CHAPTER 10: TERRITORY

Public International Law

TERRITORY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW

Modes of Acquisition of Sovereignty over Territory.

Component of Territory

Contiguous zone

The Continental (Archipelagic) Shelf

The Deep Seabed: Common Heritage of Mankind

The High Seas

The Archipelago Doctrine

TERRITORY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW

Territory as an element of a state means an
area over which a state has effective control. As
in the Las Palmas case, control over territory is of
the essence of the state, The exact boundaries
might be uncertain, but there should be a
definitive core over which sovereignty is
exercised. As mentioned by Judge Huber in the
Las Palmas case sovereignty over a portion of
the surface of the globe is the legal condition for
the inclusion of such portion in the territory of

MODES OF ACQUISITION OF SOVEREIGNTY

OVER TERRITORY
Discovery and Occupation is an original
mode of acquisition by which territory not
belonging to any state, or terra nullius, is placed
under the sovereignty of the discovering state.
Occupation is the acquisition of terra nullius, that
is, territory which prior to occupation belonged to
no state or which may have been abandoned by
prior occupant.

REQUISITES
Possession: Must be claimed on behalf of the state
represented by the discoverer and may be effected through a
formal proclamation and the symbolic act of raising the
national flag in the territory.
Administration: In this case, mere possession will not
suffice, as only an inchoate title of discovery is acquired by
the claimant state. Inchoate title of discovery performs the
function of barring other state from entering the territory until
the lapse of a reasonable period within which the discovering
state may establish a settlement thereon and commence to
administer it. If claimant begins exercising sovereignty, the
inchoate title ripens and is perfected into full title.

Dereliction: Territory is lost by dereliction when

the state exercising over it physically withdraws
from it with the intention of abandoning it
altogether. Two conditions must concur, the act of
withdrawal and intention to abandon.

Prescription: Also recognized as a mode of

acquiring
sovereignty
over
territory.
Like
occupation,
however,
prescription
requires
effective control. But unlike occupation, the
object of prescription is not terra nullius. Thus
required length of effective control is longer than
in occupation.

Cession: Acquisition of territory through treaty is another

mode. Cession is a method by which a territory is
transferred from one state to another by agreement
between them.
Conquest / Subjugation: in earlier days the taking
possession of a territory through armed force. For
acquisition of conquered territory, it was necessary that
the war had ended either by treaty or by indication that all
resistance had been abandoned.

Accretion and Avulsion: Sovereignty by operation of

nature. Accretion is the gradual increase of territory by the
action of nature; Avulsion is a sudden change resulting for
instance from the action of a volcanic eruption.

COMPONENT OF TERRITORY

The territory of the state consists usually of the

terrestrial domain, the maritime and fluvial
domain, and the aerial domain. Some even
consider continental shelf as part of their territory
like in the Philippines.

Terrestrial Domain: Refers to the land mass,

which may be integrate or dismembered or partly
bounded by water or consist of one whole island.
It may also be composed of several islands which
is known as mid-ocean archipelagoes.

Maritime and Fluvial Domain: Consists of the

bodies of water within the land mass and the
waters adjacent to the coasts of the state up to a
specified limit.. This includes the internal waters in
the land-locked lakes, the rivers and man-made
canals within the land mass, as well as the
external waters in the territorial sea.

Rivers: Can be classified into national, multinational, international, and boundary.

National rivers are those that are situated

completely in the territory of one state

Multinational rivers in which that flow through

the territories of several states.

International rivers is one that is navigable

from the open sea and is open to the use of
vessels from all states.

Bays: The waters of a bay are considered internal waters of

a coastal state. The rule on bays is found in Article 10 of the
1982 LOS.
A bay is a well-marked indention whose penetration is in
such proportion to the width of its mouth as to contain landlocked waters and constitute more than a mere curve of the
coast. An indention shall not, however, be regarded as a bay
unless its area is as large as, or larger than that of semicircle whose diameter is a line drawn across the mouth of
that indention.
For the purpose of measurement, the area of an indention is
that lying between the low-water mark around the shore of
the indention and a line joining the low-water mark of its
natural entrance point.

Contiguous zone: is an area of water not exceeding 24 nautical

miles from the baseline. It thus extends 12 nautical miles from the
edge of the territorial sea. The coastal state exercises authority
over that area to the extent necessary to prevent infringement of
its customs, fiscal immigration or sanitation authority over its
territorial waters or territory and to punish such infringements.
Exclusive Economic Zone or Patrimonial sea is a recent
development. Prior to the acceptance of this doctrine, all waters
beyond the contiguous zone were considered as high seas over
which no state had control. The doctrine developed owing to the
desire of coastal states for better conservation and management
of coastal fisheries.
The exclusive economic zone is an area extending not more than
200 nautical miles beyond the baseline. The coastal state has
rights over the economic resources of the sea, seabed and subsoil

The Continental (Archipelagic) Shelf: Refers

to seabed and subsoil of the submarine areas
adjacent to the coastal state but outside the
territorial sea, to a depth of two hundred meters
or beyond that limit, to where the depth allows
exploitation, and the seabed and subsoil of areas
adjacent to islands. That coastal state has the
right to explore and exploit its natural resources,
to erect installations needed and to erect safety
zone over its installation with a radius of 500
meters.

The Deep Seabed: Common Heritage of

Mankind
These are areas of the sea-bed and the ocean
floor and their subsoil, which lie beyond any
national jurisdiction. These are the common
heritage of mankind and may not be appropriated
by any state or person. Activities in the area
governed by Article 135 to 153 of the 1982
convention.

THE HIGH SEAS

All parts of the sea that are not included in the
territorial sea or internal waters of a state.
The high seas are subject to six freedoms:
1. Freedom of navigation;
2. Freedom of over flight;
3. Freedom of fishing;
4. Freedom to lay submarine cables and pipelines;
5. Freedom to construct artificial islands and
structures; and
6. Freedom of scientific research.

HOT PURSUIT
Article 111 allows hot pursuit of a foreign vessel where
there is good reason to believe that the ship has violated
laws or regulation of a coastal state. The pursuit must
commence when the foreign vessel is within the internal
waters, the archipelagic waters, the territorial waters or
the contiguous zone of the pursuing state.
It may continue into the high seas if the pursuit has not
been interrupted. If the foreign ship is in the contiguous
zone, it may be pursued only for violation of the rights of
the coastal state in the contiguous zone. Hot Pursuit must
stop as soon as the ship pursued enters the territorial
waters of its own state or of a third state.

AIRSPACE
Before the First World War, There were those
who held that the airspace was completely free.
The outbreak of the First World War brought about
the realization that the use of the air had security
implications. Out of this realization came the
approach which considers the air above as an
extension of the territory below. Each state has
exclusive jurisdiction over the air space above its
territory. Therefore, consent for transit must be
obtained from subjacent nation.

THE ARCHIPELAGO/ARCHIPELAGIC
DOCTRINE
The national territory comprises the Philippine
archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced
therein, and all other territories over which the
Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of
its terrestrial, fluvial and aerial domains, including its
territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular
shelves, and other submarine areas. The waters around,
between, and connecting the islands of the archipelago,
regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form part of
the internal waters of the Philippines.

Article 1 of the ratified Constitution

of 1987
The Archipelago Doctrine on territorial limits of
countries further states that the baselines from
which the territorial sea of the archipelago is to
be determined consist of the straight lines
connection the outermost portions of the islands.
Waters within the baselines are Philippine internal
waters and waters outside the baselines but
within the extent of the international treaty limits,
comprise the country's territorial sea.

This doctrine means, therefore, that our country,

with its thousands of islands and many seas,
should be considered as a political unit for
reasons of history, law, geography, economics,
and security. Also, when questions involving
territorial conflicts arise, the Philippines has this
doctrine to support its claims.

Bibliography:

Bernas S.J., Joaquin G. Introduction To

Public International Law. Manila: Rex
Book Store, 2009.

Cruz, Isagani A. International Law.

Quezon City: Central Lawbook
Publishing Co., Inc. 2003.

China v. Philippines

Division of
claims:

Chinas claim:

Discussion
Philippine stance:
The Philippines is contending that the "ninedotted line" claim by China is invalid because
it violates the UNCLOS agreements about
exclusive economic zones and territorial seas.
It says that because most of the features in
the South China Sea, such as most of the
Spratly Islands, cannot sustain life, they
cannot be given their own continental shelf
as defined in the convention.

Chinese stance:
China refuses to participate in the arbitration, stating
that several treaties with the Philippines stipulate
that bilateral negotiations be used to resolve border
disputes. It also accuses the Philippines of violating
the voluntary Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in
the South China Sea, made in 2002 between ASEAN
and
China,
which
also
stipulated
bilateral
negotiations as the means of resolving border and
other disputes. China issued a position paper in
December 2014 arguing the dispute was not subject
to arbitration because it was ultimately a matter of
sovereignty, not exploitation rights. Its refusal will
not prevent the Court from proceeding with the case .

HEARINGS

On July 7, 2015, case hearings began with the

Philippines asking the Permanent Court of
Arbitration at The Hague to invalidate China's
claims. The hearings were also attended by
observers from Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia,
Thailand and Vietnam. The case has been
compared to Nicaragua v. United States due
to similarities of the parties involved such as
that a developing country is challenging a
permanent member of the United Nations
Security Council in an arbitral tribunal.

The Court found in its verdict that the United States was
"in breach of its obligations under customary international
law not to use force against another State", "not to
intervene in its affairs", "not to violate its sovereignty",
"not to interrupt peaceful maritime commerce", and "in
breach of its obligations under Article XIX of the Treaty of
Friendship, Commerce and Navigation between the Parties
signed at Managua on 21 January 1956."

On 29 October 2015, the court ruled that it had the power

to hear the case. It agreed to take up seven of the 15
submissions made by Manila, in particular whether
Scarborough Shoal and low-tide areas like Mischief Reef
can be considered islands. It set aside seven more pointed
claims mainly accusing Beijing of acting unlawfully to be
considered at the next hearing on the case's merits. It
also told Manila to narrow down the scope of its final
request that the judges order that "China shall desist from
further unlawful claims and activities."
The arbitral tribunal scheduled the hearing on merits of
the case from November 24 to 30, 2015. The tribunal is