SC asked to reverse ‘wrong’ EDCA decision

THE SUPREME COURT on Wednesday was asked to reverse its Jan. 12 ruling that the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement ( EDCA) was “not unconstitutional.”

The SC, voting 10-4-1, had ruled that EDCA is an executive agreement and not a treaty requiring Senate concurrence, because it is not the actual instrument for the entry of United States troops and military facilities.

But petitioners led by the militant umbrella group Bagong Alyansang Makabayan pointedly called the decision “wrong” for adhering to a “strict textual approach.”

In an 82- page motion for reconsideration, the petitioners said the SC ruling ignored “relevant colonial, historical and contemporary events” in its interpretation of the Constitution.

“The majority’s strict textual approach lulls one to believe that its intersectional interpretation is neutral, objective, apolitical, scientific and precise and to accept the majority’s underlying conclusion that US- Philippine security relations [ are] equal,” read the MR.

It also stressed that Article XVIII, Section 25 of the Constitution was very clear in prohibiting the entry of foreign troops, bases and facilities in the country, with the sole exception of being through a treaty subject to Senate concurrence.

Exceptions under this provision “should be strictly but reasonably construed,” the motion read. “[ A] ll doubts should be resolved in favor of the general provision rather than the exceptions.”

The appeal also said the assertion that EDCA will help the Philippines’ position in its maritime dispute left out the fact that the US is “another bully” to contend with.

“Another underlying assumption and judicial notice made by the Majority to uphold [EDCA] is that China is a bully. True,” read the motion. “But we cannot rest our backs on the pretext that another bully — [a] greedy and giddy one at that — the US, will fly to our side the moment confrontations escalate to defend our backyards and home front. Do we expect the US to prod their Federal Government to go to war for us?”

The petitioners appealed: “We are at least deserving of hearing to contest these assumptions. The views espoused by the Majority are not the only world-view about these matters.”

EDCA was signed by Defense Secretary Voltaire T. Gazmin and US Ambassador Philip Goldberg on Apr. 28, 2014, a few hours before US President Barack H. Obama arrived for his state visit.

The 10-year agreement would allow the US to construct facilities and preposition various defense and disaster response equipment “in designated areas within a few AFP bases to be agreed upon” by both countries, according to gov.ph. —