Territorial Sovereignty (d) Evidentiary rules.

These are:

Territorial sovereignty was described in the Island of Palmas • Recognition. In respect of land claims recognition
Arbitration as being ‘the right to exercise therein [i.e. on the refers mainly to the attitude of third States, i.e. States
territory], to the exclusion of any other state, the functions of a not involved in a dispute. By a unilateral declaration or
sovereign’ by an international treaty they may show that they
have accepted a particular situation. However,
Different types of territorial sovereignty – T-C-T-I recognition will also be of relevance in a situation
where a State by positive conduct, even if contrary to
1. Titular (or residual) sovereignty and effective an existing treaty, acknowledges that its opponent has
sovereignty - Titular (or residual) sovereignty is a valid title to a disputed territory.
possessed by an entity which has the ultimate • Acquiescence. This refers to the attitude of a
capacity of disposing of the territory. dispossessed State and is inferred from its failure to
2. Condominium - This occurs when two or more States protest in circumstances where protest might
jointly exercise sovereignty over a piece of territory and reasonably have been expected against the exercise of
its inhabitants. control by its opponent over disputed territory.
3. Terminable and reversionary sovereignty - This • Estoppel. The situation of estoppel arises when a
refers to a situation where sovereignty of a territory State’s conduct is clear, sustained and consistent and
changes by operation of law as a result of fulfilment of the other party relying on such conduct has changed
a condition or a failure to meet an express or implied its position to its own detriment or has suffered some
condition. prejudice.
4. Indeterminate sovereignty - This may occur when a
territory is not terra nullius but nevertheless has no The Modes of Acquisition of Title to Territory
determinate sovereign.
The traditional five modes are: O-A-A-C-C
The Principles and Rules Applicable to the
Acquisition of Title to Territory (a) Occupation. Only terra nullius can be acquired by
occupation. The condition for the acquisition of title to
The following principles and rules can be identified: any territory by occupation is effective possession.
Such possession combines the intention of a State to
(a) The rules of jus cogens such as the prohibition (other than in act as sovereign and some actual exercise or display
self-defense or as mandated by the United Nations Security of State activity consistent with sovereignty.
Council (UNSC)) of the threat or the use of force against the (b) Acquisitive prescription. This concerns the
territorial integrity or the political independence of a State, the acquisition of territory by a State through continuous
principle of settlement of disputes in a peaceful manner and the and undisturbed exercise of sovereignty for a long
principle of self-determination. period over a territory belonging to another State
during which period the latter does not protest the
(b) Specific principles applicable to the acquisition of title to occupation, i.e. the occupying State may claim title on
territory. These are: the basis of the implied acquiescence of the alleged
dispossessed State and sufficient passage of time.
• The principle of effectiveness. This has many (c) Accretion. This refers to slow, gradual increase of
meanings but in the context of acquisition of title to land due to accumulation of soil material such as
territory it refers to how a factual situation affects the sand, silt, clay, gravel resulting from natural causes.
creation of a right, i.e. the acquisition of legal title to The opposite of accretion is erosion which occurs
territory. That situation being the exercise of effective when land is gradually washed away by water or in the
authority over the relevant territory, the principle of natural course of events. Sudden or violent changes
effectiveness is of relevance to the following modes of due to storms, floods, eruptions of a volcano, or
acquisition of territory: occupation, acquisitive sudden changes in course of a body of water are
prescription and (prior to the prohibition of the use of known as avulsion. Accretion entails gradualness
force) the acquisition of territory by conquest. whilst avulsion entails suddenness. With regard to
boundary rivers, a State may gain title to land formed
• The principle of uti possidetis. This was first by accretion in or near its border river but not as a
developed among the Spanish colonies of Latin result of avulsion.
America in the nineteenth century and later accepted (d) Cession. This consists of the peaceful transfer of
by the Organisation of African Unity in its 1964 Cairo territory from the grantor State to the grantee State
Declaration. The principle provides that the old usually by a treaty, although the form in which the
colonial boundaries will be recognised as the borders States concerned express their understanding is not
of the newly independent ex-colonial States. important. Both States must consent and a consent
obtained by the use of or a threat of force is invalid by
• Intertemporal law concerns the temporal application virtue of Article 52 of the Vienna Convention on the
of legal rules, that is whether a judicial fact should be Law of Treaties (VCLT). Cession is an example of a
appreciated in the light of the law contemporary with it derivative title and thus the grantee State cannot
or in the light of the law in existence when a matter or possess more rights than the grantor State. The
dispute arose or failed to be settled. grantee, upon the passing of the title, is responsible
under international law for any wrongful acts
(c) The critical date rule. This is a procedural rule which refers to committed in the territory concerned.
the date on which a territorial dispute crystallized. After that (e) Conquest. This was a historical method of
date subsequent events will not be taken into account in the establishing sovereignty over a territory. The
determination of the rights of the parties. prohibition of the use of force outlawed this basis for
claiming title to territory.

Reviewer / caliquigan
Other Circumstances Relevant to the Restatement (Third) of the Foreign Relations Law of the United
Acquisition of Territory – C-D-S-A States of which the major aspects are set out in the following
three points:
(a) Contiguity. This was rejected as a mode of acquisition
of title to territory. Nowadays contiguity is regarded as • Jurisdiction to prescribe, ‘i.e. to make its [a State’s]
a fact which may influence the decision of an law applicable to the activities, relations, or status of
international tribunal. persons, or the interests of persons in things, whether
(b) Discovery. In the Middle Ages, mere discovery without by legislation, by executive act or order, by
actual possession was sufficient to establish a valid administrative rule or regulation, or by determination
title to territory. The modern view is that discovery of a court
merely gives an option to the discovering State to • Jurisdiction to adjudicate under which a State has
consolidate its claim by proceeding to effective the authority ‘to subject persons or things to the
occupation within a reasonable time. process of its courts or administrative tribunals,
(c) Symbolic annexation. This will be accepted as whether in civil or criminal proceedings, whether or
establishing a valid title only in special circumstances, not the state is a party to the proceedings
such as those described in the Clipperton Island • Jurisdiction to enforce under which a State is
(d) Arbitration. Adjudication/arbitration only confirms empowered to ‘induce or compel compliance or to
the existence of a title to territory as courts and arbitral punish noncompliance with its laws or regulations,
bodies have no power to grant title. whether through courts or by use of executive,
administrative, police or other non-judicial action
The Acquisition of Territory in Polar Regions
The Territoriality Principle
In the Arctic the race continues between the five coastal States
to claim the extension of their continental shelf beyond the 200 Territorial jurisdiction is most commonly relied upon by States.
nautical miles mark from baselines, but all are willing to co- It means that every State has jurisdiction over persons and
operate in respect of environmental matters. The 1959 Antarctic events within its territory. In addition, a State is allowed to
Treaty, on the one hand, has imposed a moratorium on exercise subjective and objective territorial jurisdiction over
territorial claims to Antarctica and, on the other, ensures that acts that occur partly outside its territory. Under subjective
this region is used for peaceful purposes only. territorial jurisdiction a State will have jurisdiction over conduct
that commences within the State but is completed abroad.
Restrictions on the Transfer of Territory Objective territorial jurisdiction concerns conduct that
commences outside the State and is completed within it.
It is doubtful whether restrictions normally imposed by treaties
on the transfer of territory by a State will affect the title of a The Nationality Principle
grantee State.
A State may exercise its jurisdiction over:
The Loss of Territory
• its nationals when they commit offences abroad. It is
This mainly results from cession, acquisitive prescription, universally accepted that nationals are required to
emergence of a new State which entails that another State loses comply with the domestic law of their State even when
its territory, and by abandonment. Abandonment requires both they are outside the territory of that State;
a physical abandonment of a territory and an intention to • corporations when they are incorporated in that
abandon it. For reasons of stability there is a rebuttable State (the common law countries approach) or have
presumption against abandonment of title to territory. their seat there (the civil law countries approach), but
based on the judgments of the ICJ in Barcelona
Rights over Parts of Territory of a Foreign State: Traction, not on the ground that the majority of
International Leases and Servitudes shareholders are nationals of that State;
• ships registered in accordance with that State’s
With regard to leases each agreement is sui generis but the domestic law and sailing under its flag (ships sailing on
general principle is that a leased territory remains under the the high seas under more than one flag are regarded as
residual sovereignty of the lessor State whilst the lessee State being without nationality);
has exclusive jurisdiction over it for the period of the lease. • aircraft registered with that State.
Servitudes occur when territory of one State is made to serve the
interests of another State. By treaty or otherwise a State may be The Protective Principle
entitled to do something on the territory concerned (e.g. to
exercise a right of way) or to compel the other State to refrain Under this principle a State may exercise jurisdiction over
from doing something (e.g. fortifying its towns). Servitudes may foreigners for acts committed outside its territory if such acts
benefit the international community or a particular State. are directed against the security of the State or threaten integrity
of its governmental functions or its overriding interests.

Jurisdiction The Passive Personality Principle

Jurisdiction refers to the legal competence of a State to make, Under this controversial principle a State may exercise
apply, and enforce rules with regard to persons, property and jurisdiction over foreigners for acts committed outside its
situations/events outside its territory and to the limits of that territory if the victim of the act is a national. In the US, the
competence. passive personality principle is not recognised for ‘ordinary torts
or crimes’ but has been applied to crimes against diplomats
Three Types of Jurisdiction (assassination and kidnapping) and has been accepted in
respect of terrorist acts directed against a State’s nationals by
reason of their nationality or in respect of international crimes

Reviewer / caliquigan
such as torture and extrajudicial killings. In civil law countries, • occurred outside the US territory;
the principle of passive personality is applied not only in respect • was intended to, and did in fact, harm competition in
of international crimes but also in respect of serious common the US; and
crimes (e.g. Article 113–7 of the French Civil Code). However, in • had a direct, substantial and reasonably foreseeable
some civil law countries, the principle ne bis in idem, known in adverse effect on US commerce or US export. The
common law as the principle of double jeopardy, i.e. no legal European Community (EC) has endorsed the ‘effects
action can be instituted twice for the same cause of action, doctrine’ in the Wood Pulp cases.
limits the application of this principle (e.g. s 7(1) of the German
Penal Code). Concurrent Jurisdiction

The Universality Principle Under international law more than one State may have
jurisdiction over a person or event as well as a legitimate
This is based on the nature of the crime, not on any nexus interest in dealing with that same person or event. In the
between the forum State and the matter under consideration. It absence of a centralised enforcer of international law, it is for
is normally relied upon in a criminal law context to prosecute each State to decide whether to exercise its jurisdiction as well
core international crimes such as piracy, slave trading, as to assess the impact of any such exercise on international
geno]cide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and torture. It relations.
is submitted that, apart from piracy and slave trading, a rare
example of municipal courts actually relying on the principle of
universality to punish foreign non-State actors in proceedings Immunity from National Jurisdiction
brought by foreigners for violations of core international crimes
committed outside the forum State was that of the Belgian State immunity, non-justiciability and the act of State doctrine
courts under the 1993/1999 Belgian law.
a) State immunity, a national court is barred from
Universal criminal jurisdiction based on treaties exercising its adjudicative and enforcement
jurisdiction because of the quality of the defendant,
Universal jurisdiction can be based on treaties which define that is, because the defendant is a foreign State or its
international crimes and contain specific provisions in respect agent.
of the international jurisdiction of contracting States. A b) Plea of non-justiciability a municipal court has no
contracting State exercises its jurisdiction on the basis of the jurisdiction because of the subject matter of the
terms of the treaty rather than on any generally accepted proceedings.
principle of customary international law. c) The act of State doctrine was described by Lord
Wilber-force as concerning ‘the applicability of foreign
Examples of such international treaties are: the 1970 Hague municipal legislation within its own territory, and with
Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, the examinability of such legislation – often but not
the 1984 UN Convention against Torture and other Cruel, invariably, arising in cases of confiscation of property’.
Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the 1948 UN State immunity may be waived by the foreign State,
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of resulting in proceedings being continued, but
Genocide,61 the 1948 Geneva Conventions, the 1988 Rome successful pleas of non-justiciability and of act of
Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the State always terminate proceedings before a
Safety of Maritime Navigation and the 1999 UN Convention for municipal court.
the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism.
State immunity and its evolution
The key elements of most treaties dealing specifically with
crimes of an international nature are as follows: State immunity is a rule of customary international law under
which municipal courts of one State (the forum State) are
• the provision of definitions of international crimes; prevented from exercising their adjudicative and enforcement
• the establishment of an obligation on a contracting State to jurisdiction in disputes where a foreign State is named as
make acts considered as international crimes offences under defendant (direct impleading) or where a foreign State
their municipal legal systems; intervenes by means of interpleader proceedings (indirect
• the requirement that a contracting State must be in a position impleading), e.g. proceedings are commenced against
to establish jurisdiction over international crimes. Invariably, individual State officials for alleged official torture abroad but
territoriality and nationality are indicated as mandatory bases of the State is indirectly impleaded because acts of its officials are
jurisdiction. Other principles are permitted as optional grounds attributable to the State or the disputed property is in
of jurisdiction; possession or under control of a foreign State.
• the offences created are deemed to be extraditable offences;
• the imposition of a duty on a contracting State to either (a) There are three main justifications for State
extradite or prosecute the offender. This is often referred to as immunity:
the aut dedare aut judicare formula. The choice to extradite or • the principle of sovereign equality of States;
prosecute is left with the requested State, not the requesting • the practical impossibility of enforcing judgments against
State. foreign States, in particular in a situation where the foreign
State’s assets are located outside the jurisdiction of the
The ‘Effects Doctrine’ forum State; and
• the principle, which is now obsolete (though technically
The ‘effects doctrine’, which derives from the principle of not in the UK), that as a sovereign could not himself be sued
objective territoriality, was first developed in the US to deal with before his own municipal courts, so the sovereign of
jurisdictional problems in competition law. Under the doctrine another State was similarly exempt from the jurisdiction of
US courts have jurisdiction to apply US anti-trust law to conduct the local law.
which:

Reviewer / caliquigan
 (b) The doctrine of State immunity has evolved over the Quasi-diplomatic privileges and immunities
centuries:
• initially, a State enjoyed virtually absolute immunity from Consuls, although representatives of their States in another
proceedings in municipal courts; State, are not accorded the degree of immunity within the
• subsequently, the immunity was recognised with regard receiving State enjoyed by diplomatic agents. Their functions
to sovereign or public acts (jure imperii) of a State but not are varied and include the protection of the interests of the
with respect to private acts (jure gestionis); and finally sending State and its nationals, the development of economic
• State immunity has been challenged on three grounds: and cultural relations, the issuing of passports and visas, the
1. it is incompatible with the development of registration of births, marriages and deaths, and the supervision
international criminal law as it shields heads of State of vessels and aircraft attributed to the sending State.
and other high ranking officials from being
accountable for grave human rights abuses before GR: a consul is not immune from local jurisdiction, under the
otherwise competent courts provisions of the 1968 Consular Relations Act, which gives
2. the recognition by the international community that effect to the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, a
some rules of international law are of jus cogens consul does enjoy a limited degree of immunity in respect of his
character (i.e. they are superior to any other rules, official functions.
including the rules on State immunity) entails that the
prohibition of crimes having the character of jus Immunities of international governmental organizations
cogens, such as genocide, crimes against humanity, (IGOs)
war crimes, torture, should prevail over the rules on
State immunity which do not enjoy the status of jus The immunity of IGOs is not based on international customary
cogens; law but derives from the terms of the particular treaty creating
3. that it clashes with basic human rights such as the the IGO. These treaties, almost without exception, specify
right of access to a court, the right to a remedy and/or privileges and immunities accorded to the IGO which are
the right to effective protection. shaped by the function that the relevant IGO is aimed to fulfil.
The founding treaties usually impose an obligation on the
Does immunity result in impunity? contracting parties to enact national legislation granting the
relevant international organisation and its representatives
Commercial considerations of States have resulted in the specific immunities and privileges. Normally, a headquarters
imposition of a restriction on State immunity in that acts jure agreement is concluded between the relevant organisation and
gestionis are, as confirmed by the UN Immunity Convention, its host member State which regulates the extent of immunities
within the jurisdiction of municipal courts. HRs, although they and privileges granted to the organisation in the national
enjoy ever-increasing recognition by States, have not yet territory.
reached the stage where they prevail over the rule of State
immunity. In the Arrest Warrant Case the majority of the judges The reason behind granting immunities and privileges to an
of the ICJ noted that immunity does not mean impunity in that international organization and its representatives is that in
immunity from jurisdiction does not affect individual criminal order to fulfil particular tasks assigned to it by its members an
responsibility. organisation must be independent from any member State.

Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 *read provisions

Immunities of visiting armed forces
The Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 aims to protect the Philippines
from terrorism by criminalizing acts of terrorism, allowing for Members of the armed forces, who are in the territory of a host
surveillance and interception of communications, and State with its consent, enjoy limited immunity from jurisdiction
establishing special courts for terrorism offenses. of that State. This is necessary in order to ensure that the
integrity and the efficiency of a visiting army are not jeopardised.
The 2004 UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of the
States and Their Property (The UN Immunity Convention)
*read provisions READ:
- Republic Act No. 75
The first global codification of rules on State immunity was - 1946 Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of
successfully achieved by the Convention on Jurisdictional the United Nations
Immunities of States and Their Property (the UN Immunity - DFA Protocol Handbook on Immunities and Privileges
Convention) adopted by the General Assembly of the - 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations
United Nations (UNGA) in December 2004. At the time of (VCDR)
writing, the UN Immunity Convention has not yet entered - 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations
into force. It has been signed by the UK but it is still (VCCR) and their Protocols
uncertain whether the UK will decide to become a - 1947 Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of
Contracting Party to it. The UN Immunity Convention the Specialized Agencies of the UN
embraces the restrictive theory on State immunity and thus - UNCLOS
removes immunity in respect of acta jure gestionis. It
applies only to civil proceedings.
The Law of the Sea
Diplomatic Immunity
Archipelago
The protection of the representatives of another State is A group of islands, including parts of islands, interconnecting
necessary to ensure that they can perform their international waters and other natural features which are so closely
political functions without fear of prosecution. interrelated that such islands, waters and other natural features
form an intrinsic geographical, economic, and political entity or

Reviewer / caliquigan
which historically have been regarded as such. (Art 46 (a), charts officially recognized by the coastal state”. The
UNCLOS) line follows the curvature of the coast and therefore
would normally not consist of straight lines. (Sec. 2,
Archipelagic State Art. 5, UNCLOS)
2. Straight Baseline - Instead of following the curvatures
A state constituted wholly by one or more archipelagos and may of the coast, straight lines are drawn connecting
include other islands. (Art. 46, UNCLOS) selected points on the coast without appreciable
departure from the general shape of the coast. (Sec. 2,
Archipelagic Doctrine (2016 BAR) Art. 7, UNCLOS)

Art. I, Sec. 1 of the 1987 Constitution adopts the archipelagic Internal Waters
doctrine. It provides that the national territory of the Philippines
includes the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and In general, these are waters on the landward side of the baseline
waters embraced therein; and the waters around, between and of the territorial sea. Delimited by the UNCLOS, and they do not
connecting the islands of the archipelago, regardless of their cover the entire archipelagic waters. They include rivers, lakes,
breadth and dimensions form part of the internal waters of the bays, ports, etc. (Art 8 (1), 50, 9,10,11, UNCLOS)
Philippines.
Within the archipelagic waters, the archipelagic state may draw
Guidelines in drawing archipelagic baselines closing lines for the delimitation of internal waters. (Art. 50 in
relation with Arts. 9, 10, 11, UNCLOS)
1. The length of such baselines shall not exceed 100
nautical miles, except that up to 3 per cent of the total NOTE: A coastal state has sovereignty over its internal waters as
number of baselines enclosing any archipelago may if internal waters were part of its land territory. (Art. 50,
exceed that length, up to a maximum length of 125 UNCLOS)
nautical miles. (Art. 47 (2), UNCLOS)
2. The drawing of such baselines shall not depart to any Breadth of the Territorial Sea (2004, 2015 BAR)
appreciable extent from the general configuration of
the archipelago. (Art. 47(3) UNCLOS) Every State has the right to establish the breadth of the territorial
3. Such baselines shall not be drawn to and from low tide sea up to a limit not exceeding 12 nautical miles, measured
elevations. (Art. 47(4) UNCLOS) from baselines. (Art. 3, UNCLOS)
NOTE: Unless lighthouses or similar installations
which are permanently above sea level have been built Outer Limit of the Territorial Sea
on them or where a low tide elevation is situated
wholly or partly at distances not exceeding the breadth Applicability of the right of innocent passage in the internal
of the territorial sea from the nearest island. (Ibid) waters and territorial sea It is the line every point of which is at a
4. It shall not be applied in such a manner as to cut off distance from the nearest point of the baseline equal to the
from the high seas or the exclusive economic zone the breadth of the territorial sea. (Art. 4, UNCLOS)
territorial sea of another State. (Art. 47 (5), UNCLOS)
5. If a part of the archipelagic water of an archipelagic
State lies between two parts of an immediately
adjacent neighboring State, existing rights, and all
other legitimate interests that the latter State has
traditionally exercised in such waters and all rights
stipulated by agreement between those States shall
continue and be respected. (Art. 47(6) UNCLOS)

NOTE: The breadth of the territorial sea, the contiguous zone,

the exclusive economic zone, and the continental shelf are
measured from the archipelagic baselines drawn in accordance
with Art. 47. (Art. 48, UNCLOS)

Baseline
Sovereignty over the territorial sea (2015 BAR)
It is a line from which the breadth of the territorial sea, the
contiguous zone and the exclusive economic zone is measured
Coastal states exercise sovereignty over Territorial Sea and it
in order to determine the maritime boundary of the coastal
extends to the airspace over the territorial sea and to its seabed
State.
and subsoil.
NOTE: The sovereignty over the territorial sea is subject to the
It is the “low-water line along the coast as marked on large scale
right of innocent passage on the part of ships of all states.
charts officially recognized by the coastal State”. (Sec. 2, Art. 5,
(Magallona, 2005)
UNCLOS)
Right of Innocent Passage (1991 BAR)
Baselines may either be:
(a) normal; or, (b) straight.
It means navigation through the territorial sea of a State for the
purpose of traversing the sea without entering internal waters,
Two ways to draw baselines
or of proceeding to internal waters, or making for the high seas
from internal waters, as long as it is not prejudicial to the peace,
1. Normal Baseline – is one drawn following the “low-
water line along the coast as marked on large-scale

Reviewer / caliquigan
good order or security of the coastal State. (Arts. 18(1)(2), 19(1),
UNCLOS)

NOTE: The right of innocent passage only applies to foreign

vessels. Aircraft in Flight are not entitled to innocent passage
and thus aircraft must remain onboard vessels during innocent
passage.

Applicability of the right of innocent passage in the internal

waters and territorial sea

In the territorial sea, a foreign State can claim for its ships the
right of innocent passage, whereas in the internal waters of a
State no such right exists.

NOTE: A coastal state may extend its internal waters by applying

the straight baseline method in such a way as to enclose as its
internal waters areas which are previously part of the territorial
sea. It also applies to straits used for international navigation
converted into internal waters by applying the straight baselines
method. Thus, the right of innocent passage continues to exist
in the “extended” internal waters. (Art. 8(2), UNCLOS)

Contiguous Zone

A zone not exceeding 24 nautical miles from the baseline from

which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured where the
coastal state may exercise the control necessary to prevent and
punish infringement, committed within its territory or territorial
sea, of the following laws and regulations:

1. Customs;
2. Fiscal;
3. Immigration; or
4. Sanitary (Art. 33 (1) (2), UNCLOS

Exclusive Economic Zone

It gives the coastal State sovereign rights overall economic

resources of the sea, sea-bed and subsoil in an area extending
not more than 200 nautical miles beyond the baseline from
which the territorial sea is measured. (Arts. 55 & 57, UNCLOS)

NOTE: The provisions on the exclusive economic zone are both

a grant of right to and imposition of obligations on coastal states
relative to the exploitation, management, and preservation of
the resources found within the zone.

Rights of the Coastal State in the EEZ (2004, 2005 BAR)

1. Sovereign rights;
a. For the purpose of exploring and exploiting,
conserving and managing the living and non-living
resources in the super adjacent waters of the sea- bed
and the resources of the sea-bed and subsoil; and
b. With respect to the other activities for the economic
exploitation and exploration of the EEZ, such as
production of energy from water, currents and winds;

2. Jurisdictional rights; and

a. With respect to establishment and use of artificial
islands;
b. As to protection and preservation of the marine
environment; and
c. Over marine scientific research

3. Other rights and duties provided for in the Law of the Sea
Convention.

Reviewer / caliquigan