MANILA, Philippines — Former Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonio Carpio on Wednesday said China has no legal authority to prevent the Philippines from building structures at Ayungin (Second Thomas) Shoal, maintaining that the area lies within the country’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ) under the 2016 South China Sea arbitral ruling.
Carpio, one of the principal legal architects of the Philippines’ arbitration case against China, said the ruling affirmed that Ayungin Shoal is part of the Philippines’ EEZ, where Manila enjoys exclusive sovereign rights.
“The arbitral award declared Ayungin Shoal part of the exclusive economic zone of the Philippines. In the EEZ, there is freedom of navigation and overflight for all states,” Carpio told the Inquirer.
“As the adjacent coastal state, the Philippines has the exclusive sovereign right to erect artificial structures on Ayungin Shoal without seeking permission from any state,” he added.
Carpio issued the statement in response to Chinese Ambassador Jing Quan, who claimed that a confrontation between the China Coast Guard (CCG) and Philippine Navy personnel at Ayungin Shoal on July 20 stemmed from Manila’s alleged violation of a 2024 provisional agreement between the two countries.
Jing said the CCG intercepted Philippine personnel after discovering they were conducting construction work on the grounded BRP Sierra Madre, which serves as the country’s military outpost at the shoal.
“That’s against the spirit of the provisional agreement,” Jing said, adding that the arrangement prohibited new construction and required both sides to maintain the status quo.
The Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) announced in July 2024 that the Philippines and China had reached a temporary understanding governing rotation and resupply (RoRe) missions to BRP Sierra Madre, although it did not disclose the agreement’s full terms.
The DFA later clarified that the arrangement neither required the Philippines to seek China’s permission for resupply missions nor recognized Beijing’s territorial claims in the West Philippine Sea, describing it instead as a mechanism to reduce tensions.
Asked whether the latest confrontation could affect the agreement, Jing said its future would depend on whether similar incidents continue, while reiterating China’s preference for resolving disputes through negotiations.
Carpio questioned the legality of any agreement that would restrict the Philippines’ activities at Ayungin Shoal, noting that the DFA has never made the document public.
“If that agreement prevents the Philippines from sending vessels to Ayungin Shoal without prior notice and consultation with China, or bars the Philippines from erecting artificial structures there, then it would undermine the country’s freedom of navigation and sovereign rights under Unclos and the 2016 arbitral ruling,” he said.
Carpio also said the DFA is “now in a bind” following China’s public assertion that Manila had agreed to notify Beijing before conducting resupply missions and to refrain from building structures at the shoal.
“That is a clear derogation of Philippine sovereign rights which is beyond the power of the DFA secretary to do,” he said.
