1.
Define social justice re calalang v UNCLOS III was a concession by archipelagic
williams 2. Define and discuss the
Archipelagic doctrine. 3. Differentiate
justiciable from political questions. 4.
Elements of State.5. Immunity from
arrest. 6.privelege speech.7
qualifications for members of congress.8
Term from tenure. Good luck!
SOCIAL JUSTICE. — Social justice is
"neither communism, nor despotism, nor
atomism, nor anarchy," but the humanization of
laws and the equalization of social and economic
forces by the State so that justice in its rational
and objectively secular conception may at least
be approximated. Social justice means the
promotion of the welfare of all the people, the
adoption by the Government of measures
calculated to insure economic stability of all the
competent elements of society, through the
maintenance of a proper economic and social
equilibrium in the interrelations of the members
of the community, constitutionally, through the
adoption of measures legally justifiable, or
extra-constitutionally, through the exercise of
powers underlying the existence of all
governments on the time-honored principle of
salus populi est suprema lex.
What is the Archipelagic Doctrine?
The fact that for Archipelagic States, their
archipelagic waters are subject to both the right
of innocent passage and sea lanes passage does
not place them in lesser footing vis-a-vis
continental coastal states which are subject, in
their territorial sea, to the right of innocent
passage and the right to transit passage through
international straits. The imposition of these
passage rights through archipelagic waters under
states, in exchange for their right to claim all the
waters landward of their baselines, regardless of
their depth, or distance from coast, as
archipelagic waters subject to national
sovereignty. More importantly, the recognition
of archipelagic state's archipelago and waters
enclosed by their baselines as one cohesive
entity prevents the treatment of their islands as
separate islands under UNCLOS III. Separate
islands generate their own maritime zones,
placing the waters between the islands separated
by more than 24 nautical miles beyond the
state's territorial sovereignty subjecting these
waters to the rights of other states under
UNCLOS III.
The fact of sovereignty, however, does not
preclude the operation of the municipal and
international law norms subjecting the territorial
sea or archipelagic waters to necessary, if not
marginal, burdens in the interest of maintaining
unimpeded, expeditious international navigation,
consistent with the international law principle of
freedom of navigation. Thus, domestically, the
political branches of the Philippine government,
in the competent discharge of their constitutional
powers, may pass legislation designating routes
within the archipelagic waters to regulate
innocent and sea lanes passage (Magallona, et.
al. vs. Ermita, et. al., GR No. 187167, august
16, 2011).