EDCA may put PNoy in trouble

From the Manila Bulletin (Nov 28): EDCA may put PNoy in trouble

Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago yesterday warned that President Aquino has opened himself up to impeachment when his administration signed the controversial Philippine-US Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) without the concurrence of the Senate.

She said that the impeachable offenses that the President allegedly committed when the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) signed the EDCA for the Philippine government are “culpable violations of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust, for allowing a foreign government to maintain military bases without Senate concurrence,” she said.

Santiago pointed these out after announcing yesterday that her Senate Foreign Relations Committee will conduct a public hearing on Monday “to pass upon whether the Senate should concur with the agreement.”

She said the hearing will address four topics: Does the EDCA need to be concurred in by the Senate?; is it necessary?; is it beneficial?; and is it practical?

But Malacañang is confident that President Aquino will not be removed from office via impeachment over the counter-signing of the enhanced defense agreement with the United States.

Presidential Communications Operations Secretary Herminio Coloma Jr. stood firm that the EDCA forged by the Philippines and the United States is above board.

“We have done what is needed to ensure compliance with the Constitution and relevant laws,” Coloma said in a text message to the Manila Bulletin.

An impeachment complaint was filed recently against the President over EDCA but was eventually dismissed by a House panel.

Santiago said that her public hearing would also tackle the constitutional ban on foreign military bases, troops or facilities in the country, except under a treaty duly concurred in by the Senate.

While Malacañang maintained that the EDCA is an executive agreement, thus it does not require Senate concurrence, there is a contrary view in the Upper Chamber that the EDCA is a treaty and as such, it needs Senate ratification.

“The Constitution is categorical. It requires Senate concurrence whether the document is called a treaty or any other international agreement,” Santiago stressed.

Santiago clarified that the EDCA cannot be viewed as an implementing agreement of the 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) and the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) signed in 1998 during the Estrada administration.

“In international law, there is no such thing as an implementing treaty especially in our Constitution. Every treaty has to be on the basis on constitutional requirement, whether implementing or not,” she added.

The concurrence requirement for the EDCA is different from the requirements of the MDT and “the EDCA is for the purpose of saving the treaty from the prohibition in the Constitution,” she explained.

Contrary to claims that the EDCA does not involve the establishment of military bases, the EDCA gives the United States rights of possession, control, and use of areas of Philippine territory described as “agreed locations,” she said.

“These rights amount to the maintenance of military bases in the ‘Agreed Locations,’” she explained.

Although there is a suit pending before the Supreme Court questioning the constitutionally of the EDCA, Santiago, a constitutionalist, maintained that this does not prevent the Senate from conducting its own public hearing.

She cited Senate rules which state that “no proceeding before any government can inhibit the Senate from conducting its own proceedings.”

Santiago also chided Solicitor General Florin Hilbay for stating that the “Senate’s silence (on the suit pending before the Supreme Court) is a nuanced affirmation of the powers of the President.”

She took exception to Hilbay’s alleged statement that the fact that no senator joined the petitioners in having the Supreme Court declare the EDCA unconstitutional might be a sign that the Senate has agreed with the agreement.

Santiago said there is no law requiring any senator to intervene in any hearing before any tribunal in the country.

“We initially desisted conducting hearings out of inter-departmental comity with the Supreme Court. We did not signify consent to the EDCA. We merely signified courtesy and respect,’’ she added.

What will transpire in the public hearing might assist the Supreme Court in suggesting some approaches what the High Court has indicated as its dilemma, she explained.

Coloma, meantime, said they respect the prerogative of the Senate to review the defense agreement.

But he maintained that the Department of National Defense (DND) will continue negotiating the implementing rules and regulations of EDCA with its US counterparts unless restricted by the court.

http://www.mb.com.ph/edca-may-put-pnoy-in-trouble/