The arbitral ruling at 10: Philippines' win in public engagement
When the South China Sea arbitral award was released on July 12, 2016, I was a recent law graduate from the University of Santo Tomas reviewing for the Philippine bar examination. I knew it was a major win for the Philippines, but at the time, my attention was fixed on passing the bar.
That changed as my legal work moved closer to maritime law and public service. I later worked at Veralaw, a firm focused on maritime law and litigation, before joining the Office of the Solicitor General, where I handled and assisted in cases of national importance and international significance, including advisory opinions on climate change before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the International Court of Justice.
Those experiences eventually led me to the 2025 United Nations Nippon Foundation Fellowship, where I trained with the UN Office of Legal Affairs Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea in New York and later conducted academic research at UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Norwegian Centre for the Law of the Sea in Tromso, Norway.
That work brought me back to one question that remains central nearly a decade after the award: how does the Philippines govern, defend and understand its ocean space today?
Divergent voices on the sea
In the same vein, there appear to be varying positions on law of the sea issues in the Philippines, whether in the area of maritime security, the marine environment, the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Agreement, or the arbitral award.
The law of the sea in the Philippines, as a function, topic, strategy or advocacy, has diverse voices and different sources. Government agencies, think tanks, academic institutions, nongovernmental organizations and stakeholders collaborate with each other on some fronts, but appear to compete, be inconsistent or be critical of each other on others.
For instance, there could be meetings and conferences on the law of the sea where stakeholders appear to be cooperative. On the other hand, there are articles criticizing the strategy of the government, such as the Department of Foreign Affairs, in dealing with China's dangerous tactics in the West Philippine Sea, including the rotation and resupply missions to Second Thomas Shoal. Critics have questioned the DFA's preference for diplomatic handling over a more aggressive transparency strategy.
More recently, former Supreme Court Justice Antonio Carpio publicly reprimanded the DFA not to "sleep on the job" and urged it to file a "counter declaration" against China's declaration to the BBNJ Agreement, lest the Philippine position on the West Philippine Sea be weakened.
In response, the DFA clarified that "China's declaration does not explicitly mention the South China Sea" and that the SCS award conclusively held that China's nine-dash line is incompatible with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and carries no legal force.
The DFA further emphasized that Philippine maritime entitlements are defined and protected under UNCLOS and cannot be affected by the BBNJ Agreement, as it applies solely to areas beyond national jurisdiction.
Foreign governments have also joined the debate, either reinforcing the legal weight of the SCS award or pushing back against how it is invoked in the region. Each actor has its own motive, and I would like to think many of them are driven by good intentions, even if some statements or reactions may also be self-serving or designed to provoke.
The contrasting opinions and positions within the Philippines on law of the sea matters may be confusing and confounding. But they manifest one certainly good thing: There is a free flow of expression within the country, and anyone may convey opinions, even if they differ from the government's.
What this means is that issues involving the law of the sea in the Philippines are neither governed nor sealed in a vacuum of propaganda or an echo chamber. There are divergent public exchanges to enrich the discussion. Despite differences, all parties can agree on the importance of the South China Sea/West Philippine Sea and want the best for it. What varies is the preferred strategy for acting on that concern.
UNCLOS beyond legal circles
Another thing that must be appreciated in this range of expression is that UNCLOS as a subject has gained more traction in the Philippines than ever. Knowledge about it used to be confined to a niche, one that only a scholarly few understood.
Now, there are various platforms and resources readily available to familiarize and capacitate oneself about the law of the sea. The knowledge is not exclusive to lawyers anymore, as there is growing interest from individuals of different backgrounds.
There is still work to be done in this regard, which is a real work in progress as seen through the bill on the West Philippine Sea Mandatory Education Act, pending before Congress.
Like the ocean itself, there is a vast and deep space for learning and opportunities for Filipinos in the law of the sea. There is no monopoly of excellence.There is room for more Filipinos to deepen their appreciation of the ocean and the law that governs it. There are also platforms for Filipinos to raise their concerns and suggestions without fear or pressure from the government.
With all the discussions about the South China Sea/West Philippine Sea, the ultimate move still rests in the discretion of the President, through the executive department, just as when the South China Sea arbitration was initiated in 2013, when the Maritime and Archipelagic Nation Awareness Month was established through Presidential Proclamation 316, series of 2017, or when the National Maritime Council was reconstituted through Executive Order No. 57, series of 2024.
With all its frailties, fragments and room for improvement, the government as a whole is still doing its best to protect the interest of the country in the West Philippine Sea.
After all, Filipinos have a high standard for beaches. I would like to believe that we also have a high standard for the protection of the West Philippine Sea.
So let the waves of discussion keep going.
--
Atty. Marie Sybil P. Tropicales is an associate solicitor III in the Office of the Solicitor General and a 2025 fellow of the United Nations Nippon Foundation.
Disclaimer: The contents of this article are the sole opinion and responsibility of the author and do not reflect the views or endorsement of her affiliations, which are mentioned here only for description purposes.
- Latest
