Retired Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio has expressed readiness to participate in a public “friendly debate” regarding the legality of the West Philippine Sea and the Philippines’ maritime entitlements.
In an interview on Isyu Spotted (10 February 2026), Carpio said he is willing to engage in a live discussion to address statements questioning both the legal existence of the West Philippine Sea and the country’s claim over the Kalayaan Island Group.
Clarifying the Legal Issues
Carpio explained that the proposed debate should focus on two central questions:
Is there a legal basis for the West Philippine Sea under Philippine law?
Are Philippine islands and maritime features beyond 200 nautical miles still part of national territory and maritime jurisdiction?
He emphasized that these issues are straightforward and can be clarified by referring to existing Philippine laws, maritime baselines, and established principles of international law.
“We cannot allow misinformation to go unanswered,” Carpio said, noting that public discussion is necessary to educate Filipinos on the legal foundations of the country’s maritime claims.
Debate as Public Education
While some observers have questioned the value of holding a debate, Carpio maintained that an open forum would serve an educational purpose. He stressed that arbitration, legal interpretation, and territorial claims should be discussed based on statutes, historical records, and international jurisprudence—not on rhetoric.
Asked whether his offer has an expiration date, Carpio replied that he remains open to the discussion at any time, pending confirmation from the other side.
The former magistrate reiterated that the legal questions surrounding the West Philippine Sea can be addressed clearly and concisely under Philippine law and international maritime principles.
🎥 Watch the full interview here:
Retired Justice Antonio T. Carpio expresses readiness to join a public debate on the legality of the West Philippine Sea and the Philippines’ maritime claims, emphasizing the need to clarify legal principles and educate the public on national sovereignty rights.
Retired Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio is calling for a new international arbitration case to address sovereignty issues in the West Philippine Sea — particularly over the Kalayaan Island Group.
In a recent interview, Carpio pointed to centuries-old Philippine maps — including the 1734 Murillo Velarde map — as historical proof of the country’s longstanding claim. He emphasized that arbitration is not hostility, but a legitimate diplomatic tool grounded in international law.
The Philippines won in 2016. Can it prevail again?
Retired Justice Antonio T. Carpio urges the Philippine government to file a new arbitration case before the International Court of Justice over the West Philippine Sea dispute, citing centuries-old maps and strong legal grounds supporting the country’s claim to the Kalayaan Island Group.
In a recent interview, Senior Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio offered a pointed critique of narratives emerging within the Philippine Senate that, whether intentionally or not, echo China’s strategic messaging on the West Philippine Sea. While acknowledging that some public officials deny being “pro-China,” Justice Carpio warned that the substance of their statements—rather than their disclaimers—must be examined closely, especially when national sovereignty and sovereign rights are at stake.
On Senator Rodante Marcoleta: Appeasement Framed as Realism
Justice Carpio expressed deep concern over remarks attributed to Senator Rodante Marcoleta portraying China as a “big” and “rich” country with which the Philippines supposedly cannot compete. Framed as realism, Justice Carpio argued, this line of thinking effectively reduces Philippine foreign policy to a plea for mercy rather than an assertion of rights.
“To ask for mercy,” Justice Carpio stressed, “is not how a sovereign state conducts itself.” The issue at hand is not relative wealth or power, but sovereignty and sovereign rights guaranteed by international law. Suggesting that the Philippines temper its position because China is stronger implicitly legitimizes coercion and undermines the rule-based order the country has relied upon—and successfully invoked—in the 2016 Arbitral Award.
Justice Carpio was particularly emphatic in correcting claims that the Philippines lacks clear coordinates for its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). He noted that Senator Marcoleta was already a lawmaker when Republic Act No. 9522 (Archipelagic Baselines Law) was enacted. That law precisely defines the country’s baselines with coordinates. From those baselines, the EEZ is determined mechanically by measuring 200 nautical miles, as provided under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
Contrary to repeated insinuations, UNCLOS does not require coastal states to issue special proclamations or publish EEZ coordinates to enjoy maritime entitlements. These rights are inherent, not discretionary. Justice Carpio underscored the irony: while Philippine maritime zones are firmly grounded in domestic law and UNCLOS, China’s nine-dash (or ten-dash) line has no coordinates at all—and no legal basis.
Settled Law, Not “Fighting Over Rocks”
Justice Carpio also rejected the suggestion that focusing on the West Philippine Sea merely means “fighting over rocks.” He clarified that there are two distinct disputes.
The first—maritime entitlements—has already been finally and conclusively resolved in favor of the Philippines by the 2016 arbitral ruling. That award is binding and widely supported by the international community. No state recognizes China’s sweeping dash-line claim. The dispute today is not about legality, but about enforcement.
The second dispute concerns sovereignty over specific land features, such as Scarborough Shoal and Pag-asa Island. These are territorial disputes governed by general international law, not UNCLOS. Here, Justice Carpio reiterated a consistent position: the Philippines should challenge China to submit the matter to arbitration or adjudication. China’s refusal to do so would further expose its reliance on threats and coercion, in violation of the UN Charter’s obligation to settle disputes peacefully.
On Senator Robinhood Padilla: Freedom of Expression Is Not Negotiable
Justice Carpio also addressed comments by Senator Robinhood Padilla criticizing a caricature of Chinese President Xi Jinping that appeared in a presentation by Philippine Coast Guard spokesperson Commodore Jay Tarriela. Justice Carpio was unequivocal: freedom of expression is a constitutional right in the Philippines and cannot be curtailed to appease a foreign power.
China may criminalize satire and criticism of its leaders at home, Justice Carpio noted, but it has no authority to export those restrictions abroad. In democratic societies—including the Philippines, the United States, and Europe—political caricature is a long-standing and protected form of expression. Context matters: when Philippine vessels are rammed, water-cannoned, and harassed at sea, public criticism and even sharp satire are natural and lawful responses.
The Larger Warning
Justice Carpio’s central warning was clear: normalizing intimidation—whether at sea or in public discourse—comes at a steep cost. If bullying is met with silence, legal distortion, or self-censorship, it becomes precedent. The Philippines, he argued, must respond not with bravado, but with law, alliances, transparency, and an unwavering defense of democratic values.
Sovereignty is not preserved by asking for mercy. It is preserved by insisting—calmly, firmly, and consistently—on rights already won under international law.
Justice Antonio T. Carpio warns that China’s recent embassy rhetoric and diplomatic posturing may signal renewed assertive moves on Scarborough Shoal, underscoring threats to Philippine sovereignty, international law, and regional stability.
Former Senior Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio has warned that China’s increasingly aggressive diplomatic posture in Manila may be part of a broader strategic preparation to assert control over Scarborough Shoal — a move that could fundamentally alter the balance of power in the West Philippine Sea. In a recent interview, Justice Carpio observed that the arrival of a new Chinese ambassador appears to mark a shift toward a more confrontational tone, coinciding with Beijing’s announced plan to establish a so-called “nature reserve” in Scarborough Shoal. Based on China’s past conduct in Fiery Cross Reef and Mischief Reef, Justice Carpio cautioned that environmental or scientific pretexts often serve as the first step toward militarization, ultimately transforming occupied features into full-scale air and naval bases.
Justice Carpio explained that control of the South China Sea requires only three strategic air-naval hubs — in the Paracels, the Spratlys, and Scarborough — and China has already secured two of them. Scarborough Shoal remains the final strategic gap. He suggested that China’s abrasive rhetoric and provocative embassy behavior may be part of a deliberate effort to bait the Philippines into a confrontation that could later serve as justification for escalation. To counter this, Justice Carpio urged the Philippine government to shift from reactive diplomacy to proactive legal and strategic action by internationalizing the Scarborough Shoal issue, filing new arbitration cases under UNCLOS, enforcing existing arbitral rulings, and drawing global attention to China’s looming violation of the 2002 Declaration of Conduct. He stressed that placing Scarborough Shoal in the international spotlight — while strengthening security partnerships and alliances — remains the most effective way to deter unilateral Chinese action and defend Philippine sovereignty.
Justice Carpio, Scarborough Shoal, West Philippine Sea, South China Sea, China Philippines relations, UNCLOS, 2016 Arbitral Award, Philippine sovereignty, maritime security, Chinese embassy rhetoric, geopolitical tensions, international law, national security, foreign policy, West Philippine Sea dispute, China bullying, arbitration case, ASEAN, regional security, IMOA
Justice Antonio T. Carpio warns that China’s escalating diplomatic aggression may signal preparations to occupy Scarborough Shoal, urging legal action, international pressure, and stronger alliances to defend Philippine sovereignty in the West Philippine Sea.
Former Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio has called for firm action to defend Philippine sovereignty in light of China’s escalating diplomatic and maritime pressure. In a recent interview, Justice Carpio warned that the Philippines is being “bullied at sea” and “bullied in Manila,” highlighting that China’s coercive actions are no longer confined to the West Philippine Sea but now extend into diplomatic and political spaces within the country.
Justice Carpio emphasized that China must comply strictly with the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which governs how foreign missions engage host governments. He criticized Chinese officials for bypassing the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) by directly communicating with Philippine line agencies, calling the practice “totally wrong” and a violation of diplomatic norms. Allowing this behavior risks undermining the Philippines’ institutional authority and emboldening further interference.
To counter these actions, Justice Carpio urged the Philippine government to summon the Chinese Ambassador and hold Chinese officials accountable. He underscored the principle of reciprocity: if China summons Philippine diplomats, the Philippines should respond in kind. Above all, he stressed that these measures should be framed publicly as responses to China’s bullying—both at sea and in the nation’s capital.
Justice Carpio’s message underscores that defending national sovereignty requires firmness, legal clarity, and adherence to international law. By enforcing diplomatic protocol and standing up to coercive rhetoric, the Philippines can protect its rights and reinforce a rules-based order that safeguards smaller states from great-power pressure.
Justice Carpio warns that China is bullying the Philippines at sea and in Manila, urging strict adherence to diplomatic protocol and assertive action to protect national sovereignty.
Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio has proposed a novel approach to addressing the contentious issue of PhilHealth fund reimbursements. According to him, these reimbursements should have been sourced from assets seized from individuals linked to corruption cases.
Carpio’s recommendation underscores his long-standing commitment to upholding accountability in government and ensuring that those implicated in graft and corruption face the full force of the law.
The proposal has significant implications for the country’s anti-corruption efforts, as it seeks to redirect funds towards compensating those affected by the misappropriation of public resources.
In light of Carpio’s suggestion, questions surrounding the reimbursement process and its potential linkages to corruption cases have taken on new urgency. As such, the Philippine government must carefully consider the retired Justice’s recommendations in order to prevent further losses and uphold transparency in public finance management.
Justice Carpio calls for reimbursements from assets seized from corruption suspects
As the Philippines gears up to tackle its 2026 budget, a contentious issue has emerged that could potentially set the stage for a constitutional showdown. The matter of unprogrammed funds, which have been at the center of recent debates over the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PhilHealth), has caught the attention of none other than Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio.
Carpio’s keen interest in this issue stems from his extensive experience as a jurist and his commitment to upholding the Constitution. He has long been an advocate for transparency and accountability in government spending, and the presence of unprogrammed funds in the 2026 budget raises important questions about the allocation of resources.
According to Carpio, the concerns raised by Justice Ramon Hernando regarding these unprogrammed funds warrant a closer examination. The retired Supreme Court justice has been vocal about his desire to see more transparency and accountability in government spending, particularly when it comes to the use of public funds.
The implications of this issue extend far beyond mere fiscal management, however. It speaks to fundamental questions about the Constitution’s allocation of power between different branches of government and the accountability of public officials to the people they serve.
Justice Carpio weighs in on unprogrammed funds in 2026 budget, highlights need for transparency
Renowned jurist Justice Antonio Carpio has sounded the alarm over the newly introduced guidelines for impeachment proceedings by the Supreme Court (SC). In a stark assessment of the rules, Carpio described them as ‘redundant’ and ‘unnecessary,’ arguing that they effectively stifle the very process they aim to govern.
With his years of expertise in constitutional law, Justice Carpio’s opinions carry significant weight. His assertion that the revised guidelines have a chilling effect on impeachment proceedings is particularly noteworthy. By labeling these new rules as redundant and excessive, he invites an important discussion about the balance between procedural rigor and the practicality of maintaining public trust.
As one of the most respected voices in Philippine jurisprudence, Justice Carpio’s critique offers an authoritative perspective that warrants careful consideration from lawmakers and jurists alike. The implications of his stance underscore the need for a nuanced approach to reforming the impeachment process, ensuring that it remains effective while upholding the integrity of the judicial system.
Justice Antonio Carpio questions new SC guidelines on impeachment