THERE is an attempt in the Martin Romualdez-led House of Representatives to revive Charter Change (Cha-cha), this latest move initiated by one of Speaker Romualdez's loyal attack dogs, the Ako Bicol party-list.
Rep. Alfredo Garbin Jr. of Ako Bicol seeks to amend certain provisions of the 1987 Constitution, particularly those regarding national territory and the economy.
Resolution of Both Houses (RBH) No. 1 wants changes in Articles 1 (National Territory), 12 (National Economy and Patrimony), 14 (Education, Science, Technology, Arts, Culture and Sports) and 16 (General Provisions).
We note that Garbin's RBH 1 is similar to the Cha-cha bills filed and House-approved in the two previous Congresses in that these were about opening the economy further by doing away with the constitution's restrictive economic provisions.
Garbin explains: “This time around, RBH 1 includes the amendment to Article 1, which is the National Territory. So we propose that the provisions of the Constitution, specifically Article 1, should conform to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.”
According to Garbin, he wants to incorporate the award from the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016, which stated that the Philippines has exclusive rights over its waters, invalidating China’s nine-dash line territorial claim.
“The National Territory definition is silent on the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf that we won in the arbitral tribunal. We should enshrine it in our constitution,” he said.
Article I states that the country’s national territory includes the “Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced therein, and all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction […] including its territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular shelves and other submarine areas” and the “waters around, between, and connecting the islands of the archipelago, regardless of their breadth and dimensions.”
“Though it also speaks of all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, which might arguably include the exclusive economic zone (EEZ), but in my humble view, it is much better that we should expressly incorporate the exclusive economic zone of our 1987 Constitution,” Garbin explained.
For lack of space, we can only discuss here the National Territory aspect of Garbin's proposed amendments.
The lawmaker should have known that an exclusive economic zone is not synonymous with sovereignty, jurisdiction, or ownership.
Had Garbin taken the effort of reading and perusing the 2016 arbitral ruling, he would have known that the Kalayaan Island Group (KIG) which President Aquino included in his fictitious "West Philippine Sea" was excluded from the reckoning of Philippine territory.
Bobi Tiglao writes: "For starters, for the KIG to be part of the WPS is no longer tenable: our arbitration suit against China ruled that the KIG is as illegal as China's nine-dash line, and we committed to comply with it."
The WPS is a creation of Aquino's Administrative Order 29 dated Sept. 5, 2012, which defined the "West Philippine Sea" (WPS) as the western side of our exclusive economic zone (200 nautical miles from the "baseline," roughly the outermost land points of the archipelago). It includes the waters "around, within and adjacent to the Kalayaan Island Group (KIG) and Scarborough Shoal."
Francis "Tol" Tolentino's law on maritime baselines is a gross national and regional shame already, but Garbin wants to create an even disastrous embarrassment by involving the Constitution.
#WeTakeAStand #OpinYon #OpinYonColumn #ViewfromCalumpang