Drill without surrender
In Ocampo v. Arroyo, G.R. 182734, the Supreme Court invalidated in 2023 an earlier joint seismic undertaking among Philippine, Chinese and Vietnamese state companies.
Text size
In Ocampo v. Arroyo, G.R. 182734, the Supreme Court invalidated in 2023 an earlier joint seismic undertaking among Philippine, Chinese and Vietnamese state companies.
Last Friday, 14 August, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. said joint oil and gas exploration with China in the South China Sea was now a “distinct possibility.” Negotiations have reportedly moved forward because both countries want an agreement. For an energy-hungry Philippines, recently shaken by supply disruptions and rising prices, resources beneath the West Philippine Sea are too valuable to ignore.
Yet the first question is not how much oil or gas may be found. It is how drilling can safely take place in a sea that China claims almost entirely, despite the 2016 arbitral ruling rejecting the legal basis of that claim. How can Filipino survey ships, workers and equipment operate when China continues to treat Philippine vessels as trespassers in waters where we possess sovereign rights?
The trust problem cannot be separated from the commercial opportunity. In June 2024, Chinese Coast Guard personnel boarded Philippine boats near Ayungin Shoal, damaged equipment and injured Filipino sailors. One sailor lost a thumb. As recently as 20 July, 2026, the Philippine military accused Chinese personnel of striking another Filipino sailor with a wooden baton and damaging a Navy rubber boat. China disputed Manila’s account, but the repeated confrontations are undeniable.
An agreement signed by diplomats will mean little if China’s coast guard and maritime forces do not respect it at sea. Joint exploration would require survey ships, drilling platforms, supply vessels and regular personnel movements. Before discussing revenue sharing, both governments must explain who will protect these operations, whose laws will govern them and what will happen if Chinese vessels again block a Philippine ship.
There is also a constitutional boundary that cannot be negotiated away. In Ocampo v. Arroyo, G.R. 182734, the Supreme Court invalidated in 2023 an earlier joint seismic undertaking among Philippine, Chinese and Vietnamese state companies. The Court ruled that searching for petroleum already constituted exploration. It also held that the arrangement violated the Constitution because the Philippines surrendered full control over information concerning its natural resources. Cooperation is possible, but Philippine ownership, control and supervision must remain unmistakable.
New discussions should therefore be held in a neutral venue and expressly governed by UNCLOS and the 2016 arbitral award. Possible venues include The Hague, where the Permanent Court of Arbitration is based, Singapore, a respected center for international dispute resolution, or ASEAN-hosted talks in Jakarta. The entire agreement must be made public, including the exploration area, operating authority, revenue sharing, security arrangements and dispute-resolution process. Congress, technical experts and the Filipino public must examine the terms before any vessel begins work.
Developing these resources could strengthen our energy security and generate substantial economic benefits. Given China’s conduct, however, joint exploration will remain a difficult pill for Filipinos to swallow. We may drill with China, but only if cooperation does not require silence, secrecy, or surrender.
