The Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) strongly rejected on Monday China’s “erroneous” and “misleading” statement over the weekend, asserting its “indisputable sovereignty” in the entire South China Sea and its adjacent waters. The Philippines called it historically baseless, unsupported by international law. 

The strongly-worded statement came two days after the Chinese Embassy in Manila reiterated its maritime jurisdiction over Nanhai Zhudao (SCS islands), including its bordering waters, as a retort to “baseless accusations” of Philippine senior government officials, particularly Defense Secretary Gibo Teodoro, who called Beijing’s nine-dash line claim as “nonexistent.”

DFA maritime affairs spokesperson Rogelio Villanueva asserted that while the Philippines remains committed to resolving maritime disputes through dialogue, China should not mistake it for concession.

“Our pursuit of dialogue reflects a calibrated and principled commitment to peaceful dispute settlement—it does not, in any manner, dilute or qualify the Philippines' firm, unequivocal positions in the West Philippine Sea. Our sovereignty is non-negotiable. Our resolve is absolute,” he stressed. 

China’s recent statement only reaffirmed its brazen assertion of jurisdiction over the Bajo de Masinloc or Scarborough Shoal as part of its territory under its so-called nine-dash line claim. However, Villanueva argued that the Philippines’ sovereignty over Bajo de Masinloc is historically and legally “unassailable,” supported by Murillo Velarde’s 1734 map, cartographic records, and centuries of administration.

“Sovereignty is not merely claimed — it is exercised. The Philippines has done precisely that, consistently and without interruption,” the DFA official contended. 

The DFA also rejected a 1990 letter cited by China as its reference that the Philippines once acknowledged that it has no ownership of Scarborough Shoal, supposedly signed by the late Ambassador to Germany Bienvenido Tan Jr. 

The DFA maintained that it will not engage in “speculation over a document of uncertain origin and authenticity, and certainly without value.”

“There is no merit in debating supposed documentary artifacts produced by third parties and presented as posts on social media, especially if these third parties have vested interests and willfully misconstrue and misrepresent established facts,” Villanueva said. 

“China must be reminded that maritime and territorial claims are subject to established international legal procedures and dispute settlement mechanisms — not to unilateral proclamations or social media posts,” he added. 

The Philippines and China have long been embroiled in a maritime row over the SCS, which overlaps the West Philippine Sea. Contrary to Beijing’s claims, the Philippines has asserted jurisdiction over Bajo de Masinlo, asserting that the shoal lies well within the Philippines’ 200‑nautical‑mile exclusive economic zone and continental shelf, measured from the Philippine baseline (specifically from Luzon), under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

Villanueva further asserted that China could not merely contest the Philippines' jurisdiction in the disputed waterway because Manila’s maritime claims in the area are backed by the 2016 arbitral ruling, which has become an integral part of international law.  The landmark ruling affirmed the Philippines' 200-nautical-mile exclusive EEZ in the WPS, invalidating China’s historical claims as baseless.

China, over the weekend, stood firm with its longstanding position that the arbitral award is “illegal, null and void,” accusing the  Philippines of unilaterally initiating arbitration without China’s consent, in alleged violation of international law, including UNCLOS. 

“The tribunal exceeded its mandate and issued an illegitimate ruling. China neither accepts nor recognizes the award and will never accept claims or actions based on it. The award does not affect China’s territorial sovereignty or maritime rights. Attempts to glorify it cannot resolve disputes or legitimize the Philippines’ claims,” Chinese embassy deputy spokesperson Guo Wei said. 

However, Villanueva countered that China's persistent refusal to bring its historical claims to international courts is nothing but a “tacit admission that its claims cannot withstand legal scrutiny.”