‘ENHANCE our claims, strengthen our baselines” is the proposed “win-win” solution envisioned by Ilocos Norte Rep. Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. to break the impasse over the conflicting versions of a pending bill defining the country’s baselines. The proposed “Bongbong measure,” as it is now being called, aims to synchronize an earlier version (HB 3216), authored by House foreign affairs committee chairman Antonio Cuenco (2nd District, Cebu City), with the provisions of the 1987 Constitution and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos). The Cuenco bill has been passed by the committee on second reading; the Bongbong measure will be filed Monday.

The reason for seeking to synchronize the earlier (Cuenco) version with the Constitution and Unclos is to ensure that the same is not only going to be adopted by the Senate and signed into law but, perhaps more critical, recognized by the international community.

It bears noting that under Unclos, which we ratified 24 years ago in 1984, coastal states such as the Philippines have until May 2009 to “define and declare their 300-mile extended continental shelf as measured from their baselines. . . .” Otherwise, they run the risk of forfeiting the benefits which may be available from the “territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular shelves and other submarine areas” within the said expanded shelf. Of course, the country may choose not to define and avail itself of the benefits of being an “archipelagic state” by drawing the said baselines clearly and responsibly in accordance with Unclos and related international covenants.  

In its stead, we can simply draw the normal 3-mile lines around each and every one of our 7,183 islands and work out from there. The trouble with that initiative is it will not only be harder to handle and enforce; it will definitely entail more cost, maybe even lead to needless entanglements, a prospect which we can simplify by drawing up the baselines correctly.

Moreover, drawing such limited baselines will open parts of our territorial waters in between our islands, the so-called inland seas such as the Sibuyan and Visayas Seas and even Sarangani Bay, to being considered or declared as “high seas”—opening these to unhampered international navigation and passage, a prospect which no self-respecting nation should even think about.       

The Bongbong measure proposes to correct the flaw in the Cuenco bill which, for some questionable reasons (some observers said it was a case of misplaced and highly emotional misappreciation of the baselines issue), included the entire Kalayaan Islands Group (KIG) and the Scarborough Shoal in its definition of our baselines, an arrangement which violates paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 47 of Unclos, thus opening the entire measure to rejection and nonrecognition by the international community.

Article 47, paragraph 2 reads, “The length of such baselines shall not exceed 100 nautical miles except that up to 3 percent of the total number of baselines enclosing an archipelago may exceed that length up to a maximum length of 125 nautical miles,” while paragraph 3 reads, “The drawing of such baselines shall not depart to any appreciable extent the general configuration of the archipelago.” On the other hand, paragraph 4 of the same article states, among others, that base points can only be marked on high-tide elevation points and, if on low-tide points, only if a lighthouse or a permanent structure has been built on these before any country’s baselines law is lodged at the United Nations. These guidelines are clear and unequivocal, and if we insist on recklessly including or defying them, as in the Cuenco bill, such will not only open us to international isolation but needlessly entangle the country in a web of conflicting claims. In a word, it will degrade rather than enhance our territorial boundaries and, worse, keep our valid and existing claims in the deep freeze.

These unwanted consequences are what the Bongbong measure hopes to avoid. To the highly charged claim that his proposed measure may unduly give away parts of our territory—i.e., Kala-yaan municipality and eight other islands in the KIG and those claimed by us in other forums, local and overseas—the youthful solon draws attention to the creative manner by which the People’s Republic of China (PRC) decoupled the twin issues of territorial rights and claims and its baselines. Under Chinese law, the PRC defined its territories and waters as those under its existing sovereignty and jurisdiction, and others it has claimed by historic right and title—which is why it routinely refers to the entire South China Sea (SCS), the Gulf of Tonkin (GOT) and the Bohai Sea (BOS) as part of its territory while, at the same time, drawing its baselines principally by hugging the mainland and declaring all others such as the contested waters in and around the SCS, GOT and BOS “. . . to be enumerated, restructured and declared at another time.”  

The idea is to isolate and protect what is clearly ours and already under our jurisdiction, while maintaining a robust and vigorous claim over all others lodged in any forum in order to gain international recognition. That will allow for our unhampered exploitation of all resources—land, water and aerial—available in those clearly defined areas, including the extended continental shelves and economic zones measured from such baselines, while peacefully participating in the resolution of all contested claims lodged anywhere.

The benefits of such a decoupled but reinforcing approach to our territory and our baselines are unparalleled: we secure our piece of the seas and skies while ensuring that we share in the development of any other resources in the contested areas. That is not retreat or treason, that is as responsible and creative a patriotic act as can be.  So, let the debates ensue and let the best ideas prosper.   

E-mail: emman_delacruz@yahoo.com.

CHALK up another victory for the big pharmaceutical companies with the expected passage of a watered-down cheaper-medicines bill.

IN a global milieu of increasing scarcity of even the most basic food staples, in addition to induced and natural shortages of critical fuels, among the advantages the Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement (Jpepa) presents as responses to these afflictions are systemic approaches that immediately globalize our innate assets and address our festering deficiencies.

HAGATNA, Guam—Through the years that I’ve been flying, my austere expense account has condemned me to the economy class.

Personal Finance: On property and casualty insurance

MANY of us have some form of property and casualty insurance, or more commonly referred to as nonlife insurance. We probably have motor-car insurance, fire insurance or personal-accident insurance. However, I dare say that so many of us who do have some form of coverage are not really aware what this form of insurance is all about.

The Entrepreneur: Let’s get our figures right!

WHEN Global Source reported last month that the 7.3-percent growth in the Philippines’ gross domestic product (GDP) in 2007 might have been overstated, the immediate reaction was to label the New York-based think tank as an unfair skeptic or one with the usual western bias against developing economies.

Coast-to-Coast: Enhance our claims, strengthen baselines

‘ENHANCE our claims, strengthen our baselines” is the proposed “win-win” solution envisioned by Ilocos Norte Rep. Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. to break the impasse over the conflicting versions of a pending bill defining the country’s baselines.

Reflections from the Mirror: Con-Ass, NPAs and the Spratlys

THE Senate has suddenly resurrected the issue of Charter change (Cha-cha). I hope there is no hidden agenda behind this, but in principle, this Senate move should be supported.