Retired Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio cautioned against entering into joint oil and gas exploration agreements with China that undermine Philippine sovereignty, stressing that any arrangement must strictly comply with the Constitution and the 2016 arbitral ruling.
In a recent interview, Carpio also called for renewed legal action, stronger political will, and a unified national narrative to defend the country’s rights in the West Philippine Sea.
Joint Exploration Must Respect Philippine Ownership
Carpio warned that China’s definition of “joint development” effectively requires recognizing Chinese ownership of oil and gas resources—an arrangement the Philippines cannot accept.
He explained that:
- The Reed Bank lies within the Philippines’ Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)
- The Constitution mandates that marine resources in the EEZ belong exclusively to Filipinos
- Accepting China’s terms would violate the Constitution and reverse the arbitral award
Previous negotiations broke down after China sought to remove key provisions affirming Philippine ownership and governance under Philippine law.
Carpio emphasized that joint exploration is only acceptable if structured under the Philippines’ service contract system, where foreign entities participate without claiming ownership.
China’s Strategy and Risks of Concession
According to Carpio, agreeing to China’s conditions would effectively concede sovereignty.
“If we accept their terms, they have already won,” he warned, noting that such an agreement would amount to recognizing China as the resource owner.
While cooperation is possible, it must not compromise:
- Sovereign rights
- Constitutional safeguards
- The arbitral ruling
Political Will Key to Resource Development
Carpio pointed out that the Philippines’ inability to develop resources like Reed Bank is not due to lack of capacity, but lack of political will.
He noted that:
- Malaysia and Indonesia have successfully explored resources in their EEZ despite Chinese pressure
- The Philippines could do the same with naval support and allied presence
- The continued delay has forced the country to rely on costly imported energy
Call for New Arbitration on Territorial Disputes
Carpio stressed that while the Philippines has already won the maritime dispute, the territorial dispute remains unresolved.
He urged the government to:
- Challenge China, Vietnam, and Malaysia to voluntary arbitration
- Present evidence before an impartial tribunal
- Secure international support through legal resolution
Even if China refuses, initiating arbitration would strengthen the Philippines’ position globally.
1875 Map as ‘Title’ to Philippine Territory
Carpio highlighted the importance of the 1875 Carta General del Archipiélago Filipino as key evidence in establishing sovereignty.
He explained that:
- The map was recognized by both Spain and the United States over 381 years
- It clearly identifies Scarborough Shoal and the Kalayaan Island Group
- It represents the Philippines’ strongest documentary proof of territorial claim
He described the map as the country’s equivalent of a “Torrens title” in territorial disputes.
Need for a Unified National Narrative
A major concern raised by Carpio is the lack of a consistent Philippine position on territorial claims.
He noted that:
- Different officials and experts present conflicting legal bases
- The Philippines lacks a coherent historical and legal narrative
- This weakens the country’s credibility internationally
Carpio urged key government agencies—including the DFA, DND, DOJ, and academic institutions—to develop a unified position before pursuing further legal action.
Arbitration as a Battle for Global Support
Carpio emphasized that disputes in the West Philippine Sea are not just legal battles but contests for international legitimacy.
“The battle is for the hearts and minds of the world,” he said.
He explained that:
- The 2016 arbitral ruling gained global support for the Philippines
- A similar ruling on territorial issues would clarify competing claims
- Without such clarity, international backing remains uncertain
Conclusion
Carpio underscored that defending Philippine sovereignty requires adherence to law, clarity of position, and decisive action.
Without these, he warned, the country risks losing not only resources but also its rightful place in the international legal order.