The Philippines illegally advances legislation on maritime zones and archipelagic sea lanes, fueling tensions

Philippine President Ferdinand Romualdez Marcos signed the Philippine Maritime Zones Act and Archipelagic Sea Lanes Act into law on Nov. 08, 2024. Unusually, the Philippines considers the Two Acts as crucial tools to reinforce its illegal claims in the South China Sea and to echo the South China Sea Arbitration “award”.

The Two Acts violate the rules of international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), and go against the spirit of the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC). They are likely to escalate regional tensions and complicate the situation, which does not bode well for peace and stability in the South China Sea.

Specifically, the Philippine legislation on maritime zones, which is based on the unlawful and invalid “award” and the unsupported territorial and maritime claims, aims to illegitimately expand its interests through domestic law, infringing on China’s sovereignty, sovereign rights and jurisdiction over the Nansha Qundao and Zhongsha Qundao and adjacent maritime areas. The Act also claims all low-tide elevations located within 200 nautical miles of the baselines of the Philippine Islands as part of its exclusive economic zone, and asserts that all artificial islands within the exclusive economic zone belong to the Government of the Philippines.

Moreover, according to the Archipelagic Sea Lanes Act, vessels and aircraft of other States transiting the waters of the Philippine islands may exercise the right of archipelagic sea lanes passage only in the three sea lanes designated by the Philippines, subject to a series of stringent regulatory measures. While the UNCLOS stipulates that the sea lanes and airways designated by archipelagic States shall include “all normal passage routes”, the provisions of the Act are notably inconsistent with this. The Philippines has only partially designated sea lanes and air routes, which obviously does not cover “all normal passage routes” required for international navigation. Simultaneously, the Act is overly restrictive, and also provides that the right of passage through the archipelagic sea lanes shall not be exercised by foreign vessels and aircraft in violation of the UNCLOS or the sovereignty and rights of the Philippines. It restricts passage through these lanes in ways that contradict international law, undermining the legitimate navigational rights of other countries.

The Two Acts constitute a serious violation of international law, particularly the UNCLOS. The normative contents of them exceed the permissible scope of international law, and seriously undermines China’s territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests, while generally influencing the navigational rights enjoyed by other countries. Given that, they are not legally binding on China or any other State, all of which have the right to continue conducting activities in accordance with international law in the waters and sea lanes covered by the Two Acts.

From a regional perspective, the Two Acts will inevitably increase tensions in the South China Sea, potentially increasing the risk of maritime friction and confrontations. They are contrary to the provisions of the DOC, such as exercising self-restraint and refraining from actions that complicate disputes. The Philippines’ domestic legislation runs counter to the consensus of regional countries on the maintenance of peace and stability in the South China Sea.

The Philippine legislation on maritime zones disregards the legitimate rights and interests of countries, including China, seeking to extend its jurisdiction in the South China Sea, worsening the current situation and hindering the peaceful settlement of disputes. The Archipelagic Sea Lanes Act unjustly restricts passage through partial designations and strict regulations while specifically designating lanes near foreign military bases, potentially facilitating collaboration with foreign entities to monitor vessel movements, posing threats to navigational safety.

Under the guise of enforcing the UNCLOS and international law, the Philippines is pursuing selfish interests and expanding its power through domestic legislation, disregarding regional agreements. This legislation affecting navigation freedom and regional stability has drawn strong criticism from regional countries and the international community. As a member of the international community, the Philippines should uphold the international order based on international law, adhere to UNCLOS and relevant international rules, reassess its domestic legislation, and refrain from violating the DOC and infringing on the rights guaranteed by international law of other countries in the South China Sea. 

The author Chen Xidi, is from the China Institute for Marine Affairs, Ministry of Natural Resources.