The Philippines has been engaged in a long-standing and

complex battle for sovereignty, particularly in the context

of the dispute between China and the Philippines in the
South China Sea. Since the inception of this conflict, the
Philippines has been passionately pursuing its rightful
claim, backed by legal evidence.

AB Political Science
Cagayan State University
/'sɒv∙rən∙ti/

The possession of sovereign power; supreme political authority; paramount control of

the constitution and frame of government and Its administration; the self-sufficient
source of political power, from which all specific political powers are derived; the
international independence of a state, combined with the right and power of regulating its
internal affairs without foreign dictation; also a political society, or state, which is
sovereign and independent.

“The freedom of the nation has its correlate in the sovereignty of the nation. Political
sovereignty is the assertion of the self-determinate will of the organic people, and in this there is
the manifestation of its freedom. It is in and through the determination of its sovereignty that the
order of the nation is constituted and maintained.”
A. The President of the Philippines in his capacity as the Commander-in-Chief of the
Armed Forces

B. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court

C. The Filipino People

D. The Chief of Police who has the trust and confidence of the people through the
President of the Philippines
A. The President of the Philippines in his capacity as the Commander-in-Chief of the
Armed Forces

B. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court

C. The Filipino People

D. The Chief of Police who has the trust and confidence of the people through the
President of the Philippines

Section 1 Article II, 1987 Philippine Constitution

The Philippines is a democratic and republican State.
Sovereignty resides in the people and all government
authority emanates from them.
 South
China Sea
Tensions continue to rise to this day, with
China refusing to recognize the Permanent
Court of Arbitration ruling won by the
Philippines in 2016, despite the latter’s
repeated invocation of that ruling and
other nations’ overlapping claims in the
disputed territorial waters.
Tensions between the Philippines and China have escalated due to competing
territorial claims and resource exploitation in the South China Sea.

The Philippines sought international arbitration to resolve the dispute, leading

to significant developments in the legal and diplomatic arenas.

The South China Sea is a buffer-zone for the southern Chinese mainland.
China's control of the region will allow it to create a military barrier from
which it can challenge any future military threat.
CHINESE PRESIDENT
“China has indisputable sovereignty over the islands in the
South China Sea and the adjacent waters and enjoys
sovereign rights and jurisdiction over the relevant waters, as
well as the seabed and subsoils thereof.”

The terms “adjacent” and “relevant” waters are not UNCLOS terms. China
refuses to explain the meaning of these terms. This means that China is claiming
all islands and waters within the nine-dash line within the areas they have marked,
which were not specified.
 China had been building artificial islands and air bases in the
islands in the South China Sea, explaining that its purpose is to
“improve the working and living conditions of personnel stationed
there to better fulfil our international obligations concerning maritime
search and rescue, disaster prevention, and mitigation, and to enable
China to provide better services to vessels from China, her neighbors,
and other countries sailing in the South China Sea.”

This island-building violates the 2002 ASEAN-China Declaration

of Conduct, which states that the parties undertake to exercise self-
restraint, like “refraining from action of inhabiting on presently
uninhabited islands, reefs, shoals, cays and other features.”
• The Philippines loses about 80 percent of its EEZ in the West
Philippine Sea, including the entire Reed Bank and part of the
Malampaya Gas Field.
• Malaysia also loses about 80 percent of its EEZ in Sabah and
Sarawak, as well as most of its gas and oil fields in the area.
• Vietnam loses about 50 percent of its total EEZ.
• Indonesia loses about 30 percent of its EEZ facing the South China
Sea in Natuna Islands, whose surrounding waters comprise the
largest gas field in the South China Sea.
PHILIPPINE PRESIDENT
The part of the South China Sea that is
closest to the Philippines is called the
West Philippine Sea.

It is also the area that is within the

country’s exclusive economic zone.

An “exclusive economic zone,” or

“EEZ” is an area of the ocean, generally
extending 200 nautical miles (230 miles)
beyond a nation's territorial sea, within
which a coastal nation has jurisdiction
over both living and nonliving resources.
The Philippines filed its case in 2013, after China seized a reef over which both
countries claim sovereignty.

The main issue before the panel was the legality of China’s claim to waters within
a “nine-dash line” that appears on official Chinese maps and encircles as much as
90 percent of the South China Sea, an area the size of Mexico. The Philippines
had asked the tribunal to find the claim to be in violation of the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea, which both China and the Philippines have
ratified.

The New York Times

• First, that China is not entitled to exercise what it refers to as ‘historic rights’
over the waters, seabed and subsoil beyond the limits of its entitlements under
the Convention;
• Second, that the so-called ‘nine-dash line’ has no basis whatsoever under
international law insofar as it purports to define the limits of China’s claim to
‘historic rights’;
• Third, that the various maritime features relied upon by China as a basis upon
which to assert its claims in the South China Sea are not islands that generate
entitlement to an exclusive economic zone or continental shelf. Rather, some
are ‘rocks’…; others are low-tide elevations; and still others are permanently
submerged. … China’s reclamations activities cannot lawfully change the
original nature and character of these features;
• Fourth, that China has breached the Convention by interfering with the
Philippines’ exercise of its sovereign rights and jurisdiction; and

• Fifth, that China has irreversibly damaged the regional marine environment, in
breach of [the Convention], by its destruction of coral reefs in the South China
Sea, including areas within the Philippines’ [exclusive economic zone], by its
destructive and hazardous fishing practices, and by its harvesting of
endangered species.
On July 12, 2016, the Philippines won
the arbitration case it lodged against
China after the Permanent Court of
Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague,
Netherlands invalidated Beijing's
nine-dash line claim that covers
nearly the entire South China Sea.

Philippine Information Agency

The Permanent Court of Arbitration’s 479-page ruling was overwhelmingly favorable to the Philippines’
position, ruling several elements of China’s claims in the South China Sea unlawful. Key findings of the
ruling include:
• China’s claims to historic rights and resources within its nine-dash line have no legal basis.
• None of China’s claimed land features in the Spratly Islands are an island capable of generating a
200-nm exclusive economic zone.
• China violated the Philippines’ sovereign rights by interfering with Philippine oil exploration
activities, prohibiting Philippine fishing vessels from operating, failing to prevent Chinese fishing
vessels from operating, and conducting land reclamation in areas where the Philippines enjoys
sovereign rights to explore for and exploit natural resources.
• China violated its marine environmental protection obligations under UNCLOS by causing “severe
harm to the coral reef environment” with its land reclamation activities and harvesting of
endangered species.
• China is legally bound by the tribunal’s ruling by virtue of its ratification of UNCLOS. The extent to
which, and how, the tribunal’s ruling might be enforced is an open question, however; the
Philippines and others may be able to pursue a range of legal options to punish China should it fail
to abide by the ruling, or open negotiations to resolve the matter.
The tribunal cited China’s
construction of a large
artificial island on an atoll
known as Mischief Reef.
China has built a military
airstrip, naval berths and sports
fields on the island, but the
tribunal ruled that it was in
Philippine waters.
 China’s immediate reaction to the ruling was to release two
statements: a notably subdued Government statement that reaffirmed its
“territorial sovereignty and maritime rights” in the South China Sea and
expressed its desire to “resolve the relevant disputes peacefully”
without making explicit reference to either the Philippines or the
arbitration proceedings, and a much more hardline statement from the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs declaring that the ruling is “null and void
and has no binding force.” China’s state-affiliated press simultaneously
released a slew of articles condemning the ruling.
 In the short term, the ruling and China’s rejection of
it will heighten tensions in the region and strain China’s
relations with its neighbors, the United States, and any
other country that publicly supports the ruling. The long
term implications of the ruling are likely to be much
more significant, with potentially far-reaching
consequences.
The South China Sea dispute has created Tensions over the territorial dispute have
geopolitical instability in the region, led to strained diplomatic relations
impacting trade routes and regional between the Philippines, China, and
peace. other involved countries.

The dispute has raised concerns globally, prompting international dialogues and efforts to
mitigate escalating tensions and maintain stability.
To be sufficiently up to tasks such as defending our
sovereignty, the AFP needs to drastically improve
its military assets and materiel that focus on
aerospace and maritime capabilities. This is possible
through entering into agreements with its allies,
such as the United States. An example of this is the
Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement between
the two countries.
The EDCA is an agreement between the Philippines and the United
States which is envisioned to advance the implementation of the PH-US
Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT). It is designed to promote between the
Philippines and its defense treaty ally the United States the following:

• Interoperability
• Capacity building towards AFP modernization
• Strengthening AFP for external defense
• Maritime Security
• Maritime Domain Awareness
• Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Response (HADR)
There are currently nine EDCA sites in
the country: Basa Air Base in Pampanga,
Fort Magsaysay in Nueva Ecija, Lumbia
Air Base in Cagayan de Oro City,
Antonio Bautista Air Base in Palawan,
Mactan-Benito Ebuen Air Base in Cebu,
Naval Base Camilo Osias in Sta. Ana in
Cagayan, Lal-lo Airport also in
Cagayan, Camp Melchor Dela Cruz in
Gamu in Isabela and Balabac Island in
Palawan.
Encouraging unity and solidarity Urging greater advocacy and Promoting continued diplomatic
among nations, especially in the awareness campaigns to shed light engagement and multilateral
ASEAN Region in standing up for on the complexities of the dispute efforts to peacefully resolve the
international law and the and garner broader international territorial conflict in the South
sovereignty of nations affected by support. China Sea. Continued assertion of
the South China Sea dispute. the ruling in diplomatic
engagements does not mean
provoking war, but maintaining a
strong position that relates to
Philippine sovereignty, that this
state must be free from external
control.
 The Philippines should push for a substantive and
effective Code of Conduct between ASEAN and China,
while continuing to pursue bilateral talks with Beijing on
maritime disputes. The country should also try to boost
regional cooperation on issues of common concern, such
as fisheries management and law enforcement.
Under negotiation since 2002, the Code of Conduct for the South China
Sea could be, if it becomes a reality, one of the few common
denominators among Beijing and the ASEAN claimants.

The Philippines should continue to push for progress both at the

negotiating table and behind the scenes. The Philippines could lobby
for the creation of preparatory “working groups” that would help
achieve bilateral or trilateral consensus on vital issues among key
claimant states prior to going to the Code of Conduct negotiation table.
The Philippines should also push for relevant content in the Code of
Conduct to make the document more substantive. As one of the
claimant states most affected by incidents at sea, the Philippines would
have an interest in clarifying draft clauses such as language about “self-
restraint.” It could also promote clear phrasing regarding enforcement
mechanisms and dispute settlement provisions, including by
emphasizing the relevant mechanisms that exist under UNCLOS, and
more broadly advocate for adherence to accepted principles of
proportionality and good faith in resolving contentious issues.