Retired Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio reiterated a clear and uncompromising position: the Philippines must not enter into any agreement with China that undermines its sovereign rights in the West Philippine Sea.
In a recent interview, Carpio emphasized that while cooperation is possible, it must never come at the cost of constitutional principles, national patrimony, or the country’s hard-won legal victories.
No Compromise on Ownership of Resources
At the center of the issue is Reed Bank, a resource-rich area firmly within the Philippines’ Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).
Carpio explained that China’s version of “joint development” requires acknowledging Chinese ownership of oil and gas—something the Philippines cannot legally or constitutionally accept.
The Constitution is clear:
➡️ Marine resources within the EEZ belong exclusively to Filipinos
Any agreement that contradicts this would:
- Violate the Constitution
- Undermine the 2016 arbitral ruling
- Effectively concede sovereign rights
A lawful arrangement, he noted, is only possible if China participates under the Philippines’ service contract system, where ownership remains with the State.
A Familiar Pattern: Negotiate, Then Redefine Terms
Carpio warned of a recurring pattern in negotiations—initial agreements are later altered to favor China.
This was evident when China attempted to remove key provisions affirming:
- Philippine ownership of oil and gas
- Governance under Philippine law
Accepting such changes, Carpio stressed, would be equivalent to surrendering rights already recognized under international law.
The Real Issue: Political Will
The Philippines’ inability to develop its own energy resources is not due to lack of capability—but lack of resolve.
Carpio pointed out that:
- Malaysia and Indonesia continue drilling within their EEZs despite Chinese pressure
- Both countries proceed with operations backed by national policy and external support
The Philippines, by contrast, has yet to assert the same level of determination—resulting in continued dependence on expensive energy imports.
Time to Move: File New Arbitration Cases
While the Philippines has already secured victory in the maritime dispute, Carpio stressed that territorial disputes remain unresolved.
He urged the government to:
- Initiate arbitration on territorial claims
- Pursue arbitration on the extended continental shelf in Western Palawan
- Challenge opposing claims through peaceful legal mechanisms
Even if China refuses to participate, the process itself strengthens the Philippines’ standing before the international community.
1875 Map: Evidence That Speaks Across Centuries
Carpio highlighted the importance of the 1875 Carta General del Archipiélago Filipino as a cornerstone of the country’s territorial claim.
Recognized during both the Spanish and American periods, the map:
- Clearly identifies Scarborough Shoal and the Kalayaan Island Group
- Demonstrates historical continuity of Philippine territory
- Serves as the country’s strongest documentary evidence
In Carpio’s words, it is the Philippines’ equivalent of a “title” to its territory.
A Critical Gap: No Unified National Narrative
One of the most pressing issues, Carpio noted, is the lack of a single, coherent Philippine position.
Different voices—from officials to scholars—offer conflicting explanations of:
- The legal basis of sovereignty
- Historical claims
- Treaty interpretations
This inconsistency weakens the country’s credibility on the global stage.
Carpio called for a coordinated effort among government agencies and institutions to establish a unified historical and legal narrative.
Winning the Global Narrative
Ultimately, the West Philippine Sea dispute is not just about territory—it is about legitimacy.
The Philippines’ 2016 arbitral victory succeeded because it presented a clear legal case grounded in international law.
Carpio emphasized that the same approach must now be applied to territorial disputes:
- Present evidence
- Seek arbitration
- Gain international support
Without a ruling, the world remains uncertain. With one, support becomes decisive.
Bottom Line
The path forward is clear:
- Defend constitutional principles
- Assert sovereign rights without compromise
- Strengthen legal action through arbitration
- Unify the national narrative
What is at stake is not only territory—but the resources, rights, and future of generations of Filipinos.