Frequently Asked Questions

NO. The South China Sea is a semi-enclosed sea in the western Pacific Ocean The South China Sea lies to the south of China; to the west of the Philippines; to the east of Viet Nam; and to the north of Malaysia, Brunei, Singapore, and Indonesia. 

The South China Sea is a crucial shipping lane, a rich fishing ground, home to a highly biodiverse coral reef ecosystem, and believed to hold substantial oil and gas resources. The southern portion of the South China Sea is also the location of the Spratly Islands, a constellation of small islands and coral reefs, existing just above or below water, that comprise the peaks of undersea mountains rising from the deep ocean floor. Long known principally as a hazard to navigation and identified on nautical charts as the “dangerous ground”, the Spratly Islands are the site of longstanding territorial disputes among some of the littoral States of the South China Sea.

The Philippines regards the Award in the South China Sea Arbitration of 12 July 2016 as an important contribution to international law and the interpretation and application of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The Award conclusively settled the issue of historic rights and maritime entitlements in the South China Sea. Claims to historic rights, or other sovereign rights or jurisdiction beyond the geographic and substantive limits of UNCLOS-provided maritime entitlements are without legal effect.

In commemoration of the 6th anniversary of the issuance of the Award in the South China Sea arbitration, Secretary Manalo issued a statement demonstrating the Philippines’ reaffirmation of the Award declaring it, along with the UNCLOS, as the twin anchors of the Philippines’ policy and actions in the West Philippine Sea.

The Philippines has taken a firm stand against illegal and aggressive actions in the West Philippine Sea. The Department has taken and will continue to take the necessary diplomatic actions against activities that violate our sovereignty, sovereign rights, and jurisdiction in our maritime domain.

The full text of the award and the press release can be accessed here and here, and below is a quick reference:

Maritime Entitlements

The Arbitral Award declared that the UNCLOS superseded any historic rights, or other sovereign rights or jurisdiction, in excess of the limits imposed by the Convention. Thus, China’s claims to historic rights, sovereign rights or jurisdiction in areas of the “nine-dash line” are contrary to UNCLOS and without lawful effect in so far as they exceed the geographic and substantive limits of China’s entitlements under the Convention. 

The Arbitral Award also declared that Mischief Reef and Second Thomas Shoal are within the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and continental shelf (CS) of the Philippines. 

Status of SCS Features 

The Arbitral Award declared the following features as high-tide elevations: 

1. Scarborough Shoal (Bajo de Masinloc);

2. Gaven Reef North;

3. McKennan Reef (Chigua Reef);

4. Johnson Reef (Mabini Reef);

5. Cuarteron Reef (Calderon Reef); and 

6. Fiery Cross Reef (Kagitingan Reef). 

These features do not generate any entitlement to a 200-nautical mile EEZ and CS. These features generate a 12-nautical mile territorial sea only.

Thus, even if China occupies any of these high-tide elevations and has developed these as artificial islands, China still cannot claim any EEZ or CS entitlements for these features. China occupies features (1) to (6). Features (1) (3) (4) are within the Philippines’ EEZ and CS.

The Arbitral Award declared the following features as low-tide elevations: 

A. Subi Reef or Zamora Reef;

  B. Gaven Reef South;

  C. Hughes Reef; 

  D. Mischief Reef or Panganiban Reef; and

  E. Second Thomas Shoal or Ayungin Shoal. 

These features do not generate any entitlement to a 200-nautical mile EEZ and CS and they are not subject to appropriation. 

Thus, even if China occupies any of these low-tide elevations and has built artificial islands thereon, China cannot claim any territorial sea, EEZ or CS entitlements for these features. More importantly, China cannot appropriate any of these low-tide elevations even if it occupies them. Features (A) (B) and (D) are occupied by China. 

Under UNCLOS, low-tide elevations are considered part of the CS of the coastal state. Features (D) and (E) are inside the EEZ and CS of the Philippines. 

In addition, the Arbitral Award emphasized that the high-tide elevations in the Spratly Islands are not fully-entitled islands, and as such these high-tide features do not generate EEZ or CS entitlements. Thus, no EEZ or CS entitlement is generated by any feature claimed by China that overlaps with PH entitlements in the areas of Mischief Reef, Second Thomas Shoal, and Reed Bank.

Legality of Certain Actions of China in the SCS

The Arbitral Award declared that China breached its obligations under UNCLOS and related international conventions:

China’s operation of its official vessels at Scarborough Shoal unlawfully prevented Filipino fishermen from engaging in traditional fishing in said area.

China’s operation of its law enforcement vessels on 28 April and 26 May 2012 in the Scarborough Shoal area, which created serious risk of collision to PH ships and personnel, violated several provisions of the Convention on International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREGS).

China’s operation of its marine surveillance vessels to tolerate and protect Chinese-flagged vessels fishing in the PH EEZ at Mischief Reef and Second Thomas Shoal.

China’s construction of artificial islands, installations and structures at Mischief Reef or Panganiban Reef without PH authorization violates UNCLOS provisions on the EEZ and CS entitlements of the Philippines since said Reef is a low-tide elevation located in PH EEZ and CS.

China’s land reclamation and construction of artificial islands, installations and structures caused severe and irreparable harm to the coral reef system at (1) Mischief Reef or Panganiban Reef, (2) Johnson Reef or Mabini Reef, (3) Cuarteron Reef or Calderon Reef, (4) Fiery Cross Reef or Kagitingan Reef, (5) Subi Reef or Zamora Reef, (6) Gaven Reef North, and (7) Hughes Reef. 

China’s tolerance and failure to prevent harvesting of endangered species and giant clams in a manner that was severely destructive of the coral reef ecosystem in the SCS.

It authoritatively ruled that the claim of historic rights to resources within the sea areas falling within the ‘nine-dash line’ had no basis in law and is without legal effect. 

It upheld the Philippines’ sovereign rights and jurisdiction in its exclusive economic zone. 

It affirmed that certain actions within the Philippines’ EEZ violated the Philippines’ sovereign rights and were thus unlawful; that large-scale reclamation and construction of artificial islands caused severe environmental harm in violation of international conventions; that the large-scale harvesting of endangered marine species damaged the marine ecosystem; and that actions taken since the commencement of the arbitration had aggravated the disputes.

No, as expounded in the Arbitral Award, the “nine-dash line” has no basis in law and is without legal effect. China’s claims to historic rights, sovereign rights or jurisdiction in areas of the nine-dash line are contrary to UNCLOS and are without lawful effect in so far as they exceed the geographic and substantive limits of China’s entitlements under UNCLOS. The effect of this is that the features that China possesses beyond their geographic and substantive limits under the UNCLOS, and are within PH maritime entitlements and continental shelf are not entitled to territorial sea and EEZ.

Moreover, the Arbitral Award clarified that none of the maritime features in question could be considered as “islands” with all the maritime entitlements of such. They are either low-tide or high-tide elevations.

In the case of low-tide elevations, even if China occupies any of these features and has built artificial islands thereon, China cannot claim any territorial sea, EEZ or CS entitlements. More importantly, China cannot appropriate any of these low-tide elevations even if it occupies them.

As to high-tide features, the Arbitral Award declared that high-tide features do not generate EEZ or continental shelf (CS) entitlements. Thus, no EEZ or CS entitlement is generated by any feature claimed by China that overlaps with PH entitlements.