THE Republic of the Philippines. No doubt.
The subject of this essay are territories reckoned from Babuyan and Balintang islands north of the Luzon Strait. The islands are: Sabtang, Vohos, Dequey, Batan, Di’Nem, Itbayat, Siayan, Di’Tarem, A’Li, Misanga and Mavulis.
Mavulis island is located at the northernmost part of the Philippines, nearer to the Bashi Channel than Taiwan will ever be. It boasts of a desalination plant, is guarded by our military and flies our flag on its soil. Mavulis, or Maulis, is also known as Amianan which means north in the Ilocano language; in colonial maps of the Philippines, it is Yami or Y’ami.
Batanes province has 6 municipalities, namely Basco, Itbayat, Ivana, Mahatao, Sabtang and Uyugan.
There are several ways of acquiring territory, one of which is occupation — if territory is res nullius (i.e. that no State claims the territory or the former sovereign had abandoned it), then it may be acquired through occupation.
Occupation must be brought about by sovereign acts and sovereign acts should show a manifest interest by the State to claim sovereignty over the territory, e.g. establishment of a settlement to populate the territory, the planting of a flag by the claimant State, the setting up of administrative authority to govern the newly acquired territory.
There was an early case (decided in 1928) involving the United States and the Netherlands, two colonial powers which claimed the island of Miangas or Palmas (the Spaniards called it Palmas). The dispute arose when Spain sold and surrendered the Philippines to the United States of America by virtue of the Treaty of Paris signed on Dec. 10, 1898; the island of Miangas (Palmas to the Spaniards) was included in the cession. But the Dutch claimed that the island belonged to them.
The United States and the Netherlands agreed to refer the question of ownership of Miangas/Palmas to the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague. Referral was made through a special agreement and only one arbitrator, Max Huber, a Swiss diplomat and lawyer, was appointed by the parties to rule on the case. The only question that preoccupied the arbitrator was this: Who owns the territory of Miangas/Palmas, the United States of America or the Netherlands?
The arbitrator ruled that sovereignty must exist to claim exclusion of territory, i.e. the exercise of sovereignty must exclude other claimants to the same. In its simplest and most basic sense, there must be possession of the land being claimed.
Now, as far as the island territories north of Cagayan are concerned, the question is: Who had prior possession?
As early as 1686, Spanish missionaries reached Batanes to plant the Cross, a prelude to the coming of the Sword, the Spanish soldiers who took possession of the islands in the name of the King of Spain. In 1783, Batanes formally became an overseas territory of Spain, what was called Basay, was later renamed Basco after Spanish Governor-General Jose Basco. Later, the position of governor-general was downgraded to that of an alcalde, but was restored in 1855 with the appointment of Fernando de la Cueva.
In September 1898, Katipuneros arrived from Luzon and the Spanish governor was killed. In February 1900, during the Philippine-American War, Batanes was taken over by the new conquerors. In 1909, Otto Scheerer, an American of German descent and founder of La Minerva Cigar Co. in Manila was appointed the first governor of the province.
In 1941, the Japanese gained control of Batanes and other outlying islands. After the war, physical jurisdiction was transferred briefly to the United States of America and then to the Republic of the Philippines after the Americans officially transferred sovereignty in 1946.
In the above enumeration of events, China never entered the picture. True, the islands are close to Taiwan as any Filipino Ivatan fisherman paddling his handmade Tataya boat knows. Proximity however does not carry with it the right to claim or seize sovereignty. The Philippines, by virtue of state succession, has sovereignty over the islands being claimed by China. The unbroken chain of possession of the islands from Spain to the US, to Japan then back to the US and finally to the Philippine Republic is proven by history.
I have read numerous accounts made by Chinese investigators claiming that Batanes does not appear in the official maps made by Spain. That is not true. I have before me an original copy of the Atlas de Filipinas which is a collection of 30 maps made by Filipinos under the direction of Padre Jose Algue S.J. who was the director of the Manila Observatory in 1899.
At the turn of the 20th century, the Americans heard that the Spanish Jesuits who founded and run the Manila Observatory had accurately mapped the islands with each province of the Philippines meticulously drawn and charted. The Americans offered to print the maps, an agreement was concluded and sealed; the Jesuits then delivered to the Americans their maps of all the islands of the Philippines which were then printed in the United States. Thus, the Atlas de Filipinas came to light, multicolored, with each page ready for framing. So far, that Atlas is the most detailed and complete publication of its kind pertaining to the geography of the Philippines.
In the Atlas, each non-sectional map where the entire archipelago is shown also shows Batanes and other northward islands as part of the then Spanish territories. Perhaps China’s official historians have not seen the original of the Atlas, that is why their official propaganda is nothing but fake news.
Maybe they have not come across the “Diccionario Geografico, Estadistico, Historico” of Manuel Buzeta, where Batanes, Basay, Saptan, Hugos and other islands together with Basco, Marigatao and Ibana, the main towns of Batanes, were mentioned. That Diccionario was published in Madrid in 1850, almost half a century before the release of the Atlas de Filipinas.
I told my son, who also teaches international law, that if he is confused about the sovereign of a certain place, he must first look at the everyday currency that the inhabitants use or listen to the language of salutation of the common people.
An Ivatan, visiting a friend’s house does not say “Tao po” to announce his presence. He uses a word that came from Europe, from ancient Rome, then to Spain, to refer to the Supreme Being. The Ivatan says: “Dios.”
Saul Hofileña Jr. is a former law dean and professor of international law at San Beda University. He now teaches international law review and MCLE subjects on international law. He is a member of the Economic Society of Singapore and the American Society of International Law and was for several years a director of IBP Cavite. He is the author of five books on international law, two of which were co-authored with his son, Daniel Hofileña.
