Congress passed Republic Act No. 7711 to comply with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
In a petition filed with the Supreme Court, Anak Ti Ilocos, an association of Ilocano professionals, argued that Republic Act No. 7711discarded the definition of the Philippine territory under the Treaty of Paris and in related treaties; excluded the Kalayaan Islands and the Scarborough Shoals from the Philippine Archipelagic baselines; and converted internal waters into archipelagic waters.
Is the petition meritorious? (6%)
Suggested answer only. Not an official answer and not legal advice.
No, the petition is not meritorious. Under Magallona vs Ermita, baseline laws under UNCLOS III are statutory tools to demarcate maritime zones, not to delineate territory. UNCLOS III does not regulate territorial acquisition
Unlock the full Political Law answers365 days of full access. GCash, Maya and card accepted.
This is not an official scoring system and carries no weight with the Supreme Court or any bar review provider. It measures how much of the suggested answer's wording your response covers, not whether your reasoning is correct. For practice only.
Quick check
Under Magallona v. Ermita, what is the primary purpose of baseline laws passed pursuant to UNCLOS III?
Baseline laws serve as statutory mechanisms to demarcate maritime zones rather than define territorial boundaries.
Why are the Kalayaan Islands and Scarborough Shoal classified under a 'Regime of Islands' under the baselines law?
Classifying outlying islands under a regime of islands maintains sovereignty while adhering to UNCLOS baseline standards.
Does converting internal waters into archipelagic waters landward of baselines diminish Philippine sovereignty?
The State maintains full constitutional and international sovereignty over archipelagic waters landward of baselines.
What role does UNCLOS III play regarding territorial acquisition or loss under international law?
Choices available with full access.
What is the constitutional status of a petition claiming that the Archipelagic Baselines Law unconstitutionally discarded Philippine territory?
Choices available with full access.
Learn more about these topics
1. Maritime Baselines Purpose
Under Magallona v. Ermita, baseline laws enacted pursuant to UNCLOS III are statutory mechanisms designed to demarcate maritime zones, continental shelves, and exclusive economic zones. Baseline laws do not delineate or define national territory, nor do they operate as instruments for acquiring or relinquishing territorial sovereignty. UNCLOS III regulates maritime space and baseline construction without altering existing territorial boundaries established under international treaties. Consequently, statutory baseline adjustments do not discard or diminish national territory defined under historical treaties like the Treaty of Paris.
2. Regime of Islands
Under Article 121 of UNCLOS III, outlying island territories such as the Kalayaan Island Group and Scarborough Shoal are classified under a Regime of Islands. Drawing straight archipelagic baselines around distant offshore features would violate international length limits and enclose vast ocean spaces non-conformable to UNCLOS rules. Classifying these outlying territories under a regime of islands preserves full Philippine sovereignty over them while maintaining compliance with international baseline standards. This statutory classification ensures maritime zone claims remain valid without surrendering territorial ownership.
3. Sovereign Archipelagic Waters
Converting waters landward of archipelagic baselines from internal waters to archipelagic waters does not erode state sovereignty. Under UNCLOS III and Article I of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, the Philippine State exercises full sovereignty over its archipelagic waters, including the seabed, subsoil, and superjacent airspace. Granting innocent passage through archipelagic sea lanes to foreign vessels does not divest the State of territorial sovereignty. Sovereign control remains complete, subject only to reasonable regulation of innocent passage under international law.