Magallona vs Ermita

GR No. 187167

FACTS:

- In 1961, Congress passed RA 3046 (an act define the baselines of the territorial sea of the
Philippines.
- March 2009, RA 3046 was amended by Congress by enacting RA 9522, the statute now under
scrutiny. Change was driven because of the need to make RA 3046 compliant with terms set by
United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III)
- Requirements complied with are : (1) to shorten one baseline, (2) to optimize the location of some
basepoints, and (3) classify KIG and Scarborough Shoal as ‘regime of islands’.
- Petitioner assails the constitutionality of the law:
o It reduces the Philippine maritime territory under Article 1
o Opens the country’s waters to innocent and sea lanes passages hence undermining our
sovereignty and security.
o Treating KIG and Scarborough as ‘regime of islands’ would weaken our claim over those
territories.

ISSUE:

- Whether or not RA 9522 is unconstitutional.

RULING:

- Petitioner’s theory fails to persuade.

- UNCLOS III has nothing to do with acquisition or loss of territory.
- If passages is the issue, domestically. The legislature can enact legislation designating routes
within the archipelagic waters to regulate innocent and sea lanes passages. But in absence of
such, international law norms operate.
- With regards to KIG issue, RA 9522 just followed the basepoints mapped by RA 3046 and in fact,
it increased Philippines’ total maritime space.