The Legal Foundation of Philippine Sovereignty
In the heated discussions surrounding the West Philippine Sea, emotions often overshadow facts. Many Filipinos remain unaware that our nation stands on solid legal ground thanks to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). This international agreement, signed by 168 countries and effective since 1994, establishes a rules-based system for ocean governance that replaced the outdated 'first discoverer' principle.
UNCLOS guarantees every coastal state an Exclusive Economic Zone extending 200 nautical miles from its baselines. For an archipelago like the Philippines, this means the waters between our islands and up to this boundary are legally recognized as belonging to our nation under contemporary international law, not based on historical claims alone.
The Historic 2016 Arbitral Tribunal Ruling
The 2016 Arbitral Tribunal decision marked a pivotal moment for the Philippines. The ruling clearly stated that China's 'nine-dash line' claim lacks legal basis under UNCLOS and affirmed Philippine sovereign rights within our Exclusive Economic Zone. The tribunal also documented how China violated these rights by preventing Filipino fishermen from accessing traditional fishing grounds and causing environmental damage to coral reefs around Scarborough Shoal (Bajo de Masinloc).
This decision represented global recognition that maritime claims cannot rely solely on historical narratives but must comply with established international law. Despite China's refusal to acknowledge the ruling, the legal foundation remains intact, supported by the consensus of nations that prefer order over unilateral ambitions.
Global Precedents and Filipino Contribution to Maritime Law
International courts have consistently upheld UNCLOS principles in various maritime disputes worldwide. In the 2021 Somalia versus Kenya case, the International Court of Justice rejected colonial-era boundaries in favor of a maritime line based strictly on UNCLOS. Similarly, in 2017 Ghana versus Côte d'Ivoire and more recent cases like Mauritius versus Maldives (2023) and Nicaragua versus Colombia (2023), historical maps yielded to modern legal standards.
The Philippines' legal position is particularly significant because Filipino diplomats helped shape UNCLOS itself. Senator Arturo M. Tolentino, who led our delegation to the United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, was instrumental in developing the archipelagic doctrine now embedded in the convention. His 1982 work 'The Philippines and the Law of the Sea' championed the vision of archipelagic nations being treated as unified maritime states rather than collections of separate islands vulnerable to division by external powers.
When critics dismiss historical maps like the Murillo Velarde as irrelevant or fraudulent, they miss the crucial point: contemporary maritime disputes are decided by international law that the global community has collectively accepted, not by who first named reefs or charted waters centuries ago.
The West Philippine Sea may remember its history, but it now operates under the higher principle of measured justice based on distance, geography, and international consent. This represents the quiet power of UNCLOS—it has ended the era of empire-based claims and begun the rule of law that protects nations like the Philippines.
