Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 43 views

    PIL Module 7

    Uploaded by

    jobelle barcellano
    The document discusses the Archipelagic Doctrine and its implications for archipelagic states. It notes that: 1) Under UNCLOS III, archipelagic states can claim waters within archipelagic baselines as sovereign territory, in exchange for allowing innocent passage and sea lanes passage through these waters. 2) This prevents their islands from being treated separately, which could place waters between islands more than 24 nautical miles apart beyond the state's sovereignty. 3) While archipelagic states have sovereignty over these waters, international law still provides for freedom of navigation through innocent passage and sea lanes passage.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    PIL Module 7

    Uploaded by

    jobelle barcellano
    43 views1 page
    The document discusses the Archipelagic Doctrine and its implications for archipelagic states. It notes that: 1) Under UNCLOS III, archipelagic states can claim waters within archipelagic baselines as sovereign territory, in exchange for allowing innocent passage and sea lanes passage through these waters. 2) This prevents their islands from being treated separately, which could place waters between islands more than 24 nautical miles apart beyond the state's sovereignty. 3) While archipelagic states have sovereignty over these waters, international law still provides for freedom of navigation through innocent passage and sea lanes passage.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document discusses the Archipelagic Doctrine and its implications for archipelagic states. It notes that: 1) Under UNCLOS III, archipelagic states can claim waters within archipelagic baselines as sovereign territory, in exchange for allowing innocent passage and sea lanes passage through these waters. 2) This prevents their islands from being treated separately, which could place waters between islands more than 24 nautical miles apart beyond the state's sovereignty. 3) While archipelagic states have sovereignty over these waters, international law still provides for freedom of navigation through innocent passage and sea lanes passage.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    43 views1 page

    PIL Module 7

    Uploaded by

    jobelle barcellano
    The document discusses the Archipelagic Doctrine and its implications for archipelagic states. It notes that: 1) Under UNCLOS III, archipelagic states can claim waters within archipelagic baselines as sovereign territory, in exchange for allowing innocent passage and sea lanes passage through these waters. 2) This prevents their islands from being treated separately, which could place waters between islands more than 24 nautical miles apart beyond the state's sovereignty. 3) While archipelagic states have sovereignty over these waters, international law still provides for freedom of navigation through innocent passage and sea lanes passage.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Statehood

    The accepted criteria of statehood were laid down in the Montevideo Convention (1933),
    which provided that a state must possess a permanent population, a defined territory, a
    government, and the capacity to conduct international relations.

    Territory is, of course, itself a geographical conception relating to physical areas of the globe,
    but its centrality in law and international law in particular derives from the fact that it
    constitutes the tangible framework for the manifestation of power by the accepted authorities
    of the state in question.

    What is the Archipelagic Doctrine?

    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 footing vis-a-vis
    continental coastal states which are subject, in their territorial sea, to the right of innocent
    passage and the right to 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 coast, as archipelagic waters subject to national sovereignty.
    More importantly, the recognition of archipelagic state's archipelago and 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 maritime zones, placing the
    waters between the islands separated by more than 24 nautical miles beyond the state's
    territorial sovereignty subjecting these waters to the rights of other states under UNCLOS III.

    The fact of sovereignty, however, does not preclude the operation of the 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 (Magallona, et. al. vs. Ermita, et. al., GR No.
    187167, august 16, 2011).

    Basis for claim on Spratlys Island


     The Philippines, however, claims part of the area as its territory under UNCLOS, an
    agreement parts of which[7] have been ratified by the countries involved in the Spratly
    islands dispute.

    You might also like