1.
Define social justice re calalang v states, in exchange for their right to claim all the
williams 2. Define and discuss the
Archipelagic doctrine. 3. Differentiate
justiciable from political questions. 4.
Elements of State.5. Immunity from
arrest. 6.privelege speech.7
qualifications for members of congress.8
Term from tenure. Good luck!
SOCIAL JUSTICE. — Social justice is "neither
communism, nor despotism, nor atomism, nor
anarchy," but the humanization of laws and the
equalization of social and economic forces by the
State so that justice in its rational and objectively
secular conception may at least be approximated.
Social justice means the promotion of the welfare
of all the people, the adoption by the Government
of measures calculated to insure economic
stability of all the competent elements of society,
through the maintenance of a proper economic
and social equilibrium in the interrelations of the
members of the community, constitutionally,
through the adoption of measures legally
justifiable, or extra-constitutionally, through the
exercise of powers underlying the existence of all
governments on the time-honored principle of
salus populi est suprema lex.
What is the Archipelagic Doctrine?
The fact that for Archipelagic States, their
archipelagic waters are subject to both the right
of innocent passage and sea lanes passage does
not place them in lesser footing vis-a-vis
continental coastal states which are subject, in
their territorial sea, to the right of innocent
passage and the right to transit passage through
international straits. The imposition of these
passage rights through archipelagic waters under
UNCLOS III was a concession by archipelagic
waters landward of their baselines, regardless of
their depth, or distance from coast, as
archipelagic waters subject to national
sovereignty. More importantly, the recognition of
archipelagic state's archipelago and waters
enclosed by their baselines as one cohesive entity
prevents the treatment of their islands as separate
islands under UNCLOS III. Separate islands
generate their own maritime zones, placing the
waters between the islands separated by more
than 24 nautical miles beyond the state's
territorial sovereignty subjecting these waters to
the rights of other states under UNCLOS III.
The fact of sovereignty, however, does not
preclude the operation of the municipal and
international law norms subjecting the territorial
sea or archipelagic waters to necessary, if not
marginal, burdens in the interest of maintaining
unimpeded, expeditious international navigation,
consistent with the international law principle of
freedom of navigation. Thus, domestically, the
political branches of the Philippine government,
in the competent discharge of their constitutional
powers, may pass legislation designating routes
within the archipelagic waters to regulate
innocent and sea lanes passage (Magallona, et.
al. vs. Ermita, et. al., GR No. 187167, august 16,
2011).