JUSTICE CARPIO

Prof. Merlin M. Magallona, Akbayan Party-List Rep. Risa Hontiveros, Prof. Harry C. Roque,
Jr., And University Of The Philippines College Of Law Students, Alithea Barbara Acas,
Voltaire Alferes, Czarina May Altez, Francis Alvin Asilo, Sheryl Balot, Ruby Amor Barraca,
Jose Javier Bautista, Romina Bernardo, Valerie Pagasa Buenaventura, Edan Marri Ca?Ete,
Vann Allen Dela Cruz, Rene Delorino, Paulyn May Duman, Sharon Escoto, Rodrigo Fajardo
Iii, Girlie Ferrer, Raoulle Osen Ferrer, Carla Regina Grepo, Anna Marie Cecilia Go, Irish Kay
Kalaw, Mary Ann Joy Lee, Maria Luisa Manalaysay, Miguel Rafael Musngi, Michael
Ocampo, Jaklyn Hanna Pineda, William Ragamat, Maricar Ramos, Enrik Fort Revillas,
James Mark Terry Ridon, Johann Frantz Rivera Iv, Christian Rivero, Dianne Marie Roa,
Nicholas Santizo, Melissa Christina Santos, Cristine Mae Tabing, Vanessa Anne Torno,
Maria Ester Vanguardia, And Marcelino Veloso Iii, Petitioners,

Vs. Hon. Eduardo Ermita, In His Capacity As Executive Secretary

This case is a writ of certiorari and prohibition assailing the constitutionality of RA 9522
adjusting the countrys archipelagic baselines and classifying the baseline regime of nearby
territories.
FACTS

CERTIORARI - a writ (order) of a higher court to a lower court to send all the
documents in a case to it so the higher court can review the lower court's decision.
1958 -the Convention on Territorial Seas and Contiguous Zone(UNCLOS I) was framed.

1968 RA 5446 was enacted correcting the typographical errors and reserving the drawing
of baselines around Sabah in North Borneo.
UNCLOS III prescribed the water-land ratio, length and contour of water baselines of
archipelagic States like the Philippines and sets the deadline for the filing of applications for
the extended continental shelf.
RA 9552
enacted by Congress on March 2009
created in order to amend RA 3046 to comply with the standards of UNCLOS III
shortened one baseline
optimized he location of some basepoints around the Philippine archipelago
classified adjacent territories namely the Kalayaan Group of Islands(KIG) and the
Scarborough Shoal as regimes of Islands, whose islands generate their own
applicable maritime zones.
REGIME OF ISLANDS
Article121
Regime of islands
1.
An island is a naturally formed area of land, surrounded by water, which is above water
at high tide.
2.
Except as provided for in paragraph 3, the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the
exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf of an island are determined in accordance with
the provisions of this Convention applicable to other land territory.
3.
Rocks which cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own shall have no
exclusive economic zone or continental shelf.
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea - Part VIII

UNCLOS stands for United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
1960 -UNCLOS II which was held in Geneva attempted to fill the gaps of the previous
convention but to no avail.
1961 Congress passed RA 3046 demarcating the maritime baselines of the Philippines as
an archipelagic state.

Petitioners, professors of law, law students and a legislator, in their respective capacities
as "citizens, taxpayers or legislators, as the case may be, assail the constitutionality of RA
9522 on the grounds that:

(1) RA 9522 reduces Philippine maritime territory, and logically, the reach of the Philippine
state's sovereign power, in violation of Article 1 of the 1987 Constitution, embodying the
terms of the Treaty of Paris11 and ancillary treaties
(2) RA 9522 opens the country's waters landward of the baselines to maritime passage by
all vessels and aircrafts, undermining Philippine sovereignty and national security,
contravening the country's nuclear-free policy, and damaging marine resources, in violation
of relevant constitutional provisions.
(3)RA 9522's treatment of the KIG as "regime of islands" not only results in the loss of a
large maritime area but also prejudices the livelihood of subsistence fishermen
To buttress their argument of territorial diminution, petitioners facially attack RA 9522 for
what it excluded and included - its failure to reference either the Treaty of Paris or Sabah
and its use of UNCLOS III's framework of regime of islands to determine the maritime zones
of the KIG and the Scarborough Shoal.
Respondent officials raised threshold issues questioning:
(1) the petition's compliance with the case or controversy requirement for judicial review
grounded on petitioners' alleged lack of locus standi and
(2) the propriety of the writs of certiorari and prohibition to assail the constitutionality of
RA 9522.
(3)the normative force, under international law, of petitioners' assertion that what Spain
ceded to the United States under the Treaty of Paris were the islands and all the waters
found within the boundaries of the rectangular area drawn under the Treaty of Paris.
On the merits, respondents defended RA 9522 as the country's compliance with the terms
of UNCLOS III, preserving Philippine territory over the KIG or Scarborough Shoal.
Respondents add that RA 9522 does not undermine the country's security, environment
and economic interests or relinquish the Philippines' claim over Sabah.

ISSUES and HELD RATIO

1. Whether petitioners possess locus standi to bring this suit

The court recognizes petitioners' locus standi as citizens with constitutionally sufficient
interest in the resolution of the merits of the case which undoubtedly raises issues of
national significance necessitating urgent resolution.

2. Whether the writs of certiorari and prohibition are the proper remedies to assail the
constitutionality of RA 9522.
Although respondents contended that there should be a "strict observance of the offices of
the writs of certiorari and prohibition" the courts holds that "When this Court exercises its
constitutional power of judicial review, however, we have, by tradition, viewed the writs of
certiorari and prohibition as proper remedial vehicles to test the constitutionality of
statutes,19 and indeed, of acts of other branches of government.20 Issues of constitutional
import are sometimes crafted out of statutes which, while having no bearing on the
personal interests of the petitioners, carry such relevance in the life of this nation that the
Court inevitably finds itself constrained to take cognizance of the case and pass upon the
issues raised, non-compliance with the letter of procedural rules notwithstanding." , hence
the statute sought to be reviewed by the court.
3) Whether or not RA 9522 is unconstitutional
a) National Territory
1. UNCLOS III is not concerned with the acquisition or loss of territory. It is a multilateral
treaty regulating, among others, sea-use rights over maritime zones and continent shelves
that UNCLOS III delimits.
2. Baseline laws mere statutory mechanisms enacted simply to mark-out the basepoints
from which baselines are drawn to serve as the starting points from which to measure the
breadth of the maritime zones and continental shelf.
3. The baselines of the Philippines have to be drawn in accordance with RA 9522 because
this law conforms to UNCLOS III

4. States acquire or lose territory through occupation, accretion, cession and prescription
and not by executing multilateral treaties on the regulations of sea-use rights or enacting
statutes to comply with the treaty's terms to delimit maritime zones and continental
shelves.
b) Regime of Islands
5. RA 9522 which classified the KIG and Scarborough Shoal as "regime of islands" does not
weaken the Philippines' claim of sovereignty. In fact, RA 9522 recognizes that the
Philippines exercise sovereignty and jurisdiction over these areas.
6. If RA 9522 enclosed KIG and Scarborough Shoal as part of the Philippine archipelago, the
Philippines would have committed a breach of two provisions of UNCLOS III:
(a) Article 47 (3) of UNCLOS III requires that "[t]he drawing of such baselines shall not depart
to any appreciable extent from the general configuration of the archipelago."
(b) Article 47 (2) of UNCLOS III requires that "the length of the baselines shall not exceed
100 nautical miles, save for three per cent (3%) of the total number of baselines which can
reach up to 125 nautical miles."
c) Internal Waters
7. UNCLOS III and RA 9522 complies with the Constitution's delineation of internal waters
8. Whether referred to as "internal waters" under Article I of the Constitution or
"archipelagic waters" under UNCLOS III, Article 49 of the UNCLOS recognizes that a State
party has sovereignty over the body of water lying landward of the baselines, including the
air space over it and the submarine areas underneath.
9. Sovereignty, however, does not preclude the operation of international law subjecting
the territorial sea or archipelagic waters to burdens of maintaining unimpeded, expeditious
international navigation consistent with the principle of freedom of navigation.
10.To comply with international law, the Congress may pass laws designating routes within
the archipelagic waters to regulate innocent and sea lanes passage.

FINAL RULING
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.