MAGALLONA V ERMITA

UNCLOS III has nothing to do with the acquisition (or loss) of territory. It is a
multilateral treaty regulating, among others, sea-use rights over maritime zones (i.e.,
the territorial waters [12 nautical miles from the baselines], contiguous zone [24
nautical miles from the baselines], exclusive economic zone [200 nautical miles from
the baselines]), and continental shelves that UNCLOS III delimits. [23] UNCLOS III was
the culmination of decades-long negotiations among United Nations members to codify
norms regulating the conduct of States in the world's oceans and submarine areas,
recognizing coastal and archipelagic States' graduated authority over a limited span of
waters and submarine lands along their coasts.

Thus, baselines laws are nothing but statutory mechanisms for UNCLOS III States
parties to delimit with precision the extent of their maritime zones and continental shelves . In
turn, this gives notice to the rest of the international community of the scope of the
maritime space and submarine areas within which States parties exercise treaty-based
rights, namely;

 the exercise of sovereignty over territorial waters (Article 2),

 the jurisdiction to enforce customs, fiscal, immigration, and sanitation laws in the
contiguous zone (Article 33), and
 the right to exploit (emce - exploitation, management, exploitation, and exploration)
the living and non-living resources in the exclusive economic zone (Article 56)
and continental shelf (Article 77).

Hence, far from surrendering the Philippines' claim over the KIG and the Scarborough
Shoal, Congress' decision to classify the KIG and the Scarborough Shoal as "`Regime[s] of
Islands' under the Republic of the Philippines consistent with Article 121" [36] of UNCLOS
III manifests the Philippine State's responsible observance of its pacta sunt
servanda obligation under UNCLOS III. Under Article 121 of UNCLOS III, any "naturally
formed area of land, surrounded by water, which is above water at high tide," such as
portions of the KIG, qualifies under the category of "regime of islands," whose islands
generate their own applicable maritime zones. [37]

UNCLOS III favors States with a long coastline like the Philippines. UNCLOS III creates
a sui generis maritime space - the exclusive economic zone - in waters previously part of
the high seas. UNCLOS III grants new rights to coastal States to exclusively exploit the
resources found within this zone up to 200 nautical miles. [53] UNCLOS III, however,
preserves the traditional freedom of navigation (FON) of other States that attached to
this zone beyond the territorial sea before UNCLOS III.

Petitioners hold the view that, based on the permissive text of UNCLOS III, Congress
was not bound to pass RA 9522. [54] We have looked at the relevant provision of UNCLOS
III[55] and we find petitioners' reading plausible. Nevertheless, the prerogative of
choosing this option belongs to Congress, not to this Court. Moreover, the luxury of
choosing this option comes at a very steep price. Absent an UNCLOS III compliant
baselines 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. This is recipe for a two-fronted disaster: 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.

The enactment of UNCLOS III compliant baselines law for the Philippine archipelago and
adjacent areas, as embodied in RA 9522, allows an internationally-recognized
delimitation of the breadth of the Philippines' maritime zones and continental shelf. RA
9522 is therefore a most vital step on the part of the Philippines in safeguarding its
maritime zones, consistent with the Constitution and our national interest.

ARIGO V SWIFT (2014)

In the landmark case of Oposa v. Factoran, Jr.,13 we recognized the “public right” of
citizens to “a balanced and healthful ecology which, for the first time in our
constitutional history, is solemnly incorporated in the fundamental law.” We declared
that the right to a balanced and healthful ecology need not be written in the
Constitution for it is assumed, like other civil and political rights guaranteed in the Bill
of Rights, to exist from the inception of mankind and it is an issue of transcendental
importance with intergenerational implications. Such right carries with it the correlative
duty to refrain from impairing the environment. 14 cralawlawlibrary

The liberalization of standing first enunciated in Oposa, insofar as it refers to minors

and generations yet unborn, is now enshrined in the Rules which allows the filing of a
citizen suit in environmental cases. The provision on citizen suits in the Rules “collapses
the traditional rule on personal and direct interest, on the principle that humans are
stewards of nature.”16
cralawlawlibrary

The UNCLOS is a product of international negotiation that seeks to balance State

sovereignty (mare clausum) and the principle of freedom of the high seas (mare
liberum).29 The freedom to use the world’s marine waters is one of the oldest
customary principles of international law. 30 The UNCLOS gives to the coastal State
sovereign rights in varying degrees over the different zones of the sea which are: 1)
internal waters, 2) territorial sea, 3) contiguous zone, 4) exclusive economic zone, and
5) the high seas. It also gives coastal States more or less jurisdiction over foreign
vessels depending on where the vessel is located.

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES V PROVINCE OF PALAWAN

Included in the metes and bounds of the Municipality of Kalayaan are the seabed, subsoil,
continental margin, and air space over this territory. This is consistent with Article 76(1) of the United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which states:

1. The continental shelf of a coastal State comprises the seabed and subsoil of the submarine areas
that extend beyond its territorial sea throughout the natural prolongation of its land territory to the
outer edge of the continental margin, or to a distance of 200 nautical miles from the baselines from
which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured where the outer edge of the continental margin
does not extend up to that distance.

cralawlawli