Magallona vs.

Ermita

Summary Cases:

● Merlin M. Magallona vs. Eduardo Ermita

Subject: National territory, UNCLOS, baselines, internal waters, archipelagic waters

Facts:
Republic Act No. 3046 (RA 3046) demarcated the baselines of the Philippines and codified the right of
State parties under United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) I over their territorial
sea. The breadth, however, was not determined. Congress amended RA 3046 by enacting Republic Act
No. 9522 to comply with the terms of UNCLOS III. RA 9522 shortened one baseline, optimized the
location of some basepoints and classified the Kalayaan Island Group (KIG) and Scarborough Shoal as
"regimes of islands" which generate their own maritime zones.
This original action assails the constitutionality of RA 9522 on the ground that: (1) RA 9522 reduces
Philippine maritime territory in violation of Article 1 of the 1987 Constitution; and (2) RA 9522 opens the
country's waters landwards of the baselines to maritime passage by all vessels and aircrafts.
Held:
National Territory
1. UNCLOS III is not concerned with the acquisition or loss of territory. It is a multilateral treaty regulating,
among others, sea-use rights over maritime zones and continent shelves that UNCLOS III delimits.
2. Baseline laws mere statutory mechanisms enacted simply to mark-out the basepoints from which
baselines are drawn to serve as the starting points from which to measure the breadth of the maritime
zones and continental shelf.
3. The baselines of the Philippines have to be drawn in accordance with RA 9522 because this law
conforms to UNCLOS III
4. States acquire or lose territory through occupation, accretion, cession and prescription and not by
executing multilateral treaties on the regulations of sea-use rights or enacting statutes to comply with the
treaty's terms to delimit maritime zones and continental shelves.
Regime of Islands
5. RA 9522 which classified the KIG and Scarborough Shoal as "regime of islands" does not weaken the
Philippines' claim of sovereignty. In fact, RA 9522 recognizes that the Philippines exercise sovereignty
and jurisdiction over these areas.
6. If RA 9522 enclosed KIG and Scarborough Shoal as part of the Philippine archipelago, the Philippines
would have committed a breach of two provisions of UNCLOS III:
(a) Article 47 (3) of UNCLOS III requires that "[t]he drawing of such baselines shall not depart to any
appreciable extent from the general configuration of the archipelago."
(b) Article 47 (2) of UNCLOS III requires that "the length of the baselines shall not exceed 100 nautical
miles, save for three per cent (3%) of the total number of baselines which can reach up to 125 nautical
miles."
Internal Waters
7. UNCLOS III and RA 9522 complies with the Constitution's delineation of internal waters
8. Whether referred to as "internal waters" under Article I of the Constitution or "archipelagic waters"
under UNCLOS III, Article 49 of the UNCLOS recognizes that a State party has sovereignty over the
body of water lying landward of the baselines, including the air space over it and the submarine areas
underneath.
9. Sovereignty, however, does not preclude the operation of international law subjecting the territorial
sea or archipelagic waters to burdens of maintaining unimpeded, expeditious international navigation
consistent with the principle of freedom of navigation.
10.To comply with international law, the Congress may pass laws designating routes within the
archipelagic waters to regulate innocent and sea lanes passage.

| Page 1 of 1