Facts:

RA 3046 was passed in 1961 which provides among others

the demarcation lines of the baselines of the Philippines as an
archipelago. This is in consonance with UNCLOS I.

RA 5446 amended RA 3046 in terms of typographical errors

and included Section 2 in which the government reserved the
drawing of baselines in Sabah in North Borneo.

RA 9522 took effect on March 2009 amending RA 5446. The

amendments, which are in compliance with UNCLOS III in
which the Philippines is one of the signatory, shortening one
baseline while optimizing the other and classifying Kalayaan
Group of Island and Scarborough Shoal as Regimes of Island.

Petitioners in their capacity as taxpayer, citizen and legislator

assailed the constitutionality of RA 9522:- it reduces the
territory of the Philippines in violation to the Constitution and
it opens the country to maritime passage of vessels and
aircrafts of other states to the detriment of the economy,
sovereignty, national security and of the Constitution as well.
They added that the classification of Regime of Islands would
be prejudicial to the lives of the fishermen.

Issues:

1. WON the petitioners have locus standi to bring the suit;

and
2. WON RA 9522 is unconstitutional

Ruling:
Petition is dismissed.

1st Issue:
The SC ruled the suit is not a taxpayer or legislator, but as a
citizen suit, since it is the citizens who will be directly injured
and benefitted in affording relief over the remedy sought.

2nd Issue:
The SC upheld the constitutionality of RA 9522.

First, RA 9522 did not delineate the territory the Philippines

but is merely a statutory tool to demarcate the countrys
maritime zone and continental shelf under UNCLOS III. SC
emphasized that UNCLOS III is not a mode of acquiring or
losing a territory as provided under the laws of nations.
UNCLOS III is a multi-lateral treaty that is a result of a long-
time negotiation to establish a uniform sea-use rights over
maritime zones (i.e., the territorial waters [12 nautical miles
from the baselines], contiguous zone [24 nautical miles from
the baselines], exclusive economic zone [200 nautical miles
from the baselines]), and continental shelves. In order to
measure said distances, it is a must for the state parties to
have their archipelagic doctrines measured in accordance to
the treatythe role played by RA 9522. The contention of the
petitioner that RA 9522 resulted to the loss of 15,000 square
nautical miles is devoid of merit. The truth is, RA 9522, by
optimizing the location of base points, increased the
Philippines total maritime space of 145,216 square nautical
miles.

Second, the classification of KGI and Scarborough Shoal as

Regime of Islands is consistent with the Philippines
sovereignty. Had RA 9522 enclosed the islands as part of the
archipelago, the country will be violating UNCLOS III since it
categorically stated that the length of the baseline shall not
exceed 125 nautical miles. So what the legislators did is to
carefully analyze the situation: the country, for decades, had
been claiming sovereignty over KGI and Scarborough Shoal
on one hand and on the other hand they had to consider that
these are located at non-appreciable distance from the
nearest shoreline of the Philippine archipelago. So, the
classification is in accordance with the Philippines sovereignty
and States responsible observance of its pacta sunt
servanda obligation under UNCLOS III.

Third, the new base line introduced by RA 9522 is without

prejudice with delineation of the baselines of the territorial
sea around the territory of Sabah, situated in North Borneo,
over which the Republic of the Philippines has acquired
dominion and sovereignty.

And lastly, the UNCLOS III and RA 9522 are not incompatible
with the Constitutions delineation of internal waters.
Petitioners contend that RA 9522 transformed the internal
waters of the Philippines to archipelagic waters hence
subjecting these waters to the right of innocent and sea lanes
passages, exposing the Philippine internal waters to nuclear
and maritime pollution hazards. The Court emphasized that
the Philippines exercises sovereignty over the body of water
lying landward of the baselines, including the air space over it
and the submarine areas underneath, regardless whether
internal or archipelagic waters. However, sovereignty will not
bar the Philippines to comply with its obligation in
maintaining freedom of navigation and the generally
accepted principles of international law. It can be either
passed by legislator as a municipal law or in the absence
thereof, it is deemed incorporated in the Philippines law since
the right of innocent passage is a customary international
law, thus automatically incorporated thereto.

This does not mean that the states are placed in a lesser
footing; it just signifies concession of archipelagic states in
exchange for their right to claim all waters inside the
baseline. In fact, the demarcation of the baselines enables
the Philippines to delimit its exclusive economic zone,
reserving solely to the Philippines the exploitation of all living
and non-living resources within such zone. Such a maritime
delineation binds the international community since the
delineation is in strict observance of UNCLOS III. If the
maritime delineation is contrary to UNCLOS III, the
international community will of course reject it and will refuse
to be bound by it.

The Court expressed that it is within the Congress who has

the prerogative to determine the passing of a law and not the
Court. Moreover, such enactment was necessary in order to
comply with the UNCLOS III; otherwise, it shall backfire on the
Philippines for its territory shall be open to seafaring powers
to freely enter and exploit the resources in the waters and
submarine areas around our archipelago and it will weaken
the countrys case in any international dispute over Philippine
maritime space.

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.