SPECIAL ISSUES IN INTERNATIONAL LAW(Law of the Sea)FREEDOM OF THE SEAS A ship on high seas enjoys the freedom to navigate. UNCLOS reinforces this freedom by subjecting such avessel to the exclusive jurisdiction of the flag state. Thus, a vessel may be boarded by a warship or by agovernment vessel at any time; Vessels engaged in piracy, in slavery and in the tariff ofnarcotics may likewise not fend off inspection and legalaction because of the freedom of the high seas; The interest of the international community out of these evilsis safeguarded by appropriate treaty provisions.Two concepts:- mare liberum, or the sea held to be free and open to all forall purposes;- mare clausum, or the sea held to be appropriated byparticular nations. Who shall control the seas and for what purposes? How do we balance between the general interest (advocatingfreedom of the sea) and the particular interest of coastal states(advocating the extension of their authority to at least acertain belt of the adjacent sea)?UNCLOSThe law of the sea is one of the oldest disciplines ininternational law. It is primarily concerned with therules which bind states in their internationalrelations concerning maritime matters which arebasically molded by the political, geographical andeconomic relations of states.Types of waters recognized under UNCLOSTerritorial Sea - This refers to the waters adjacent to thecoasts or a state, excluding the internal waters in bays andgulfs, which do not form part of the open sea. TheConvention fixes the maximum breadth of the territorial seaa state may claim at 12 NM seaward from the baseline. Innocent Passage - The Convention confirms the right,established in customary international practice of all ships toinnocent passage through the territorial sea. It specifiesactivities of ships not considered innocent. The regime ofinnocent passage does not include the right of over flight orsubmerged passage. Transit Passage - The Convention also confirms the right,established in customary international practice, of all shipsand aircraft to unimpeded passage in the normal modethrough, over, and under the territorial sea when transitingan international strait without a high-seas route through it.Innocent Passage in Territorial Sea Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to thepeace, good order or security of the coastal state. Passage of a foreign ship shall be considered prejudicialto the peace, good order or security of the coastal state ifin the territorial sea it engages in any of the followingactivities:Any threat or use of force against the sovereignty,territorial integrity or political independence of thecoastal state, or in any other manner in violation ofthe principles of international law embodied in theUN Charter;Any exercise or practice with weapons of any kind;Any act aimed at collecting information to theprejudice of the defence or security of the coastalstate;Any act or propaganda aimed at affecting the defenceor security of the coastal state;The launching, landing or taking on board of anyaircraft;The launching, landing or taking on board of anymilitary device;The loading or unloading of any commodity, currencyor person contrary to the customs, fiscal, immigrationor sanitary laws and regulations of the coastal state;Any act of willful and serious pollution;Any fishing activities;The carrying out of research or surveyactivities;Any act aimed at interfering with any systemsof communication or any other facilities orinstallations of the coastal state;Any other activity not having a direct bearingon passage.Archipelagic Waters All waters inside the archipelagicbaselines are archipelagic waters. The archipelagic stateexercises sovereignty over said waters as stipulated in PartIV of the Convention. Right of Innocent Passage Ships of all States enjoy theright of innocent passage through archipelagic waters. Archipelagic Sea Lanes Passage An archipelagic statemay designate sea lanes suitable for the continuous andexpeditious passage of foreign ships through or over itsarchipelagic waters and the adjacent territorial sea.Contiguous Zone - The coastal state may exercisecontrol necessary to: 1) prevent infringement of itscustoms, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws andregulations within its territory or territorial sea; 2)punish infringement of the above laws andregulations committed within its territory orterritorial sea. It may not extend beyond 24 NM from thebaselines from which the breadth of the territorialsea is measured.Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) - The ExclusiveEconomic Zone (EEZ) is the zone extending seaward fromthe outer limit of the territorial sea out to 200 miles fromthe baseline. In EEZ, the coastal state has: Sovereign rights for the purpose of exploring and exploiting,conserving and managing the natural resources, whether livingor non-living, of the waters superadjacent to the seabed and ofthe seabed and its subsoil, and with regard to other activitiesfor the economic exploitation and exploration of the zone, suchas the production of energy from water, currents and winds; Jurisdiction with regard to: The establishment and use of artificial islands, installationsand structures; Maritime scientific research; The protection and preservation of the marine environment;Straits Used for International Navigation are those between one area of the high seas zoneand another part of the high seas or an exclusiveeconomic zone through which all ships and aircrafthave the right of transit passage.High Seas are all parts of the sea that are notincluded in the exclusive economic zone, theterritorial sea, or the internal waters of a state or inthe archipelagic waters of an archipelagic state. It isopen to all states.CONTINENTAL SHELFThe continental shelf comprises the sea bed and subsoil of thesubmarine area that extend beyond the territorial sea throughout thenatural prolongation of its land territory to the outer edge of thecontinental margin or to a distance of 200 nautical miles from thebaselines from which the territorial sea is measured where the outeredge of the continental margin does not extend up to that distance.Coastal states have the right to exploit the mineral resources of theircontinental shelf but must pay a small commission through theInternational Sea-Bed Authority (ISBA) to other states from theproceeds of any exploitation of resources beyond 200 miles from shore.Coastal state jurisdiction over the continental shelf does not affect thelegal status of the waters above. Thus, beyond the territorial sea, thefreedoms of navigation and over flight, as well as other internationallylawful uses of the seas related to these freedoms, including the right tolay submarine cables and pipelines, are the same above a continentalshelf as on the high seas.UNCLOS Dispute Settlement ProvisionsIt is Part XV of UNCLOS that is designated as Settlement of Disputes;- Additionally, annexes V (Conciliation), VI (ITLOS), VII (Arbitration) andVIII (Special Arbitration) relate to the specific mechanisms that Part XVpropounds;- It must be noted that as a UN instrument, the Convention still istraversed by the principles and norms that emanate from the UNCharter as well as any other applicable instrument;- Most, if not all, of the UNCLOS State Parties are members of UN as well,and by virtue of Article 103 of the Charter, it is the latter that prevailsover any other treaty obligations;- Note: 3rd UN Conference on the Law of the Seas the disputesettlement of provisions of UNCLOS under Part XV and the 4 Annexesapplies only AS A MEANS TO SETTLE DISPUTES THAT COULD ARISEFROM THE INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION OF UNCLOS.4 Fundamental Aims that Guides the Process UnderPart XV:1.Settlement of disputes was to be based on law to avoid disputesbeing settled through the political and economic pressures of themore powerful States;2.The greatest possible uniformity in the interpretation of theConvention would be sought through compulsory disputesettlement;3.Exceptions would be carefully determined in order to enhance theobligatory character of the settlement regime;4.The system of dispute settlement had to constitute an integral partof the Convention rather than be included as an optional protocol.Main Characteristics of Part XV:1.It is a subsidiary mechanism to solve the parties disputes. Itfirstly allows parties to deal with their disputes in a pacific mannerunder the means of settlement of their own choice;2.It requires from the parties to exchange views, thereforeprivileging a negotiated solution;3.When used, Part XV provides for any escalation procedure,starting with diplomatic means of settlement, followed by (ifresorted to) conciliation and afterwards entering into adjudicativebinding methods (if the issue is not excluded by the Convention orby a declaration).Part XV comprises 20 Articles which are arranged intothree sections, namely:1.SECTION 1 GENERAL PROVISIONSa. Diplomatic meansb. Freedom of choicec. Non-compulsory conciliation2.SECTION 2 COMPULSORY PROCEDURES WITHBINDING DECISIONSa. Compulsory settlement thru ICJ, ITLOS or Arbitration3.SECTION 3 LIMITATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS TOAPPLICABILITY OF SECTION 2SECTION 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS(CONCILIATION)It is under Section 1 where the Principles of DisputeSettlement Mechanism are laid down:1.The obligations of the parties to settle their disputes bysimple means;2.The parties are free to choose the means of settlement oftheir preference;3.The procedures under Part XV apply only when the choice ofthe parties has been unsuccessful in bringing a final resolutionor when the time designated for that has lapsed.SECTION 2 COMPULSORY PROCEDURESResidual procedures in that they are applicable only indefault of other procedures acceptable to the parties;Resort to Section 2 take place only when after attemptingsettlement under Section 1 has proven unsuccessful;Article 287 and 288 constitute the core of Section 2,providing respectively the famous choice of procedure (whichactually is a choice of mechanism, mean or institution ratherthan procedure) and the scope of jurisdiction.VARIOUS MEANS TO SETTLE DISPUTES UNDERSECTION 2(Art. 287) freedom to select means (one or more mechanisms)to settle disputes that have not been solved under Section 1:- International Court of Justice (ICJ)- International Tribunal on the Law of the Seas (ITLOS)-Arbitration (also considered Default mechanism, that is, where no choice wasmade or when parties to a dispute have divergent choices)-Special Arbitration(Art. 288) Jurisdiction comprises any dispute concerning theinterpretation or application of UNCLOS, as well as of aninternational agreement related to the purposes of UNCLOS,which is substituted to it in accordance with the agreementSECTION 3 EXCEPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS TO THESYSTEM OF COMPULSORY JURISDICTION UNDER SEC. 21. AUTOMATIC EXCEPTIONS (ART. 297)a. Disputes which deals with the submission of claimsagainst the exercise of sovereign rights or jurisdiction bythe coastal state shall be subject to Section 2 when it fallsunder the following three categories:i. When it is alleged that the coastal state transgressed theconventions provisions on the freedoms and rights of navigation,overflight or laying of submarine cables and pipelines and anyother internationally lawful uses of the sea allowed in its EEZ;ii. When it is a third state that has contravened the convention orthe laws and regulations of a coastal state in the exercise of thosefreedoms and rights; andWhen it is alleged that a coastal state has acted incontravention of international rules and standards forthe protection and preservation of the marineenvironment either established under the conventionor through a competent international organization(e.g. International Maritime Organization).Therefore, by necessary implication, any other case notincluded in the above list is excluded from compulsoryjurisdiction under Sec. 2.Disputes which deals with marine scientificresearch; Art. 246 states what maritime scientific researchactivities are; It then provides for the limitation that the coastal stateis not obliged to accept the submission for settlementof any dispute arising out of its discretionary rightunder Art. 246 and its power to suspend marinescientific research in accordance to Article 253; However, despite the above-limitation, third statesare given the right to resort to compulsoryconciliation under Annex V;Disputes which deals with fisheries Coastal state is not obliged to allow the submission of adispute relating to its sovereign rights with respect tothe living resources and discretionary managementand conservations powers, including the contents ofrelated domestic legislation; Similarly, a third state can institute compulsoryconciliation under the same conditions as in par. 2.OPTIONAL EXCEPTIONS (Art. 298) EXCLUDEDBY WRITTEN DECLARATION:a. Disputes concerning maritime delimitation andhistoric titles RATIONALE FOR EXCLUSION: when a declaration to beexcluded under sec. 2 is made, the consequence is that thestate is obliged to submit itself to compulsoryconciliation under Annex V; This makes reaching an agreement completely dependenton the will of both parties, hence it has been labeled asmere pactum de contrahendo.Disputes concerning military and lawenforcement activities in regard to theexercise of sovereign rights or jurisdiction(with regard to maritime scientific researchand fisheries) RATIONALE FOR EXCLUSION: the exclusiontouches a highly sensitive area and the reason forits existence can hardly be questioned, at leastunder the current status of international law.Disputes in respect of which the SecurityCouncil of the United Nations is exercisingits functionsNote: Although Sec. 3 puts in place by means of Art.297 and 298 the previously stated categories ofdisputes away from the reach of means of disputesettlement set forth in Sec. 2, Art. 299 preserves theright of the parties, still, to resort to any mean oftheir own choice to settle those disputes.FOUR ANNEXES WHICH ARE INTEGRAL PART OFPART XV:ANNEX V CONCILIATION- Two modalities:1. Parties freedom to choose under Section 12. Compulsory conciliation (that is, the only compulsorymean to settle disputes that are covered by the exceptions)-Non-binding mean-The only mean available to parties when disputes areexcluded from compulsory settlementWAY TO INSTITUTE PROCEEDINGS:By writing to the other party or partiesIn such notification, the instituting party should nominate twoconciliators, preferably from the list maintained by the Secretary Generalof the UN; one of them may be its nationalWithin 21 days from notification, the other party has to appoint its owntwo conciliators following the same rule. If the appointment is not made,within one week after the expiry of the 21-day period, the other party canrequest the Secretary General to do the corresponding appointments orterminate the procedure by notification to the other partyWithin 30 days from last nomination, the 4 conciliators have to nominatea chairperson (from UN list), completing the conciliation commission.Otherwise, any of the party may request the Secretary General to fulfill hisobligation following the same rules as above described.Report of the conciliation commission is NON-BINDING! If an agreement is reached but one of the parties rejects theconclusions or three months have lapsed after the deposit of thereport with the Secretary General, the conciliation process isdeemed terminated;COMPULSORY CONCILIATION All the above rules are applicable The only difference is that the passive party cannot resist theconciliation process from happening (as it could in conciliationby rejecting it and therefore resulting to termination); failure toact is not a bar for the proceedings to take place.ANNEX VI ITLOS-Closely modeled after that of ICJ-Number of judges 21 (vis--vis ICJ which has 15)-It has jurisdiction over States, other juridicalpersons and individualsANNEX VII ARBITRATION-Default mechanism (an ad hoc procedure)-Compose of 5 Arbitrators-The institution of proceedings is made by one party by a written notification to the otherparty to the dispute, accompanied by a statement of the claim and the ground on which itis based, as well as the name of its chosen arbitrator (who can be its own national);-The other party within 30 days from receipt of notification shall nominate its ownarbitrator;-Both nominations are to be made preferably from the list of kept by the SecretaryGeneral)-If the notified party does not act within 30 days, the other party can request thePresident of ITLOS, as appointing authority, to make the necessary appointment who hasto do so, in consultation with the parties, in the following 30 days;The three remaining arbitrators have to be nominated by agreement of the parties(none of whom can be their own national) no later than 60 days from the originalnotification that instituted the arbitration;- From those three remaining arbitrators, none of which must be a national of theparties, the president must be elected by common agreement. Otherwise, any of theparties can ask the President of ITLOS to make the necessary appointments from thereferred list.-The decision of the arbitration tribunal shall be taken by majority and the absence orabstention of less than the half of the tribunal is no bar for the tribunal to take action.-The President has a casting vote in case of a tie.-Arbitrators are not required to be lawyers or jurists (simply expert in maritime affairs);The award is final and without appeal unless beforehand the parties decided on anappellate procedure.-Parties owe full cooperation to the tribunal and under such obligation they have toprovide it with all relevant documents, facilities and information, and to call witnesses,experts and receive evidence and to visit localities as the case requires, all of theseunder each parties domestic law and all means at their disposal.-They also have to cover the expenses and remuneration of the tribunal by equal shares.-If a party does not appear or fails to defend its case, the tribunal can beasked by the other party to continue the proceedings and to deliver anAward, prior to which the tribunal must satisfy itself of having jurisdictionand that the claim is well based in fact and law.ANNEX VIII SPECIAL ARBITRATION-Applies when dispute settlement calls for functional solution (that is, not allencompassingsolution)-It covers four areas:1. Fisheries2. protection and preservation of the marine environment3. Maritime Scientific Research4. navigation including pollution from vessels and bydumping-The procedure follows Annex VII mutatis mutandisPhilippines National Territory and UNCLOSArchipelagic DoctrineUnder the Philippine Constitution1935 CONSTITUTIONThe Philippines comprises all the territory ceded to theUnited States by: Treaty of Paris (between US and Spain on December 10,1898 the limits of which are set forth in Article III ofsaid treaty); Treaty concluded in Washington (between US andSpain on Nov. 7, 1900 to include: Islands of Sibutu andCagayan de Sulu); Treaty bet. US and Great Britain on Jan. 2, 1930 (toinclude: Turtle and Mangsee Islands)Note: Incl. Batanes over which Phils. exercise jurisdiction.1973 CONSTITUTIONThe national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago,with all the islands and waters embraced therein, and all theother territories belonging to the Philippines by historic rightor legal title, including the territorial sea, the air space, thesubsoil, the seabed, the insular shelves and the submarineareas over which the Philippines has sovereignty orjurisdiction.The waters around, between and connecting the islands ofthe archipelago, irrespective of their breadth anddimensions, form part of the INTERNAL WATERS of thePhils.The concept of Archipelagic Doctrine as stated under thesecond sentence of the 1973 Philippine Constitution is thatthe waters around, between, and connecting the islands ofthe archipelago irrespective of their breadth anddimensions, form part of the internal waters of thePhilippines. This is intended to project the idea that the Philippines is anarchipelago and bolster the archipelagic concept which thePhilippines, together with Indonesia, Mauritius, Fiji andother archipelago states similarly situated. This provision was retained under the 1987 Constitution.Archipelagic DoctrineUnder UNCLOSArt. 46 defines an archipelago as: a group of islands, including parts ofislands, interconnecting waters and other natural features which are soclosely interrelated that such islands, waters and other natural featuresfrom an intrinsic geographical, economic and political entity, or whichhistorically have been regarded as such. Art. 47(1) provides that: an archipelagic state may draw straightarchipelagic baselines joining the outermost posts of the outermostislands and drying reefs of the archipelago provided that within suchbaselines are included the main islands x x x Art. 47(2) provides that: the length of such baselines shall not exceed100 NM, except that up to 3% of the total number of baselines enclosingany archipelago may exceed that length, up to a maximum length of125NM. Art. 47(3) provides that: the drawing of such baselines shall not departto any appreciable extent from the general configuration of thearchipelago.Art. 49 provides for the legal status of archipelagic waters:x x x the sovereignty of an archipelagic State extends to thewaters enclosed by the archipelagic baselines x x x describedas archipelagic waters x x x Art. 52 states the right of innocent passage: x x x ships of allStates enjoy the right of innocent passage througharchipelagic waters xxx Art. 53 states the right of archipelagic sea lanes passage: anArchipelagic State may designate sea lanes and air routesthereabove, suitable for the continuous and expeditiouspassage of foreign ships and aircraft through or over itsarchipelagic waters and the adjacent territorial sea. The Philippines ratified UNCLOS in Feb. 27, 1984.INTERNAL WATERSVS.ARCHIPELAGIC WATERSFr. Ranhillo Aquino of the San BedaGraduate School of Law explained that:Art. 47 of UNCLOS now provides for straightbaselines drawn by connecting the outermostpoints of the islands where a state is archipelagic.There is however a limit of 100 to 125 milesbetween the islands of an archipelago; that is tosay, when one island is beyond this limit, it is notto be connected with an imaginary straight line tothe rest of the archipelago but is to have its ownterritorial sea.Despite the said limit, it remains a fact thatbecause of the archipelagic doctrine, stretches ofsea that would otherwise be high seas may now bewell within the baselines.And because of this, Art. 49 provides that thewaters landward of archipelagic baselines shall beconsidered ARCHIPELAGIC WATERS overwhich there is a right of innocent passage oversealanes drawn by the state itself.The Philippine participants to UNCLOS in March 1987objected to this considering that under the Philippineconstitution, the waters around, between and connectingthe islands of the archipelago are regarded as INTERNALWATERS (which is not subject to right of innocentpassage). Philippine participants appended to the treaty the countrysDECLARATION which maintained that signing by ourdelegates was without prejudice to the claims we maintainedunder our constitution. USSR registered an objection, arguing that the Philippinedeclaration was in effect an attempt to contravene the verypurpose and intent of UNCLOS and was therefore, by the law oftreaties, a nullity.Clearly then, under UNCLOS, the Philippinescannot treat the waters between the Batanesgroup of islands and Aparri as internal watersbut as archipelagic waters and thus the rightsenjoyed by foreign ships in regard to archipelagicwaters must be sustained.THE CORFU CHANNEL CASE (UK VS.ALBANIA, 1949 ICJ REP. 428)Facts: A squadron of British ships left the Port ofCorfu and started navigating through a channel inthe Straight of North Corfu (in Albanian Territorialwaters) when two of the British ships hit mines andwere damaged;Issues:1) what liabilities, if any, accrue to Albania andwhat damages is she responsible for in terms ofloss of life and destruction?2) Did the UK violate international law bynavigating through Albanian territorial waterswithout first having secured Albanian consent?Held: Albania is liable. It had an obligation to warn vesselsabout existence of a minefield in its territorial waters. Thisobligation rests on elementary considerations of humanityas well as on the principle of the freedom of maritimecommunication. UK did not violate international law. In time of peace,States have a right to send their water ships throughstraits used for international navigation between two partsof the high seas without the previous authorization of acoastal state, provided that the passage is innocent.PHILIPPINE BASELINE LAW(Magallona vs. Ermita, GR 187167, Aug. 16, 2011)The Philippine Congress enacted RA 9522 (PhilippineBaseline Law) to make RA 3046 compliant with the terms ofUNCLOS: It shortened one baseline It optimized the location of some basepoints around thePhilippine archipelago It classified adjacent territories, namely the KalayaanIsland Group (KIG) and the Scarborough Shoal, asREGIME OF ISLANDS whose islands generate theirown applicable maritime zones.Dean Merlin Magallona of UP College of Law positsthat: RA 9522 formally assumed the status of the Philippines as anarchipelagic state under UNCLOS; Consequently, all waters landward of those baselines aredeclared archipelagic waters which is contrary with theConstitution proclaiming them as internal waters Under UNCLOS, archipelagic waters are subject to the rightof innocent passage of all ships of all States withoutneed of express permission from archipelagic state. On the other hand, under the Constitution, navigation byforeign ships over internal waters are allowed only by expresspermission.Dean Magallona feared that such categories ofships as warships, submarines, nuclear-poweredships and ships loaded with toxic or noxiousmaterials could now navigate over our internalwaters under the right to innocent passage inaccordance with UNCLOS.According to him, this contravenes the countrysnuclear-free policy, and the protection of marineresources, in violation of relevant constitutionalprovisions.SC ruled that: Whether referred to as Philippine internalwaters (under the constitution) or asarchipelagic waters (under UNCLOS), thePhilippines exercises sovereignty over the bodyof water lying landward of the baselines,including the air space over it and thesubmarine areas underneath. UNCLOS affirmsthis under Art. 49.That the fact of sovereignty does not precludethe operation of municipal and internationallaw norms subjecting our archipelagic waters tonecessary burdens in the interest of maintainingunimpeded, expeditious internationalnavigation, consistent with the international lawprinciple of FREEDOM OF NAVIGATION.THUS - Under Municipal law, SC cited a pending bill inCongress establishing archipelagic sea lanes inthe Philippine archipelagic waters; In the absence of municipal law, internationallaw norms now codified in UNCLOS operates togrant innocent passage rights over archipelagicwaters. It also pointed out that the right toinnocent passage is a customaryinternational law.SC explained that no modern state can validly invoke itssovereignty to absolutely forbid innocent passage that isexercised in accordance with customary internationallaw without risking retaliatory measures from theinternational community. It explained further that the imposition of these passagerights through archipelagic waters under UNCLOS wasa concession by archipelagic states, in exchange for theirright to claim all the waters landward of their baselines,regardless of their depth or distance from the coast, asarchipelagic waters subject to their territorialsovereignty.According to the SC, UNCLOS favors thePhilippines by:Creating a sui generis maritime zone theEEZ in waters previously part of the highseas;Granting new rights to the Philippines toexclusively exploit the resources found withinthis zone up to 200 NM;Other Issues: Magallona vs. ErmitaDean Merlin Magallona of UP College of Law positsthat: RA 9522 dismembers a large portion of the national territorybecause it discards the pre-UNCLOS demarcation of Philippineterritory under the Treaty of Paris and related treaties. SC disagreed. UNCLOS has nothing to do with the acquisition or loss of territory Rather, it is a multilateral treaty regulating sea-use rights overmaritime zones On the other hand, RA 9522 was enacted to mark-out specificbasepoints along theirs coasts from which baselines are drawn, toserve as geographic starting points to measure the breadth of themaritime zones and continental shelf. Baseline are nothing but statutory mechanisms for UNCLOS.UNCLOS and RA 9522 play no role in theacquisition, enlargement or diminution ofterritory.Under traditional international law typology, statesacquire or lose territory through: Occupation Accretion Cession PrescriptionAND NOT BY MULTILATERAL TREATIES!ACKNOWLEDGMENT: The Archipelago Concept in the Law of the Sea: Problems AndPerspectives by Miriam Defensor Santiago (published in thePhilippine Law Journal); Primer on UNCLOS by Ferdinand Golez (Philippine Navy); Dispute Settlement Provisions of UNCLOS by Lesther Antonio OrtegaLemus; Issues in Public International Law by Fr. Ranhilio Callangan Aquino; Magallona vs. Executive Secretary, GR 187167, Aug. 16, 2011; Philippine Baseline Law (R.A. 9522); Administrative Order No. 29, Series of 2012