SIIL Review Q&A

1.Discovery and contiguity are sufficient bases for the acquisition of sovereignty.

No, the title of discovery is only an inchoate title which, within a reasonable
period, must be accompanied by an effective occupation of the area or region
which was discovered. When it comes to the title of contiguity, understood as a
basis of territorial sovereignty, is not recognized under international law.

2. RA 9522 is a statutory tool that delineates Philippine Territory.

No, RA 9522 is not a statutory tool that delineates the National Territory.

In a case decided by the Supreme Court, R.A. 9522 has been deemed
constitutional contrary to the proposed assertion that it reduces the Philippine maritime
territory. It is a statutory tool used to demarcate not to delineate the country’s
maritime zones and continental shelf in compliance with UNCLOS III. It is a means
of protecting and allowing the international recognition of the breadth of the
Philippine’s maritime zones and continental shelf.
he 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.

Additionally, 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.
3.The non-enactment of an UNCLOS-compliant baselines law has absolutely no
consequence for the Philippines.

No, the enactment of RA 9522 is an essential course of action to secure the

Philippine’s maritime zone and for the international community to recognize its
bounds. A clear benefit of such law was during the arbitration case against China,
it was used as a means to support our claim within the West Philippine Sea. It
would have been difficult to win the case due to lack of legal basis for our claim
without such statute.
first, it sends an open invitation to the seafaring powers to freely enter and exploit the resources in
the waters and submarine areas around our archipelago; and second, it weakens the country’s case
in any international dispute over Philippine maritime space. These are consequences Congress
wisely avoided.

4. The breadth of the territorial sea is always 12 nautical miles from the
baselines.

The breadth of the territorial sea is not always 12 nautical miles.

Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea,every State has the
right to establish the breadth of its territorial sea up to a limit not
exceeding 12 nautical miles, from the baselines in accordance with the
Convention. Based on the this provision, the territorial sea may be less than
12 from the baselines of the state in which it is measured.

5. The natural coastline, or where the waves meet the shore, is the same as
the baseline.

No, a natural coastline may be deemed as a baseline in cases where, it is

deeply indented and cut into or if there is a fringe of islands along the coast.
 However, there are instances wherein the coastline is not the
same as the baseline such as that mentioned in article 7(2) where the
coastline is highly unstable. The natural coastline is merely a means
of establishing baselines and is dependent upon the features where
the baselines shall be drawn from, in accordance with the rules set
by the convention.

6. A duly-promulgated law declaring a coastal state’s baselines is sufficient to

establish such baselines.

A duly-promulgated law is not sufficient to establish the coastal

state’s baselines.

Laws enacted by a state cannot be the sole basis to establish a

baseline, it requires compliance with the rules set under UNCLOS for such
to be effective. Lack of UNCLOS compliant baseline laws shall result into
non-recognition by the international community upon such law. An
archipelagic State like the Philippines will find itself devoid of
internationally acceptable baselines from where the breadth of its maritime
zones and continental shelf is measured. Without such statute first, it sends
an open invitation to the seafaring powers to freely enter and exploit the
resources in the waters and submarine areas around our archipelago;
and second, it weakens the country’s case in any international dispute over
Philippine maritime space.”
7. A baseline cannot be drawn from a low-tide elevation which has a
lighthouse built on it.

Article 7 & 47 of the UNCLOS III directly state that “baselines shall not
be drawn to and from low-tide elevations, unless lighthouses or
similar installations which are permanently above sea level have
been built on them”.

8. A low-tide elevation always generates a territorial sea.

Article 13, p. 2 of the UNCLOS states “Except where a low-tide

elevation falls within the breadth of a territorial sea generated from a
high-tide feature or mainland, it generates no territorial sea of its
own.”

9. Japan asserts that okinotorishima is an island that is entitled to a 100

nautical mile EEZ. Okinotorishima is an atoll with two islets, or rocks above
water at high tide. The waters around the reefs are potentially rich in oil
and other mineral and fisheries resources and it lies in an area of potential
military significance. The rocks have concrete encasings. The rocks appear
barren, and without terrestrial vegetation. There is a stilt platform within
the okinotorishima lagoon which houses a research station.

In compliance with Art 121 paragraph 3 of the UNCLOS III,

Okinotorishima is a rock because of its inability to sustain human
habitation or economic life of its own. Okinotorishima, without
vegetation and a steady supply of potable water, cannot in any way
sustain human life for long periods of time without external supplies
being brought to it.
 Another misleading point in the facts provided, is that an EEZ should
extend up to 200 nautical miles from the atoll if it were considered as
an island.

10.The arbitral tribunal made a definitive ruling on which country has

sovereignty over the land features in Scarborough Shoal and in the
Kalayaan Island Group
The Convention, however, does not address the sovereignty of States over land territory.
Accordingly, this Tribunal has not been asked to, and does not purport to, make any ruling as to
which State enjoys sovereignty over any land territory in the South China Sea, in particular with
respect to the disputes concerning sovereignty over the Spratly Islands or Scarborough Shoal.
None of the Tribunal’s decisions in this Award are dependent on a finding of sovereignty, nor
should anything in this Award be understood to imply a view with respect to questions of land
sovereignty.

It clarified that it would not "...rule on any question of sovereignty over land territory and would not
delimit any maritime boundary between the Parties"

11.Waters on the landward side of the baseline are always called internal
waters.

No. Article 8 of UNCLOS III, provides that waters on the

landward side of the baseline of the territorial sea form part of the
internal waters of the State, except as provided in Archipelagic State
refers to the waters enclosed by the archipelagic baselines drawn in
accordance with article 47 as archipelagic waters.
Hence, not all waters on the landward side of the baseline are
always called internal waters because in Archipelagic States waters
enclosed by the archipelagic baselines are called archipelagic waters.

12.There is always a right of innocent passage through internal waters.

 What is provided under Article 17 of UNCLOS is that, the ships of all
States, whether coastal or land-locked, enjoy the right of innocent
passage through the territorial sea.

There is no right of innocent passage in internal waters, and, unless

in distress, ships and aircraft may not enter or overfly internal waters
without the permission of the coastal nation. Where the
establishment of a straight baseline drawn in conformity with the
1982 LOS Convention has the effect of enclosing as internal waters
areas that had previously not been considered as such, a right of
innocent passage exists in those waters. (The Commander’s
Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations, 2007)

13.There is no difference between an archipelagic state and an archipelago.

An archipelagic state is defined by the UNCLOS III as a State

constituted wholly by one or more archipelagos and may include
other islands.

An archipelago on the other hand is defined by the same as a group

of islands, including parts of islands, interconnecting waters and
other natural features which are so closely interrelated that such
islands, waters and other natural features form an intrinsic
geographical, economic, and political entity, or which historically
have been regarded as such.

14.The sovereignty exercised by an archipelagic state over its archipelagic

waters, as well as the superjacent airspace, the subjacent seabed and
subsoil, and all the resources contain therein, is absolute and limitless.
1.Without prejudice to article 49, an archipelagic State shall respect existing agreements with
other States and shall recognize traditional fishing rights and other legitimate activities of the
immediately adjacent neighbouring States in certain areas falling within archipelagic waters.
The terms and conditions for the exercise of such rights and activities, including the nature, the
extent and the areas to which they apply, shall, at the request of any of the States concerned,
be regulated by bilateral agreements between them. Such rights shall not be transferred to or
shared with third States or their nationals.

2. An archipelagic State shall respect existing submarine cables laid by other States and passing
through its waters without making a landfall. An archipelagic State shall permit the
maintenance and replacement of such cables upon receiving due notice of their location and
the intention to repair or replace them.

15.Archipelagic sea lane passage has no similarities with transit passage.

The statement is false because archipelagic sea lane passage has

similarities with transit passage.

Transit passage means the exercise in accordance with this Part of the freedom
of navigation and overflight solely for the purpose of continuous and expeditious transit
of the strait between one part of the high seas or an exclusive economic zone and
another part of the high seas or an exclusive economic zone. Archipelagic sea lanes
passage means the exercise in accordance with this Convention of the rights of
navigation and overflight in the normal mode solely for the purpose of continuous,
expeditious and unobstructed transit between one part of the high seas or an exclusive
economic zone and another part of the high seas or an exclusive economic zone.
“Articles 39, 40, 42 and 44 apply mutatis mutandis to archipelagic sea
lanes passage.”

Therefore, the same duties of ships and aircraft during transit

passage provided in Article 39 of the UNCLOS, apply mutatis mutandis to
Article 54 of the UNCLOS which provides for the duties of ships and aircraft
during their passage, research and survey activities, duties of the
archipelagic State and laws and regulations of the archipelagic State
relating to archipelagic sea lanes passage

16.The Philippines may draw straight archipelagic baselines around the

Kalayaan island group.
 Paragraph 574 of the arbitral ruling pointed out that “the Philippines could not
declare archipelagic baselines surrounding the Spratly Islands.” It explained:
“Article 47 of the Convention limits the use of archipelagic baselines to
circumstances where ‘within such baselines are included the main islands and an
area in which the ratio of the area of the water to the area of the land, including
atolls, is between 1 to 1 and 9 to 1.” And paragraph 599: “The ratio of water to
land in the Spratly Islands would greatly exceed 9:1 under any conceivable system
of baselines.” Indeed, 98 percent of the Spratlys is made up of water.

An archipelagic State may draw straight archipelagic baselines joining the outermost points of
the outermost islands and drying reefs of the archipelago provided that within such baselines
are included the main islands and an area in which the ratio of the area of the water to the area
of the land, including atolls, is between 1 to 1 and 9 to 1.

17.Norway and Australia are examples of UNCLOS-compliant archipelagos.

No. Both Norway and Australia are not archipelagos, although

they are coastal states. Under Article 46, paragraph (b) of the
UNCLOS:

(b) "archipelago" means a group of islands, including parts

of islands, interconnecting waters and other natural
features which are so closely interrelated that such
islands, waters and other natural features form an
intrinsic geographical, economic and political entity, or
which historically have been regarded as such.
 The geographical features of Norway and Australia do not meet
definition provided under the above-mentioned provision.

18.The only criteria for drawing archipelagic baseline is that the baseline mist
not depart from the general configuration of the archipelago.

As per Article 47 of the UNCLOS, the ff. are the criteria for drawing
archipelagic baseline:

1. An archipelagic State may draw straight archipelagic baselines joining the

outermost points of the outermost islands and drying reefs of the
archipelago provided that within such baselines are included the main
islands and an area in which the ratio of the area of the water to the area
of the land, including atolls, is between 1 to 1 and 9 to 1.

2. The length of such baselines shall not exceed 100 nautical miles, except
that up to 3 per cent of the total number of baselines enclosing any
archipelago may exceed that length, up to a maximum length of 125
nautical miles.

3. The drawing of such baselines shall not depart to any appreciable extent
from the general configuration of the archipelago.

4. Such baselines shall not be drawn to and from low-tide elevations, unless
lighthouses or similar installations which are permanently above sea level
have been built on them or where a low-tide elevation is situated wholly
or partly at a distance not exceeding the breadth of the territorial sea from
the nearest island.
 5. The system of such baselines shall not be applied by an archipelagic State
in such a manner as to cut off from the high seas or the exclusive
economic zone the territorial sea of another State.

6. If a part of the archipelagic waters of an archipelagic State lies between

two parts of an immediately adjacent neighbouring State, existing rights
and all other legitimate interests which the latter State has traditionally
exercised in such waters and all rights stipulated by agreement between
those States shall continue and be respected.

7. For the purpose of computing the ratio of water to land under paragraph l,
land areas may include waters lying within the fringing reefs of islands and
atolls, including that part of a steep-sided oceanic plateau which is
enclosed or nearly enclosed by a chain of limestone islands and drying
reefs lying on the perimeter of the plateau.
8. The baselines drawn in accordance with this article shall be shown on
charts of a scale or scales adequate for ascertaining their position.
Alternatively, lists of geographical coordinates of points, specifying the
geodetic datum, may be substituted.

19.Under the archipelagic doctrine, the waters around, between, and

connecting the islands of the archipelago form part of the territorial sea of
the archipelagic state.

Under this concept ("archipelagic doctrine"), an archipelago shall be regarded

as a single unit, so that 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 state, and are subject to its exclusive sovereignty. In
 addition, the waters within the archipelagic baseline shall be deemed as
archipelagic waters.

20.The breadth of the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the exclusive
economic zone, and the continental shelf of an archipelagic state shall be
measured from the closing lines used to delimit internal waters.

Article 48 of the UNCLOS III provides that the breadth of the

territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the exclusive economic zone and
the continental shelf shall be measured from archipelagic baselines
drawn in accordance with article 47. Consequently, Article 47 of the
UNCLOS states that straight archipelagic baselines may be drawn by
an Archipelagic State joining the outermost points of the outermost
islands and drying reefs of the archipelago. On the other hand,
closing lines used to delimit internal waters as provided in Article 50
may be drawn at the mouth of a river in accordance with Article 9,
across the mouth of a bay in accordance with Article 10, or by using
the outermost permanent harbor works in accordance with Article
11. Archipelagic baseline is different from the closing lines used to
delimit internal waters, hence the statement was false.

21.Ships and aircraft of all States enjoy the right of innocent passage though
archipelagic waters.
Ships enjoy the right of innocent passage in the territorial sea.
Innocent passage does not include a right for aircraft overflight of the
territorial sea. (The Commander’s Handbook on the Law of Naval
Operations, 2007)

The right of innocent passage only applies to foreign vessels. Aircraft

in flight are not entitled to innocent passage and thus aircraft must
remain onboard vessels during innocent passage. (Law of the Sea: A
Policy Primer, n.d.)
22.The rights enjoyed by foreign ships in archipelagic sea lane passage is the
same as the right to innocent passage enjoyed by foreign ships in
archipelagic waters.

The right of innocent passage is for transit by ships through all other archipelagic
waters except for internal waters of an archipelagic state; whereas archipelagic sea
lanes passage is for transit by ships and aircraft in the designated sea lanes or through
routes normally used for international navigation. The right of innocent passage can be
suspended whenever it is essential for the protection of the security of the archipelagic
state whereas, the right of archipelagic sea lanes passage is a non-suspendable right.

23.The UNCLOS-prescribed rights for foreign vessels to overflight, fishing,

scientific research, laying of submarine cables, and mining is applicable in
the internal waters.

The statement is false because the UNCLOS-prescribed rights for

foreign vessels to overflight, fishing, scientific research, laying of
submarine cables, and mining is not applicable in the internal
waters.

The above mentioned rights enshrined in Article 87 of the UNCLOS is

not applicable in the internal waters because Article 86 of the
UNCLOS expressly stated that the “Application of the provisions of
this Part (Part VII, High Seas) apply to all parts of the sea that are
not included in the exclusive economic zone, in the territorial sea or
in the internal waters of a State, or in the archipelagic waters of an
archipelagic State. This article does not entail any abridgement
of the freedoms enjoyed by all States in the exclusive economic
zone in accordance with article 58.”

Therefore, the enshrined rights in Article 87 of the UNCLOS, being

one of the provisions of the Part VII, is not applicable in
internal waters.
24.Ships of all states enjoy the right of innocent passage in the internal waters.

Article 17 of the UNCLOS states that, “ships of all States, whether

coastal or land-locked, enjoy the right of innocent passage through the
territorial sea” and not within the internal waters.

The baseline is also the line which establishes the outer limit of the
internal waters in which the State exercises its full sovereignty and where
the right of innocent passage does not apply. The coastal state is free to
make laws relating to its internal waters, regulate any use, and use any
resource. In the absence of agreements to the contrary, foreign vessels
have no right of passage within internal waters, and this lack of right
to innocent passage is the key difference between internal waters and
territorial waters. (UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, Part II, Article 2)

25.Collection of giant clams by a foreign vessel in a coastal state’s territorial

sea is not a prohibited act in the UNCLOS, and may thus be part of the right
of innocent passage.

There is nothing in the UNCLOS that allows any foreign state to

exploit the resources found in the territorial sea of an archipelagic state.
What is provided under Article 24 of the UNCLOS is the duty of the latter to
allow innocent passage of foreign vessels through its territorial sea. Thus,
the collection of giant clams by a foreign vessel in a coastal state’s
territorial sea is a prohibit act in the UNCLOS.

26.The breadth of the contiguous zone is always 12 nautical miles from the
edge of the territorial sea.
 Article 33, p.2 of the UNCLOS states that “The contiguous zone may
not extend beyond 24 nautical miles from the baselines from which
the breadth of the territorial sea is measured.”

27.Indonesia is the world’s largest Muslin state. It asserts that, in retaliation

for the masscre that happened in the mosque in Christchurch, New
Zealand, Indonesia can validly ban ships bearing the Australian flag from
innocent passage in its territorial waters.

1. The coastal State shall not hamper the innocent passage of foreign ships through the
territorial sea except in accordance with this Convention. In particular, in the application
of this Convention or of any laws or regulations adopted in conformity with this
Convention, the coastal State shall not:
(a) impose requirements on foreign ships which have the practical effect of denying or
impairing the right of innocent passage; or
(b) discriminate in form or in fact against the ships of any State or against ships carrying
cargoes to, from or on behalf of any State