Scribd
Upload
99 views

ISLAND OF PALMAS Case Digest

The dispute was over sovereignty of the Island of Palmas between the United States (as successor to Spain) and the Netherlands. [1] The United States argued it had sovereignty based on Spanish discovery and treaties. [2] However, the Netherlands showed it had continuously exercised authority over the island since the 1600s through agreements with local leaders. [3] The arbitrator ruled in favor of the Netherlands, finding discovery alone was not sufficient to prove sovereignty, and the Netherlands had established effective control over the island for a long period of time.

Uploaded by

Aure Reid
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
99 views

ISLAND OF PALMAS Case Digest

The dispute was over sovereignty of the Island of Palmas between the United States (as successor to Spain) and the Netherlands. [1] The United States argued it had sovereignty based on Spanish discovery and treaties. [2] However, the Netherlands showed it had continuously exercised authority over the island since the 1600s through agreements with local leaders. [3] The arbitrator ruled in favor of the Netherlands, finding discovery alone was not sufficient to prove sovereignty, and the Netherlands had established effective control over the island for a long period of time.

Uploaded by

Aure Reid
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

ISLAND OF PALMAS (PCA, 1928)

FACTS:

The subject of the dispute is the sovereignty over the Island of Palmas (or Miangas). It
lies between Mindanao, the southernmost part of the Philippines, and the Nanusa
Islands, the northernmost part of Indonesia.

In January 21, 1906, General Leonard Wood, the Governor of the Province of Moro paid
a visit to the Island of Palmas. This visit led to the statement that the Island of Palmas,
undoubtedly included in the archipelago known as the Philippine Islands and ceded to
the United States by Spain through the Treaty of Paris (1898), was considered by the
Netherlands as forming part of the territory of their possessions in the East Indies. The
two parties agreed to submit to binding arbitration by the Permanent Court of Arbitration
and on January 23, 1925, the two governments signed an agreement to that effect.

The United States argued that, as a successor to the rights of Spain over the
Philippines, it bases its title in the first place on discovery. The existence of sovereignty
thus acquired is, in the American view, confirmed by reliable authors and a treaty
(Treaty of Munster,1648) to which Spain and Netherlands are contracting parties.
Further, nothing has occurred of a nature, in international law, to cause the acquired title
to disappear as it was still intact when Spain ceded the Philippines to the United States
through the Treaty of Paris. Thus, in the American view, it is unnecessary to establish
facts showing actual display of sovereignty precisely over the Island of Palmas. The
United States Government finally maintains that Palmas forms a geographical part of
the Philippine group and in virtue of the principle of contiguity, it belongs to the power
having sovereignty over the Philippines.

On the other hand, the Netherlands argument endeavors to show that the state,
represented for this purpose in the first period of colonization by the East India
Company, have possessed and exercised rights of sovereignty from 1677, or probably
from a date prior even to 1648, to the time of arbitration. This sovereignty arose from
conventions entered into with native princes of the Island of Sangi, establishing
suzerainty of the Netherlands over the territories of these princes, including Palmas.
The state of affairs thus set up is claimed to be validated by international treaties.

ISSUE: Whether or not the Island of Palmas, at the moment of the conclusion and
coming into force of the Treaty of Paris formed a part of the Spanish territory.

RULING:

NO.

The same principle which subjects the act creative of a right to the law in force at the
time the right arises, demands that the existence of the right, in other words its
continued manifestation, shall follow the conditions required by the evolution of law.

International law in the 19th century, having regard to the fact that most parts of the
globe were under the sovereignty of states members of the community of nations, and
that territories without a master had become relatively few, took account of a tendency
already existing and especially developed since the middle of the 18th century, and laid
down the principle that occupation, to constitute a claim to territorial sovereignty, must
be effective, that is, offer certain guarantees to other states and their nationals.
It seems therefore incompatible with this rule of positive law that there should be
regions which are neither under the effective sovereignty of a state, nor without a
master, but which are reserved for the exclusive influence of one state, in virtue solely
of a title of acquisition which is no longer recognized by existing law, even if such a title
ever conferred territorial sovereignty.

For these reasons, discovery alone by Spain, without any subsequent act, cannot at the
present time suffice to prove sovereignty over the Island of Palmas (or Miangas); and in
so far as there is no sovereignty, the question of an abandonment properly speaking of
sovereignty by one state in order that the sovereignty of another may take its place
does not arise.

Even admitting that the Spanish title still existed as inchoate in 1898 and must be
considered as included in the cession under Article III of the Treaty of Paris, an inchoate
title could not prevail over the continuous and peaceful display of authority by another
state; for such display may prevail even over a prior, definitive title put forward by
another state.

The acts of indirect or direct display of Netherlands sovereignty at Palmas (or Miangas),
especially in the 18th and early 19th centuries are not numerous, and there are
considerable gaps in the evidence of continuous display. But apart from the
consideration that the manifestations of sovereignty over a small and distant island,
inhabited only by natives, cannot be expected to be frequent, it is not necessary that the
display of sovereignty should go back to a very far distant period. It may suffice that
such display existed in 1898, and had already existed as continuous and peaceful
before that date long enough to enable any Power who might have considered herself
as possessing sovereignty over the island, or having a claim to sovereignty, to have,
according to local conditions, a reasonable possibility for ascertaining the existence of a
state of things contrary to her real or alleged rights.

There is moreover no evidence which would establish any act of display of sovereignty
over the island by Spain or another Power, such as might counterbalance or annihilate
the manifestations of Netherlands sovereignty.

The title of contiguity, understood as a basis of territorial sovereignty, has no foundation


in international law.

The Netherlands title of sovereignty, acquired by continuous and peaceful display of


state authority during a long period of time going probably back beyond the year 1700,
therefore holds good.

For these reasons the Arbitrator decides that: The Island of Palmas (or Miangas) forms
in its entirety a part of Netherlands territory.

You might also like