SC: Marine tripartite agreement unconstitutional

The Supreme Court has ruled that the tripartite agreement for Joint Marine Seismic Undertaking entered into by the Philippine government with China and Vietnam during the term of President Gloria MacapagalArroyo in 2005 is unconstitutional.

Under the JMSU, which expired in 2008, the Philippines, China and Vietnam through their respective national oil corporations agreed to conduct joint explorations of the disputed South China Sea covering 142,886 square kilometers (agreement area).

But up to 80 percent of the JMSU site is within the Philippines’ 200-mile exclusive economic zone, thus the filing of petitions seeking to declare the agreement as unconstitutional.

The Court en banc, voting 12-2-1, ruled that the JSMU is unconstitutional for allowing wholly-owned foreign corporations to participate in the exploration of the country’s natural resources without observing the safeguards provided in Section 2, Article XII of the 1987 Constitution.

The said provision mandates that the exploration, development, and utilization of natural resources shall be under the full control and supervision of the State.

Bayan Muna PartyList Representatives Satur C. Ocampo and Teodoro A. Casiño, et al. along with former Senator Teofisto “TG” Guingona III filed the petition before the SC in 2008 assailing the constitutionality of the agreement.

They argued that the JMSU was illegal as it allowed foreign corporations wholly-owned by China and Vietnam to undertake large-scale exploration of the country’s petroleum resources, in violation of the Constitutional provision which reserves the EDU of natural resources to Filipino citizens, or corporations or associations at least 60 percent of whose capital is owned by such citizens.

Clear proof

The petitioners said that even if the agreement is merely for a pre-exploration activity, it is clear that all the data and information acquired in the implementation of the agreement shall be jointly owned by the parties, which is a clear proof that the Philippines has conceded or forfeited its ownership over the country’s petroleum and other mineral oils.

Also, the petitioners said the respondents compromise their claim over the disputed Spratly Group of Islands by allowing the implementation of the said tripartite agreement.

It covers six islands claimed and occupied by the Philippines in Spratly such as Pag-asa Island, Likas Island, Lawak Island, Kota Island, Patag Island and Panata Island.

Respondents in the petition were then president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, her executive secretary Eduardo Ermita, her Foreign and Energy secretaries as well as the PNOC and the Philippine National Oil Company-Exploration Corporation.

The Court, noting that the term “exploration” pertains to a search or discovery of something in both its ordinary or technical sense, ruled that the JMSU involves the exploration of the countrys natural resources, particularly petroleum.

Citing the text of the fifth whereas clause of the JMSU, which states the Parties’ “expressed desire to engage in a joint research of petroleum resource potential of a certain area of the South China Sea as a pre-exploration activity,” the Court said that it is clear that the JMSU was executed for the purpose of determining if petroleum exists in the agreement area.