REFERENCES

Philippine claims on the Spratly Islands

http://en.wikipilipinas.org/index.php?
title=Spratly_Islands
While the Philippine claim to the Spratly Islands was first expressed in the United Nations
General Assembly in 1946, Philippine involvement in the Spratly's did not begin in earnest
until 1956, when on15 May Philippine citizen Tomas Cloma proclaimed the founding of a new
state, Kalayaan (Freedom Land). Clomas Kalayaan encompassed fifty three features spread
throughout the eastern South China Sea, including Spratly Island proper, Itu Aba, Pag-asa and
Nam Yit Islands, as well as West York Island, North Danger Reef, Mariveles Reef and Investigator
Shoal. Cloma then established a protectorate in July 1956 with Pag-asa as its capital and Cloma
as Chairman of the Supreme Council of the Kalayaan State. This action, although not officially
endorsed by the Philippine government, was considered by other claimant nations as an act of
aggression by the Philippines and international reaction was swift. Taiwan, the PRC, South
Vietnam, France, the United Kingdom and theNetherlands lodged official protests (the
Netherlands on the premise that it considered the Spratly Islands part of Dutch New Guinea) and
Taiwan sent a naval task force to occupy the islands and establish a base on Itu Aba, which it
retains to the present day.
Tomas Cloma and the Philippines continued to state their claims over the islands; in October
1956 Cloma traveled to New York to plead his case before the United Nations and the Philippines
had troops posted on three islands by 1968 on the premise of protecting Kalayaan citizens. In
early 1971 the Philippines sent a diplomatic note on behalf of Cloma to Taipei demanding the
ROC's withdrawal from Itu Aba and on 10 July in the same year Ferdinand Marcos announced
the annexation of the 53 island group known as Kalayaan, although since neither Cloma or
Marcos specified which fifty three features constituted Kalayaan, the Philippines began to claim
as many features as possible. In April of 1972 Kalayaan was officially incorporated into Palawan
province and was administered as a single poblacion (township), with Tomas Cloma as the town
council Chairman and by 1992, there were twelve registered voters on Kalayaan. The Philippines
also reportedly attempted to land troops on Itu Aba in 1977 to occupy the island but were repelled
by ROC troops stationed on the island. There were no reports of casualties from the conflict.
In 2005, a cellular phone base station was erected by the Philippines' Smart Communications on
Pag-asa Island.
The Philippines base their claims of sovereignty over the Spratly's on the issues of res nullius and
geography. The Philippines contend Kalayaan was res nullius as there was no effective
sovereignty over the islands until the 1930s when France and then Japan acquired the islands.
When Japan renounced their sovereignty over the islands in the San Francisco Peace Treaty in
1951, there was a relinquishment of the right to the islands without any special beneficiary.
Therefore, argue the Philippines, the islands became res nullius and available for annexation.
Philippine businessman Tomas Cloma did exactly that in 1956 and while the Philippines never
officially supported Clomas claim, upon transference of the islands sovereignty from Cloma to
the Philippines, the Philippines used the same sovereignty argument as Cloma did. The

Philippine claim to Kalayaan on geographical bases can be summarized using the assertion that
Kalayaan is distinct from other island groups in the South China Sea because:
It is a generally accepted practice in oceanography to refer to a chain of islands through the
name of the biggest island in the group or through the use of a collective name. Note that Spratly
(island) has an area of only 13 hectares compared to the 22 hectare area of the Pag-asa Island.
Distance-wise, Spratly Island is some 210nm off Pag-asa Islands. This further stresses the
argument that they are not part of the same island chain. The Paracels being much further
(34.5nm northwest of Pag-asa Island) is definitely a different group of islands
A second argument used by the Philippines regarding their geographical claim over the Spratlys
is that all the islands claimed by the Philippines lie within their archipelagic baselines, the only
claimant who can make such a statement. The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of
the Sea (UNCLOS) stated that a coastal state could claim two hundred nautical miles of
jurisdiction beyond its land boundaries. It is perhaps telling that while the Philippines is a
signatory to UNCLOS, the PRC and Vietnam are not. The Philippines also argue, under Law of
the Sea provisions, that the PRC can not extend its baseline claims to the Spratlys because the
PRC is not an archipelagic state. Whether this argument (or any other used by the Philippines)
would hold up in court is debatable but possibly moot, as the PRC and Vietnam seem unwilling to
legally substantiate their claims and have rejected Philippine challenges to take the dispute to the
World Maritime Tribunal in Hamburg.