Discussant: Wendcy Macalisang

Article 1 of the 1987 Constitution and the Archipelagic Doctrine

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.
Archipelagic doctrine is the specification of the Filipino Constitution of 1973 defining the boundaries of
the country. The doctrine means, therefore, that the country, with its thousands of islands and many seas,
should be considered as a political unit for reasons of history, law, geography, economics, and security.
Also, when questions involving territorial conflicts arise, the Philippines use the doctrine to support its
territorial claims.
The national territory of the Philippines:
• The Philippines archipelago with all island and waters embraced there in
• All other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty and jurisdiction
• The terrestrial, fluvial and aerial domains including the territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil,
insular shelves and other submarines areas.
• The internal waters
The Philippines archipelago with all island and waters embraced there in geographically is consisting of
three main islands, namely, Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao.
All other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty and jurisdiction the phrase “all the other
territories belonging to the Philippines by historic right or legal title” that says that we have the right to
claim any other territory over which the Philippines may in the future find it has right to claim with historic
right and legal title. And with the distances with respect to the waters around the Philippines, in claiming a
territorial sea we should target 12 nautical miles or 12 kms from the lowest level reached by the sea at low
tide. In Contiguous zone extends up to 12 nautical miles from the territorial sea, so what is contiguous
zone? It is the area in which a state can exercise limited control to prevent violation of its customs, sanitary
laws and regulations within its territory. To those who violate the regulations are committed to
infringement. Although not part of the territory, the coastal State may exercise jurisdiction to prevent
infringement of customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws.
Presidential Decree No. 1599, Exclusive economic zone, the body of water extending up to 200 nautical
miles, within which the state may exercise sovereign rights to explore, exploit, conserve and manage the
natural resources. The state in the EEZ exercises jurisdiction with regard to: the establishment and use of
artificial islands, installations, and structures; marine scientific research; and the protection and preservation
of marine environment
There can be a Continental Shelf without an EEZ, but not an EEZ without a Continental Shelf. Expound.
Other areas included in the Philippine archipelago are the three domains which is the Terrestrial, Fluvial
and Aerial domains.
• Terrestrial domain refers to the land whether, agricultural, forest or timber, mineral lands,
and national parks under sovereignty and jurisdiction of the Philippines.
 • Aerial domain refers to the air space above the territorial lands and waters of the Philippines
but excluding the outer space. Air space is the portion of the atmosphere controlled by a country
above its territory. Outer space refers to the beyond territorial controlled of the country, it
doesn’t exist beyond the Earth.
• Fluvial Domain refers to internal or national waters, over which the Philippines exercises
jurisdiction. In addition to the external waters, are:
 Territorial sea which the part of the sea extending 12 nautical miles from the baseline. It
is also called the marginal sea, the marginal belt or marine belt. State is free to set laws,
regulate use, and use any resources. Vessels are given the right of innocent passage through
any territorial waters.
 The seabed refers to the land that holds the sea, lying beyond the seashore, including
mineral and natural resources. It is known as the sea floor or ocean floor, the bottom of the
ocean.
 Subsoil refers to everything beneath the surface soil and the seabed, including mineral and
natural resources. It is a layer of the earth that is just below the surface soil but above hard
rock.
 Insular shelves can be defined as the parts of an island that remain under water.
 And lastly the other submarine areas that refers to all the areas under territorial sea. Like
seamount, trough, trench, basin, deep bank, shoal and reef.
As a part of the national territory, the seabed, the insular shelves, and other submarine areas are necessarily
co-extensive with territorial sea. The Philippines has a right or title to them to the extent recognized by the
international law.
The three-fold division of navigable waters based from the stand point of international law, the waters of
the earth are divided into;
• Inland or Internal waters a part of the sea within land territory and sometimes called national
territory. Examples are the rivers, canals, and lakes within the land territory.
• Territorial sea or supra, it is the belt of water outside and parallel to the coastline or to the
outer limits of the inland or internal waters. State is free to set laws, regulate use, and use any
resources.
• And High or open sea, they are waters that lie seaward of the territorial sea or the sea away
from land and outside the territorial waters, we might be partially have the rights to used it.
The inland or internal waters the territorial sea together comprise what is generally known as the territorial
waters of a state. Over these waters, a state exercise sovereignty to the same extent as its land territory but
foreign vessels have the right off innocent passage through the territorial sea. On the other hand, the open
seas are international water which means that they are not subject to the sovereignty of any state, but every
state has equal right of use in them.
What is the value of provision defining our national territory? It is important to define as precisely as
possible our national territory for the purpose of making known to the world the areas over which we assert
title or ownership to avoid future conflicts with other nations. As a sovereign State, the Philippines can
promulgate and enforce laws within our country.
Discussant: Ria Gio
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS)
UNCLOS or the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea/Law of the Sea/Law of the Sea
treaty — it defines the rights and responsibilities of nations in their use of the world’s oceans, establishing
guidelines for businesses, the environment, and the management of marine natural resources.
UNCLOS replaces the older and weaker "freedom of the seas" concept dating from the 17th Century which
is developed by the Dutch jurist Cornelius van Bynkershoek.
It also replaced the four 1958 treaties which were formed during its first convention.
Although UNCLOS came into force by the year of 1994, it was concluded in 1982 after the final Convention
but the first Convention was in 1956 held at Geneva, Switzerland in which they call the UNCLOS I or The
First UNCLOS:
In the first Convention, there were four treaties that were concluded in the span of two years, from 1956 to
1958. Those were: The Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone, The Convention on the
Continental Shift, The Convention on the High Seas and The Convention on Fishing and Conservation of
the Living Resources of the High Seas.
a) The Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone — its objective is to define and
limit the territorial sea and the contiguous zone. This treaty was forced on September 10, 1964 as
it was ratified by 52 states.
b) The Convention on the Continental Shift — its objective is to define and delimit the rights of
State to explore and exploit the natural resources of the continental shelf. The treaty, after entering
into force 10 June 1964, established the rights of a sovereign state over the continental shelf
surrounding it, if there be any.
c) The Convention on the High Seas — its objective is to codify the rules of international law
relating to the high seas. States undertake to draw up regulations to prevent pollution of the sea by
oil from ships and pipelines or resulting from the exploration and exploitation of the sea-bed.
d) The Convention on Fishing and Conservation of the Living Resources of the High Seas — its
objective is that through international cooperation, to solve the problems involved in the
conservation of the living resources of the high seas, considering that through the development of
modern techniques some of these resources are in danger of being over-exploited.
However, for the second Convention or the UNCLOS II, unlike the UNCLOS I which had forced four
treaties, UNCLOS II which was still held in Geneva in 1960 but only for six-weeks. It did not result in any
new agreements. Developing nations and third world countries participated only as clients, allies, or
dependents of United States or the Soviet Union, with no significant voice of their own.
For UNCLOS III which became the last Convention, and which made way to resolve many outstanding
concerns in 1960 wherein UNCLOS II failed to do. Further discussions and negotiations continued until
the third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III) in 1982, which tried to address most issues
of those concerns. Delegates submitted for ratification the Law of the Sea treaty, which formally outlines
modern international policy regarding the oceans and marine resources. It was adopted by the Conference
on 10 December 1982.
Discussant: Kyla Marie Ibarra
Sabah Territorial Dispute: The Jebidah Massacre
Why is there a Sabah Dispute?
Sabah is in the Northern portion of the Borneo island. The Sultan of Sulu claims ownership of the
territory as he claims that his forbears leased the property to the British North Borneo Company, and that
when it ceded its control to Malaysia, rentals for the property are still being paid to the Sultan. On the other
hand, the then President Diosdado Macapagal, asserted that the Philippines should have sovereignty over
the said territory. However, in an alleged referendum showing that the residents did not want to be part of
the Philippines or of the Sultanate of Sulu, Malaysia incorporated Sabah as part of its national territory.
When did this happen?
This happened during the administration of Former President Diosdado Macapagal and Ferdinand
Marcos.
What exactly happened?
The clandestine operation that happened during the Marcos administration, known to Operation
Merkedah (Operation Freedom) happened. The plan was for government-trained commando unit, named
Jabidah, to infiltrate and wreak havoc in Sabah. With the sole purpose indoctrinating and convincing the
large number of Filipinos residing in Sabah to secede from Malaysia and be part of the Philippines.
However, what was supposedly an offensive attack to Malaysia severely backfired on the Philippines. When
the recruits from Sulu and Tawi-Tawi realized that they were being deceived and that their real job might
put them in the position of having to kill their own Muslim brothers and sisters, they rebelled. But never
got the chance to see justice. After being deprived of the promised 50Php per month as compensation for
their work, being deceived with the promise of being part of an elite unit in the Armed Forces, and being
forced to live in cruel conditions on the duration of their training, they have decided they’ve had enough
and wrote a letter, addressed to President Marcos, explaining their situation and demanding to be treated
better. 3 out of the 4 of the proponents of the letter, after being called to a supposed meeting from the
president, were never heard of again. Afterwards, the rest of the recruits who signed the petition was
disarmed and considered resigned. Jibin Arula, one of the most notable of the Jabidah massacre, recounted
his story, and his story was this, on March 18, after several batches were transported out of the barracks,
another batch of 12 was told to prepare to be sent home, Arula was one of them. He said this “When we
reached the airport, our escorts alighted ahead of us. Then Lt Eduardo Nepomuceno ordered us to get down
from the truck and line up. As we put down our bags, I heard a series of shots. Like dominoes, my colleagues
fell. I got scared. I ran and was shot at, in my left thigh. I didn't know that I was running towards a mountain.
By 8 am, I was rescued by two fishermen on Caballo Island, near Cavite." Men and officers belonging to
the Army Special Forces was tasked to clean up the scene, and order from Army chief Gen Romero Espino.
All day, they collected charred flesh from the bodies that they had previously burned after shooting them
dead, wrapped them in ponchos, loaded them into the helicopter, tied heavy stones in each of them, and
dropped them in the sea as they were flying over Manila bay. And those bags of bodies, along with justice
and truth, drowned with them.
What was Malaysia’s response to what happened?
The Malaysian government has known since May 1967 through its own intelligence service that the
Philippines was involved in preparing a program for infiltration and subversion in Sabah in support of the
Philippine claim there. They were confident that their own security forces could repel any Philippine
subversion effort and that the political situation in Sabah was not susceptible to Philippine influence. The
Malaysians hoped that, by quietly making known their awareness of the Philippine plans, they could
persuade the Philippine government to drop the project, thus preventing any rupture in Philippine-
Malaysian relations. Malaysia would have “no alternative but to regard such activities as a most serious
breach of good faith and friendly relations” and requested “a full explanation.”
What did the administration do about it?
Secretary Ramos told the Malaysian Ambassador that the Philippines was “not trying to instigate a revolt
in Sabah” and that the Philippines would answer the Malaysian note soon “in a friendly, moderate tone.” It
was clear that the Philippines was annoyed that the Malaysians were reporting to the UN Secretary General.
One Philippine diplomat called this action “presumptuous” and said Malaysia was elevating the issue
unnecessarily. The Malaysians were further disturbed when Marcos and Ramos insisted that the Corregidor
training camp had been established for counterinsurgency training following reports of communist activities
in Mindanao and the Sulus and when Manila in its secret reply to Malaysia’s note accused the Malaysians
of infiltrating the Philippines from Sabah. On March 25, the Malaysians issued a statement demanding that,
in the interests of friendly relations between the two countries, the results of both President Marcos’ and
the Philippine Congress’ investigations of the Corregidor training program be made public and describe the
objectives of the training.
If Marcos and his men were to be believed, the killings on Corregidor never happened. The expose on
Jabidah, they said, was part of a grand plot by the opposition to discredit the Marcos regime. They said
Arula, a survivor of the massacre, was an agent planted by Malaysia after it had uncovered Jabidah's
purpose. The Armed Forces top brass never ordered a search for missing persons, living and dead. No real
investigation took place, except for a few Senate and Congressional hearings which yielded inconclusive
findings.
For many soldiers involved in Operation Merdeka, there was nothing wrong with a plot to take back a
territory they believe the Philippines owned. Looking back, they say that if not for the failed training, the
killings would not have ensued and Oplan Merdeka would have pushed through.
But the Jabidah massacre tainted the reputation of the military. Those who participated, either in actual
training or in the clean-up operations, have not fully come clean. In the end, it may have left a legacy of
lying and cover-up.

Discussant: Jahna Alexandra Rey

Spratly Islands Territorial Dispute

Discussant: Cesar Kenneth Gregory Cabrera

Scarborough Shoal Territorial Dispute
Good morning people of the Philippines!
To those who do not know me, I am Rodrigo Roa Duterte, yours truly, the16th and current President of the
Philippines. I guess you want to know my stand on the disputed territories in the South China Sea.
Beijing hinted at plans for building an environmental monitoring station at Scarborough Shoal, a major
South China Sea fishery disputed by the Philippine government. China and the Philippines have frozen for
the past year their dispute over rights to the shoal and surrounding waters, where both look for fish as well
as fuel under the seabed. They’re trying to get along instead, evidenced by China’s offers of development
aid to the Philippines. Chinese coast guard vessels now control the 150-square-kilometer, environmentally
sensitive shoal but let Philippine fishing boats use the nearby waters.
This whole matter of the Scarborough Shoal dispute started way back in 2012, during the Aquino
administration. On April 8, 2012, a Philippine Navy surveillance plane spotted eight Chinese fishing vessels
anchored in the waters of Scarborough shoal. The Filipino inspection team claimed that they discovered
illegally collected corals, giant clams and live sharks inside the first vessel boarded by the team. Since then,
tensions have continued between the two countries. In the course of the previous administration, there have
been several protests both from our side and China in a call for one another to back down.
During Aquino’s time, the Philippines’ promised to withdraw their forces from the Scarborough Shoal after
a deal mediated by the United States saying both countries must back down until a solid deal over its
ownership would be reached. China, however, did not abide by that agreement and continued its presence
at the shoal, effectively militarizing it

As president of this country, I reiterate the Philippines’ principled position on these matters. I would have
wanted to take a stronger and more violent stance on the dispute. But in my own estimation, it would
probably be a great loss to the nation, and we will probably end up losing the war. I cannot go into battle in
which I cannot win, and which would only result in the destruction and probably a multitude of losses from
our Armed Forces of the Philippines.
An arbitration case brought by us in the permanent court The Hague against china annex VII to the United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea concerning issues in the South China Sea including the legality
of China's Nine-dash line and yes, we won; but let me ask you, who will enforce that ruling in China?
Knowing the fact that China did not join the arbitration and does not recognize the ruling. We the
Philippines would join the rest of the world in urging China to follow The Hague Ruling granting the
Philippines rights over the disputed territories in the South China Sea.