Beyond The 2016 Victory
A blog on the speech of Justice Carpio on “The Rule of Law in West Philippine Sea.”
How can we determine ownership when two parties rely on different references to support their claims? One argues that they bought the pen and could provide the receipt, but the other says that they have been using the same pen since the beginning of the semester. This would have been simpler if the pen were something worth Php 28 from a nearby bookstore, but no, the said pen is a Pilot Flexible Nib Fountain Pen that would probably cost thousands, and neither party is willing to give it up.
Get Rish Lobitos’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
This dilemma mirrors the dispute over the international waters, with China claiming it as “South China Sea,” referencing its nine-dash line history, power, and persistence. As for the Philippines, calling it “West Philippine Sea” was an assertion of a legally grounded international law upheld by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016. How is this important? This matters because it shapes the story, and the story shapes perceptions and behaviors. Most would say that the body of water is legally and rightfully under the Philippines’ sovereign rights, part of the country’s continental shelf. However, just as with the Pilot fountain pen, surrendering the claim over the rich WPS is a huge loss, especially for China.
Not all legal victories translate into reality, and this is a perfect example. Justice Carpio’s speech emphasizes the necessity of action to maintain the validity of the decision. International jurisprudence is not easily enforceable, since countries cannot simply be compelled to follow it due to the lack of strong consequences. This enabled China to persist in its claims. Nevertheless, there is an emphasis on the need for both countries to uphold international law, subject to UNCLOS jurisdiction, thereby justifying the Philippines’ claim to the EEZ.
To further strengthen the tribunal’s 2016 victory, the Philippines shall continuously assert the ruling at every diplomatic opportunity to prevent it from being undermined. Consistency is the key to making a point and establishing rights. Aside from emphasizing the rule, forming alliances and gaining recognition from other states is also crucial to normalizing maritime law. They can help in solidifying the claim because they also agree with the ruling and its reality. Additionally, actions within are also important in strengthening legitimacy. The claim on the WPS must become a lived, defended, and normalized national policy that protects Filipino fisherfolk, ensures visible maritime patrols, and makes clear to the public why the West Philippine Sea matters, as this shows the country’s dedication to its claims, not just for pride, but also for resource security and national dignity.
While history is important for informing claims, legal evidence is more decisive in shaping reality. The 2016 arbitral victory is the ticket to the Philippines’ tight hold on the now-found pen, and it is important to maintain the grip now and in the future. The win does not stop there; persistent defense and action will permanently translate this into reality that does not easily slip away.
