Duterte said ‘sea bargain’ would violate Constitution

Is President Rody Duterte’s fishing agreement with Xi Jinping a virtual successful invasion by China without a shot fired? Is it not a violation of our Constitution that orders our President and military to defend what’s ours?

Former foreign secretary Albert del Rosario asked those amidst public dismay. The Duterte-Xi verbal deal is seen as lopsided against Filipinos. China is to let us fish in our Scarborough Shoal, 150 sq. km, while it trawls our Reed Bank, 8,866 sq. km, and the rest of our EEZ, larger than our 330,000-s q.km land territory. The “Environment Crisis” forum critiqued the deal last July 12, the third anniversary of Manila’s arbitral victory against Beijing’s sea incursions. Duterte has shelved that UN court award, against the wish of 93 percent of Filipinos.

Of the second question, on constitutionality, Duterte gave the answer before. Del Rosario quoted transcripts of the President’s press briefing on departing for Brunei and China, Oct. 16, 2016:

“Duterte: Many are wondering how I would deal with China on the matter of the China Sea or West Philippine Sea. We will stick towards our claim. We do not bargain anything though. We continue to insist that it’s ours, and that the Tribunal, the international decision will be taken up, but there will be no hard impositions. We will talk and we will maybe paraphrase everything in the judgment and set the limits of our territories, the [exclusive] economic zones. It will be – no bargaining there. It is ours and many of you are just wanting to ask the question. That is it. No bargaining of our territories, whether within the [12] or to the 200, it will remain a special concern and I will be very careful not to bargain anything, for after all I cannot give what is not mine and which I am not empowered to do by any stretch of imagination.

“Question from Mr. Ian Cruz, GMA-7: Sir, according to Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio, if you concede the sovereign claims over Scarborough Shoal, you could be impeached. What’s your reaction, sir?

“Duterte: He is correct. I would be impeached; it’s an impeachable offense. I do not fight with that statement. It’s all correct, it’s all legal and so I agree with him. I said we cannot barter which is not ours, it belongs to the Filipino people. I cannot be the sole authorized agent for that is not allowed under the Constitution. Tama siya.”

“Interesting,” del Rosario said of Duterte’s words then. “That position of the President is what the people want, not only in Scarborough but also in our EEZ, including West Philippine Sea (WPS). It is consistent with the Constitution and puts the interest of the Filipino people first. To paraphrase the President, he cannot be ‘sole authorized agent’ to share with the Chinese our EEZ that belongs exclusively to the Filipino people. In fact, the President and the military are constitutionally mandated to secure the integrity of our national territory which includes our EEZ.”

Today Malacañang insists the Duterte-Xi

fishing deal is legal. So del Rosario asked more questions in his speech. Excerpts:

“Is the agreement, whether verbal or written, now Philippine policy? To what extent will it diminish or nullify our arbitral victory? To what extent will it embolden Chinese militia vessels to further bully our poor fishermen; will they be continually persecuted and prevented from fishing in our sea? Can we be assured that our lawful rights to oil and gas within our EEZ are being protected? With China’s artificial-island building, the massive destruction of the marine environment and now this fishing deal, how much faster will it take to exhaust fish resources? When will we stop giving our northern neighbor primacy over that of our own people? When will Filipinos be first and not last in our own country? Filipinos deserve answers.

“Government must listen to its people. Ninety-three percent of Filipinos, according to a recent Social Weather Station survey, think it is important to regain control of artificial islands built by China in the WPS. Similarly, 92 percent think it is right to strengthen Philippine military capability, especially the Navy. And 83 percent support bringing these issues to the UN, ASEAN, or other international organizations.

“Given the Administration’s decision to shelve the Award, former Ombudswoman Conchita Carpio-Morales and I took the initiative. We filed a communication with the International Criminal Court on March 15, 2019 for wrongful acts of Chinese officials against not only Filipinos but also our neighbors in the SCS. This ICC communication is a means of enforcing the Award. It aims to exact accountability for actions committed by Chinese President Xi and others, already found unlawful by the Award.

“Given the unfortunate shelving of the Award, it falls on us ordinary Filipinos to find creative, viable means to enforce it. We must defend and preserve our national patrimony – not only for ourselves but for our children and those yet unborn.

“To deep dismay of our people, our government is allowing China to deprive our citizens of what is ours. We are succumbing to threats of force. Surprising as it may sound, according to Prof. Amitav Acharya of American University, war is not even a good option for China. Its economy heavily relies on global trade, including fuel supply that needs open shipping lanes such as Malacca Strait and Indian Ocean dominated by US naval power.

“With the recent clearer security guarantee by the US, it may not be necessary therefore to shrink to China’s threat of war.”

(Full text of del Rosario’s and other ADRi presentations at: https://adrinstitute. org/2019/07/13/three-years-after-our-nationsarbitral-victory-an-environmental-crisis/)

In his State of the Nation Monday, Duterte indicated that President Xi Jinping exacted Chinese fishing rights through threats of war during their first meeting in Oct. 2016. To which Del Rosario and CarpioMorales reacted in part:

“International law protects the Filipino people in this situation. The Philippines and China are parties to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which provides: ‘A treaty is void if its conclusion has been procured by the threat or use of force in violation of the principles of international law embodied in the Charter of the United Nations.’ Thus, if the Philippines agrees to share its resources in its EEZ because China is threatening to use force or wage war, such an agreement is illegal, void and does not bind the Filipino people.”

Catch Sapol radio show, Saturdays, 8-10 a.m., DWIZ (882-AM).

Gotcha archives: www.philstar.com/columns/134276/gotcha