THE SENATE committee on foreign relations announced on Thursday that it would conduct a public hearing on the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA), which critics earlier petitioned the Supreme Court to strike down as unconstitutional for bypassing the chamber’s approval.
While treaties needed to secure the Senate’s approval, EDCA was an “executive agreement” signed in April 2014 by Philippine and United States Presidents Benigno S. C. Aquino III and Barack H. Obama, raising questions regarding its constitutionality. EDCA would allow American troops more freedom to maintain its rotational presence throughout the archipelago.
In a statement, committee chairperson Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago said that the hearings would address the concerns of whether the EDCA needed to be concurred in by the Senate, and whether it was necessary, beneficial or practical.
In a statement, committee chairperson Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago said that the hearings would address the concerns of whether the EDCA needed to be concurred in by the Senate, and whether it was necessary, beneficial or practical.
She clarified, however, that “the concurrence requirement for EDCA is for the purpose of saving the treaty from the prohibition in the Constitution.”
By agreeing to the EDCA without the concurrence of the Senate, Mr. Aquino could “be held accountable for impeachable offenses.”
“These are culpable violations of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust, for allowing a foreign government to maintain military bases without Senate concurrence,” Ms. Santiago said.
An impeachment complaint against Mr. Aquino on these grounds, however, was quickly dismissed in early September by the House of Representatives’ justice committee.
She also rejected the view that EDCA was an “implementing agreement” of the 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty and the 1999 Visiting Forces Agreement. “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 said.
Ms. Santiago said that the hearing would tackle the constitutional ban on foreign military presence and use of facilities in the country without Senate approval.
“Contrary to the claim that the EDCA does not involve the establishment of military bases, the EDCA gives the US rights of possession, control, and use over areas of Philippine territory described as ‘Agreed Locations,” she said.
The hearing on the EDCA would be held on Monday, Dec. 1.
By agreeing to the EDCA without the concurrence of the Senate, Mr. Aquino could “be held accountable for impeachable offenses.”
“These are culpable violations of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust, for allowing a foreign government to maintain military bases without Senate concurrence,” Ms. Santiago said.
An impeachment complaint against Mr. Aquino on these grounds, however, was quickly dismissed in early September by the House of Representatives’ justice committee.
She also rejected the view that EDCA was an “implementing agreement” of the 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty and the 1999 Visiting Forces Agreement. “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 said.
Ms. Santiago said that the hearing would tackle the constitutional ban on foreign military presence and use of facilities in the country without Senate approval.
“Contrary to the claim that the EDCA does not involve the establishment of military bases, the EDCA gives the US rights of possession, control, and use over areas of Philippine territory described as ‘Agreed Locations,” she said.
The hearing on the EDCA would be held on Monday, Dec. 1.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.