GUEST COLUMNIST
Last Nov. 8, President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. signed the Maritime Zones Act (RA12064) and the Archipelagic Sea Lanes Act (RA12065). The two new laws, as per President Marcos, aim to “protect our maritime resources, preserve our rich biodiversity, and ensure that our waters remain a source of life and livelihood for all Filipinos.” While maintaining national sovereignty, these laws have substantial consequences. In this light, this article looks into the security, legal, and diplomatic aspects of these laws.
The Maritime Zones Act (RA12064) aligns the country’s domestic laws with the 2016 Arbitral Tribunal decision and the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention. It also outlines the internal waters, archipelagic waters, territorial sea, contiguous zone, Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), and continental shelf. The Archipelagic Sea Lanes Act (RA12065), meanwhile, demarcates where foreign vessels and airplanes could traverse in our waters.
Maritime security is the foremost benefit of these laws. With the declaration of our rights over these waters especially in the EEZ as per RA12064, greater authority is established. Thus, uncontrolled exploitation of resources, illicit fishing, and other maritime invasions will be controlled. RA12065, meanwhile lowers the security threats as it limits foreign traffic of vessels and airplanes over defined passages. The result is a regulated international transit system that supports the strategic aims of the protection of biodiversity and resources.
Nevertheless, a delicate approach is needed in the enforcement of the Maritime Zones Act. Its execution entails a satisfactory level of security and surveillance capacity. With the country’s sprawling archipelagic geography, implementation of the Act may fail and may even encourage other countries to test our resolve. Another likely consequence is an increase in the deployment of maritime militia, coast guard, and naval vessels in the contested areas which also increases the risk of clashes. Thus, to strengthen enforcement, the Philippines must improve its air and maritime domain awareness while strengthening naval and coast guard capabilities.
From a legal standpoint, the Maritime Zones Act boosts our posture in international maritime law as it defines the nation’s view on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The Act also explains the entitlements to the continental shelf and EEZ by stating the rights to protect them against illegal claims and exploit resources in these waters. The United States in expressing support for these new laws cited that it is a positive step toward honoring international maritime guidelines.
Diplomatically, there is an increased risk of worsening the already strained relations between China and the Philippines. This may potentially trigger political, economic, and diplomatic reprisals. Furthermore, this may cause a more assertive maritime posturing that challenges the nation’s authority in contentious areas. With China not recognizing the International Tribunal’s ruling on the West Philippine Sea, it did not recognize the new law based on the Tribunal’s award.
Additionally, Beijing also claimed that portions of the Archipelagic Sea Lanes Act violate International Maritime Organization resolutions and weaken the broader framework of international maritime law. It argues further that any limitations imposed on transit could disrupt the rights of international passage.
Likewise, the diplomatic relationships and foreign policy especially in ASEAN will be affected. As other nations may perceive the legislation as restrictive, diplomatic pressure will be experienced by the nation. Diplomatic fallouts with other countries with interests in the West Philippine Sea may also occur due to the perception of the country imposing unjust constraints on freedom of navigation.
As it advances these new laws, the Philippines will need to find the right balance in asserting its maritime sovereignty with the risks of provoking or alienating neighboring powers. Legally, it must ensure that its measures always follow the standards of UNCLOS while avoiding actions that could be seen as violations of international law. Diplomatically, it should foster open dialogue and proactively engage to clarify its positions and calmly resolve potential conflicts.
In conclusion, the Maritime Zones Act and the Archipelagic Sea Lanes Act provide a clear and distinct framework for the nation’s maritime sovereignty. The new laws are crucial in safeguarding entitlements in the maritime zones, but their success hinges on prudent and carefully nuanced diplomatic negotiations that avoid escalating tensions among nations. The future of the country relies on a cautious steering over these new and sometimes turbulent waters — securing maritime sovereignty while avoiding conflicts, and asserting rights without isolating allies. In this approach, the Philippines shall meet the challenge by integrating the national interest with the pragmatic foresight required in navigating the intricate geopolitical waters.
(Lt. Gen. Aurelio B. Baladad (Ret) served as the 8th commander of the Eastern Mindanao Command, the 32nd commander of the 3rd Infantry (Spearhead) Division, and the former deputy chief of staff for Operations, J3 of the AFP. He is now the VP for cooperative planning and marketing of PAFCPIC, a cooperative serving the active and retired AFP personnel.)