Fall in L(aw)ve.

By Dennie Idea

Magallona v. Ermita (Case Digest)

 MissIdea  Uncategorized  August 24, 2014August 24, 2014 2 Minutes

MAGALLONA v. ERMITA, G.R. 187167, August 16, 2011

Facts:

In 1961, Congress passed R.A. 3046 demarcating the maritime baselines of the Philippines as an
Archepelagic State pursuant to UNCLOS I of 9158, codifying the sovereignty of State parties over their
territorial sea. Then in 1968, it was amended by R.A. 5446, correcting some errors in R.A. 3046 reserving
the drawing of baselines around Sabah.

In 2009, it was again amended by R.A. 9522, to be compliant with the UNCLOS III of 1984. The
requirements complied with are: to shorten one baseline, to optimize the location of some basepoints
and classify KIG and Scarborough Shoal as ‘regime of islands’.

Petitioner now assails the constitutionality of the law for three main reasons:

1. it reduces the Philippine maritime territory under Article 1;

2. it opens the country’s waters to innocent and sea lanes passages hence undermining our sovereignty
and security; and

3. treating KIG and Scarborough as ‘regime of islands’ would weaken our claim over those territories.

Issue: Whether R.A. 9522 is constitutional?

Ruling:

1. UNCLOS III has nothing to do with acquisition or loss of territory. it is just a codified norm that
regulates conduct of States. On the other hand, RA 9522 is a baseline law to mark out basepoints along
coasts, serving as geographic starting points to measure. it merely notices the international community
of the scope of our maritime space.

2. 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 the absence of such, international
law norms operate.

the fact that for archipelagic states, their waters are subject to both passages does not place them in lesser
footing vis a vis continental coastal states. Moreover, RIOP is a customary international law, no modern
state can invoke its sovereignty to forbid such passage.
3. On the KIG issue, RA 9522 merely followed the basepoints mapped by RA 3046 and in fact, it
increased the Phils.’ total maritime space. Moreover, the itself commits the Phils.’ continues claim of
sovereignty and jurisdiction over KIG.

If not, it would be a breach to 2 provisions of the UNCLOS III:

Art. 47 (3): ‘drawing of basepoints shall not depart to any appreciable extent from the general
configuration of the archipelago’.

Art 47 (2): the length of baselines shall not exceed 100 mm.

KIG and SS are far from our baselines, if we draw to include them, we’ll breach the rules: that it should
follow the natural configuration of the archipelago.

Advertisements

REPORT THIS AD

Published by MissIdea

Dennie Vieve Idea graduated Magna Cum Laude with the degree of AB Political Science at Far Eastern
University-Manila. She was a working law student and finished Juris Doctor (Law) at New Era University College
of Law in Quezon City Currently she is an Environmental Management Specialist at Environmental Management
Bureau (NCR). Previous work exeprience: - Legal Assistant, Pollution Adjudication Board Secretariat of the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) - Legislative staff of Congresswoman Emmi De Jesus
of Gabriela Women's Party Aside from politics and law, she also loves to read Young Adult and ChickLit books.
She is also into TV series like How I met your mother, Big Bang Theory, Scandal, How To Get Away with Murder
and Pre y Li le Liars. Ignorantia legis non excusat is her favorite legal maxim. :) View all posts by MissIdea

7 thoughts on “Magallona v. Ermita (Case Digest)”

resuscitatedlass says:
June 10, 2015 at 1:58 PM
Thank you very much!

 Reply
MissDennieIdea says:
June 15, 2015 at 9:45 AM
You’re welcome

 Reply
ronaldjay41 says:
August 23, 2016 at 1:43 PM
thank you very much for the digest. sana po nilagay mu name mu . thanks

 Reply
MissDennieIdea says:
September 7, 2016 at 11:28 AM
You’re welcome po. I’m Dennie Idea btw.

 Reply
ronald41 says:
August 23, 2016 at 1:46 PM
thank you very much for the digest.

 Reply
Mike says:
July 25, 2017 at 1:00 PM
Thank you this case digest is exactly what I need

 Reply
MissDennieIdea says:
July 26, 2017 at 6:49 AM
Yey glad to hear that. You’re welcome po

 Reply

Blog at WordPress.com. Do Not Sell My Personal Information