1 
NINETEENTH CONGRESS   
) 
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES ) 
Second Regular Session 
 
) 
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
Introduced by Representative Rufus B. Rodriguez 
House Bill No.  _____ 
EXPLANATORY NOTE 
The Philippines recently marked the 7th year of the Philippines’ resounding victory won 
in the 12 July 2016 South China Sea (SCS) Arbitral Award. The win in the SCS arbitration was 
the invalidation by the Arbitral Tribunal of the Chinese Nine-Dash Line claim as being contrary 
to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).  
In particular, the Arbitral Award noted that while the claim is one only encompassing 
historic rights short of title,1 it nevertheless makes excessive maritime claims that contradict 
the People’s Republic of China’s obligations as a State party to the UNCLOS.2  
This, in fact, was the Philippines’ gift to the international community: an international 
juridical declaration for the Rule of Law for the seas unyielding in its clarity and commitment 
to the ideal that norms, and not might, makes Right. 
Seven years have come and gone since the landmark Arbitral Award. Yet the country 
remained unable to translate the gains from the Arbitral Award into an unimpregnable national 
reality.3 This proposed law now seeks to implement in concrete ways the Philippine triumph 
over China in the SCS arbitral proceedings. 
The 1987 Constitution includes in the definition of national territory not only the 
Philippine archipelago but also “all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty 
or jurisdiction.”4  
The Records of the Constitutional Commission indicate that the category “all other 
territories” refers to the “Kalayaan Island”;5 “Kalayaan Islands”;6 “Kalayaan group of islands”;7 
“Kalayaan group”;8 “five islands called Kalayaan”;9 “Freedom-land”;10 and those which “P.D. 
1
In re Arbitration Between the Republic of the Philippines and the People's Republic of China, PCA Case  
No. 2013-19, Award on Merits  (12 July 2016) paras. 207-278 86- 117[hereinafter, Philippines v. China]. 
2
Ibid   para. 261-62 111-112. 
3
In fact, there had been serious mis-readings of the Award that threaten to undo our strongest gain, the  
invalidation of the Nine-Dash Line claim. See Melissa Loja and Romel Bagares, ‘Arbitral Award:  What  
We Won and Lost’ (Philippine Daily Inquirer, 2 May 2021) https://opinion.inquirer.net/140366/arbitral-
award-what-we-won-and-lost <accessed 1 July 2021>, and Melissa Loja and Romel Bagares, ‘Ph 
Arbitral Win: What is to be Done?’ (Philippine Daily Inquirer,  29 May 2021), 
https://opinion.inquirer.net/140677/ph-arbitral-win-what-is-to-be-done <accessed 1 June  
2021>  
4
Article 1. National Territory. The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the  
islands and waters embraced therein, and all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or 
jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial, and aerial domains, including its territorial sea, the seabed, 
the subsoil, the insular shelves, and other submarine areas. The waters around, between, and connecting 
the islands of the archipelago, regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form part of the internal waters 
of the Philippines. 
5
Records of the Constitutional Convention (RCC), Vol. 2,  275 and 331. 
6
Ibid 255, 260, 276 and 296.  
7
RCC Vol. I 265. 
8
Ibid 255.  
9
Ibid. 
10
Ibid 253, 255 and 275.  
August 17, 2023
2:00 pm
8934


2 
No. 1596 … defined as the territories belonging to the Philippines by historic right or legal 
title.”11  
Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 1596 (1978) declared that a “cluster of islands and 
islets” in the South China Sea belong to the Philippines. It named the territory as Kalayaan 
Island Group and identified it by drawing six straight lines. It declared that the “area within the 
boundaries …. including the sea-bed, sub-soil, continental margin and air space shall belong 
and be subject to the sovereignty of the Philippines.”12 It constituted the area as the 
Municipality of Kalayaan under the Province of Palawan.13  
P.D. No. 1596 did not name the islands and islets inside the boundaries of the KIG.
Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9522 reiterated that the Philippines exercises sovereignty and
jurisdiction over the KIG as constituted under PD 1596 but declared that the baselines shall 
be determined as “Regime of Islands” consistent with Article 121 of the United Nations 
Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). R.A. No. 9522 did not name the features that 
are part of the KIG or specify which of the three regimes under Article 121 shall apply. 
R.A. No. 9522 also declared that Bajo de Masinloc is under Philippine sovereignty and 
jurisdiction and that its baselines shall be determined under Article 121 of UNCLOS.14 
The victory embodied in the 2016 SCS Arbitral Award also entailed immense costs on 
our part, because it meant fully aligning our national territorial and maritime domain claims 
with the UNCLOS.15 
One of the least understood but very important consequences of the Arbitral Award is 
that it reduced the claims of the competing states to the granular size of individual rocks and 
their individual territorial seas (TS), effectively erasing the offshore archipelago created by the 
polygonal lines defined in PD 1596 for the KIG.16 
Nevertheless, in Philippines v. China,17 the Philippines submitted Annex 97, List of 
Occupied Spratly Features, Geographic Coordinates, Claimants and Occupants. The list 
names and gives the coordinates of 43 features composing the Spratly Islands. It states that 
all these 43 features are being claimed by the Philippines and that 11 of them are occupied 
by the Philippines.18 Annex 97 does not include Sandy Cay.19 Other authors list more than 46 
to 96 features in the Spratly Islands.20  
The Philippines also submitted Annex 230, the 6th edition of the Philippine Coast Pilot 
(1995), which lists at least 125 maritime features in the KIG that are subject to Philippine 
sovereignty and jurisdiction. 
The proposed law combines the lists in Annex 97 and Annex 230 with full awareness 
that low tide elevations and sunken atolls are not susceptible of territorial acquisition. This will 
11
Ibid. 298. See also ibid 420, where Representative Maambong explained that PD 1596 can be referred to  
for purposes of interpreting the Kalayaan Islands as part of the national territory.  
12
Ibid Sec. 1.  
13
Ibid. 
14
Ibid. In Magallona v Executive Secretary, the Supreme Court upheld the new baseline law’s  
constitutionality. It is important to note that the Supreme Court also prefigured here the Arbitral Court’s  
rejection of any offshore archipelago in the KIG for being inconsistent with the UNCLOS. [2011] G.R  
No. 187167 [En Banc] 16 August 2011. 
15
Philippines v. China, para. 223 95. See also, Melissa Loja and Romel Bagares, ‘Should We Now Slay the 
Elephant in the Room? (Philippine Daily Inquirer, 2 May 2021)  
https://opinion.inquirer.net/139823/should-we-now-slay-the-elephant-in-the-room <accessed 1 June  
2021> 
16
Philippines v China, paras. 574-75 237; Loja and Bagares (n 15).  
17
Philippines v. China, Annex 97 
18
Commodore Reef, Flat Island, Irving Reef, Lankiam Cay, Loaita, Nanshan, Northeast Cay,  
Second Thomas Shoal, Thitu, Philippines, West York. 
19
Sandy Cay is different from Sand Cay. Annex 97 lists Sand Cay as occupied by Vietnam but claimed by 
the Philippines and China.  
20
See Daniel J. Dzurek, ‘The Spratly Islands Dispute: Who’s on First?’, 2 International Boundaries  
Research Unit Maritime Briefing 1, which lists 46 features; and David Hancox and Victor Prescott, ‘A 
Geographical Description of the Spratly Islands and an Account of Hydrographic Surveys Amongst 
Those Islands’, 1 International Boundaries Research Unit Maritime Briefing 6, which lists 96 features.  


3 
forestall a repeat of the Chinese occupation of Mischief Reef notwithstanding that it is a low-
tide elevation. 
It bears noting that in 2012, the Office of the President issued Administrative Order No. 
29 renaming maritime areas on the western side of the Philippine archipelago as the “West 
Philippine Sea”. These areas include the Luzon Sea as well as the waters around, within and 
adjacent to the Kalayaan Island Group and Bajo De Masinloc (BDM), also known as 
Scarborough Shoal. As it were, the issuance prefigures the Arbitral Court’s eventual 
invalidation of PD 1596’s straight baselines. 
It thus cannot now be gainsaid how important it is to establish in clear and 
unambiguous terms in the proposed law the exact names, number and coordinates of the 
maritime features under the Philippine claim to sovereignty and jurisdiction in the West 
Philippine Sea. 
In Eritrea v. Yemen, the Tribunal held that evidence of intention to claim islands à titre 
de souverain (under sovereign title) “is an essential element of the process of consolidation of 
title.”21  
Such intention is evidenced by public exercise  of right or assertion of sovereignty to 
the islands as well as legislative acts openly seeking to regulate activity on the islands with 
specificity.22 This is consistent with the peaceful assertion of sovereignty and exercise of 
effectivités over territorial and maritime domains.23 
It is thus important that each of the features over which the Philippines claims 
sovereignty and jurisdiction are identified specifically by law, and the baselines of their TS and 
contiguous zone (CZ)24 immediately and already drawn from appropriate basepoints, pursuant 
to the rules of the UNCLOS. 
Without clearly established baselines, we cannot ensure full enjoyment of sovereign 
rights in the waters within our maritime domains. 
The rule is that the CZ is automatically made part of the EEZ when the latter zone is claimed 
and established by a coastal state.25  
But as there are features in the KIG claimed by the Philippines that are outside the 
Philippine EEZ, it is essential that the TS and CZ of these features lying outside the Philippine 
EEZ are immediately and already drawn using the appropriate basepoints.   
It is true that UNCLOS does not oblige the coastal State to give due publicity to charts 
embodying the establishment of the CZ.26 Nevertheless, the CZ of such features extend in 
many ways Philippine claims to sovereign rights in the KIG, and provide a buffer zone against 
unlawful incursions into Philippine territorial seas around rocks or High Tide Elevations the 
Philippines claims or occupies in the area, with some limited jurisdictional rights.  
To begin with, UNCLOS delineates the CZ as the maritime belt established to (a) 
prevent infringement of a Coastal State’s customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws and 
regulations within its territory or territorial sea; (b) punish infringement of the above laws and 
regulations committed within its territory or territorial sea.27 
Moreover, the right of hot pursuit for incursions into the territorial sea may be 
prosecuted in the CZ.28 A coastal State may exercise the right to stop a ship, the right to arrest 
21
The Eritrea-Yemen Arbitration (PCA 1996-04), Award on Territorial Sovereignty and Scope of the  
Dispute, Phase I, 9 October 1998, para. 241 71; Territorial and Maritime Dispute (Nicaragua v. 
Colombia) ICJ Reports 19 November 2012 para, 80-84 35-37; Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/ Mali), 
ICJ Reports 22 December 1986 para. 126 71. 
22
Eritrea-Yemen Arbitration ibid. 
23
Island of Palmas Case (or Miangas), United States v Netherlands, Award, (1928) II RIAA 829, ICGJ  
392 (Permanent Court of Arbitration 1928), 4 April 1928. 
24
Yoshifumi Tanaka, The International Law of the Sea (Cambridge University Press, 3rd edn, 2019 77 
25
Ibid 147; Thomas Cottier, Equitable Principles of Maritime Boundary Delimitation: The Quest for  
Distributive Justice in International Law (Cambridge University Press 2015) 214 
26
Tanaka ibid.  
27
Art. 33(1), UNCLOS. 
28         Tanaka, ibid., citing Arts. 111(1), UNCLOS. 


 
4 
the ship, and the right to escort the ship to a port for infringement of municipal laws, in the 
CZ.29 
Thus, the delineation of the TS and the CZ around Philippine-held or claimed offshore 
islands in the KIG will help the Philippine Coastguard and the Armed Forces of the Philippines 
ensure effective enforcement of sovereignty and jurisdiction in the area. 
As to the features in our EEZ that had been identified as Rocks or High Tide Elevations with 
their respective TS, they present particular challenges that must be immediately addressed. 
Their TS pushes against our EEZ.  
This, in fact, was recognized by the Philippines in the SCS arbitral proceedings, when 
our lawyers  submitted to the Arbitral Court that “the waters, seabed and subsoil of the South 
China Sea within 200 M of the Philippine coast, but beyond 12 M from any high-tide feature 
within the South China Sea, constitute the EEZ and continental shelf of the Philippines” under 
Articles 57 and 76 of the Convention because none of the maritime features claimed by China 
“generates entitlement to an EEZ or continental shelf.”30 
The national security implications of this carefully considered compromise31 was 
shown by our lawyers in figure 4.2 attached to the Philippine Memorial in the SCS arbitral 
proceedings. It illustrates the various rocks and LTEs found inside the Philippine EEZ and the 
TS of each rock. 32Thus, we now have pockets of rocks with their respective TS now marking 
our EEZ, and projecting their own airspace over which full sovereignty is also exercised. 33  
The airspace within the TS of each rock serves as basis for declaring an Air 
Identification and Defense Zone (AIDZ).34 
The Philippines must press its sovereign claims over them by identifying them as 
Philippine-claimed or occupied features, and drawing the appropriate baselines for their TS 
around them. This is particularly urgent in BDM, because the Arbitral Award declared its TS 
as subject to traditional fishing of Chinese, Vietnamese, and Filipino fishermen. 35 
Such traditional fishing regime must be contained within the TS of the BDM. An un-
delineated TS provides a perfect pretext for other claimants to fish beyond it and within the 
Philippine EEZ, as the latter remains indistinguishable from BDM’s TS.36 
 
In view of the foregoing, immediate approval of this measure is earnestly requested. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
RUFUS B. RODRIGUEZ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
29         Ibid, citing Arts. 111(6)(7) and (8), UNCLOS. 
30  
 Philippines v China, para. 683 275, citing the Philippine Memorial Memorial, para. 6.6; Merits Hearing  
 
Tr. (Day 2), 132-134. 
31  
To argue otherwise would be to oust the Arbitral Court of jurisdiction, as it would also require  
 
determination of ownership of the Rocks and HTEs in question; see Melissa Loja, ‘The SCS Arbitral  
 
Award and Julian Felipe Reef’ (Philippine Daily Inquirer 21 April 2021)  
 
https://opinion.inquirer.net/139501/the-scs-arbitral-award-and-julian-felipe-reef <accessed 1 June 2021> 
32  
Melissa Loja and Romel Bagares, ‘Ph Arbitral Win: What is to be Done?’ (Philippine Daily Inquirer,  
 
29 May 2021), https://opinion.inquirer.net/140677/ph-arbitral-win-what-is-to-be-done <accessed 1 June  
 
2021> 
33  
Ibid. 
34  
Ibid. James Kraska and Raul Pedrozo, International Maritime Security (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers  
 
2013) 178-180 
35  
Ibid. Philippines v China, para 794-814 311-318 
36  
Ibid. 


5 
NINETEENTH CONGRESS 
) 
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES ) 
Second Regular Session 
) 
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
Introduced by Representative Rufus B. Rodriguez 
House Bill No.  _____ 
AN ACT 
IDENTIFYING THE PHILIPPINE MARITIME FEATURES OF THE WEST PHILIPPINE SEA, 
DEFINING THEIR RESPECTIVE APPLICABLE BASELINES, AND FOR OTHER 
PURPOSES 
Be it enacted by the House of Representatives and House of the Senate of the Philippines in 
Congress assembled. 
SECTION 1. This Act shall be known as the “Philippine Maritime Features of the West 
Philippine Sea Act”. 
SECTION 2. This Act applies to the maritime areas on the western side of the Philippine 
archipelago collectively named as the “West Philippine Sea” under Administrative Order No. 
29, Series of 2012. These areas include the Luzon Sea as well as the waters around, within 
and adjacent to the Kalayaan Island Group and Bajo De Masinloc, also known as Scarborough 
Shoal. 
SECTION 3. The Philippines has sovereignty, sovereign rights and jurisdiction, as appropriate, 
over the following identified maritime features in the West Philippine Sea, without prejudice to 
other such features that will be discovered or established as part of Philippine sovereignty or 
jurisdiction in the future:  
Name 
Coordinates 
1. Abad Santos Shoal
9°26′N, 111°55′E 
2. Aguinaldo Reef37
To be supplied (TBS) 
3. Alicia Annie Reef
9°22′N, 115°26′E 
4. Alison Reef
8°51′N, 114°00′E 
5. Amboyna Cay
7°51′N, 112°55′E 
6. Ardasier (Antonio Luna) Reef
7°38′N, 113°56′E 
7. Bajo De Masinloc (Scarborough Shoal)
TBS 
8. Ban Than Jiao
10°24’N, 114°24′E 
9. Barque Canada Reef
8°10′N, 113°18′E 
10. Baybayin Dagat Bank38
 (TBS) 
11. Binago Island39
(TBS) 
12. Bisugo Shoal
11°19′N, 114°35′E 
13. Bombay Castle
7°56′N, 111°42′E 
14. Bonifacio (Jacinto and Diego Silang)
Reefs40
(TBS) 
37
Located 7 miles E of E of Rizal Reef, Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-70. 
38
Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-68 
39
Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-73 
40
The two reefs are 5.5 miles apart. Diego Silang Reef is 27 miles SW of Quirino Atoll,  Philippine Coast 
Pilot (1995) 16-69. 
8934


 
6 
15. Brown41 
(TBS) 
16. Bulig Shoal 
9°20′N, 115°56′E 
17. Central Reef 
8°55′N, 116°11′E 
18. Collins Reef 
9°45′N, 114°14′E 
19. Commodore (Rizal) Reef 
8°21′N, 115°17′E 
20. Cornwallis South Reef 
8°44′N, 114°11′E 
21. Coronation Bank 
9°21′N, 111°44′E 
22. Cuarteron (Calderon) Reef 
8°53′N, 112°51′E 
23. Dalag Bank 
11°01′N, 117°16′E 
24. Dalagang Bukid (Investigator NE Shoal) 
Bank 
9°10′N, 116°25′E 
25. Dallas Reef42 
(TBS) 
26. Day Shoal 
11°26′N, 114°23′E 
27. Del Pilar Reef 
10°48′N, 116°52′E 
28. Dhaulle Shoal 
9°32′N, 112°24′E 
29. Discovery Great Reef 
9°59′N, 113°51′E 
30. Discovery Small Reef 
10°01′N, 114°01′E 
31. Dulong Shoal and Palma Reef43 
(TBS) 
32. East Reef 
8°52′N, 112°46′E 
33. Eldad Reef 
10°21′N, 114°42′E 
34. Erica Reef 
8°6′N, 114°09′E 
35. Fiery Cross Reef 
9°37′N, 112°58′E 
36. Flat (Patag) Island 
10°50′N, 115°49′E 
37. Foulerton Reef44 
(TBS) 
38. Gaven Reef (North) 
10°13′N, 114°12′E 
39. Gitna Reef45 
(TBS) 
40. Gomes Reef 
10°16′N, 113°37′E 
41. Hirane Shoal46 
(TBS) 
42. Hopkins Reef 
10°49′N, 116°06′E 
43. Hubo (Handy) Reef47 
(TBS) 
44. Investigator Shoal 
08°7′N, 114°29′E 
45. Iroquis and Banker Reefs 
10°37′N, 116°11′E 
46. Irving Reef 
10°53′N, 114°56′E 
47. Iroquis Ridge48 
(TBS) 
48. Itu Aba (Ligaw Island) 
10°23′N, 114°21′E 
49. Johnson Patch49 
 (TBS) 
50. Johnson Reef 
9°43′N, 114°18′E 
51. Kahoy Bank 
10°35′N, 117°10′E 
52. Kalantiyaw Cay 
7°53′N, 112°55′E 
53. Kanduli Shoal 
9°03′N, 116°41′E 
54. Kingstorm Shoal50 
(TBS) 
 
41  
A “danger” whose existence is doubtful, charted at 7 miles west of Kahoy Bank, Philippine Coast Pilot  
 
(1995) 16-68  
42  
5 miles W of  Ardesier Reef, Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-70 
43 
 25 miles E and SW respectively of Mabini Reef, Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-72 
44  
13 miles W of Kahoy Bank on the E extremity of South Banks, Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-69 
45  
Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-72 
46  
18 miles NE of Baker Reef, Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-69 
47 
30 miles SE of Quirino Atoll, Philippine Coast Pilot (1995)16-69 
48  
Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-75 
49 
 Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-71 
50 
 Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-71 


 
7 
55. Kota Bank51 
(TBS) 
56. Kota (Loaita) Island 
10°41′N, 114°25′E 
57. Hasa Hasa Shoal 
8°54′N, 116°16′E 
58.Hizon Reef 
8°56′N, 113°40′E 
59. Jenkin Patches52 
(TBS) 
60. Jubilee Bank 
8°30′N, 116°16′E 
61. Ladd Reef 
8°38′N, 111°40′E 
62. Lagos (Spratley) Island 
8°39′N, 111°29′E 
63. Lansdowne Reef 
9°46′N, 114°22′E 
64. Lankiam Cay (Panata Island) 
10°44′N, 114°31′E 
65.Lapu-Lapu Shoal 
10°20′N, 117°22′E 
66. Lapu-Lapu Reef53 
 (TBS) 
68. Lawak Island 
10°44′N, 115°48′E 
67. Leslie Bank 
11°04′N 117° 28′ E 
68. Little Patches54 
(TBS) 
69. Louisa Reef 
6°20′N, 113°14′E 
70. Mabuhangin Shoal 
11°02′N 117° 39′ E 
71. Mahiwagang Diwata 
10°38′N 117° 39′ E 
72. Malvar Reef 
10°21′N 114° 42′ E 
73. Maralie Reef 
9°13′N 113° 40′ E 
74. Maria Louise Bank55 
11°55′N 116° 47′ E 
75. Mariano Cay 56 
 (TBS) 
76. Mariveles Reef 
7°59′N, 113°50′E 
77. Mascardo Reef  
8°04′N, 113°12′E 
78. Menzies Reef 
11°09′N, 114°48′E 
79. Mischief (Panganiban) Reef 
9°55′N, 115°32′E 
80. Namyit 
10°11′N, 114°22′E 
81. Nanshan (Lawak Island) 
10°45′N, 115°49′E 
82. Nares Bank 
11°16′N, 116°03′E 
83. North Danger Reef 
11°N 114°21′E 
84. Northeast Shoal57 
 (TBS) 
85. Northeast Cay (Parola island) 
11°28′N, 114°21′E 
86. Orleana Shoal58 
 (TBS) 
87. Osmeña Reef 
8°57′N, 114°11′E 
88. Owen Shoal59 
 (TBS) 
89. Pagkakaisa Banks and Reef60 
 (TBS) 
90. Paredes Reef 
10°01′N, 113°52′E 
91. Parola Island  
11°27′N, 114°21′E 
92. Parola Island Light 
11°27′N, 54”N,114°21′ 26”E 
93. Pearson Reefs 
8°58′N, 113°41′E 
 
51  
 Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-73 
52  
1 mile SW of Pugad Island, Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-75 
53  
23 miles SE of Irving Reef, Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-74 
54  
22 miles SW of Foulerton Reef, Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-69 
55       30 miles NNW of the 21meter-shoal of Recto Bank, Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-69 
56  
Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-72 
57  
Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-71 
58  
Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-71 
59  
Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-71 
60  
30 miles NE from Mabini Reef, Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-72. This consists of several features that  
are already listed. It is included for purposes of identification. The same is true for Tizard Bank, Reed 
Bank and other areas.  


 
8 
94. Petley Reef 
10°24′N, 114°34′E 
95. Pigeon Reef 
8°52′N, 114°39′E 
96. Pugad Island61 
 (TBS)  
97.Quezon Reefs62  
(TBS) 
98. Quirino Atoll 
 (TBS) 
99. Rajah Soliman Reef 
9°36′N, 116°10′E 
100. Recto Bank63 
 (TBS) 
101. Rifleman Bank64 
 (TBS) 
102. Rizal Reef 
8°21′N, 115°18′E 
103. Royal Charlotte Reef 
6°56′N, 113°36′E 
104.Rurok Island 
9°53′N, 114°20′E 
105. Sabina Patches65 
 (TBS) 
106. Sabina Shoal66 
 (TBS) 
107. Sand Cay 
10°23′N, 114°28′E 
108. Sandy Cay 
 (TBS) 
109. Second Thomas Shoal (Ayungin Shoal) 18º 23'N, 110 2'E 
110. Shinko Shoal67 
 (TBS) 
111. Sikatuna Shoal 
10°06′N, 117°22′E 
112. Silangan Reef68 
 (TBS) 
113. Sin Cowe 
9°52′N, 114°19′E 
114. South Reef 
11°23′N, 114°18′E 
115. Southern Bank 
10°41′N, 116°50′E 
116. Southwest Cay 
11°26′N, 114°20′E 
117. Spratly 
8°38′N, 114°25′E 
118. Stag Shoal69 
 (TBS) 
119. Subi Reef 
10°54′N, 114°06′E 
120. Swallow Reef 
7°23′N, 113°48′E 
121. Tatlong Tulis Shoal70 
 (TBS) 
122. Tennent Reef 
8°50′N, 114°36′E 
123. Thitu (Pag-Asa Island) 
11°03′N, 114°17′E 
124. Tizard Bank71 
 10°16’59.33”N, 114°26’37.81”E 
125. West Reef 
8°52′N, 112°15′E 
126. West York (Likas Island) 
11°05′N, 115°01′E 
127. Whitson Reef (Julian Felipe Reef) 
10°00′N, 114°43′E 
128. Zamora Reef 
10°74′N, 114°06′E 
 
SECTION 4. The breadth of the territorial sea adjacent to the coast of each island shall extend 
to a distance of twelve nautical miles measured seaward from the baselines.  
 
SECTION 5. The breadth of the contiguous zone shall extend to a distance of 24 nautical 
miles from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured. 
 
61  
1.7 miles SW of Parola Island, Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-74 
62  
Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-71 
63  
30 miles NW of N extremity of Dalag Bank, Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-69 
64  
75  miles W of Kalantiyaw Cay 
65  
SE end of North Danger Reef, 3 miles SE of Pugad Island, Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-75 
66  
60 miles SW of Sikatuna Shoal 
67  
The last data on this is from 1941, Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-69 
68  
Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-72 
69  
Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-71 
70 
2 miles N Bisugo Shoal, Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-75 
71  
Philippine Coast Pilot (1995) 16-73 


 
9 
SECTION 6. The Philippines adopts the following baselines of each identified offshore rock or 
high tide feature within the West Philippine Sea, without prejudice to the determination of the 
baselines of other such maritime features over which the Philippines has sovereignty and 
jurisdiction in the future:  
 
Name 
Baselines 
1. Abad Santos Shoal  
 
2. Alicia Annie Reef 
 
3. Bajo De Masinloc 
 
4. Baybayin Dagat Bank 
 
5. Binago Island 
 
6. Commodore (Rizal) Reef 
 
7. Cuarteron (Calderon) Reef 
 
8. Flat (Patag) Island  
 
9. Fiery Cross (Kagitingan) Reef 
 
10. Gaven Reef (North) 
 
11. Hasa Hasa Shoal 
 
12. Investigator Shoal  
 
13. Itu Aba (Ligaw Island) 
 
14. Jacinto Reef 
 
15. Johnson (Mabini) Reef  
 
16. Kota Bank 
 
17. Kota (Loaita) Island  
 
18. Lagos (Spratley) Island 
 
19. Lapu Lapu Shoal 
 
20. Malvar Reef 
 
21. Mckennan Reef 
 
22. Nanshan (Lawak Island) 
 
23. Northeast Cay (Parola Island) 
 
24. Paredes Reef 
 
25. Parola Island Light 
 
26. Quirino Atoll  
 
27. Royal Charlotte Reef 
 
28. Rurok Island 
 
29. Sabina Shoal  
 
30. Sandy Cay 
 
31. Sin Cowe Island 
 
32. Swallow Reef 
 
33. Tennent Reef 
 
34. Thitu (Pag-Asa Island) 
 
35. West York (Likas Island) 
 
 
SECTION 7. The rights of the Philippines over the territorial sea and contiguous zone  of each 
maritime feature identified in this Act, as may be applicable,  shall be exercised in accordance 
with Philippines laws and international law, particularly the United Nations Charter and the 
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), as interpreted in the Award 
dated 12 July 2006 rendered by the Arbitral Tribunal in  In re Arbitration Between the Republic 
of the Philippines and the People's Republic of China, PCA Case No. 2013-19. 
 
SECTION 8. The provisions of Presidential Decree No. 1596, Republic Act No. 9522 and 
Republic Act No. 3046, as amended by Republic Act No. 5446, and all other laws, decrees, 
executive orders, rules, judgments, and issuances inconsistent with this Act are hereby 
amended or modified accordingly.  


 
10
SECTION 9.  The National Mapping and Resource Information Authority (NAMRIA) shall 
produce and publish charts and maps of the Philippines reflecting this Act, within six (6) 
months of the effectivity of this Act. 
 
SECTION 10. All departments, subdivisions, agencies, and instrumentalities of the 
Government shall use and employ the designations of the maritime features named and 
identified in this law in all communications, messages and public documents, to popularize the 
use of such designations in the general public, both domestically and internationally. 
 
SECTION 11.  All departments, subdivisions, agencies, and instrumentalities of the 
Government shall henceforth use the official Philippine maps and charts produced and 
published by NAMRIA in accordance with this Act. 
For this purpose, the Department of Education (DepEd), the Commission on Higher 
Education (CHED), and state universities and colleges (SUCs) shall issue circulars requiring 
the use of said official Philippine maps in relevant subjects, researches and instructional 
materials, such as, among other things, text books, instructional materials, electronic, web, 
social media, and audio-visual presentations. 
 
SECTION 12. The NAMRIA shall ensure compliance with this Act, pursuant to Department of 
Environment and Natural Resources Administrative Order (DENR-AO) No. 31 (s. 1988) and 
other pertinent laws, rules and regulations. 
 
SECTION 13.  The  Government, through the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA), and in 
consultation with NAMRIA and other appropriate government agencies, shall deposit, within 
six months of its effectivity, a copy of this Act, enclosing the official maps and charts of the 
Philippines reflecting the aforementioned maritime features, their  coordinates, baselines, 
territorial sea and where applicable, their contiguous zone, with the Secretary-General of the 
United Nations and notify accordingly relevant international organizations, such as the 
International Hydrographic Organization and the United Nations Conference on the 
Standardization of Geographical Names. 
 
SECTION 14. The Heads of Agencies Concerned shall Include in their Programs the 
Implementation of this Act in their Programs, the funding of which shall be included in the 
Annual General Appropriations Act.  
 
SECTION 15. Should any part or provision of this Act be held unconstitutional or invalid, the 
other parts or provisions not affected thereby shall continue to be in full force and effect. 
 
SECTION 16. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days following its publication in the Official 
Gazette or in any two (2) newspapers of general circulation. 
 
 
Approved,