said that the presence of Chinese military transport planes on Panganiban Reef
is another intrusion in our sovereign territory and that the Armed Forces of the
Philippines (AFP) and the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) explain the issue.

“Are Philippine authorities aware of this? Are these passages or landing allowed? What
is China bringing next after these transport planes — war planes?” he
said. /kga
Ruling on West Philippine
Sea: Group says PH sovereign
footing in foreign policy can
begin
Jul 14, 20162,648 Views

From asianjournal.com
The arbitral ruling favoring Philippine claim over the West
Philippine Sea can be the new administration’s signal for further
asserting its economic sovereignty, research group IBON said. This
is also an opportune time for the Philippines to consider cutting or
renegotiating unequal arrangements with other countries that put
the nation’s control over its resources at stake, said the group.

The United Nation’s backed Permanent Court of Arbitration based in The Hague announced its
unanimous decision on the territorial dispute case between the Philippines and China over the
West Philippine Sea. The Philippines filed a complaint at the international tribunal upon China’s
laying claim over portions of the sea which fall within Philippine exclusive economic zone,
construction of facilities there and allowing Chinese nationals to fish in Philippine fishing zones.

According to the decision, China’s historical claim over the territory by virtue of its 9-dash rule
does not stand. The Philippines was also awarded sovereign rights over Panginiban (Mischief)
Reef, Ayungin (Second Scarborough) Shoal, and Recto (Reed) Bank off Palawan province.
However, the court stated that neither country has the right to stop anyone from fishing at
 Panatag (Scarborough) Shoal off Zambales since it is a traditional fishing ground for several
countries.

IBON said that this favorable ruling is an opportunity for the Philippines to uphold its economic
sovereignty not just with China, but other countries including the US. One-sided and unfair trade
and investment agreements with other countries have long-impeded the Philippine’s national
development and industrialization. These agreements can be reviewed on a case-to-case basis,
renegotiated, and even terminated if necessary.

The Duterte administration, through Department of Foreign Affairs Secretary Perfecto Yasay,
said that it welcomes and respects the ruling, is committed to a peaceful resolution, and is
awaiting an interpretation of the Arbitral Tribunal’s decision to be released in five days before it
formally comments.

IBON said that though diplomacy and ensuring cooperation among involved parties is important,
this should not be at the expense of Philippine sovereignty. The group said that Duterte should
consider forging economic policies and trade agreements that will be beneficial and serve the
genuine national industrialization of the country.###