TERRITORY

A. CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS

The 1935 Constitution - Article I.—THE NATIONAL TERRITORY

Section 1. The Philippines comprises all the territory ceded to the United States by the treaty of Paris con-
cluded between the United States and Spain on the tenth day of December, eighteen hundred and ninety-
eight, the limits of which are set forth in Article III of said treaty, together with all the islands embraced in
the treaty concluded at Washington, between the United States and Spain on the seventh day of November,
nineteen hundred, and in the treaty concluded between the United States and Great Britain on the second day
of January, nineteen hundred and thirty, and all territory over which the present Government of the
Philippine Islands exercises jurisdiction.

The 1973 Constitution - Article I.—THE NATIONAL TERRITORY

SECTION 1. The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and waters
embraced therein, and all the other territories belonging to the Philippines by historic right or legal title,
including the territorial sea, the air space, the subsoil, the sea-bed, the insular shelves, and the other
submarine areas over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction. The waters around, between, and
connecting the islands of the archipelago, irrespective of their breadth and dimensions, form part of the
internal waters of the Philippines.

B. TREATIES AND LAWS

TREATY OF PARIS - Article III.

Spain cedes to the United States the archipelago known as the Philippine Islands, and comprehending the
islands lying within the following line:

A line running from west to east along or near the twentieth parallel of north latitude, and through the middle
of the navigable channel of Bachi, from the one hundred and eighteenth (118th) to the one hundred and twenty-
seventh (127th) degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich, thence along the one hundred and twenty
seventh (127th) degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich to the parallel of four degrees and forty five
minutes (4 [degree symbol] 45']) north latitude, thence along the parallel of four degrees and forty five minutes (4
[degree symbol] 45') north latitude to its intersection with the meridian of longitude one hundred and nineteen
degrees and thirty five minutes (119 [degree symbol] 35') east of Greenwich, thence along the meridian of
longitude one hundred and nineteen degrees and thirty five minutes (119 [degree symbol] 35') east of Greenwich
to the parallel of latitude seven degrees and forty minutes (7 [degree symbol] 40') north, thence along the parallel
of latitude of seven degrees and forty minutes (7 [degree symbol] 40') north to its intersection with the one
hundred and sixteenth (116th) degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich, thence by a direct line to the
intersection of the tenth (10th) degree parallel of north latitude with the one hundred and eighteenth (118th)
degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich, and thence along the one hundred and eighteenth (118th)
degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich to the point of beginning.The United States will pay to Spain the
sum of twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) within three months after the exchange of the ratifications of the
present treaty.
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 3046 (as Amended by RA 5446 & RA 9522)

AN ACT DEFINE THE BASELINES OF THE TERRITORIAL SEA OF THE PHILIPPINES.

WHEREAS, the Constitution of the Philippines describes the national territory as comprising all the
territory ceded to the United States by the Treaty of Paris concluded between the United States
and Spain on December 10, 1898, the limits of which are set forth in Article III of said treaty,
together with all the islands embraced in the treaty concluded at Washington, between the United
States and Spain on November 7, 1900, and in the treaty concluded between the United States
and Great Britain on January 2, 1930, and all the territory over which the Government of the
Philippine Islands exercised jurisdiction at the time of the adoption of the Constitution.

WHEREAS, all the waters within the limits set forth in the above-mentioned treaties have always
been regarded as part of the territory of the Philippine Islands.

WHEREAS, all the waters around, between and connecting the various islands of the Philippines
archipelago, irrespective of their width or dimension, have always been considered as necessary
appurtenances of the land territory, forming part of the inland or internal waters of the Philippines.

WHEREAS, all the waters beyond the outermost islands of the archipelago but within the limits of
the boundaries set forth in the aforementioned treaties comprise the territorial sea of the
Philippines.

WHEREAS, the baselines from which the territorial sea of the Philippines is determined consist of
straight lines joining appropriate points of the outermost islands of the archipelago; and

WHEREAS, the said baselines should be clarified and specifically defined and described for the
information of all concerned; Now, therefor,

Section 1. The baselines for the territorial sea of the Philippines are hereby defined and described
specifically as follows:

Sec. 2. All waters within the baselines provided for in Sec. one hereof are considered inland or
internal waters of the Philippines.

Sec. 3. This Act shall take effect upon its approval.

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9522
AN ACT TO AMEND CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 3046, AS AMENDED BY
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 5446, TO DEFINE THE ARCHIPELAGIC BASELINES OF THE
PHILIPPINES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

SECTION 1. Section 1 of Republic Act No. 3046, entitled “An Act to Define the Baselines of
the Territorial Sea of the Philippines”, as amended by Section 1 of Republic Act No. 5446, is
hereby amended to read as follows:

“SEC. 1. The baselines of the Philippine archipelago are hereby defined and described specifically as
follows:

SECTION 2. The baselines in the following areas over which the Philippines likewise exercises sovereignty
and jurisdiction shall be determined as “Regime of Islands” under the Republic of the Philippines consistent
with Article 121 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS):

a) The Kalayaan Island Group as constituted under Presidential Decree No. 1596; and

b) Bajo de Masinloc, also known as Scarborough Shoal.

SECTION 3. This Act affirms that the Republic of the Philippines has dominion, sovereignty and jurisdiction
over all portions of the national territory as defined in the Constitution and by provisions of applicable laws
including, without limitation, Republic Act No. 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code of
1991, as amended.

SECTION 4. This Act, together with the geographic coordinates and the charts and maps indicating the
aforesaid baselines, shall be deposited and registered with the Secretary General of the United Nations.

SECTION 5. The National Mapping and Resource Information Authority (NAMRIA) shall forthwith produce
and publish charts and maps of the appropriate scale clearly representing the delineation of basepoints and
baselines as set forth in this Act.

SECTION 6. The amount necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act shall be provided in a
supplemental budget or included in the General Appropriations Act of the year of its enactment into law.

SECTION 7. If any portion or provision of this Act is declared unconstitutional or invalid, the other portions or
provisions hereof which are not affected thereby shall continue to be in full force and effect.

SECTION 8. The provisions of Republic Act No. 3046, as amended by Republic Act No. 5446, and all other
laws, decrees, executive orders, rules and issuances inconsistent with this Act are hereby amended or
modified accordingly.

SECTION 9. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days following its publication in the Official Gazette or in
any two (2) newspapers of general circulation.
MAGALONA VS ERMITA
G.R. No. 187167 16Aug2011
Prof. Merlin Magalona, et al., Petitioners,
vs
Hon. Eduardo Ermita in his capacityas Executive Secretary, et al., Respondents.

Facts:
In March 2009, R.A. 9522 was enacted by the Congress to comply with the terms of the United Nations Convention on
the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III), which the Philippines ratified on February 27, 1984.

Professor Merlin Magallona et al questioned the validity of RA 9522 as they contend, among others, that the law
decreased the national territory of the Philippines. Some of their particular arguments are as follows:

RA 9522 reduces Philippine maritime territory, and logically, the reach of the Philippine state’s sovereign power, in
violation of Article 1 of the 1987 Constitution, embodying the terms of the Treaty of Paris and ancillary treaties.
RA 9522 opens the country’s waters landward of the baselines to maritime passage by all vessels and aircrafts,
undermining Philippine sovereignty and national security, contravening the country’s nuclear-free policy, and
damaging marine resources, in violation of relevant constitutional provisions.
RA 9522’s treatmentof the KIG as “regime of islands” not only results in the loss of a large maritime area but also
prejudices the livelihood of subsistence fishermen.

Hence, petitioners files action for the writs of certiorari and prohibition assails the constitutionality of Republic Act
No. 95221 (RA 9522) adjusting the country’s archipelagic baselines and classifying the baseline regime of nearby
territories.

Issues:
Whether or not RA 9522, the amendatory Philippine Baseline Law is unconstitutional.

Discussions:
The provision of Art I 198 Constitution clearly affirms the archipelagic doctrine, which we connect the outermost
points of our archipelago with straight baselines and consider all the waters enclosed thereby as internal waters. RA
9522, as a Statutory Tool to Demarcate the Country’s Maritime Zones and Continental Shelf Under UNCLOS III, gave
nothing less than an explicit definition in congruent with the archipelagic doctrine.

Rulings:
No. The Court finds R.A. 9522 constitutional. It is a Statutory Tool to Demarcate the Country’s Maritime Zones and
Continental Shelf Under UNCLOS III, not to Delineate Philippine Territory. It is a vital step in safeguarding the
country’s maritime zones. It also allows an internationally-recognized delimitation of the breadth of the Philippine’s
maritime zones and continental shelf.

dditionally, The Court finds that the conversion of internal waters into archipelagic waters will not risk the Philippines
as affirmed in the Article 49 of the UNCLOS III, an archipelagic State has sovereign power that extends to the waters
enclosed by the archipelagic baselines, regardless of their depth or distance from the coast. It is further stated that
the regime of archipelagic sea lanes passage will not affect the status of its archipelagic waters or the exercise of
sovereignty over waters and air space, bed and subsoil and the resources therein.

The Court further stressed that the baseline laws are mere mechanisms for the UNCLOS III to precisely describe the
delimitations. It serves as a notice to the international family of states and it is in no way affecting or producing any
effect like enlargement or diminution of territories.
ARIGO ET.AL V SWIFT, ET.AL G.R. NO. 206510, SEPTEMBER 16, 2014 735 SCRA 102

FACTS:
While transiting the Sulu Sea, the USS Guardian, a US Navy ship, ran aground on the South Shoal of Tubbataha Reefs,
a restricted and marine protected area. The US Government provided compensation for the damaged caused and
undertook salvage operations to remove the grounded ship from the coral reef.

Petition: issuance of a Writ of Kalikasan with prayer for the issuance of a Temporary Environmental Protection Order
(TEPO) under Rule 7 of A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC, otherwise known as the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases
(Rules), involving violations of environmental laws and regulations in relation to the grounding of the US military ship
USS Guardian over the Tubbataha Reefs

ISSUES:
Whether or not the Court has jurisdiction over the US respondents who did not submit any pleading or manifestation
in the case.

Whether or not there is a waiver of immunity from suit in the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) that would make the
US respondents liable.

RULING:
Immunity of foreign states from the jurisdiction of local courts
The inhibition to implead a foreign state in a local jurisdiction is expressed in the maxim par in parem, non habet
imperium. That is, all states are sovereign equals and cannot assert jurisdiction over one another. This is also
applicable to complaints filed against officials of the state for acts allegedly performed by them in the discharge of
their duties. The rule is that if the judgment against such officials will require the state itself to perform an affirmative
act to satisfy the same, such as the appropriation of the amount needed to pay the damages awarded against them,
the suit must be regarded as against the state itself although it has not been formally impleaded.

The alleged act or omission resulting in the unfortunate grounding of the USS Guardian on the TRNP was committed
while the US respondents were performing official military duties and working as commanding officers of the US Navy
who had control and supervision over the USS Guardian and its crew. The suit is deemed to be one against the US
itself as the satisfaction of a judgment against said officials will require remedial actions and appropriation of funds by
the US government. Therefore, the principle of State immunity bars the exercise of jurisdiction by this Court over the
persons of respondents Swift, Rice and Robling.

The waiver of state immunity under the VFA pertains only to criminal jurisdiction and not to special civil actions such
as the present petition for issuance of a writ of Kalikasan. A ruling on the application or non-application of criminal
jurisdiction provisions of the VFA to US personnel who may be found responsible for the grounding of the USS
Guardian, would be premature and beyond the province of a petition for a writ of Kalikasan.
The VFA is an agreement which defines the treatment of United States troops and personnel visiting the Philippines
to promote “common security interests” between the US and the Philippines in the region. It provides for the
guidelines to govern such visits of military personnel, and further defines the rights of the United States and the
Philippine government in the matter of criminal jurisdiction, movement of vessel and aircraft, importation and
exportation of equipment, materials and supplies. The invocation of US federal tort laws and even common law is
thus improper considering that it is the VF A which governs disputes involving US military ships and crew navigating
Philippine waters in pursuance of the objectives of the agreement.