CONFLICTS OF LAWS; Definition: 1.

That part of the law of each state or nation which determines whether, in dealing with a legal situation, the law or some other state or nation will be recognized, given effect, or applied (16 Am Jur, 2d, Conflict of Laws, 1). 2. That part of municipal law of a state which directs its courts and administrative agencies, when confronted with a legal problem involving a foreign element, whether or not they should apply a foreign law/s (Paras). DISTINGUISHED FROM PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW BASIS 1 CONFLICT OF LAW LAW OF NATIONS

Nature

Municipal in character Dealt with by private individuals; governs individuals in their private transactions which involve a foreign element

International in character Sovereign states and other entities possessing international personality, e.g., UN; governs states in their relationships amongst themselves Generally affected by public interest; those in general are of interest only to sovereign states May be peaceful or forcible Peaceful: includes diplomatic negotiation, tender & exercise of good offices, mediation, inquiry & conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement by ICJ, reference to regional agencies Forcible: includes severance of diplomatic relations, retorsions, reprisals, embargo, boycott, non-intercourse, pacific blockades, collective measures under the UN Charter, and war.

Persons involved

Transactions involved

Private transactions between private individuals

Remedies and Sanctions

Resort to municipal tribunals

SOURCES:

Direct: 1. Constitutions 2. Codifications

1. 2. 3. 4. Special Laws Treaties and Conventions Judicial Decisions International Customs

Indirect: 1. Natural moral law

1. Work of writers

TERMS: Lex Domicilii law of the domicile; in conflicts, the law of ones domicile applied in the choice of law questions Lex Fori law of the forum; that is, the positive law of the state, country or jurisdiction of whose judicial system of the court where the suit is brought or remedy is sought is an integral part. Substantive rights are determined by the law where the action arose (lex loci) while the procedural rights are governed by the law of the place of the forum (lex fori) Lex Loci law of the place Lex Loci Contractus the law of the place where the contract was made or law of the place where the contract is to be governed (place of performance) which may or may not be the same as that of the place where it was made Lex Loci Rei Sitae law of the place where the thing or subject matter is situated; the title to realty or question of real estate law can be affected only by the law of the place where it is situated Lex Situs - law of the place where property is situated; the general rule is that lands and other immovables are governed by the law of the state where they are situated Lex Loci Actus - law of the place where the act was done Lex Loci Celebrationis law of the place where the contract is made Lex Loci Solutionis law of the place of solution; the law of the place where payment or performance of a contract is to be made Lex Loci Delicti Commissi law of the place where the crime took place

Lex Mereatoria law merchant; commercial law; that system of laws which is adopted by all commercial nations and constitute as part of the law of the land; part of common law Lex Non Scripta the unwritten common law, which includes general and particular customs and particular local laws Lex Patriae - national law Renvoi Doctrine doctrine whereby a jural matter is presented which the conflict of laws rules of the forum refer to a foreign law which in turn, refers the matter back to the law of the forum or a third state. When reference is made back to the law of the forum, this is said to be remission while reference to a third state is called transmission. Nationality Theory - by virtue of which the status and capacity of an individual are generally governed by the law of his nationality. This is principally adopted in the RP Domiciliary Theory in general, the status, condition, rights, obligations, & capacity of a person should be governed by the law of his domicile. Long Arm Statutes Statutes allowing the courts to exercise jurisdiction when there are minimum contacts between the non-resident defendant and the forum. WAYS OF DEALING WITH A CONFLICTS PROBLEM: 1. Dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction, or on the ground of forum non-conveniens DOCTRINE OF FORUM NON CONVENIENS the forum is inconvenient; the ends of justice would be best served by trial in another forum; the controversy may be more suitably tried elsewhere 1. Assume jurisdiction and apply either the law of the forum or of another state 1. i. A specific law of the forum decrees that internal law should apply 1. APPLY INTERNAL LAW forum law should be applied whenever there is good reason to do so; there is a good reason when any one of the following factors is present: Examples: Article. 16 of the Civil Code real and personal property subject to the law of the country where they are situated and testamentary succession governed by lex nationalii Article 829 of the Civil Code makes revocation done outside Philippines valid according to law of the place where will was made or lex domicilii Article 819 of the Civil Code prohibits Filipinos from making joint wills even if valid in foreign country 1. ii. The proper foreign law was not properly pleaded and proved NOTICE AND PROOF OF FOREIGN LAW As a general rule, courts do not take judicial notice of foreign laws; Foreign laws must be pleaded and proved Effect of failure to plead and prove foreign law (3 alternatives) of the forum court: (a) Dismiss the case for inability to establish cause of action

(b) Assume that the foreign law of the same as the law of the forum (c) Apply the law of the forum
1. The case falls under any of the exceptions to the application of foreign law

Exceptions to application of foreign law: (a) The foreign law is contrary to the public policy of the forum (b) The foreign law is procedural in nature (c) The case involves issues related to property, real or personal (lex situs) (d) The issue involved in the enforcement of foreign claim is fiscal or administrative (e) The foreign law or judgment is contrary to good morals (contra bonos mores) (f) The foreign law is penal in character (g) When application of the foreign law may work undeniable injustice to the citizens of the forum (h) When application of the foreign law might endanger the vital interest of the state
2. APPLY FOREIGN LAW when properly pleaded and proved

THEORIES WHY FOREIGN LAW SHOULD BE GIVEN EFFECT 1. Theory of Comity foreign law is applied because of its convenience & because we want to giveprotection to our citizens, residents, & transients in our land 2. Theory of Vested Rights we seek to enforce not foreign law itself but the rights that have been vested under such foreign law; an act done in another state may give rise to the existence of a right if the laws of that state crated such right. 3. Theory of Local Law- adherents of this school of thought believe that we apply foreign law not because it is foreign, but because our laws, by applying similar rules, require us to do so; hence, it is as if the foreign law has become part & parcel of our local law 4. Theory of Harmony of Laws theorists here insist that in many cases we have to apply the foreign laws so that wherever a case is decided, that is, irrespective of the forum, the solution should be approximately the same; thus, identical or similar solutions anywhere & everywhere. When the goal is realized, there will be harmony of laws 5. Theory of Justice the purpose of all laws, including Conflict of Laws, is the dispensing of justice; if this can be attained in may cases applying the proper foreign law, we must do so Rules on Status in General

Factual Situation 1

Point of Contact

Beginning of personality of natural person

National law of the child (Article 15, CC)

Ways & effects of emancipation

3

Same

Age of majority
4

Same

Use of names and surnames

5

Same

Use of titles of nobility

6

Same

Absence
7

Same Lex fori (Article 43, 390, 391, CC; Rule 131 5 [jj], Rules of Court)

Presumptive death & survivorship

Rules on Marriage as a Contract FACTUAL SITUATION

POINT OF CONTACT

Between Filipinos

Lex loci celebrationis is without prejudice to the exceptions under Articles 25, 35 (1, 4, 5 & 6), 36, 37 & 38 of the Family Code (bigamous & incestuous marriages) & consular marriages Lex loci celebrationis EXCEPT if the marriage is: 1. Highly immoral (like bigamous/ polygamous marriages) 2. Universally considered incestuous (between brothersister, and ascendants-

Celebrated Abroad

Between Foreigners

descendants) Mixed Apply 1 (b) to uphold validity of marriage National law (Article 21, FC) PROVIDED the marriage is not highly immoral or universally considered incestuous) National law of Filipino (otherwise public policy may be militated against) Lex loci celebrationis (with prejudice to the foregoing rules)

Celebrated in RP

Between Foreigners Mixed Marriage by proxy (NOTE: a marriage by proxy is considered celebrated where the proxy appears

Rules on Marriage as a Status FACTUAL SITUATION POINT OF CONTACT

Personal rights & obligations between husband & wife

National of husband (Note: Effect of subsequent change of nationality: 1. If both will have a new nationality the new one 2. If only one will change the last common nationality 3. If no common nationality nationality of husband at the time of wedding) National law of husband without prejudice to what the CC provides concerning REAL property located in the RP (Article 80) (NOTE: Change of nationality has NO EFFECT. This is the DOCTRINE OF IMMUTABILITY IN THE MATRIMONIAL PROPERTY REGIME)

Property relations bet husband & wife

Rules on Property FACTUAL SITUATION

POINT OF CONTACT

Real property

Lex rei sitae (Article 16, CC)

Successional rights Capacity to succeed Contracts involving real property which do not deal with the title thereto

National law of decedent (Article 16 par. 2, CC) National law of decedent (Article. 1039) The law intended will be the proper law of the contract (lex loci voluntantis orlex loci intentionis) The principal contract (usually loan) is governed by the proper law oft the contract (lex loci voluntatis or lex loci intentionis) NOTE: the mortgage itself is governed by lex rei sitae. There is a possibility that the principal contract is valid but the mortgage is void; or it may be the other way around. If the principal contract is void, the mortgage will also be void (for lack of proper cause or consideration), although by itself, the mortgage could have been valid.

Exceptions

Contracts where the real property is given as security

Tangible personal property (choses in possession)

1

In General

Lex rei sitae (Article. 16, CC) EXCEPTION: same as those for real property EXCEPT that in the example concerning mortgage, the same must be changed to pledge of personal property)

Exceptions: same as those for real property Means of Transportation Vessels

2

Law of the flag (or in some cases, place of registry) Law of the depot (storage place for supplies or resting place)

Other means
3

Things in transitu (these things have a changing status because they move)

Loss, destruction, deterioration Validity & effect of the seizure of the goods

Law of the destination (Article. 1753, CC) Locus regit actum (where seized) because said place is their temporarysitus Lex loci volutantis or lex loci intentionis because here there is a contract

Disposition or alienage of the goods

FACTUAL SITUATION

POINT OF CONTACT

INTangIBLE PERSONAL PROPERTY (CHOSES IN ACTION)

1

Recovery of debts or involuntary assignment of debts (garnishment)

Where debtor may be effectively served with summons (usually the domicile) Lex loci voluntatis or lex loci intentionis(proper law of the contract)

Voluntary assignment of debts Other Theories: 1. National law of the debtor or creditor 2. Domicile of the debtor or creditor 3. Lex loci celebrationis 4. Lex loci solutionis
3

Taxation of debts
4

Domicile of creditor Lex situs of assets of the debtor (for these assets can be held liable for the debts) The right embodied in the instrument (for example, in the case of a Swedish bill of exchange, Swedish law determines its negotiability)

Administration of debts

Negotiability or non-negotiability of an instrument

Validity of transfer, delivery or negotiation of the instrument Effect on a corporation of the sale of corporate shares

In general, situs of the instrument at the time of transfer, delivery or negotiation

Law of the place incorporation Lex loci voluntatis or lex loci intentionis (proper law of the contract) for this is really a contract; usually this is the place where the certificate is delivered)

Effect between the parties of the sale of corporate shares Taxation on the dividends of corporate shares Taxation on the income from the sale of corporate shares

Law of the place of incorporation Law of the place where the sale was consummated

10

11

Franchises
12

Law of the place that granted them Law of the place where the business is carried on In the absence of a treaty, they are protected only by the state that granted them NOTE: foreigners may sue for infringement of trademarks and trade names in the RP ONLY IF Filipinos are granted reciprocal concessions in the state of the foreigners

Goodwill of the business & taxation thereto

13

Patents, copyrights, trademarks, trade names

Wills, Succession & Administration of Conflict Rules FACTUAL SITUATION POINT OF CONTACT

Extrinsic Validity of Wills

1

Made by an alien abroad

Lex nationalii OR lex domicilii OR RP law (Article 816, CC), OR lex loci celebrationis(Article 17(1))

Made by a Filipino abroad

3

Lex nationalii OR lex loci celebrationis(Article 815) Lex nationalii OR lex loci celebrationis(Article 817)

Made by an alien in the RP

FACTUAL SITUATION

POINT OF CONTACT

Extrinsic Validity of Joint Wills (made in the same instrument)

1

Made by Filipinos abroad

2

Lex nationalii (void, even if valid where made) (Article 819) Valid if valid according to lex domicilii orlex loci celebrationis (Article 819) Lex loci celebrationis therefore void even if apparently allowed by Article 817 because the prohibition on joint wills is a clear expression of public policy Lex nationalii of the deceased regardless of the LOCATION & NATURE of the property (Article 16 (2)) Lex nationalii of the deceased not of the heir (Article 1039)

Made by aliens abroad

Made by aliens in the RP

Intrinsic Validity of Wills Capacity to Succeed Revocation of Wills

1

If done in the RP If done OUTSIDE the RP

2

Lex loci actus (of the revocation) (Article. 829)

1. By a NON-DOMICILIARY

Lex loci celebrationis (of the making of the will, NOT revocation), OR lex domicilii(Article 829)

1. By a DOMICILIARY of the RP Probate of Wills Made Abroad

Lex domicilii (RP law) OR lex loci actus (of the revocation) (Article 17)

If not yet probated abroad

Lex fori of the RP applies as to the procedural aspects, i.e., the will must be fully probated here & due execution must be shown Lex fori of the RP again applies as to the procedural aspects; must also be probated here, but instead of proving due execution, generally it is enough to ask for the enforcement here of the foreign judgment on the probate abroad

If already probated abroad Executors and Administrators

1

Where appointed

Place where domiciled at death or incase of non-domiciliary, where assets are found Co-extensive with the qualifying of the appointing court powers may only be exercised within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned NOTE: these rules also apply to principal, domiciliary, or ancillary administrators & receivers even in nonsuccessive cases

Powers
Rules on Obligation and Contracts FACTUAL SITUATION

POINT OF CONTACT

Formal or Extrinsic Validity

Lex loci celebrationis (Article 17 {1})

Exceptions
1. Alienation & encumbrance of property 1. Consular contracts Capacity of Contracting Parties Lex situs (Article 16 [1]) Law of the RP (if made in RP consulates) National law (Article 15) without

prejudice to the case of Insular Government v Frank 13 P 236, where the SC adhered to the theory of lex loci celebrationis Exception

Alienation & encumbrance of property Intrinsic validity (including interpretation of the instruments, and amt. of damages for breach)

Lex situs (Article 16 {1}) Proper law of the contract lex contractus(in the broad sense), meaning the lex voluntatis or lex loci intentionis

Other Theories are: 1. Lex loci celebrationis (defect: this makes possible the evasion of the national law) 2. Lex nationalii (defect: this may impede commercial transactions) 3. Lex loci solutionis (law of the place of performance) (defect: there may be several places of performance 4. Prof Minors solution: 5. Perfection lex loci celebrationis 6. Cause or consideration lex loci considerations 7. Performance lex loci solutionis (defect: this theory combines the defect of the others)
Rules on Torts FACTUAL SITUATION POINT OF CONTACT

Liability & damages for torts in general NOTE: The locus delicti (place of commission of torts) is faced by the problem of characterization. In civil law countries, the locus delicti is generally where the act began; in common law countries, it is where the act first became effective
Rules on Crimes FACTUAL SITUATION

Lex loci delicti (law of the place where the delict was committed) NOTE: liability for foreign torts may be enforced in the RP if: 1. The tort is not penal in character 2. If the enforcement of the tortious liability wont contravene our public policy 3. If our judicial machinery is adequate for such enforcement

POINT OF CONTACT

Essential elements of a crime and penalties

Generally where committed (locus regit

actum) Theories as to what court has jurisdiction: 1. Territoriality theory where the crime was committed 2. Nationality theory country which the criminal is citizen or a subject 3. Real theory any state whose penal code has been violated has jurisdiction, where the crime was committed inside or outside its territory 4. Protective theory any state whose national interests may be jeopardized has jurisdiction so that it may protect itself 5. Cosmopolitan or universality theory state where the criminal is found or which has his custody has jurisdiction 6. Passive personality theory the state of which the victim is a citizen or subject has jurisdiction NOTE: In the RP, we follow the territoriality theory in general; exception: Article 2, RPC, stresses the protective theory The locus delicti of certain crimes
1

Frustrated an consummated, homicide, murder, infanticide & parricide

Where the victim was injured (not where the aggressor wielded his weapon) Where the intended victim was (not where the aggressor was situated) so long as the weapon or the bullet either touched him or fell inside the territory where he was Where the illegal marriage was performed Where the property was unlawfully taken from the victim (not the place to which the criminal went after the commission of the crime) Where the object of the crime was received (not where the false representations were made)

Attempted homicide, etc.

3

Bigamy

Theft & robbery

5

Estafa or swindling thru false representation Conspiracy to commit treason, rebellion, or sedition NOTE: Other conspiracies are NOT penalized by our laws

Where the conspiracy was formed (not where the overt act of treason, rebellion or sedition was committed)

Libel
8

Where published or circulated Any place where the offense begins, exists or continues Any place where any of the essential elements of the crime took place

Continuing crime
9

Complex crime
Rules on Juridical Persons FACTUAL SITUATION

POINT OF CONTACT

Corporations General rule: the law of the place of incorporation EXCEPTIONS: 1. For constitutional purposes even of the corporation was incorporated in the RP, it is nor deemed a Filipino corporation & therefore cant acquire land, exploit our natural resources, 7 operate public utilities unless 60% of capital if Filipino owned 2. For wartime purposes we pierce the corporation veil & go to the nationality of the controlling stockholders to determine if the corporation is an enemy (CONTROL TEST)

Powers and liabilities Formation of the corporation (requisites); kind of stocks, transfer of stocks to bind the corporation, issuance, amount & legality & dividends, powers & duties of members, stockholders and officers Validity of corporate acts & contracts (including ultra vires acts)

Law of the place of incorporation Law of the place of incorporation & law of the place of performance (the act or contract must be authorized by

BOTH laws) Right to sue & amenability to court processes & suits against it Lex fori Law of the place of incorporation provided that the public policy of the forum is not militated against If not fixed by the law creating or recognizing the corporation or by any other provision the domicile is where it is legal representation is established or where it exercises its principal functions (Article. 15) Principal receiver is appointed by the courts of the state of incorporation; ancillary receivers, by the courts of any state where the corporation has assets (authority is CO-EXTENSIVE) w/ the authority of the appointing court

Manner & effect of dissolution

Domicile

Receivers (appointment & powers)

NOTE: Theories on the personal and/or governing law of corporations: 1. Law of the place of incorporation (this is generally the RP rule) 2. Law of the place or center of management (center for administration or siege social) (center office principle) 3. Law of the place of exploitation (exploitation centre or siege d exploitation) Partnerships The existence or non-existence of legal personality of the firm; the capacity to contract; liability of the firm & the partners to 3rd persons Creation of branches in the RP; validity & effect of the branches commercial transaction; & the jurisdiction of the court Dissolution, winding up, & termination of branches in the RP Domicile The personal law of the partnership, i.e., the law of the place where it was created (Article 15 of the Code of Commerce) (Subject to the exceptions given above as in the case of corps.) RP law (law of the place where branches were created) (Article 15, Code of Commerce) RP law (Article 15, Code of Commerce) If not fixed by the law creating or recognizing the partnership or by any

other provision the domicile is where it is legal representation is established or where it exercises its principal functions (Article. 15) RP law insofar as the assets in the RP are concerned can be exercised as such only in the RP Personal law of the foundation (place of principal center of administration)

Receivers Foundations (combination of capital independent of individuals, usually not for profit)

REPUBLIC ACT No. 2382 THE MEDICAL ACT OF 1959 ARTICLE I Objectives and Implementation Section 1. Objectives. This Act provides for and shall govern (a) the standardization and regulation of medical education; (b) the examination for registration of physicians; and (c) the supervision, control and regulation of the practice of medicine in the Philippines. Section 2. Enforcement. For the purpose of implementing the provisions of this Act, there are created the following agencies: the Board of Medical Education under the Department of Education, and the Board of Medical Examiners under the Commissioner of Civil Service. ARTICLE II The Board of Medical Education Its Functions Section 3. Composition of Board of Medical Education. The Board of Medical Education shall be composed of the Secretary of Education or his duly authorized representative, as chairman, and the Secretary of Health or his duly authorized representative, the Director of the Bureau of Private Schools or his duly authorized representative, the chairman of the Board of Medical Examiners or his duly authorized representative, a representative of private practitioners, upon recommendation of an acknowledged medical association and a representative chosen by the Philippine Association of Colleges and Universities, as members. The officials acting as chairman and members of the Board of Medical Education shall hold office during their incumbency in their respective positions.

Section 4. Compensation and traveling expenses. The chairman and members of the Board of Medical Education shall not be entitled to any compensation except for traveling expenses in connection with their official duties as herein provided. For administrative purposes, the Board shall hold office in the office of its chairman, who may designate a ranking official in the Department of Education to serve as secretary of the Board. Section 5. Functions. The functions of the Board of Medical Education shall be: (a) To determine and prescribe minimum requirements for admission into a recognized college of medicine; (b) To determine and prescribe requirements for minimum physical facilities of colleges of medicine, to wit: buildings, including hospitals, equipment and supplies, apparatus, instruments, appliances, laboratories, bed capacity for instruction purposes, operating and delivery rooms, facilities for out-patient services, and others, used for didactic and practical instructions in accordance with modern trends; (c) To determine and prescribe the minimum number and the minimum qualifications of teaching personnel, including student-teacher ratio and curriculum; (d) To determine and prescribe the number of students who should be allowed to take up the preparatory course taking into account the capacity of the different recognized colleges of medicine. (e) To select, determine and approve hospitals or some departments of the hospitals for training which comply with the minimum specific physical facilities as provided in subparagraph (b) hereof: and (f) To promulgate and prescribe and enforce necessary rules and regulations for the proper implementation of the foregoing functions. Section 6. Minimum required courses. Students seeking admission to the medical course must have a bachelor of science or bachelor of arts degree or their equivalent and must have taken in four years the following subjects with their corresponding number of units: Unit English Latin Mathematics, including Accounting and Statistics Philosophy, including Psychology and Logic 12 3 9 12

Zoology and Botany Physics Chemistry Library Science Humanities and Social Sciences

15 8 21 1 12

Twelve units of Spanish shall be required pursuant to Republic Act Numbered Seven hundred nine; but commencing with the academic year nineteen hundred sixty to nineteen hundred sixtyone, twenty-four units of Spanish shall be required pursuant to Republic Act Numbered Eighteen hundred and eighty-one as cultural, social and nationalistic studies. Provided, That the following students may be permitted to complete the aforesaid preparatory medical course in shorter periods as follows: (a) Students whose general average is below eighty-five per cent but without any grade of failure or condition may be allowed to pursue and finish the course in three academic years and the intervening summer sessions; and (b) Students whose general average is eighty-five per cent or over may be permitted to finish the course in three academic years by allowing them to take each semester the overload permitted to bright students under existing regulations of the Bureau of Private Schools. Provided, That upon failure to maintain the general average of eighty-five per cent, students under (b) shall automatically revert to the category of students under (a) and those under (a), upon having any grade of failure or condition, shall automatically revert to the category of students required to pursue the preparatory course in four years mentioned above. The medical course shall be at least five years, including not less than eleven rotating internship in an approved hospital, and shall consist of the following subjects: Anatomy Physiology Biochemistry and Nutrition Pharmacology Microbiology Parasitology Medicine and Therapeutics

Genycology Opthalmology, Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology Pediatrics Obstetrics Surgery Preventive Medicine and Public Health Legal Medicine, including Medical Jurisprudence and Ethics. Section 7. Admission requirements. The medical college may admit any student to its first year class who has not been convicted by any court of competent jurisdiction of any offense involving moral turpitude, and who presents (a) a certificate showing completion of a standard high school course, (b) a record showing completion of a standard preparatory medical course as herein provided, (c) a certificate of registration as medical student, (d) a certificate of good moral character issued by two former professors in the pre-medicine course, and (e) birth certificate and marriage certificate, if any. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to inhibit any college of medicine from establishing, in addition to the preceding, other entrance requirements that may be deemed admissible. For the purposes of this Act, the term "College of Medicine" shall mean to include faculty of medicine, institute of medicine, school of medicine or other similar institution offering a complete medical course leading to the degree of Doctor of Medicine or its equivalent. Every college of medicine must keep a complete record of enrollment, grades and turnover, and must publish each year a catalogue giving the following information: 1. Date of publication 2. Calendar for the academic year 3. Faculty roll indicating whether on full time part time basis 4. Requirements of admission 5. Grading system 6. Requirements for promotion 7. Requirements for graduation 8. Medical hours per academic year by departments

9. Schedule hours per academic year by departments 10. Number of students enrolled in each class. ARTICLE III THE BOARD OF MEDICAL EXAMINERS; REGISTRATION OF PHYSICIANS Section 8. Prerequisite to the practice of medicine. No person shall engage in the practice of medicine in the Philippines unless he is at least twenty-one years of age, has satisfactorily passed the corresponding Board Examination, and is a holder of a valid Certificate of Registration duly issued to him by the Board of Medical Examiners. Section 9. Candidates for board examination. Candidates for Board examinations shall have the following qualifications: (1) He shall be a citizen of the Philippines or a citizen of any foreign country who has submitted competent and conclusive documentary evidence, confirmed by the Department of Foreign Affairs, showing that his country's existing laws permit citizens of the Philippines to practice medicine under the same rules and regulations governing citizens thereof; (2) He shall be of good moral character, showing for this purpose certificate of civil status; (3) He shall be of sound mind; (4) He shall not have been convicted by a court of competent jurisdiction of any offense involving moral turpitude; and (5) He shall be a holder of the degree of Doctor of Medicine or its equivalent, conferred by a college of medicine duly recognized by the Department of Education. Section 10. Acts constituting practice of medicine. A person shall be considered as engaged in the practice of medicine (a) who shall, for compensation, fee, salary or reward in any form, paid to him directly or through another, or even without the same, physical examine any person, and diagnose, treat, operate or prescribe any remedy for any human disease, injury, deformity, physical, mental or physical condition or any ailment, real or imaginary, regardless of the nature of the remedy or treatment administered, prescribed or recommended; or (b) who shall, by means of signs, cards, advertisements, written or printed matter, or through the radio, television or any other means of communication, either offer or undertake by any means or method to diagnose, treat, operate or prescribe any remedy for any human disease, injury, deformity, physical, mental or physical condition; or (c) who shall use the title M.D. after his name. Section 11. Exemptions. The preceding section shall not be construed to affect (a) any medical student duly enrolled in an approved medical college or school under training, serving without any professional fee in any government or private hospital, provided that he renders such service

under the direct supervision and control of a registered physician; (b) any legally registered dentist engaged exclusively in the practice of dentistry; (c) any duly registered masseur or physiotherapist, provided that he applies massage or other physical means upon written order or prescription of a duly registered physician, or provided that such application of massage or physical means shall be limited to physical or muscular development; (d) any duly registered optometrist who mechanically fits or sells lenses, artificial eyes, limbs or other similar appliances or who is engaged in the mechanical examination of eyes for the purpose of constructing or adjusting eye glasses, spectacles and lenses; (e) any person who renders any service gratuitously in cases of emergency, or in places where the services of a duly registered physician, nurse or midwife are not available; (f) any person who administers or recommends any household remedy as per classification of existing Pharmacy Laws; and (g) any psychologist or mental hygienist in the performance of his duties, provided such performance is done in conjunction with a duly registered physician. Section 12. Limited practice without any certificate of registration. Certificates of registration shall not be required of the following persons: (a) Physicians and surgeons from other countries called in consultation only and exclusively in specific and definite cases, or those attached to international bodies or organization assigned to perform certain definite work in the Philippines provided they shall limit their practice to the specific work assigned to them and provided further they shall secure a previous authorization from the Board of Medical Examiners. (b) Commissioned medical officers of the United States armed forces stationed in the Philippines while rendering service as such only for the members of the said armed forces and within the limit of their own respective territorial jurisdiction. (c) Foreign physicians employed as exchange professors in special branches of medicine or surgery whose service may in the discretion of the Board of Medical Education, be necessary. (d) Medical students who have completed the first four years of medical course, graduates of medicine and registered nurses who may be given limited and special authorization by the Secretary of Health to render medical services during epidemics or national emergencies whenever the services of duly registered physicians are not available. Such authorization shall automatically cease when the epidemic or national emergency is declared terminated by the Secretary of Health. Section 13. The Board of Medical Examiners, its composition and duties. The Board of Medical Examiners shall be composed of six members to be appointed by the President of the Philippines from a confidential list of not more than twelve names approved and submitted by the executive council of the Philippine Medical Association, after due consultation with other medical associations, during the months of April and October of each year. The chairman of the Board shall be elected from among themselves by the member at a meeting called for the purpose. The President of the Philippines shall fill any vacancy that may occur during any examination from

the list of names submitted by the Philippine Medical Association in accordance with the provisions of this Act. No examiner shall handle the examinations in more than four subjects or groups of subjects as hereinafter provided. The distribution of subject to each member shall be agreed upon at a meeting called by the chairman for the purpose. The examination papers shall be under the custody of the Commissioner of Civil Service or his duly authorized representative, and shall be distributed to each member of the Board who shall correct, grade, and sign, and submit them to the said Commissioner within one hundred twenty days from the date of the termination of the examinations. A final meeting of the Board for the deliberation and approval of the grades shall be called by the Commissioner of Civil Service immediately after receipt of the records from the members of the Board of Medical Examiners. The secretary of the Board shall submit to the President of the Philippines for approval the names of the successful candidates as having been duly qualified for licensure in alphabetical order, without stating the ratings obtained by each. Section 14. Qualifications of examiners. No person shall be appointed a member of the Board of Medical Examiners unless he or she (1) is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines, (2) is a duly registered physician in the Philippines, (3) has been in the practice of medicine for at least ten years, (4) is of good moral character and of recognized standing in the medical profession, (5) is not a member of the faculty of any medical school and has no pecuniary interest, directly or indirectly, in any college of medicine or in any institution where any branch of medicine is taught, at the time of his appointment: Provided, That of the six members to be appointed, not more than two shall be graduates of the same institution and not more than three shall be government physicians. Section 15. Tenure of office and compensation of members. The members of the Board of Medical Examiners shall hold office for one year: Provided, That any member may be reappointed for not more than one year. Each member shall receive as compensation ten pesos for each candidate examined for registration as physician, and five pesos for each candidate examined in the preliminary or final physician examination. The President of the Philippines, upon the recommendation of the Commissioner of Civil Service , after due investigation, may remove any member of the Board of Medical Examiners for neglect of duty, incompetency, or unprofessional or dishonorable conduct. Section 16. Executive Officer and Secretary of the Board. The Secretary of the Boards of Examiners appointed in accordance with section ten of Act Numbered Four thousand seven, as amended, shall also be the secretary of the Board of Medical Examiners, who shall keep all the records, including examination papers, and the minutes of the deliberations of the Board. He shall also keep a register of all persons to whom certificates of registration has been granted; set forth the name, sec, age, and place of birth of each, place of business, post office address, the name of the medical college or university from which he graduated or in which he had studied, together with time spent in the study of the profession elsewhere, the name of the country where the institution is located which had granted to him the degree or certificate of attendance upon

clinic and all lectures in medicine and surgery, and all other degrees granted to him from institutions of learning. He shall keep an up-to-date registration book of all duly registered physicians in the Philippines. He shall furnish copies of all examination questions and ratings in each subject of the respective candidates in the physicians examination, one month after the release of the list of successful examinees, to the deans of the different colleges of medicine exclusively for the information and guidance of the faculties thereof. This report shall be considered as restricted information. Any school which violates this rule shall be deprived of such privilege. The secretary of the Board shall likewise keep a record of all registered medical students. He shall keep all the records and proceedings, and issue and receive all papers in connection with any and all complaints presented to the Board. Section 17. Rules and regulations. The Board of Medical Examiners, with the approval of the Commissioner of Civil Service, shall promulgate such rules and regulations as may be necessary for the proper conduct of the examinations, correction of examination papers, and registration of physicians. The Commissioner shall supervise each Board examination and enforce the said rules and regulations. These rules and regulations shall take effect fifteen days after the date of their publication in the Official Gazette and shall not be changed within sixty days immediately before any examination. Such rules and regulations shall be printed and distributed for the information and guidance of all concerned. Section 18. Dates of examinations. The Board of Medical Examiners shall give examinations for the registration of physicians, one in May and one in November every year, in the City of Manila or any of its suburbs after giving not less than ten days' notice to each candidate who had filed his name and address with the secretary of the Board. Section 19. Fees. The secretary of the Board, under the supervision of the Commissioner of Civil Service, shall collect from each candidate the following fees: For registration as medical student For complete physician examination For preliminary or final examination For registration as physician P 5.00 75.00 40.00 20.00

All fees paid as provided herein shall accrue to the funds of the Board of Medical Examiners and be expended for the payment of the compensation of the members thereof. No fees other than those provided herein shall be paid to the Board. Section 20. Issuance of Certificate of Registration, grounds for refusal of same. The Commissioner of Civil Service and the secretary of the Board of Medical Examiners shall sign jointly and issue certificates of registration to those who have satisfactorily complied with the requirements of the Board. They shall not issue a certificate of registration to any candidate who has been convicted by a court of competent jurisdiction of any criminal offense involving moral turpitude, or has been found guilty of immoral or dishonorable conduct after he due investigation by the Board of Medical Examiners, or has been declared to be of unsound mind.

Section 21. Scope of examination. The examination for the registration of physicians shall consist of the following subjects: (1) Anatomy and Histology, (2) Physiology, (3) Biochemistry, (4) Microbiology and Parasitology, (5) Pharcology and Therapeutics, (6) Pathology, (7) Medicine, (8) Obstetrics and Gynecology, (9) Pediatrics and Nutrition, (10) Surgery and Opthalmology, Otolaryngology and Rhinology, (11) Preventive Medicine and Public Health, and (12) Legal Medicine, Ethics and Medical Jurisprudence: Provided, however, That the examination questions in each subject or group of subject shall at least be ten in number: Provided, further, That the examination questions in Medicine shall include at least three from the following branches: Infectious diseases, Neurology, Dermatology, Allergy, Endocrinology and Cardio-Vascular diseases: Provided, finally, That the examination questions in Surgery shall include at least four questions from the following: Opthalmology, Otology, Rhinology, Laryngology, Orthopedic Surgery and Anesthesiology. The questions shall be the same for all applicants. All answers must be written either in English or Spanish. No name of the examinee shall appear in the examination paper but the examiners shall devise a system whereby each applicant can be identified by number only. In order that a candidate may be deemed to have passed his examination successfully he must have obtained a general average of seventy-five per cent without a grade lower than sixty-five per cent in Medicine, Pediatrics and Nutrition, Obstetrics and Gynecology, and Preventive Medicine and Public Health, and no grade lower than fifty per cent in the rest of the subjects. The preliminary examinations shall comprise of the following subjects: (1) Gross Anatomy and Histology (2) Physiology (3) Biochemistry (4) Microbiology and Parasitology Section 22. Administrative investigations. In addition to the functions provided for in the preceding sections, the Board of Medical Examiners shall perform the following duties: (1) to administer oath to physicians who qualified in the examination; (2) to study the conditions affecting the practice of medicine in all parts of the Philippines; (3) to exercise the powers conferred upon it by this article with the view of maintaining the ethical and professional standards of the medical profession; (4) to subpoena or subpoena duces tecum witnesses for all purposes required in the discharge of its duties; and (5) to promulgate, with the approval of the Commissioner of Civil Service, such rules and regulations as it may deem necessary for the performance of its duties in harmony with the provisions of this Act and necessary for the proper practice of medicine in the Philippines. Administrative investigations may be conducted by not less than four members of the Board of Medical Examiners; otherwise the proceedings shall be considered void. The existing rules of evidence shall be observed during all administrative investigations. The Board may disapprove

applications for examination or registration, reprimand erring physicians, or suspend or revoke registration certificates, if the respondents are found guilty after due investigations. Section 23. Procedure and rules. Within five days after the filling of written charges under oath, the respondent physician shall be furnished a copy thereof, without requiring him or her to answer the same, and the Board shall conduct the investigation within five days after the receipt of such copy by the respondent. The investigation shall be completed as soon as practicable. Section 24. Grounds for reprimand, suspension or revocation of registration certificate. Any of the following shall be sufficient ground for reprimanding a physician, or for suspending or revoking a certificate of registration as physician: (1) Conviction by a court of competent jurisdiction of any criminal offense involving moral turpitude; (2) Immoral or dishonorable conduct; (3) Insanity; (4) Fraud in the acquisition of the certificate of registration; (5) Gross negligence, ignorance or incompetence in the practice of his or her profession resulting in an injury to or death of the patient; (6) Addiction to alcoholic beverages or to any habit forming drug rendering him or her incompetent to practice his or her profession, or to any form of gambling; (7) False or extravagant or unethical advertisements wherein other things than his name, profession, limitation of practice, clinic hours, office and home address, are mentioned. (8) Performance of or aiding in any criminal abortion; (9) Knowingly issuing any false medical certificate; (10) Issuing any statement or spreading any news or rumor which is derogatory to the character and reputation of another physician without justifiable motive; (11) Aiding or acting as a dummy of an unqualified or unregistered person to practice medicine; (12) Violation of any provision of the Code of Ethics as approved by the Philippine Medical Association. Refusal of a physician to attend a patient in danger of death is not a sufficient ground for revocation or suspension of his registration certificate if there is a risk to the physician's life.

Section 25. Rights of respondents. The respondent physician shall be entitled to be represented by counsel or be heard by himself or herself, to have a speedy and public hearing, to confront and to cross-examine witnesses against him or her, and to all other rights guaranteed by the Constitution and provided for in the Rules of Court. Section 26. Appeal from judgment. The decision of the Board of Medical Examiners shall automatically become final thirty days after the date of its promulgation unless the respondent, during the same period, has appealed to the Commissioner of Civil Service and later to the Office of the President of the Philippines. If the final decision is not satisfactory, the respondent may ask for a review of the case, or may file in court a petition for certiorari. Section 27. Reinstatement. After two years, the Board may order the reinstatement of any physicians whose certificate of registration has been revoked, if the respondent has acted in an exemplary manner in the community wherein he resides and has not committed any illegal, immoral or dishonorable act. ARTICLE IV PENAL AND OTHER PROVISIONS Section 28. Penalties. Any person found guilty of "illegal practice of medicine" shall be punished by a fine of not less than one thousand pesos nor more than ten thousand pesos with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, or by imprisonment of not less than one year nor more than five years, or by both such fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court. Section 29. Injunctions. The Board of Medical Examiners may file an action to enjoin any person illegally practicing medicine from the performance of any act constituting practice of medicine if the case so warrants until the necessary certificate therefore is secured. Any such person who, after having been so enjoined, continues in the illegal practice of medicine shall be punished for contempt of court. The said injunction shall not relieve the person practicing medicine without certificate of registration from criminal prosecution and punishment as provided in the preceding section. Section 30. Appropriation. To carry out the provisions of this Act, there is hereby appropriated, out of any funds in the National Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of twenty thousand pesos. Section 31. Repealing clause. All Acts, executive orders, administrative orders, rules and regulations, or parts thereof inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are repealed or modified accordingly. Section 32. Effectivity. This Act shall take effect upon its approval: Provided, That if it is approved during the time when examinations for physicians are held, it shall take effect immediately after the said examinations: Provided, further, That section six of this Act shall take effect at the beginning of the academic year nineteen hundred sixty to nineteen hundred sixtyone, and the first paragraph of section seven shall take effect four years thereafter.

Approved: June 20, 1959 Republic of the Philippines Congress of the Philippines Metro Manila Fourteenth Congress Second Regular Session

Begun and held in Metro Manila, on Monday, the twenty-eight day of July, two thousand eight. Republic Act No. 9522 March 10, 2009

AN ACT TO AMEND CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 3046, AS AMENDED BY REPUBLIC ACT NO. 5446, TO DEFINE THE ARCHIPELAGIC BASELINE OF THE PHILIPPINES AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled:: Section 1. Section 1 of Republic Act No. 3046, entitled "An Act to Define the Baselines of the Territorial Sea of the Philippines", as amended by Section 1 of Republic Act No. 5446, is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 1. The baselines of the Philippines archipelago are hereby defined and described specifically as follows: Basepoint Number Station Name Location World Geodetic System of 1984 (WGS 84) Coordinates Latitude (N) 1 PAB-01 2 PAB-02 3 PAB-04 Amianan Is. Balintang Is. Bigan Pt. 21657.73" 195738.19" 181835.30" 17716.30" 17614.79" 17551.31" 17236.91" 165918.03" Longitude (E) 1215727.71" 122946.32" 1222019.07" 1223128.34" 1223143.84" 1223142.66" 122313.28" 1222756.61" Distance to next basepoint (M) 70.08 99.17 71.83 1.05 0.39 3.29 9.74 3.51

4 PAB-05A Ditolong Pt. 5 PAB-05B Ditolong Pt. 6 PAB-05 7 PAB-06 Ditolong Pt. Spires Is.

8 PAB-06B Digollorin Pt.

9 PAB-06C Digollorin Rk. 10 PAB-07 11 PAB-08 Divimisa Pt. Dinoban Pt.

164956.11" 164738.86" 161844.33" 142954.43" 146.29.91" 146.10.40" 12416.37" 123618.41" 1232.33.62" 1231.57.45" 122836.42" 122737.51" 122141.64" 121727.17" 121321.95" 121148.16" 121120.67" 1267.00" 104516.70" 94959.58" 85316.62" 81311.53" 74245.02" 72949.47" 72916.93" 72830.97" 72729.42" 71719.80" 71614.43"

1222650.78" 122264.40" 1221406.69" 1225751.15" 1241659.21" 1241726.28" 125353.71" 125850.19" 1251259.70" 1251332.37" 1251712.32" 125185.23" 125237.41" 125270.12" 1253019.47" 1253130.88" 1253148.29" 1253411.94" 125588.78" 126106.39" 1262048.81" 1262853.25" 1263429.08" 1263559.24" 1263559.50" 1263557.30" 1263551.31" 1263618.26" 1263557.20"

2.40 30.94 116.26 80.29 0.54 96.04 6.79 5.52 0.80 4.90 1.30 7.09 5.68 5.21 1.94 0.54 5.71 83.94 56.28 57.44 40.69 30.80 12.95 0.54 0.76 1.2 10.12 1.14 63.28

12 PAB-10A Tinaga Is. 13 PAB-11 14 PAB-12 15 PAB-13 Horodaba Rk. Matulin Rk. Atalaya Pt.

16 PAB-13A Bacan Is. 17 PAB-14 Finch Rk.

18 PAB-14A Cube Rk. 19 PAB-14D NW Manjud Pt. 20 PAB-15 SE Manjud Pt.

21 PAB-16A S Sorz Cay 22 PAB-16B Panablihon 23 PAB-16C Alugon 24 PAB-16D N Bunga Pt. 25 PAB-17 E Bunga Pt.

26 PAB-18A SE Tobabao Is. 27 PAB-19C Suluan Is. 28 PAB-19D N Tuason Pt. 29 PAB-20A Arangasa Is. 30 PAB-21B Sanco Pt. 31 PAB-22 Bagoso Is

32 PAB-22C Languyan 33 PAB-23 Languyan

34 PAB-23B Languyan 35 PAB-23C N Baculin Pt. 36 PAB-24 Pusan Pt.

37 PAB-24A S Pusan Pt.

38 PAB-25B Cape San Agustin 39 PAB-25 40 PAB-26 41 PAB-27 42 PAB-28 43 PAB-29 44 PAB-30 45 PAB-31 46 PAB-32 Cape San Agustin SE Sarangani Is. Pangil Bato Pt. Tapundo Pt. W Calia Pt. Manamil Is. Marampog Pt. Pola Pt.

61714.73" 6168.35" 52334.20" 52321.80" 62155.66" 52158.48" 5222.91" 52320.18" 698.44" 62647.22" 6233.77" 618.51" 6017.88" 512.8.70" 44739.24" 42453.84" 4253.83" 436"9.01" 44252.07" 44555.25" 4475.36" 45510.45" 5223.73" 54635.15" 6558.41" 6414.08" 6114.65" 61339.90"

1261214.40" 1261135.06" 1252842.11" 1252819.59" 1262511.21" 1252152.03" 1252059.73" 1251944.29" 1241542.81" 12213.34.50" 1215636.20" 1215441.45" 1216311.17" 1204138.14" 1195158.08" 1191450.71 1191415.15" 119322.75" 119144.04" 119315.19" 119512.94" 119221.30 1194418.14" 1193951.77" 1182657.30" 1181833.33" 118654.15" 118352.09"

1.28 67.65 0.43 3.44 3.31 0.87 1.79 78.42 122.88 29.44 2.38 1.72 85.94 55.24 43.44 0.61 15.48 6.88 8.40 2.28 18.60 23.37 44.20 75.17 8.54 13.46 3.97 5.53

47 PAB-33A Kantuan Is 48 PAB-34A Tongguil Is. 49 PAB-35 Tongquil Is

50 PAB-35A Tongquil Is. 51 PAB-38A Kirapusan Is 52 PAB-39 53 PAB-40 Manuk Manka Is. Frances Reef

54 PAB-40A Frances Reef 55 PAB-41A Bajapa Reef 56 PAB-42A Paguan Is. 57 PAB-43 58 PAB-44 59 PAB-45 60 PAB-46 61 PAB-47 62 PAB-48 Alice Reef Alice Reef Omapoy Rk. Bukut Lapis Pt. Pearl Bank Bagnan Is.

63 PAB-48A Taganak Is 64 PAB-49 65 PAB-50 Great Bakkungaan Is. Libiman Is.

66 PAB-51 67 PAB-52 68 PAB-53 69 PAB-54

Sibaung Is. Muligi Is. South Mangsee Is. Balabac Is.

61743.99" 65214.53" 73026.05" 74830.69" 75127.17" 75219.86" 75436.35" 820.26" 81118.36" 88756.37" 84417.40" 85332.20" 92.57.47" 95922.54" 111319.82" 121935.22" 135324.45" 154843.61" 155761.67" 16957.90" 161012.42" 161634.46" 163712.70" 161829.49" 161928.20" 16204.38" 173424.94" 174117.56" 17554.13"

11805.44" 1182340.49" 1171833.75" 1165939.18" 1165417.19" 1165328.73" 1165316.64" 1165410.04" 1165951.87" 1171551.23" 1172039.37" 1172815.78" 1173738.88" 1183653.61" 1191517.74" 1195056.00 12015.86" 1194656.09" 1194455.32" 11945.15.76" 1194511.95" 1194619.50" 1194628.62" 1194644.94" 119477.69" 1194720.48" 1202033.36" 120212.20" 1202440.56"

41.60 75.06 26.00 6.08 1.18 2.27 5.42 10.85 30.88 7.91 11.89 13.20 81.12 82.76 74.65 93.88 115.69 9.30 12.06 0.25 6.43 0.65 1.30 1.04 0.63 80.60 6.86 14.15 35.40

70 PAB-54A Balabac Great Reef 71 PAB-54B Balabac Great Reef 72 PAB-55 73 PAB-60 74 PAB.61 75 PAB-62 76 PAB-63 Balabac Great Reef Ada Reef Secam Is. Latua Pt. SW Tatub Pt.

77 PAB-63A W Sicud Pt. 78 PAB-64 Tarumpitao Pt.

79 PAB.64B Dry Is. 80 PAB-65C Sinangcolan Pt. 81 PAB-67 82 PAB-68 83 PAB-71 84 PAB-72 Pinnacle Rk. Cabra Is Hermana Mayor Is. Tambobo Pt.

85 PAB-72B Rena Pt. 86 PAB-73 87 PAB-74 Rena Pt. Rocky Ledge

88 PAB-74A Piedra Pt. 89 PAB-75 Piedra Pt.

90 PAB-75C Piedra Pt. 91 PAB-75D Piedra Pt. 92 PAB-76 93 PAB-77 94 PAB-78 Dile Pt. Pinget Is. Baboc Is.

95 PAB-79

Cape Bojeador

182932.42" 183052.88" 191014.78" 204315.74" 21717.47" 21718.41" 21712.04"

1203342.41" 1203455.35" 1211252.64" 1214657.80" 1215643.85" 1215648.79" 121573.65"

1.77 58.23 98.07 25.63 0.08 0.25 0.44

96 PAB-79B Bobon 97 PAB-80 98 PAB-82 99 PAB-83 100 PAB-84 101 PAB-85 Calagangan Pt. Itbayat Is. Amianan Is Amianan Is. Amianan Is.

Section 2. The baseline in the following areas over which the Philippines likewise exercises sovereignty and jurisdiction shall be determined as "Regime of Islands" under the Republic of the Philippines consistent with Article 121 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS): a) The Kalayaan Island Group as constituted under Presidential Decree No. 1596; and b) Bajo de Masinloc, also known as Scarborough Shoal. Section 3. This Act affirms that the Republic of the Philippines has dominion, sovereignty and jurisdiction over all portions of the national territory as defined in the Constitution and by provisions of applicable laws including, without limitation, Republic Act No. 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991, as amended. Section 4. This Act, together with the geographic coordinates and the chart and maps indicating the aforesaid baselines, shall be deposited and registered with the Secretary General of the United Nations. Section 5. The National Mapping and Resource Information Authority (NAMRIA) shall forthwith produce and publish charts and maps of the appropriate scale clearly representing the delineation of basepoints and baselines as set forth in this Act. Section 6. The amount necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act shall be provided in a supplemental budyet or included in the General Appropriations Act of the year of its enactment into law. Section 7. If any portion or provision of this Act is declared unconstitutional or invalid the other portions or provisions hereof which are not affected thereby shall continue to be in full force and effect. Section 8. The provisions of Republic Act No. 3046, as amended by Republic Act No. 5446, and all other laws, decrees, executive orders, rules and issuances inconsistent with this Act are hereby amended or modified accordingly.

Section 9. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days following its publication in the Official Gazette or in any two (2) newspaper of general circulation. Approved (Sgd.) PROSPERO C. NOGRALES Speaker of the House of Representatives (Sgd.) JUAN PONCE ENRILE President of the Senate

This Act which is a consolidation of Senate Bill No. 2699 and House Bill No. 3216 was finally passed by the Senate and the House of Representative on February 17, 2009. (Sgd.) MARILYN B. BARUAYAP Secretary General House of Represenatives Approved: MAR 10, 2009 (Sgd.) GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO President of the Philippine (Sgd.) EMMA LIRIO-REYES Secretary of Senate

EN BANC

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

G.R No. 187167

Present:

CORONA, C.J., CARPIO, VELASCO, JR.,

ALFERES, CZARINA MAY CASTRO, ALTEZ, FRANCIS ALVIN ASILO, SHERYL BALOT, RUBY AMOR BARRACA, JOSE JAVIER BAUTISTA, ROMINA BERNARDO, VALERIE PAGASA BUENAVENTURA, EDAN MARRI CAETE, 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,

LEONARDO-DE BRION, PERALTA, BERSAMIN, DEL CASTILLO, ABAD, VILLARAMA, JR., PEREZ, MENDOZA, and SERENO, JJ.

CHRISTIAN RIVERO, DIANNE MARIE ROA, NICHOLAS SANTIZO, MELISSA CHRISTINA SANTOS, CRISTINE MAE TABING, VANESSA ANNE TORNO, MARIA ESTER VANGUARDIA, and MARCELINO VELOSO III, Petitioners,

- versus HON. EDUARDO ERMITA, IN HIS CAPACITY AS EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, HON. ALBERTO ROMULO, IN HIS CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, HON. ROLANDO ANDAYA, IN HIS CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT, HON. DIONY VENTURA, IN HIS CAPACITY AS ADMINISTRATOR OF THE NATIONAL MAPPING & RESOURCE INFORMATION

AUTHORITY, and HON. HILARIO DAVIDE, JR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PERMANENT MISSION OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES TO THE UNITED NATIONS, Respondents. July 16, 2011 Promulgated:

x -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

DECISION

CARPIO, J.:

The Case

This original action for the writs of certiorari and prohibition assails the constitutionality of Republic Act No. 9522 (RA 9522) adjusting the countrys
1

archipelagic baselines and classifying the baseline regime of nearby territories.

The Antecedents

In 1961, Congress passed Republic Act No. 3046 (RA 3046) demarcating the
2

maritime baselines of the Philippines as an archipelagic State. This law followed the
3

framing of the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone in 1958 (UNCLOS I), codifying, among others, the sovereign right of States parties over their
4

territorial sea, the breadth of which, however, was left undetermined. Attempts to fill this void during the second round of negotiations in Geneva in 1960 (UNCLOS II) proved futile. Thus, domestically, RA 3046 remained unchanged for nearly five decades, save for legislation passed in 1968 (Republic Act No. 5446 [RA 5446]) correcting typographical errors and reserving the drawing of baselines around Sabah in North Borneo.

In March 2009, Congress amended RA 3046 by enacting RA 9522, the statute now under scrutiny. The change was prompted by the need to make RA 3046 compliant with the terms of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III), which the Philippines ratified on 27 February 1984. Among others, UNCLOS III
5 6

prescribes the water-land ratio, length, and contour of baselines of archipelagic States like the Philippines and sets the deadline for the filing of application for the extended
7

continental shelf. Complying with these requirements, RA 9522 shortened one

8

baseline, optimized the location of some basepoints around the Philippine archipelago and classified adjacent territories, namely, the Kalayaan Island Group (KIG) and the Scarborough Shoal, as regimes of islands whose islands generate their own applicable maritime zones.

Petitioners, professors of law, law students and a legislator, in their respective capacities as citizens, taxpayers or x x x legislators, as the case may be, assail the
9

constitutionality of RA 9522 on two principal grounds, namely: (1) RA 9522 reduces Philippine maritime territory, and logically, the reach of the Philippine states sovereign power, in violation of Article 1 of the 1987 Constitution, embodying the
10

terms of the Treaty of Paris and ancillary treaties, and (2) RA 9522 opens the
11 12

countrys waters landward of the baselines to maritime passage by all vessels and aircrafts, undermining Philippine sovereignty and national security, contravening the countrys nuclear-free policy, and damaging marine resources, in violation of relevant constitutional provisions.
13

In addition, petitioners contend that RA 9522s 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
14

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 IIIs framework of regime of islands to determine the maritime zones of the KIG and the Scarborough Shoal.

Commenting on the petition, respondent officials raised threshold issues questioning (1) the petitions 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. On the merits, respondents defended RA 9522 as the countrys 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 countrys security, environment and economic interests or relinquish the Philippines claim over Sabah.

Respondents also question 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.

We left unacted petitioners prayer for an injunctive writ.

The Issues

The petition raises the following issues:

1. Preliminarily

1. Whether petitioners possess locus standi to bring this suit; and 2. Whether the writs of certiorari and prohibition are the proper remedies to assail

the constitutionality of RA 9522.

2. On the merits, whether RA 9522 is unconstitutional.

The Ruling of the Court On the threshold issues, we hold that (1) petitioners possess locus standi to bring this suit as citizens and (2) the writs of certiorari and prohibition are proper remedies to test the constitutionality of RA 9522. On the merits, we find no basis to declare RA 9522 unconstitutional.

On the Threshold Issues

Petitioners Possess Locus Standi as Citizens

Petitioners themselves undermine their assertion of locus standi as legislators and taxpayers because the petition alleges neither infringement of legislative prerogative nor misuse of public funds, occasioned by the passage and implementation of RA
16 15

9522. Nonetheless, we recognize 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. Indeed, owing to the peculiar nature of RA 9522, it is understandably difficult to find other litigants possessing a more direct and specific interest to bring the suit, thus satisfying one of the requirements for granting citizenship standing.
17

The Writs of Certiorari and Prohibition Are Proper Remedies to Test the Constitutionality of Statutes

In praying for the dismissal of the petition on preliminary grounds, respondents seek a strict observance of the offices of the writs of certiorari and prohibition, noting that the writs cannot issue absent any showing of grave abuse of discretion in the exercise of judicial, quasi-judicial or ministerial powers on the part of respondents and resulting prejudice on the part of petitioners.
18

Respondents submission holds true in ordinary civil proceedings. 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, and indeed, of acts of other branches of government.
19 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. The statute sought to be reviewed here is one such law. RA 9522 is Not Unconstitutional

RA 9522 is a Statutory Tool to Demarcate the Countrys Maritime Zones and Continental Shelf Under UNCLOS III, not to Delineate Philippine Territory

Petitioners submit that RA 9522 dismembers a large portion of the national territory because it discards the pre-UNCLOS III demarcation of Philippine territory
21

under the Treaty of Paris and related treaties, successively encoded in the definition of national territory under the 1935, 1973 and 1987 Constitutions. Petitioners theorize that this constitutional definition trumps any treaty or statutory provision denying the Philippines sovereign control over waters, beyond the territorial sea recognized at the time of the Treaty of Paris, that Spain supposedly ceded to the United States. Petitioners argue that from the Treaty of Paris technical description, Philippine sovereignty over territorial waters extends hundreds of nautical miles around the Philippine archipelago, embracing the rectangular area delineated in the Treaty of Paris.
22

Petitioners theory fails to persuade us.

UNCLOS III has nothing to do with the acquisition (or loss) of territory. It is a multilateral treaty regulating, among others, 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 that UNCLOS III delimits. UNCLOS III was
23

the culmination of decades-long negotiations among United Nations members to codify norms regulating the conduct of States in the worlds oceans and submarine areas, recognizing coastal and archipelagic States graduated authority over a limited span of waters and submarine lands along their coasts.

On the other hand, baselines laws such as RA 9522 are enacted by UNCLOS III States parties to mark-out specific basepoints along their coasts from which baselines are drawn, either straight or contoured, to serve as geographic starting points to measure the breadth of the maritime zones and continental shelf. Article 48 of UNCLOS III on archipelagic States like ours could not be any clearer:

Article 48. Measurement of the breadth of the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf. The breadth of the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf shall be measured from archipelagic baselines drawn in accordance with article 47. (Emphasis supplied)

Thus, baselines laws are nothing but statutory mechanisms for UNCLOS III States parties to delimit with precision the extent of their maritime zones and continental shelves. In turn, this gives notice to the rest of the international community of the scope of the maritime space and submarine areas within which States parties exercise treaty-based rights, namely, the exercise of sovereignty over territorial waters (Article 2), the jurisdiction to enforce customs, fiscal, immigration,

and sanitation laws in the contiguous zone (Article 33), and the right to exploit the living and non-living resources in the exclusive economic zone (Article 56) and continental shelf (Article 77).

Even under petitioners theory that the Philippine territory embraces the islands and all the waters within the rectangular area delimited in the Treaty of Paris, the baselines of the Philippines would still have to be drawn in accordance with RA 9522 because this is the only way to draw the baselines in conformity with UNCLOS III. The baselines cannot be drawn from the boundaries or other portions of the rectangular area delineated in the Treaty of Paris, but from the outermost islands and drying reefs of the archipelago.
24

UNCLOS III and its ancillary baselines laws play no role in the acquisition, enlargement or, as petitioners claim, diminution of territory. Under traditional international law typology, States acquire (or conversely, lose) territory through occupation, accretion, cession and prescription, not by executing multilateral treaties
25

on the regulations of sea-use rights or enacting statutes to comply with the treatys terms to delimit maritime zones and continental shelves. Territorial claims to land features are outside UNCLOS III, and are instead governed by the rules on general international law.
26

RA 9522s Use of the Framework of Regime of Islands to Determine the Maritime Zones of the KIG and the

Scarborough Shoal, not Inconsistent with the Philippines Claim of Sovereignty Over these Areas

Petitioners next submit that RA 9522s use of UNCLOS IIIs regime of islands framework to draw the baselines, and to measure the breadth of the applicable maritime zones of the KIG, weakens our territorial claim over that area. Petitioners
27

add that the KIGs (and Scarborough Shoals) exclusion from the Philippine archipelagic baselines results in the loss of about 15,000 square nautical miles of territorial waters, prejudicing the livelihood of subsistence fishermen. A comparison
28

of the configuration of the baselines drawn under RA 3046 and RA 9522 and the extent of maritime space encompassed by each law, coupled with a reading of the text of RA 9522 and its congressional deliberations, vis--vis the Philippines obligations under UNCLOS III, belie this view.

The configuration of the baselines drawn under RA 3046 and RA 9522 shows that RA 9522 merely followed the basepoints mapped by RA 3046, save for at least nine basepoints that RA 9522 skipped to optimize the location of basepoints and adjust the length of one baseline (and thus comply with UNCLOS IIIs limitation on the maximum length of baselines). Under RA 3046, as under RA 9522, the KIG and the Scarborough Shoal lie outside of the baselines drawn around the Philippine archipelago. This undeniable cartographic fact takes the wind out of petitioners argument branding RA 9522 as a statutory renunciation of the Philippines claim over the KIG, assuming that baselines are relevant for this purpose.

Petitioners assertion of loss of about 15,000 square nautical miles of territorial waters under RA 9522 is similarly unfounded both in fact and law. On the contrary, RA 9522, by optimizing the location of basepoints, increased the Philippines total maritime space (covering its internal waters, territorial sea and exclusive economic zone) by 145,216 square nautical miles, as shown in the table below:
Extent of maritime area using RA 3046, as amended, taking into account the Treaty of Paris delimitation (in square nautical miles) Internal or archipelagic waters Extent of maritime area using RA 9522, taking into account UNCLOS III (in square nautical miles)
29

166,858

171,435

Territorial Sea

274,136

32,106

Exclusive Economic Zone TOTAL 440,994

382,669 586,210

Thus, as the map below shows, the reach of the exclusive economic zone drawn under RA 9522 even extends way beyond the waters covered by the rectangular demarcation under the Treaty of Paris. Of course, where there are overlapping exclusive economic zones of opposite or adjacent States, there will have to be a delineation of maritime boundaries in accordance with UNCLOS III.
30

Further, petitioners argument that the KIG now lies outside Philippine territory because the baselines that RA 9522 draws do not enclose the KIG is negated by RA 9522 itself. Section 2 of the law commits to text the Philippines continued claim of sovereignty and jurisdiction over the KIG and the Scarborough Shoal:

SEC. 2. The baselines in the following areas over which the Philippines likewise exercises sovereignty and jurisdiction shall be determined as Regime of Islands under the Republic of the Philippines consistent with Article 121 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS): a) The Kalayaan Island Group as constituted under Presidential Decree No. 1596 and b) Bajo de Masinloc, also known as Scarborough Shoal. (Emphasis supplied)

Had Congress in RA 9522 enclosed the KIG and the Scarborough Shoal as part of the Philippine archipelago, adverse legal effects would have ensued. The Philippines would have committed a breach of two provisions of UNCLOS III. First, 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. Second, 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.
31

Although the Philippines has consistently claimed sovereignty over the KIG

32

and the Scarborough Shoal for several decades, these outlying areas are located at an appreciable distance from the nearest shoreline of the Philippine archipelago, such
33

that any straight baseline loped around them from the nearest basepoint will inevitably depart to an appreciable extent from the general configuration of the archipelago.

The principal sponsor of RA 9522 in the Senate, Senator Miriam DefensorSantiago, took pains to emphasize the foregoing during the Senate deliberations:

What we call the Kalayaan Island Group or what the rest of the world call[] the Spratlys and the Scarborough Shoal are outside our archipelagic baseline because if we put them inside our baselines we might be accused of violating the provision of international law which states: The drawing of such baseline shall not depart to any appreciable extent from the general configuration of the archipelago. So sa loob ng ating baseline, dapat magkalapit ang mga islands. Dahil malayo ang Scarborough Shoal, hindi natin masasabing malapit sila sa atin although we are still allowed by international law to claim them as our own. This is called contested islands outside our configuration. We see that our archipelago is defined by the orange line which [we] call[] archipelagic baseline. Ngayon, tingnan ninyo ang maliit na circle doon sa itaas, that is Scarborough Shoal, itong malaking circle sa ibaba, that is Kalayaan Group or the Spratlys. Malayo na sila sa ating archipelago kaya kung ilihis pa natin ang dating archipelagic baselines para lamang masama itong dalawang circles, hindi na sila magkalapit at baka hindi na tatanggapin ng United Nations because of the rule that it should follow the natural configuration of the archipelago. (Emphasis supplied)
34

Similarly, the length of one baseline that RA 3046 drew exceeded UNCLOS IIIs limits. The need to shorten this baseline, and in addition, to optimize the location of basepoints using current maps, became imperative as discussed by respondents:

[T]he amendment of the baselines law was necessary to enable the Philippines to draw the outer limits of its maritime zones including the extended continental shelf in the manner provided by Article 47 of [UNCLOS III]. As defined by R.A. 3046, as amended by R.A. 5446, the baselines suffer from some technical deficiencies, to wit:

1. The length of the baseline across Moro Gulf (from Middle of 3 Rock Awash to Tongquil Point) is 140.06 nautical miles x x x. This exceeds the maximum length allowed under Article 47(2) of the [UNCLOS III], which states that The length of such baselines shall not exceed 100 nautical miles, except that up to 3 per cent of the total number of baselines enclosing any archipelago may exceed that length, up to a maximum length of 125 nautical miles. 2. The selection of basepoints is not optimal. At least 9 basepoints can be skipped or deleted from the baselines system. This will enclose an additional 2,195 nautical miles of water. 3. Finally, the basepoints were drawn from maps existing in 1968, and not established by geodetic survey methods. Accordingly, some of the points, particularly along the west coasts of Luzon down to Palawan were later found to be located either inland or on water, not on low-water line and drying reefs as prescribed by Article 47.
35

Hence, far from surrendering the Philippines claim over the KIG and the Scarborough Shoal, Congress decision to classify the KIG and the Scarborough Shoal as Regime[s] of Islands under the Republic of the Philippines consistent with Article 121 of UNCLOS III manifests the Philippine States responsible observance
36

of its pacta sunt servanda obligation under UNCLOS III. Under Article 121 of UNCLOS III, any naturally formed area of land, surrounded by water, which is above water at high tide, such as portions of the KIG, qualifies under the category of regime of islands, whose islands generate their own applicable maritime zones.
37

Statutory Claim Over Sabah under

RA 5446 Retained

Petitioners argument for the invalidity of RA 9522 for its failure to textualize the Philippines claim over Sabah in North Borneo is also untenable. Section 2 of RA 5446, which RA 9522 did not repeal, keeps open the door for drawing the baselines of Sabah:

Section 2. The definition of the baselines of the territorial sea of the Philippine Archipelago as provided in this Act is without prejudice to the 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. (Emphasis supplied)

UNCLOS III and RA 9522 not Incompatible with the Constitutions Delineation of Internal Waters

As their final argument against the validity of RA 9522, petitioners contend that the law unconstitutionally converts internal waters into archipelagic waters, hence subjecting these waters to the right of innocent and sea lanes passage under UNCLOS III, including overflight. Petitioners extrapolate that these passage rights indubitably expose Philippine internal waters to nuclear and maritime pollution hazards, in violation of the Constitution.
38

Whether referred to as Philippine internal waters under Article I of the Constitution or as archipelagic waters under UNCLOS III (Article 49 [1]), 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. UNCLOS III affirms this:

39

Article 49. Legal status of archipelagic waters, of the air space over archipelagic waters and of their bed and subsoil. 1. The sovereignty of an archipelagic State extends to the waters enclosed by the archipelagic baselines drawn in accordance with article 47, described as archipelagic waters, regardless of their depth or distance from the coast. 2. This sovereignty extends to the air space over the archipelagic waters, as well as to their bed and subsoil, and the resources contained therein. xxxx 4. The regime of archipelagic sea lanes passage established in this Part shall not in other respects affect the status of the archipelagic waters, including the sea lanes, or the exercise by the archipelagic State of its sovereignty over such waters and their air space, bed and subsoil, and the resources contained therein. (Emphasis supplied)

The fact of sovereignty, however, does not preclude the operation of 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. Indeed, bills drawing nautical highways for sea lanes passage are
40

now pending in Congress.

41

In the absence of municipal legislation, international law norms, now codified in UNCLOS III, operate to grant innocent passage rights over the territorial sea or archipelagic waters, subject to the treatys limitations and conditions for their exercise. Significantly, the right of innocent passage is a customary international
42

law, thus automatically incorporated in the corpus of Philippine law. No modern

43 44

State can validly invoke its sovereignty to absolutely forbid innocent passage that is exercised in accordance with customary international law without risking retaliatory measures from the international community. 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
45

footing vis--vis continental coastal States which are subject, in their territorial sea, to the right of innocent passage and the right of transit passage through international straits. The imposition of these passage rights through archipelagic waters under UNCLOS III was a concession by archipelagic States, in exchange for their right to claim all the waters landward of their baselines, regardless of their depth or distance from the coast, as archipelagic waters subject to their territorial sovereignty. More importantly, the recognition of archipelagic States archipelago and the 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
46

maritime zones, placing the waters between islands separated by more than 24 nautical miles beyond the States territorial sovereignty, subjecting these waters to the rights of other States under UNCLOS III.
47

Petitioners invocation of non-executory constitutional provisions in Article II (Declaration of Principles and State Policies) must also fail. Our present state of
48

jurisprudence considers the provisions in Article II as mere legislative guides, which, absent enabling legislation, do not embody judicially enforceable constitutional rights x x x. Article II provisions serve as guides in formulating and interpreting
49

implementing legislation, as well as in interpreting executory provisions of the Constitution. Although Oposa v. Factoran treated the right to a healthful and
50

balanced ecology under Section 16 of Article II as an exception, the present petition lacks factual basis to substantiate the claimed constitutional violation. The other provisions petitioners cite, relating to the protection of marine wealth (Article XII, Section 2, paragraph 2 ) and subsistence fishermen (Article XIII, Section 7 ), are not
51 52

violated by RA 9522.

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.

UNCLOS III favors States with a long coastline like the Philippines. UNCLOS III creates a sui generis maritime space the exclusive economic zone in waters

previously part of the high seas. UNCLOS III grants new rights to coastal States to exclusively exploit the resources found within this zone up to 200 nautical miles.
53

UNCLOS III, however, preserves the traditional freedom of navigation of other States that attached to this zone beyond the territorial sea before UNCLOS III.

RA 9522 and the Philippines Maritime Zones

Petitioners hold the view that, based on the permissive text of UNCLOS III, Congress was not bound to pass RA 9522. We have looked at the relevant provision
54

of UNCLOS III and we find petitioners reading plausible. Nevertheless, the

55

prerogative of choosing this option belongs to Congress, not to this Court. Moreover, the luxury of choosing this option comes at a very steep price. Absent an UNCLOS III compliant baselines law, an archipelagic State like the Philippines will find itself devoid of internationally acceptable baselines from where the breadth of its maritime zones and continental shelf is measured. This is recipe for a two-fronted disaster: first, it sends an open invitation to the seafaring powers to freely enter and exploit the resources in the waters and submarine areas around our archipelago; and second, it weakens the countrys case in any international dispute over Philippine maritime space. These are consequences Congress wisely avoided.

The enactment of UNCLOS III compliant baselines law for the Philippine archipelago and adjacent areas, as embodied in RA 9522, allows an internationallyrecognized 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.

WHEREFORE, we DISMISS the petition.

SO ORDERED.

ANTONIO T. CARPIO Associate Justice

WE CONCUR:

RENATO C. CORONA Chief Justice

(Pls. see concurring opinion) PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR. Associate Justice

TERESITA J. LEONARDODE CASTRO Associate Justice

ARTURO D. BRION Associate Justice

DIOSDADO M. PERALTA Associate Justice

MARIANO C. DEL CASTILLO LUCAS P. BERSAMIN Associate Justice Associate Justice

I certify that Mr. Justice Abad left his concurring vote. ROBERTO A. ABAD Associate Justice

MARTIN S. VILLARAMA, JR. Associate Justice

(on leave) JOSE PORTUGAL PEREZ Associate Justice

JOSE C. MENDOZA Associate Justice

MARIA LOURDES P. A. SERENO Associate Justice

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution, I certify that the conclusions in the above Decision had been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court.

RENATO C. CORONA Chief Justice

1Entitled An Act to Amend Certain Provisions of Republic Act No. 3046, as Amended by Republic Act No. 5446, to Define the Archipelagic Baselines of the Philippines, and for Other Purposes. 2 Entitled An Act to Define the Baselines of the Territorial Sea of the Philippines. 3 The third Whereas Clause of RA 3046 expresses the import of treating the Philippines as an archipelagic State: WHEREAS, all the waters around, between, and connecting the various islands of the Philippine archipelago, irrespective of their width or dimensions, have always been considered as necessary appurtenances of the land territory, forming part of the inland waters of the Philippines. 4 One of the four conventions framed during the first United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in Geneva, this treaty, excluding the Philippines, entered into force on 10 September 1964. 5 UNCLOS III entered into force on 16 November 1994. 6 The Philippines signed the treaty on 10 December 1982. 7 Article 47, paragraphs 1-3, provide:
1. An archipelagic State may draw straight archipelagic baselines joining the outermost points of the outermost islands and drying reefs of the archipelago provided that within such baselines are included the main islands and an area in which the ratio of the area of the water to the area of the land, including atolls, is between 1 to 1 and 9 to 1. 2. The length of such baselines shall not exceed 100 nautical miles, except that up to 3 per cent of the total number of baselines enclosing any archipelago may exceed that length, up to a maximum length of 125 nautical miles.

3. The drawing of such baselines shall not depart to any appreciable extent from the general configuration of the archipelago. (Emphasis supplied)

xxxx 8UNCLOS III entered into force on 16 November 1994. The deadline for the filing of application is mandated in Article 4, Annex II: Where a coastal State intends to establish, in accordance with article 76, the outer limits of its continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles, it shall submit particulars of such limits to the Commission along with supporting scientific and technical data as soon as possible but in any case within 10 years of the entry into force of this Convention for that State. The coastal State shall at the same time give the names of any Commission members who have provided it with scientific and technical advice. (Underscoring supplied) In a subsequent meeting, the States parties agreed that for States which became bound by the treaty before 13 May 1999 (such as the Philippines) the ten-year period will be counted from that date. Thus, RA 9522, which took effect on 27 March 2009, barely met the deadline. 9 Rollo, p. 34. 10Which provides: The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced therein, and all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial, and aerial domains, including its territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular shelves, and other submarine areas. The waters around, between, and connecting the islands of the archipelago, regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the Philippines. 11Entered into between the Unites States and Spain on 10 December 1898 following the conclusion of the Spanish-American War. Under the terms of the treaty, Spain ceded to the United States the archipelago known as the Philippine Islands lying within its technical description. 12 The Treaty of Washington, between Spain and the United States (7 November 1900), transferring to the US the islands of Cagayan, Sulu, and Sibutu and the US-Great Britain Convention (2 January 1930) demarcating boundary lines between the Philippines and North Borneo. 13 Article II, Section 7, Section 8, and Section 16. 14 Allegedly in violation of Article XII, Section 2, paragraph 2 and Article XIII, Section 7 of the Constitution. 15 Kilosbayan, Inc. v. Morato, 320 Phil. 171, 186 (1995). 16 Pascual v. Secretary of Public Works, 110 Phil. 331 (1960); Sanidad v. COMELEC, 165 Phil. 303 (1976).

17Francisco, Jr. v. House of Representatives, 460 Phil. 830, 899 (2003) citing Kilosbayan, Inc. v. Guingona, Jr., G.R. No. 113375, 5 May 1994, 232 SCRA 110, 155-156 (1995) (Feliciano, J., concurring). The two other factors are: the character of funds or assets involved in the controversy and a clear disregard of constitutional or statutory prohibition. Id. 18. Rollo, pp. 144-147. 19See e.g. Aquino III v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 189793, 7 April 2010, 617 SCRA 623 (dismissing a petition for certiorari and prohibition assailing the constitutionality of Republic Act No. 9716, not for the impropriety of remedy but for lack of merit); Aldaba v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 188078, 25 January 2010, 611 SCRA 137 (issuing the writ of prohibition to declare unconstitutional Republic Act No. 9591); Macalintal v. COMELEC, 453 Phil. 586 (2003) (issuing the writs of certiorari and prohibition declaring unconstitutional portions of Republic Act No. 9189). 20See e.g. Neri v. Senate Committee on Accountability of Public Officers and Investigations, G.R. No. 180643, 25 March 2008, 549 SCRA 77 (granting a writ of certiorari against the Philippine Senate and nullifying the Senate contempt order issued against petitioner). 21 Rollo, p. 31. 22Respondents state in their Comment that petitioners theory has not been accepted or recognized by either the United States or Spain, the parties to the Treaty of Paris. Respondents add that no State is known to have supported this proposition. Rollo, p. 179. 23UNCLOS III belongs to that larger corpus of international law of the sea, which petitioner Magallona himself defined as a body of treaty rules and customary norms governing the uses of the sea, the exploitation of its resources, and the exercise of jurisdiction over maritime regimes. x x x x (Merlin M. Magallona, Primer on the Law of the Sea 1 [1997]) (Italicization supplied). 24 Following Article 47 (1) of UNCLOS III which provides:
An archipelagic State may draw straight archipelagic baselines joining the outermost points of the outermost islands and drying reefs of the archipelago provided that within such baselines are included the main islands and an area in which the ratio of the area of the water to the area of the land, including atolls, is between 1 to 1 and 9 to 1. (Emphasis supplied)

25 Under the United Nations Charter, use of force is no longer a valid means of acquiring territory. 26 The last paragraph of the preamble of UNCLOS III states that matters not regulated by this Convention continue to be governed by the rules and principles of general international law.

27 Rollo, p. 51. 28 Id. at 51-52, 64-66. 29 Based on figures respondents submitted in their Comment (id. at 182). 30 Under Article 74. 31 See note 7. 32 Presidential Decree No. 1596 classifies the KIG as a municipality of Palawan. 33 KIG lies around 80 nautical miles west of Palawan while Scarborough Shoal is around 123 nautical west of Zambales. 34 Journal, Senate 14th Congress 44th Session 1416 (27 January 2009). 35 Rollo, p. 159. 36 Section 2, RA 9522. 37 Article 121 provides: 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. 38 Rollo, pp. 56-57, 60-64. 39Paragraph 2, Section 2, Article XII of the Constitution uses the term archipelagic waters separately from territorial sea. Under UNCLOS III, an archipelagic State may have internal waters such as those enclosed by closing lines across bays and mouths of rivers. See Article 50, UNCLOS III. Moreover, Article 8 (2) of UNCLOS III provides: Where the establishment of a straight baseline in accordance with the method set forth in article 7 has the effect of enclosing as internal waters areas which had not previously been considered as such, a right of innocent passage as provided in this Convention shall exist in those waters. (Emphasis supplied) 40 Mandated under Articles 52 and 53 of UNCLOS III:

Article 52. Right of innocent passage. 1. Subject to article 53 and without prejudice to article 50, ships of all States enjoy the right of innocent passage through archipelagic waters, in accordance with Part II, section 3. 2. The archipelagic State may, without discrimination in form or in fact among foreign ships, suspend temporarily in specified areas of its archipelagic waters the innocent passage of foreign ships if such suspension is essential for the protection of its security. Such suspension shall take effect only after having been duly published. (Emphasis supplied) Article 53. Right of archipelagic sea lanes passage. 1. An archipelagic State may designate sea lanes and air routes thereabove, suitable for the continuous and expeditious passage of foreign ships and aircraft through or over its archipelagic waters and the adjacent territorial sea. 2. All ships and aircraft enjoy the right of archipelagic sea lanes passage in such sea lanes and air routes. 3. Archipelagic sea lanes passage means the exercise in accordance with this Convention of the rights of navigation and overflight in the normal mode solely for the purpose of continuous, expeditious and unobstructed transit between one part of the high seas or an exclusive economic zone and another part of the high seas or an exclusive economic zone. 4. Such sea lanes and air routes shall traverse the archipelagic waters and the adjacent territorial sea and shall include all normal passage routes used as routes for international navigation or overflight through or over archipelagic waters and, within such routes, so far as ships are concerned, all normal navigational channels, provided that duplication of routes of similar convenience between the same entry and exit points shall not be necessary. 5. Such sea lanes and air routes shall be defined by a series of continuous axis lines from the entry points of passage routes to the exit points. Ships and aircraft in archipelagic sea lanes passage shall not deviate more than 25 nautical miles to either side of such axis lines during passage, provided that such ships and aircraft shall not navigate closer to the coasts than 10 per cent of the distance between the nearest points on islands bordering the sea lane. 6. An archipelagic State which designates sea lanes under this article may also prescribe traffic separation schemes for the safe passage of ships through narrow channels in such sea lanes. 7. An archipelagic State may, when circumstances require, after giving due publicity thereto, substitute other sea lanes or traffic separation schemes for any sea lanes or traffic separation schemes previously designated or prescribed by it. 8. Such sea lanes and traffic separation schemes shall conform to generally accepted international regulations. 9. In designating or substituting sea lanes or prescribing or substituting traffic separation schemes, an archipelagic State shall refer proposals to the competent international organization with a view to their adoption. The organization may adopt only such sea lanes and traffic separation schemes as may be agreed with the archipelagic State, after which the archipelagic State may designate, prescribe or substitute them. 10. The archipelagic State shall clearly indicate the axis of the sea lanes and the traffic separation schemes designated or prescribed by it on charts to which due publicity shall be given.

11. Ships in archipelagic sea lanes passage shall respect applicable sea lanes and traffic separation schemes established in accordance with this article. 12. If an archipelagic State does not designate sea lanes or air routes, the right of archipelagic sea lanes passage may be exercised through the routes normally used for international navigation. (Emphasis supplied)

41Namely, House Bill No. 4153 and Senate Bill No. 2738, identically titled AN ACT TO ESTABLISH THE ARCHIPELAGIC SEA LANES IN THE PHILIPPINE ARCHIPELAGIC WATERS, PRESCRIBING THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF FOREIGN SHIPS AND AIRCRAFTS EXERCISING THE RIGHT OF ARCHIPELAGIC SEA LANES PASSAGE THROUGH THE ESTABLISHED ARCHIPELAGIC SEA LANES AND PROVIDING FOR THE ASSOCIATED PROTECTIVE MEASURES THEREIN. 42 The relevant provision of UNCLOS III provides: Article 17. Right of innocent passage. Subject to this Convention, ships of all States, whether coastal or land-locked, enjoy the right of innocent passage through the territorial sea. (Emphasis supplied)

Article 19. Meaning of innocent passage. 1. Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State. Such passage shall take place in conformity with this Convention and with other rules of international law. 2. Passage of a foreign ship shall be considered to be prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State if in the territorial sea it engages in any of the following activities: (a) any threat or use of force against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of the coastal State, or in any other manner in violation of the principles of international law embodied in the Charter of the United Nations; (b) any exercise or practice with weapons of any kind; (c) any act aimed at collecting information to the prejudice of the defence or security of the coastal State; (d) any act of propaganda aimed at affecting the defence or security of the coastal State; (e) the launching, landing or taking on board of any aircraft; (f) the launching, landing or taking on board of any military device;

(g) the loading or unloading of any commodity, currency or person contrary to the customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws and regulations of the coastal State; (h) any act of willful and serious pollution contrary to this Convention; (i) any fishing activities; (j) the carrying out of research or survey activities; (k) any act aimed at interfering with any systems of communication or any other facilities or installations of the coastal State; (l) any other activity not having a direct bearing on passage Article 21. Laws and regulations of the coastal State relating to innocent passage. 1. The coastal State may adopt laws and regulations, in conformity with the provisions of this Convention and other rules of international law, relating to innocent passage through the territorial sea, in respect of all or any of the following: (a) the safety of navigation and the regulation of maritime traffic; (b) the protection of navigational aids and facilities and other facilities or installations; (c) the protection of cables and pipelines; (d) the conservation of the living resources of the sea; (e) the prevention of infringement of the fisheries laws and regulations of the coastal State; (f) the preservation of the environment of the coastal State and the prevention, reduction and control of pollution thereof; (g) marine scientific research and hydrographic surveys; (h) the prevention of infringement of the customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws and regulations of the coastal State. 2. Such laws and regulations shall not apply to the design, construction, manning or equipment of foreign ships unless they are giving effect to generally accepted international rules or standards. 3. The coastal State shall give due publicity to all such laws and regulations. 4. Foreign ships exercising the right of innocent passage through the territorial sea shall comply with all such laws and regulations and all generally accepted international regulations relating to the prevention of collisions at sea.

43The right of innocent passage through the territorial sea applies only to ships and not to aircrafts (Article 17, UNCLOS III). The right of innocent passage of aircrafts through the sovereign territory of a State arises only under an international agreement. In contrast, the right of innocent passage through archipelagic waters applies to both ships and aircrafts (Article 53 (12), UNCLOS III). 44Following Section 2, Article II of the Constitution: Section 2. The Philippines renounces war as an instrument of
national policy, adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land and adheres to the policy of peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity with all nations. (Emphasis supplied)

45Archipelagic sea lanes passage is essentially the same as transit passage through straits to which the territorial sea of continental coastal State is subject. R.R. Churabill and A.V. Lowe, The Law of the Sea 127 (1999). 46 Falling under Article 121 of UNCLOS III (see note 37). 47 Within the exclusive economic zone, other States enjoy the following rights under UNCLOS III:

Article 58. Rights and duties of other States in the exclusive economic zone. 1. In the exclusive economic zone, all States, whether coastal or landlocked, enjoy, subject to the relevant provisions of this Convention, the freedoms referred to in article 87 of navigation and overflight and of the laying of submarine cables and pipelines, and other internationally lawful uses of the sea related to these freedoms, such as those associated with the operation of ships, aircraft and submarine cables and pipelines, and compatible with the other provisions of this Convention. 2. Articles 88 to 115 and other pertinent rules of international law apply to the exclusive economic zone in so far as they are not incompatible with this Part. xxxx

Beyond the exclusive economic zone, other States enjoy the freedom of the high seas, defined under UNCLOS III as follows:

Article 87. Freedom of the high seas.

1. The high seas are open to all States, whether coastal or land-locked. Freedom of the high seas is exercised under the conditions laid down by this Convention and by other rules of international law. It comprises, inter alia, both for coastal and land-locked States: (a) freedom of navigation; (b) freedom of overflight; (c) freedom to lay submarine cables and pipelines, subject to Part VI; (d) freedom to construct artificial islands and other installations permitted under international law, subject to Part VI; (e) freedom of fishing, subject to the conditions laid down in section 2; (f) freedom of scientific research, subject to Parts VI and XIII. 2. These freedoms shall be exercised by all States with due regard for the interests of other States in their exercise of the freedom of the high seas, and also with due regard for the rights under this Convention with respect to activities in the Area. 48 See note 13. 49 Kilosbayan, Inc. v. Morato, 316 Phil. 652, 698 (1995); Taada v. Angara, 338 Phil. 546, 580581 (1997). 50 G.R. No. 101083, 30 July 1993, 224 SCRA 792. 51 The State shall protect the nations marine wealth in its archipelagic waters, territorial sea, and exclusive economic zone, and reserve its use and enjoyment exclusively to Filipino citizens. 52The State shall protect the rights of subsistence fishermen, especially of local communities, to the preferential use of the communal marine and fishing resources, both inland and offshore. It shall provide support to such fishermen through appropriate technology and research, adequate financial, production, and marketing assistance, and other services. The State shall also protect, develop, and conserve such resources. The protection shall extend to offshore fishing grounds of subsistence fishermen against foreign intrusion. Fishworkers shall receive a just share from their labor in the utilization of marine and fishing resources. 53This can extend up to 350 nautical miles if the coastal State proves its right to claim an extended continental shelf (see UNCLOS III, Article 76, paragraphs 4(a), 5 and 6, in relation to Article 77). 54 Rollo, pp. 67-69.

55Article 47 (1) provides: An archipelagic State may draw straight archipelagic baselines joining the outermost points of the outermost islands and drying reefs of the archipelago provided that within such baselines are included the main islands and an area in which the ratio of the area of the water to the area of the land, including atolls, is between 1 to 1 and 9 to 1. (Emphasis supplied)