Philippine Baseline Law (R.A.

9522)

Republic Act No. 9522, also known as the "Philippine Baseline Law," was enacted in 2009 in the
Philippines. This law defines the archipelagic baselines of the Philippines, specifying the country's
maritime boundaries. It is important for the Philippines to establish these baselines to clarify its
territorial claims and rights over the waters surrounding its numerous islands.

Some key points of RA 9522 include:

1. Definition of archipelagic baselines: The law outlines the baselines connecting the outermost
points of the Philippine archipelago, which serve as the basis for measuring the breadth of the
country's territorial sea, contiguous zone, exclusive economic zone (EEZ), and continental shelf.

2. Territorial sea: It establishes the Philippines' territorial sea, which extends up to 12 nautical miles
from the baselines. Within this zone, the Philippines has full sovereignty.

3. Contiguous zone: The contiguous zone extends an additional 12 nautical miles beyond the
territorial sea, allowing the Philippines to enforce customs, immigration, and other laws in this
area.

4. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and continental shelf: The law defines the Philippines' EEZ,
which extends 200 nautical miles from the baselines, and its continental shelf rights. Within the
EEZ, the Philippines has exclusive rights to exploit and manage natural resources.

5. Regulating foreign passage: RA 9522 also includes provisions for regulating the right of innocent
passage and archipelagic sea lanes passage through Philippine waters in accordance with
international law.

This law plays a significant role in the Philippines' efforts to protect its maritime interests and
resources, as well as in maintaining its sovereignty and territorial integrity in the context of
international law and disputes over the South China Sea.

Republic of the Philippines v. The People’s Republic of China, 2016

The case you are referring to, "Republic of the Philippines v. The People’s Republic of China," is
commonly known as the Philippines v. China arbitration case. It was a landmark international legal
case brought before the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague, Netherlands, under
the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

The case was initiated by the Philippines in 2013, challenging China's maritime claims and
activities in the South China Sea. The Philippines argued that China's claims and actions, such as
constructing artificial islands and interfering with Filipino fishermen, violated its rights under
UNCLOS.

Key points and outcomes of the case:

1. Jurisdiction: The PCA tribunal ruled in 2015 that it had jurisdiction to hear the case, despite
China's refusal to participate in the proceedings. China had argued that the case was outside the
tribunal's jurisdiction.

2. Merits of the case: In July 2016, the PCA tribunal issued its final award on the merits of the case.
The tribunal ruled in favor of the Philippines on several key issues, including:

- That China's nine-dash line claim (historical claim to most of the South China Sea) had no
legal basis under UNCLOS.
- That certain land features in the South China Sea, including the Spratly Islands, were not
entitled to exclusive economic zones (EEZs) or territorial seas.

3. Rejection of the ruling: China rejected the tribunal's ruling, stating that it had no binding force.
However, the ruling is widely recognized as a significant legal precedent regarding the
interpretation and application of UNCLOS.

4. Diplomatic and regional impact: The case had significant diplomatic and regional implications,
leading to increased tensions in the South China Sea. It also influenced the positions of other
countries with territorial disputes in the area.

While the ruling did not resolve the broader political and territorial disputes in the South China Sea,
it clarified certain legal aspects related to maritime entitlements and contributed to discussions
about the peaceful resolution of disputes in the region based on international law.