The National Territory of the Philippines: Sovereignty and Jurisdiction in a Complex Maritime Landscape

 

Article I of the Philippine Constitution defines the national territory and lays the foundation for the country’s sovereignty and jurisdiction. This article reflects not only a territorial claim but also a complex assertion of sovereignty over land, water, and air spaces. In addition to the Philippine archipelago, it includes all areas where the Philippines exercises legal authority, such as terrestrial, fluvial, and aerial domains, as well as territorial seas, seabeds, subsoils, insular shelves, and other submarine areas. 

Understanding the scope of the national territory, particularly within the maritime context, is essential for addressing contemporary issues related to territorial integrity, resource management, and international relations. Given the Philippines’ strategic location and its rich natural resources, especially in its maritime zones, the boundaries and jurisdictional claims articulated in Article I are critical to both national identity and security.

I. Components of the Philippine National Territory

Article I explicitly defines the national territory as comprising various domains:

1. Philippine Archipelago: This includes all islands and waters contained within the Philippine archipelago. The archipelagic nature of the Philippines entails a distinct configuration of territorial claims that must account for the interconnected land and water forms across numerous islands.

2. Other Territories: The article includes any territory over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, acknowledging that claims may extend beyond the main archipelago.

3. Terrestrial, Fluvial, and Aerial Domains: This highlights the Philippines’ authority not only over its landmass and rivers (fluvial areas) but also over its airspace, asserting a comprehensive scope of sovereignty.

4. Territorial Sea, Seabed, Subsoil, Insular Shelves, and Other Submarine Areas: The inclusion of these domains reflects the state’s interest in underwater resources, emphasizing the Philippines’ claims over natural resources in areas surrounding the archipelago.

5. Internal Waters: According to Article I, the waters between and around the islands of the Philippine archipelago are considered internal waters, irrespective of their breadth or size. This is a significant assertion in terms of maritime jurisdiction and resource management.

II. The Archipelagic Doctrine and Its Implications

The Philippines adheres to the archipelagic doctrine, which regards an archipelago as a single, unified entity rather than as a collection of isolated islands. Under this doctrine, the waters surrounding, between, and connecting the islands are considered internal waters, thus under complete Philippine sovereignty. This concept is recognized under UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea), to which the Philippines is a signatory.

Significance of Internal Waters

Labeling these waters as internal grants the Philippines exclusive authority over navigation, resource extraction, and environmental management within its archipelagic waters. Unlike territorial seas, where certain rights of passage are accorded to foreign vessels, internal waters are subject to the Philippines’ full control, underscoring the importance of maintaining territorial integrity.

Challenges with the Archipelagic Doctrine

Despite UNCLOS recognition, some challenges arise. The waters surrounding the Philippines contain critical international shipping lanes. Balancing the rights of exclusive control with the obligations of allowing innocent passage for international navigation is complex, as the country must respect both its sovereignty and its responsibilities to global maritime norms.

III. Territorial Disputes and International Implications

Article I’s definition of national territory also includes “other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction.” This vague phrasing has enabled claims to contested areas, particularly in the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea). This region is rich in natural resources and strategically significant, with several countries, including China, asserting overlapping claims.

The West Philippine Sea Dispute

The Philippines’ claim over parts of the West Philippine Sea has led to significant tension with neighboring countries, particularly China, which asserts claims over almost the entire South China Sea under its “Nine-Dash Line” claim. In 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) ruled in favor of the Philippines, invalidating China’s expansive claims. However, enforcing this ruling remains challenging due to China’s refusal to recognize it.

The Philippines’ constitutional assertion of sovereignty over its maritime territories reinforces its legal position in these disputes. By clearly defining these areas within Article I, the Philippines strengthens its stance for maintaining control over resources, fishing rights, and navigation rights in contested waters.

Implications for Resource Management and National Security

Control over the West Philippine Sea has critical implications for the Philippines’ economy and security. This area holds vast potential for fishing, oil, and gas resources, which are crucial for the nation’s energy and food security. However, ongoing tensions and militarization in the region complicate these prospects. The Philippines has sought both diplomatic and multilateral avenues to assert its rights, collaborating with ASEAN members and engaging in dialogues to address territorial concerns peacefully.

IV. Sovereignty over Submarine Areas and Resource Jurisdiction

In addition to its terrestrial and fluvial domains, the Philippine Constitution asserts sovereignty over submarine areas, including the seabed, subsoil, and insular shelves. This claim enables the country to control natural resources found within its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and continental shelf.

The Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)

Under UNCLOS, the Philippines has an EEZ extending 200 nautical miles from its baselines, where it holds rights to exploit and manage natural resources. This includes fishing rights and the extraction of minerals, oil, and gas. The inclusion of such rights in Article I emphasizes the Philippine government’s interest in protecting and developing these resources for national benefit.

    Example: The potential for oil and gas exploration in the Recto (Reed) Bank highlights the significance of these territorial claims. However, disputed areas within the EEZ, particularly with China, challenge the Philippines’ ability to fully exploit these resources.

Sustainable Management and Environmental Concerns

Beyond economic interests, managing these marine resources also entails responsibilities for environmental conservation. Article I’s inclusion of submarine areas within Philippine territory emphasizes the need for sustainable management, ensuring that natural resources are conserved for future generations.

V. The Legal and Diplomatic Dimensions of Philippine Territorial Claims

The Philippine government faces significant challenges in balancing its constitutional mandate to uphold territorial integrity with the complex dynamics of international relations. While Article I provides a constitutional basis for sovereignty, enforcing these claims requires effective diplomacy, adherence to international law, and cooperation with global institutions.

Diplomatic Efforts and Multilateralism

The Philippines has actively pursued multilateral solutions, engaging with ASEAN, the United States, Japan, and other allies to bolster its position in maritime disputes. The country has also emphasized the rule of law, particularly through its reliance on UNCLOS and the PCA ruling, as a framework for resolving territorial issues. 

However, challenges remain, as diplomatic resolutions often require significant negotiation and compromise. Navigating these waters diplomatically requires balancing national sovereignty with regional stability, an ongoing challenge in the West Philippine Sea.

VI. Conclusion: Upholding Sovereignty Amidst Geopolitical Complexities

Article I of the Philippine Constitution establishes a strong foundation for territorial sovereignty, emphasizing the country's commitment to preserving its national territory. However, enforcing these rights involves navigating a complex geopolitical landscape where overlapping claims and competing interests frequently come into play.

The Philippines’ approach to territorial claims is a testament to its resilience and dedication to protecting its sovereignty. The constitutional recognition of land, maritime, and aerial domains underscores the importance of these areas not only to national security but also to economic development and environmental sustainability. As the Philippines continues to assert its sovereignty, Article I serves as a reminder of the nation’s right to self-determination, resource management, and regional stability in an ever-evolving global order.