KALAYAAN GROUP OF ISLAND

The Spratly Islands or so called the “Kalayaan group of Island” are located in the
so-called South China Sea and consist of a number of small islands, reefs, atolls and
rocks. These islands have been disputed with varying degrees of intensity for more than
50 years. They continue to be a point of dispute between six different states to this day.
The Spratly Islands are claimed in whole or part by The People’s Republic of China
(PRC), The Republic of China (ROC/Taiwan), The Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and
Brunei.
Contrary to the thinking in certain quarters, the Philippines does not lay claim to
the entire South China Sea (SCS), but rather to that smaller area of the SCS off the
country’s western seaboard that is well within its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and
continental shelf and is known as the West Philippine Sea (WPS). The Philippine
government spelled out this difference when President Benigno Aquino Jr.
issued Administrative Order 29 on September 5, 2012, which renamed the maritime
areas to the country’s west. The Philippines is an archipelagic, maritime state, which
makes the WPS a matter of serious national importance given its strategic location,
security implications and resources.
The Philippines had been seeking to align its position in the WPS with
international law. In 2009, the country passed its baselines law, wherein the Kalayaan
Island Group and Bajo de Masinloc were placed under a “regime of islands” consistent
with UNCLOS, signaling that Manila has no interest in drawing EEZs and ECSs for its
WPS features, which would excessively expand the country’s maritime entitlements and
cause it to overlap with the maritime claims of other SCS disputants. The Philippines is
also advocating a rules-based approach that calls for the delineation of areas under
dispute from those that are undisputed, to facilitate talks on functional cooperation or
joint development in disputed areas. This position had been communicated at regional
meetings and summits on the SCS issue. The recent filing of a legal challenge against
China’s claims in the WPS can also be understood as resorting to international law to
encourage a rival claimant to clarify the extent, nature and bases of its claims.