MANILA, Philippines — The Philippine Maritime Council has dismissed China’s claim that a 1990 document undermines the country’s sovereignty over Scarborough Shoal, calling the correspondence a product of a “doubtful source” with no legal weight. Officials stressed that the shoal remains part of the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone under international law.

On March 18, 2026, the Maritime Council joined the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) and the Department of National Defense (DND) in rejecting the validity of a 1990 letter circulated by the Chinese Embassy in Manila. The document, allegedly involving former Philippine Ambassador to Germany Bienvenido A. Tan Jr. and German radio operator Dieter Löffler, was presented by Beijing as evidence that Scarborough Shoal was not part of Philippine territory.

Maritime Affairs Spokesperson Rogelio Villanueva Jr. of the DFA said, “As regards the recent letter posted by the Chinese Embassy in Manila, the DFA will not engage in conjecture or speculation over a document of uncertain origin and authenticity, and certainly without value.”

Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro Jr. also dismissed the claim, describing it as part of a broader pattern of misinformation. “That letter is not binding at all. Iyan ang problema sa China, lahat ng pagsisinungaling ginagawa nila,” Teodoro said, underscoring that the shoal, also known as Bajo de Masinloc, lies well within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone.

The Maritime Council emphasized that the 1990 correspondence does not represent official Philippine policy and cannot override established legal frameworks, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). 

“It is from a doubtful source and carries no weight in international law,” the council stated, adding that the shoal’s location, roughly 230 kilometers west of Zambales, firmly places it within Philippine jurisdiction.

China’s attempt to use the document has been widely criticized as a tactic to weaken Manila’s claims in the West Philippine Sea. Analysts noted that Beijing’s reliance on questionable historical correspondence reflects its struggle to counter the 2016 arbitral ruling, which invalidated its sweeping “nine-dash line” claims.

For the Philippines, the rejection of the 1990 document reinforces its consistent position that Scarborough Shoal is part of its territory and that any foreign claims based on dubious sources are legally groundless. The Maritime Council’s statement adds to the growing chorus of government agencies and officials affirming national sovereignty over the contested waters.

As tensions continue in the West Philippine Sea, the controversy over the 1990 letter highlights the importance of vigilance against disinformation and the need for strong diplomatic and legal responses to protect Philippine maritime rights.