Some Answers to the 2015 Asean Integrationby Christian Chua

The Asean integration is a series of programs which has an aim to create a single economic region. In this economic region, good, services and capital will flow freely without any barriers. The integration has already started even before 2015. Each member countries had implemented specific programs based on the agreed timeline. In the area of free flow of goods, most of the tariff rates in the Philippines are now close to zero. Although the reduction of tariff barriers has been implemented as planned, it seems that the reduction of non-tariff barriers will be beyond 2015. For example, in the single window and customs integration program, member countries will have the same standard customs procedures. This will allow a faster flow of trades. If the goods are already cleared in the originating country, the recipient country will just accept the goods with minimal inspection. However, such vision will be harder to attain. This integration of the customs procedures will require a higher and continuing level of assurance. How can the Philippines be assured that the customs from the exporting country had followed the required customs procedures in preventing the trade of contrabands? The relatively well-developed member countries, such as Singapore, Malaysia and Philippines, have an earlier deadline in the implementation of the programs. New member countries, such as Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar, were given more time to implement similar programs. The envisioned economic integration will contribute to the dislocation in the local economy. Hence, as part of the Asean Economic Community blueprint, provisions are provided to minimize the effects of this dislocation. For example, one of the major focus areas of the Asean integration is the SME and human resource development. In terms of impact, the year 2015 may just be a symbolic date for the celebration of this pursuit.

The regional corridor approach may be our strategy to compete in this new economic era. The Philippines is an archipelago country. Each of our regions has their unique economic needs and competitive advantage. Furthermore, the implementation of this strategy requires the heavy involvement of the local government and business. We can divide our country into nine economic corridors. These nine corridors are compsed of (1) Davao-ARMM-Soccsksargen, (2) Northern Mindano-Central Visayas, (3) Zamboanga Peninsula, (4) Bicol-Eastern Visayas-Caraga, (5) Cagayan Valley-Aurora, (6) MIMAROPA, (7) Western Visayas, (8) Ilocos-CAR and (9) Central Luzon-CALABARZON.

Each economic corridor will have its own production and logistics capability. Investments in integrated supply chain, infrastructure and mobility will allow these corridors to become significant contributors to the Philippine economy, with or without the Asean Integration.

Note: The corridor approach idea came from our work in SGV. Our team is working on a project that willidentify clusters of strength and weaknesses in the Philippines and ASEAN economies, and assess what are the industries and sub-industries who will thrive in this new environment.Thank you to our partner and team. Thank you also to Ms. Go for giving the idea for this topic. Due to limited space, I was not able to discuss thoroughly the current state of the Asean integration and the idea of the corridor approach. In case you want a copy of the full presentation, feel free to email me at Christian.edmund.l.chua@ph.ey.com.

Scrap VFA?

The Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) a "historic document of inequity between a colonizer and its former colony," Senator Miriam Santiago renewed her call to scrap the agreement because of the "gross disparity" in the provisions of jurisdiction and custody. Santiago hit the provision in the agreement that grants the Philippines jurisdiction over US servicemen accused of crimes, but gives the US custody over them. On Wednesday, October 22, 2014 Santiago presided over the hearing of the Senate foreign relations committee on the killing of transgender Filino woman.The primary suspect in the case is 19 year old US Marine. Santiago said the unequal provisions of the VFA heavily favor the United States. [1] The senator in particular hit the provisions on jurisdiction and custody of US servicemen who commit crimes in Philippine territory. While the Philippines has jurisdiction over erring US officers, Article V, Paragraph 6 of the VFA states: “The custody of any United States personnel over whom the Philippines is to exercise jurisdiction shall immediately reside with the United States military authorities, if they so request.” But Santiago said this "gross inequality" in the provisions, among other things, "has given our country much grief". If the Philippines has primary jurisdiction, then it follows that the Philippines should have custody. But this logic is spurned by the VFA, the senator said. She added: "When the US requests custody, the Philippines is required to comply immediately. But when the Philippines considers it to be an extraordinary case and requests custody, the US is merely required to give full account." The senator said the VFA does not imply that US will come to our aid in case of a firefight with China over maritime disputes in the South China Sea. Santiago said the United States has consistently maintained that it adopts a neutral stance on the issue. She added that US President Barack Obama's "pivot to Asia" has been threatened by crises in other parts of the world, including the threat of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. "Sa ngayon, wala tayong halaga sa Amerika," she said. (As of now, we are of no value to America.) In her call to scrap the agreement, Santiago said the Philippines should do away with a document that ties it to an "unreliable ally.  We are a stillborn state because our umbilical cord from the US has never been cut," the senator said. [1]

Philippine President Benigno Aquino rejected on Monday (October 20, 2014) calls to tear up the Visiting Forces Agreement with the United States after an American serviceman was charged with the murder of a transgender Filipino outside a former U.S Navy base. Under the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA), the Philippines is supposed to exercise jurisdiction over such a crime. Some lawmakers and activists have called on the government to terminate the VFA unless the United States hands him over. [2]

"Why do we need to abrogate the Visiting Forces Agreement?" Aquino told reporters while in the central island of Leyte to commemorate the 70th anniversary of the start of the U.S. liberation of the Philippines in World War Two. "I mean, name me any place that doesn't have a crime. And the sin of one person should be reflective of the entire country? I don't think so. What is important is there was a crime, we should gather all evidence to prove the guilt and justice will be served." [3]

In Jakarta, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry assured the Philippines Washington was not seeking special treatment for the American marine but wanted his rights protected. "We're not seeking a special privilege, that everybody's rights will be appropriately protected," Kerry told reporters after meeting his Filipino counterpart, Albert del Rosario."Due process will play out, and we will work with the Philippines in order to make certain that rule of law and the agreement are upheld."[4]

The incident was described as "unfortunate" and "tragic". We do have all the mechanisms in place so that justice can properly be served. They are making sure that everything that they are doing is based on the treaty, that the accused is available for both investigations in any and all judicial processes.

 

 

 

 

Katerina Francisco

Published 3:34 PM, Oct 22, 2014

www.rappler.com

 

ASEAN AFTA: Maximizing Opportunity of Economic Slavery

            Philippines foreign relations were indeed successful in resourcing additional revenue to the country. Thank you to our Over-seas Filipino Skilled Workers who played a big part to this success. Being far from home and their families was truly worth it. This could not be possible without the opportunity provided or engaged by our Government in doing their constitutional mandate of strengthening country’s foreign relations which created jobs abroad for filipinos.

            The Country is a member of ASEAN. In 2015 ASEAN plans to have ASEAN Free Trade Agreement (AFTA) or its more recent transformation into ASEAN Trade in Goods Agreement (ATIGA) and ASEAN Framework Agreement on Services (AFAS).[1] This strategic plan is definitely good in providing more opportunities for Filipinos. But this made me think that, this might prejudice our own country. Through this AFTA goods from other neighboring country can enter freely which offers cheaper price compared to our local goods. This would definitely affect the livelihood of our agricultural farmers. This is not a good indication of progress in our economy if our own people suffer from this kind of agreement. The other advantage that the government sought to this agreement is providing more opportunities abroad for our skilled workers. This is good because more families could upgrade their mode of lifestyle or living. But really! I think we miss something to this opportunity. The government will send skilled workers abroad for the benefit of the foreign country. So, what about us? I think the main goal here is to educate the people to contribute development or advancement to the country, not in the foreign state.

            Government’s vision in strengthening the foreign relations to boost country’s economy is not bad at all. But looking to the bigger picture AFTA prejudiced our own goods and services. I understand that the government wanted the best for us and for the economy. But for me this agreement is simply maximizing our opportunity of economic slavery or independence. When can we stand on our own?  

---

[1] http://asean.aim.edu/research/presentations/asean-integration-2015-is-the-philippines-ready-for-afta/

Philippines: 7,107 islands?

The Philippines , officially known as the Republic of the Philippines, is an archipelago, a cluster or collection of islands. When ask of the number of islands it is composed of most would naturally answer 7,107 islands. But then again it would depend if its high tide or low tide since some islands would be under water when high tide having lesser number of islands.

The Philippine Constitution states that the national territory of the Philippines included, among other things, "all other areas which belong to the Philippines on the basis of historical rights or legal claims." In pursuant to this the Philippines has continued to assert there claims in a number of islands, regrettably so have other Asian nations causing international disputes.

One island in particular that the Philippines has encountered trouble reclaiming is Sabah, formerly known as North Borneo. Sabah is being claimed by both the Philippines and Malaysia. Today it has become on of the thirteen states that formed Malaysia in 1963.

Historically, the then Sultanate of Sulu leased the eastern part of Sabah to a Gustavus von Overbeck in return for modern weapons, to keep the Spanish colonizers away from Sulu, and an annual compensation to the Muslim dignitary a sum equivalent to 5,000 Malaysian dollars(ringgit). And further explicitly stating that the right to the territory may not be transferred to a nation or another company without the sultan expressed permission.

Through the years the territory ended in the control of Great Britain, or formerly known as the British Crown. The Philippines sent delegations to London to reminded them that the eastern part of Sabah belongs to the Philippines. But in the end the whole territory of Sabah was then claimed by Malaysia insisting that Sabah was under its sovereignty based on the fact of the agreements secured by Baron von Overbeck with the Sultanate. The British Crown renewed the lease but finally ceded it to Malaysia and it is still believed that Malaysia is paying the annual rent to the Sultan of Sulu. In effect Sabah is still within the control of Malaysia and the Philippines is still in the process of proving its claim.

Scarborough Shoal, more correctly described as a group of islands, atolls, and reefs than a shoal, is another territory that is being claimed not only by the Philippines but also by People's  Republic of China. The People's Republic of China based there claim that the shoal would have first been discovered by Chinese in the 13th century and historically used by Chinese fishermen. Though its claim  to sovereignty would need a deeper basis that that provided.
On the other hand the Philippines based there claim on the international law on acquisition of sovereignty, as well as that it is within the Exclusive Economic Zone of its waters.

There are other islands being claimed as part of the territory of the Philippines, historically and because it is well within what is internationally defined as composing a countries territorial waters. Though the Philippines is guilty of not being assertive of its claims giving other countries the opportunity do so instead. But in resent events it seems that the Philippines has started to be more active in claiming what it deems rightfully theirs and one action showing that is its stand against the People's Republic of China over the Scarborough Shoal. This islands are not the only ones being claimed by the Philippines. It would be more to its advantage if it takes more active actions in asserting its claims to islands it believes is rightful part of its territory and not wait when other countries are start staking there own claims.

When Green Becomes Greener

To work and to live peacefully in the United States is perhaps, one the greatest dream of most Filipinos. Our professionals and skilled workers are advancing their knowledge, skills, training and expertise to increase their potentials in the global competition. They are doing their utmost best to reach their ultimate dreams not only for their personal benefits but for the greener future of their family.

But not all Filipinos are instantly successful in legally working in the United States. Some of them need to hide their shadows for working illegitimately. They fit in positions lower than their earned degrees, be compensated below than their hard works, and be kept on fear of being deported away from becoming a legitimate citizen of the United States.

According to latest government data collated by the Commission on Filipinos Overseas (CFO) in 2013, around 271,000 "irregular" Filipino migrants are in the US. The CFO statistic consists of Filipino migrants in the US who are undocumented, are without a valid residence or work permit, or are overstaying tourists and workers.[1]

President Barack Obama in his contemporary eight-day visit in Asian countries, promised to initiate an Executive Action to legalize undocumented immigrants in the United States. And for the fulfillment of his vow to fix a broken immigration system, US President recently announced his new immigration plan. The President`s Immigration Accountability Executive Actions will temporarily shield undocumented immigrants from deportation.

Under this new plan, eligible immigrants will have the opportunity to request temporary relief from deportation if they come forward and pass criminal and national security background checks and pay a fee.[2] The United States will grant a work permit to immigrants without proper travel documents who have stayed in the US for at least 5 years, have children who are American citizens or are legal residents, have registered, and are willing to pay taxes.[3]

This would not be the first time President Obama issued an executive order on immigration. And this is just a common sense step from his office, but only the Congress can finish the job. That is, fix the whole system.[4]

This initiative of President Barack Obama opens fair opportunity and huge challenge for all undocumented immigrants in the U.S. especially to our “kababayans” who has been competing for their lucks in the past several years. Fair opportunity for our fellow Filipinos to get back and abide on the legal rules. They can now have nondiscriminatory job opportunity, earn according to their capabilities and most importantly work and stay in their dream country without any fear of being deported.

This is a huge challenge for us to prove our worth as efficient contributor in the international community. Another milestone for us Filipinos to showcase to the world our infinite knowledge, dynamic skills, and world class expertise.

---

[1] http://www.rappler.com/move-ph/balikbayan/76106-filipinos-eligible-us-deportation-shield

[2] http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/20/fact-sheet-immigration-accountability-executive-action

[3] http://www.rappler.com/move-ph/balikbayan/76106-filipinos-eligible-us-deportation-shield

[4] [4] http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/20/fact-sheet-immigration-accountability-executive-action

Gone and Forgotten

During the time of then President Ferdinand Marcos, the Philippines was one of the most powerful countries in Asia in terms of military power. The Philippines was looked up to as one of the countries in Asia which could render military assistance to its neighbor countries when needed. In short the Philippines had the adequate and necessary military forces to defend itself against the intruders. But that was before. The truth is, it is now part of the Philippine history. The glorious days of Philippine military are now gone and forgotten. Perhaps, it is meant to happen.
Here comes the Enhance Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA). The purpose of EDCA is to promote the maritime security, strengthening AFP for external defense, humanitarian assistance and disaster response (HADR), maritime domain awareness, and modernization of AFP. Maybe EDCA is the missing ingredient the Armed Forces have been hoping for for decades now. The Philippines, obviously, does not have the sufficient military power to defend itself against the countries which have the might not only to swipe out the Philippine military forces but to invade the latter as well. But with EDCA, the Philippines will be able once again to go back to its original form. But it will surely take a lot of time. Maybe years, decades, or maybe forever. It depends on how the Philippine Government will treat this opportunity.  
All of us or perhaps some of us know that the military strength of the United States is not eternal. Take note of the cliché “change is the only constant thing in this world”. Today might be the sweetest day of the American forces but tomorrow might be a different story. So while the military power of the U.S is still in its peak, the Philippines should take into account that nothing lasts forever. That time is of the essence right now.
Today our Armed Forces might be a laughingstock to other countries, but I’m pretty sure that it will not take long before the Philippines takes its reign again as one of  the most powerful countries in Asia. 

WON: Philippine Foreign Relations

Last April, the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement was signed by our Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin and the US Ambassador Philip Goldberg. The agreement, which plans to strengthen our Military Power with their (United States) assistance, and at the same time to build up our foreign relation with them. Supporters of EDCA tells us that it will benefit us, especially in protecting our sovereignty over the disputed islands at the West Philippine Sea, however, are we certain that the agreement will reinforce our foreign relation with US, or does it really support the US-China relations?

On the Supreme Court oral arguments this past week, Solicitor General Florin Hilbay introduces the stand of the Executive Department on implementing EDCA. One of which was that the agreement will help our National Defense under the Mutual Defense Treaty, which is where EDCA is implemented upon. However, Justice Carpio pointed out, that EDCA (under MDT) cannot really guarantee any aid from the US when we need to defend our Philippine territory on the West Philippine Sea. Solicitor General Florin Hilbay did not expressly concur on it, but it was evident that he also agrees to it.

As we all know, China is one of the biggest holder of US Debt, amounting to around $1.3 trillion today, and their (US-China) foreign trading plays a big part on their economies. US and China too, has their own military agreements, most of them is to avoid military conflict. These are the facts which shows that the US are more inclined to prevent tensions with China. EDCA was not really as beneficial for us, for our National Interest, for our foreign relations with the US, but rather it is more beneficial to the US-China relationship.

On Philippine Foreign Relations

Foreign relations are basically defined as the relationship between sovereign states as the manifest result of foreign policy. [1] The history of Philippine relations can be traced back from Spanish to American colonization until its independence in 1946. After nearly seventy years of independence, Filipinos still view their national identity as undefined and see international respect as elusive. [2] 

Poverty, economic setbacks, weak military defense facilities, and the like have been problems that the past government administrations tried to eradicate. The government had to seek pecuniary aid from foreign creditors. But because of corruption, the Philippines ended up deeply in debt to private banks, multilateral lending institutions, and foreign governments.[3] 

As the state actor in the global scale, the government of a country plays a vital role in its conduct of foreign relations among other states. Proponents of International Relations view the political, economic and cultural situation as well as the domestic policy of the country as an important aspect in determining how strong or weak its foreign relations with other countries. [4] For example, a third world country like the Philippines may have weaker foreign relations with other states compared to a first world country like the United States. 

The domestic performance of a country through its government affect its foreign performance that eventually define its foreign relations. The Philippine government, thus, should cease its problematic institutions that breed corruption so that it may reap more benefits in the global level where it engages foreign relations with other states in the world.

____________________________

[1] http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/foreign%20relations

[2] http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/philippines/forrel.htm

[3] id

[4] Domestic politics, foreign policy and theories of international law by James D. Fearon

United

A country's foreign policy, also called the foreign relations policy, consists of self-interest strategies chosen by the state to safeguard its national interests and to achieve goals within its international relations milieu.

The Philippine foreign policy derives its power from the mandate of the Constitution under Article II, section 2: "The Philippines renounces war as an instrument of national policy, adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land and adheres to the policy of peace, equality, justice." And under section 7:  "The State shall pursue an independent foreign policy. In its relations with other states the paramount consideration shall be national sovereignty, territorial integrity, national interest, and the right to self-determination." And to further emphasize the mandate of the Constitution, Republic Act No. 7157, otherwise known as "Philippine Foreign Service Act of 1991” was enacted.  

Philippine foreign policy is based on the advancement of Filipino ideals and values, which include the advancement of democracy and advocacy for human rights worldwide

The nation is currently actively engaging with regional neighbors in Southeast Asia through the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (as a founding member) with the intention of strengthening regional harmony, stability, and prosperity. It has been a supporter of East Timor since the latter's independence and has expanded trade links with its traditional allies Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand. Relations with Vietnam and Cambodia have thawed in the 1990s after their entry into the ASEAN.

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN, was established on 8 August 1967 in Bangkok, Thailand, with the signing of the ASEAN Declaration (Bangkok Declaration) by the Founding Fathers of ASEAN, namely Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand.

Brunei Darussalam then joined on 7 January 1984, Viet Nam on 28 July 1995, Lao PDR and Myanmar on 23 July 1997, and Cambodia on 30 April 1999, making up what is today the ten Member States of ASEAN with the aims and purposes were about cooperation in the economic, social, cultural, technical, educational and other fields, and in the promotion of regional peace and stability through abiding respect for justice and the rule of law and adherence to the principles of the United Nations Charter.

The United Nations (UN) is an intergovernmental organization established 24 October 1945, to promote international co-operation. A replacement for the ineffective League of Nations, the organization was created following the Second World War to prevent another such conflict.

In general, the aims and purposes of the Philippine foreign policy is the three pillars mentioned in the Republic Act 7157, preservation and enhancement of national security, promotion and attainment of economic security, protection of the rights and promotion of the welfare and interest of Filipino overseas.

Raising the Bar

Set on track by the end of 2015 is the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) aiming for a broader and deeper economic integration amongst the members of the Association of the South East Asian Nations (ASEAN).  AEC is designed to establish ASEAN as single market and production base with the goal of making it more competitive and dynamic. 

Economic Integration is the process in which economic borders are abolished among countries and/or participating regions to give place for a free flow of goods, services and production factors.[1] The idea behind economic integration is equitable economic development.

President Benigno Aquino said on his statement at the 24th ASEAN Summit plenary last May 11, 2014, “the 2015 ASEAN Economic Community will be seen as a culmination of years of forging a high level of integration, cooperation, and collaboration amongst our economies—efforts aimed at ensuring a mutually beneficial environment for all members and all peoples of ASEAN. At the same time, we are still faced with challenges in achieving our collective goal of inclusive growth and sustained development.”[2]

AEC leads to the efficient use of resources and is beneficial to the members of the ASEAN according to most of the entrepreneurs. On its face, AEC is more or less similar with European Union (EU) which is now under a debt dilemma.  On the outset, therefore, it is inevitable to think of the consequences of AEC such as an eventual debt crisis like what EU is experiencing and perhaps, constitutional issues as regards Filipino- first policy might come up as well.

Indeed challenges are ahead and as much as AEC is ideal, is the Philippines ready for it? Beneficial as it may be, some Filipinos are worrisome about this regional economic integration. Be that as it may, AEC’s aim is towards economic development wherein challenges are unavoidable. Certainly, there is no room for complacency just to avoid possible difficulties.

EU might be suffering from debt crisis but it does not follow that when AEC kicks off, ASEAN will likewise walk on the same path.  The people need to be open-minded on this kind of development and shall be united come AEC.

I am not patriotic and I doubt if it’s about that, nevertheless, I believe that Philippines… Filipinos can and will keep pace with the competition because when they raise the bar, people just have to gear up and  level with that.

---

[1] ASEAN and EU Economic Integration: A comparative Analysis by Nguyen Anh Thu, Vietnam National University

[2] http://www.gov.ph/2014/05/11/intervention-of-president-aquino-at-the-24th-asean-summit-plenary-may-11-2014/ (last visited 11/28/2014)

A Better Growth through FDI

The Philippines’ growing middle class, strong domestic demand, and stable political environment, paired with gross domestic product (GDP) growth of 7.2% in 2013 make the country an increasingly attractive destination for Foreign Direct Investment (FDI). FDI rose in 2013 and is expected to continue with the Government of the Philippines (GPH) emphasizing job creation and inclusive economic growth. Thanks to a relatively large, educated, English-speaking workforce, the Business Processing Outsourcing (BPO) and tourism industries have experienced growth in recent years and these trends are likely to continue. Under the administration of President Benigno Aquino, the Philippines has implemented reforms to improve the investment climate, making strides in good governance, transparency, and accountability.

Restrictions on foreign ownership rules, poor infrastructure, and corruption continue to be significant concerns for investors. Strengthening the rule of law is important as a complex and slow judicial system inhibits the timely and fair resolution of commercial disputes. In general, the Philippines lags behind its Asian neighbors in attracting foreign direct investment (FDI) because many sectors of the economy are limited to foreign investment. The Philippines has recently liberalized some of its industries to stimulate investments, specifically infrastructure, insurance, banking, telecommunications, and power industries. Invest Philippines is the GPH’s network of investment promotion agencies. [1]

According to present reports about the Philippine economic update, it is transparent that the country’s economy has strong growth in the past two years despite of its slow start in the first quarter of 2014. Over the years, our good foreign relation is one of the leverage to this development and it helped a lot in uplifting the Filipino lives and reducing poverty. Currently, the Philippines will be hosting on ASEAN PPP guidelines. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) aims to harmonize the principles on the Public-Private Partnership (PPP) to further improve the economic assimilation and worldwide competitiveness of the region. Our active participation will be an avenue to the better growth of our nation with the help of other countries. This indicates that progress is at work.

However, there are still confined problems that hinder the full progression of advancement. World Bank says, “Philippines can sustain high growth by accelerating structural reforms and increasing investments in infrastructure and in the health and education of the Filipino people.” Also, the slow pacing of our judicial system and the classic problem of our country, corruption, clogs the way to successfully gain from the prospects in our investment sector. These are aspects that should be given more attention by the government. We have all the opportunity to step forward and to be a rich country, not just in monetary terms, but also to have educated and skilled people who will lead us to achievement as a country. The executive summary of 2014 Investment Climate Statement stated that investors generally report that Philippines bureaucracy is non-discriminatory, but describe business registration and procedures as slow and burdensome. Overall, however, the climate of the Philippines has improved. If the country can maintain its reform momentum, its prospects for investment will continue to brighten.

[1] 2014 Investment Climate Statement, Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs, June 2014 Report at m.state.gov/md226859

Mending of Political Wounds

The relationship of Hong Kong and the Philippines was soured when the Manila hostage crisis happened. This involves a number of Hong Kong tourists being hostages of a dismissed police officer Rolando Mendoza. This hostage crisis happened on August 23, 2010. As a result of this crisis, the Hong Kong government asked for an apology from the Philippines. Chief Executives Pres. Aquino III (Philippines) and CY Leung (Hong Kong) met. Aquino III extended our condolences to Hong Kong but did not give the apology. For him, there is no need to say sorry because in our system, we cannot admit wrongdoing if it's not ours. Aside from the apology, Hong Kong also asked for compensation for the survivors and the casualties; and that the local officials involved in the failed rescue be held liable. For not giving the apology, Philippines was blacklisted on the Outbound Travel Alert and Hong Kong residents were also advised not to travel here. Also, Filipinos were now only allowed to a maximum of 14-day stay in Hong Kong without a visa.

What went wrong?

There were several errors on how the government handled the situation. First, the Ombudsman not granting his request right away. Mendoza complained that he was harassed and that he was dismissed by the Ombudsman without being heard. His dismissal removed all his benefits and that his good name was tarnished. He demanded for reinstatement. This was the only reason of Mendoza doing the crime. Second, the commander in chief, Mayor Lim, going out for dinner in the most crucial time of the crisis. According to report, later that day, the Ombudsman already ordered Mendoza's reinstatement but it was addressed to Lim. Since Lim was out for dinner, there is no one in command with the operations. Third, the lack of safety protective gears and equipment of our policemen. When Mendoza began shooting, the policeman tried to get into the bus but they could not break-in. When they smash the sledge hammer unto the bus' windows, which were reinforced flexi-glass, Mendoza fires a gun to battle for his survival. Since our police were not protected by bulletproof vests, they back out. And lastly, which I can say is the worst among all errors, the uncontrolled media. In their quest to get the best scoop, the media participated in the crime. Media showed how Mendoza's brother was caught by the police, where the SWAT team were situated and that the police were trying to get into the bus. These were all broadcast live. The bus was television-equipped; thus, Mendoza was able to plan on his action. 

What should have been done?

First, the Ombudsman should have granted the reinstatement of Mendoza to save the lives of the hostages. The government can just file criminal charges against him with regard to the hostage-taking afterwards. Second, during such crisis, a commander in chief should not leave the command post without assigning a person to be in his shoe. Third, policemen should have been given safety protective gears and equipment to handle such crisis. Lastly, media should at least be responsible in what they should and what should not report live. Since our media is protected by the Bill of Rights, news blackout is not possible. What is possible is to select the reports that can be broadcast live. During the crisis, the media were not responsible. Reports like the positions of the SWAT team and that the policemen trying to enter the bus should have not been broadcast live since these reports had given Mendoza idea on what the actions of the authorities were. Thus, Mendoza was able to plan for his next move.

Mayor Estrada's apology and how did it make difference.

April 2014, Manila Mayor Joseph Estrada, the Local Chief Executive of the City of Manila, went to Hong Kong to apologize to the Hong Kong Government for what had happened on August 23, 2010. This apology of Mayor Estrada normalized the ties between the two states. Diplomats and officials were now again enjoying the visa-free access to Hong Kong and that the travel warning imposed against the Philippines was also lifted. 

What's Ours is Ours

 Palawan Court found nine Chinese fishermen guilty of poaching and environmental crimes for fishing within Philippine waters. These Chinese fishermen were arrested after Police found hundreds of sea turtles and other protected species on their vessels. Fines were imposed against them.

Violations and crimes were commited in the disputed waters, again, may taint relations with China aside from the pending territorial dispute in the area. According to Foreign Affairs spokesperson Charles Jose, issue is purely a law enforcement matter after China demanded the release of the fishermen and claimed that it is undisputed sovereignty.

Our government should not be threaten thus must be firm instead. The violations as found by Palawan Court should be respected as an independent branch of the government which should be obeyed and executed faithfully.

Our laws were created to protect our rights. People who violate them should be prosecuted in accordance with law regardless of their race, gender, occupation or status in life. We are equal in the eyes of law. It is plain and square that there were violations and the Chinese fishermen should serve the punishment or fine imposed to them.

The decision laid by the Palawan Court has nothing to do with the pending territotial dispute with China. Evidences proved that sea turtles and other endangered species within Philippine waters were illegallly taken by the Chinese fishermen. To note, these are endangered species and should not be taken from their home neither should be taken for business or other illegal purposes. Since hundreds of marine species were taken, the penalties and fines imposed should be greater and higher. For if not, no man will adhere to laws and will repeat the same illegal acts. Giving them leeway would mean our laws and officials are ineffective. It constitutes partiality which gives chance to anyone to act as they please.

Our government, regardless of the existing agreements, treaties and relations involving economic policies and strategies should ensure that our treasures such sea creatures, natural resources as our source of living and mark of our culture are within the Philippine territory are protected and preserved not only by its people but from anyone else. But our government cannot stand without the support of its people. Laws are implemented for the people and against them. While jurisdiction issue must be considered, our rights and sovereighty must also be upheld.

We are being bullied by different countries and we should not let them. We should stand against it, guided by our laws and supported by our rights. For after all, what’s ours is ours.

One World, One Family

The United Nation (UN) is an international organization founded in 1945 after the Second World War by 51 countries committed to maintaining international peace and security, developing friendly relations among nations and promoting social progress, better living standards and human rights.[1]

In the Philippines, UN Development Programme (UNDP) fosters human development for peace and prosperity. Working with central and local Governments as well as civil society, and building on global best practices; UNDP strengthens capacities of women, men and institutions to empower them to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the objectives of the Philippine Development Plan. Through advocacy and development projects, with a special focus on vulnerable groups, UNDP works to ensure a better life for the Filipino people.[2]

One year ago, when Typhoon Yolanda made landfall in the Eastern Visayas region, it caused wide spread damages and losses. UNDP’s programme in support to Typhoon Yolanda Recovery and Resilience in the Visayas region (TRRV) takes into account differential impacts, vulnerabilities and capacities across the affected region and articulates an area-based approach around four programming hubs: Tacloban, Guiuan, Ormoc, and Roxas. It aims to meet some of the immediate early recovery needs of the affected people and to assist with critical recovery interventions to support the country in transitioning from early recovery to rehabilitation, while creating conditions for long-term recovery, resilience and sustainable development.[3]

The programme builds on prior UNDP engagement and partnerships in the affected areas, including extensive work on debris/ solid waste management, disaster risk management, climate change adaptation, support to local governance, rural development and environmental resilience and sustainability. It takes into account the high level of decentralization in the country, the opportunity to partner with an active civil society and the private sector, and the critical role of central line departments in emergency response and recovery.[4]

Unity among the countries will truly help not only the Philippines but the whole world in maintaining peace and order, promoting social and economic progress and improving rapport among different countries in the world. Since we live in one world, we are responsible to take care, support and help each other.

---

[1] UN AT A GLANCE, available at http://www.un.org/en/aboutun/index.shtml, (last accessed November 23, 2014)

[2] UNDP IN THE PHILIPPINES, available at http://www.ph.undp.org/content/philippines/en/home/ourwork/overview.html, (last accessed November 23, 2014)

[3] http://www.ph.undp.org/content/philippines/en/home/presscenter/typhoon-haiyan--yolanda-/

[4] ID.

EDCA: Executive Agreement or a Treaty

International agreement refers to a contract or understanding, regardless of nomenclature, entered into between the Philippines and another government in written form and governed by international law, whether embodied in single instruments.[1]

In our laws, Treaties are international agreements entered into by the Philippines which require legislative concurrence after executive ratification. This includes compacts like conventions, declarations, covenants and acts. [2]

In International law, Treaty means an international agreement concluded between States in written form and governed by international law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments and whatever its particular designation. [3]

Executive Agreements in the other hand are similar to treaties except that they do not require legislative concurrence.[4]

Under international law, there is no difference between treaties and executive agreements in their binding effect upon states concerned, as long as the negotiating functionaries have remained within their powers. [5]

In our laws, the binding effects between treaties and executive agreements are the same even though latter needs no concurrence with the senate. General rule is that, international agreement of any kind, whether bilateral or multilateral, requires Senate concurrence[6] the exception to that is executive agreements[7].

Commissioner Joaquin Bernas made a clarification in his book by quoting from the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs vs. Eastern Sea Trading:

“The right of the executive to enter into binding agreements without the necessity of subsequent Congressional approval has been confirmed by long usage. From the earliest days of our history, we have entered into executive agreements covering such subjects as commercial and consular relations, most favored nation rights, patent rights, trademark and copyright protection, postal and navigation arrangements and the settlement of claims. The validity of this has never been seriously questioned by our Courts.”

“Agreements with respect to the registration of trademarks have been concluded by the executive and various countries under the Act of Congress of March 3, 1881 (21 Stat. 502) . . . International agreements involving political issues or changes of national policy and those involving international agreements of a permanent character usually take the form of treaties. But international agreements embodying adjustments of detail, carrying out well established national policies and traditions and those involving arrangements of a more or less temporary nature usually take the form of executive agreements.”[8]

Commissioner Bernas further explained that, international agreements, which require Senate concurrence, are those, which are permanent in nature or which establish nation policy. Such agreements are in fact treaties. But executive agreements on the other hand are merely implementation of treaties or of statutes or of well-established policy or are of a transitory effectivity that does not require concurrence.[9]

The Enhance Defense Cooperation Agreement is an executive agreement as it merely further implements a well-established policy in Article II of the MDT (Mutual Defense Treaty) which states that “the Parties separately and jointly by self-help and mutual aid will maintain and develop their individual and collective policy to resist attack” and within the context of VFA.[10]

EDCA does not need concurrence with the senate as far as the purpose and nature of the agreement is further implementation of an agreed treaties which is the MDT and VFA.

---

[1] Section 2(a)Executive Order No. 459, Providing for the Guidelines in the Negotiation of International Agreements and its Ratification

[2] Ibid. Section 2 (b)

[3] Article 2 (1) (a), Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties

[4] Ibid. Section 2(c)

[5] USAFE Veterans Association Inc. vs. Treasurer of the Philippines, 105 Phil. 1030, 1037 [1959] as cited in Joaquin G. Bernas, S.J., The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines: A commentary, 2009 Edition

[6] Joaquin G. Bernas, S.J., The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines: A commentary, 2009 Edition, p.935

[7] Section 7(a)Executive Order No. 459, Providing for the Guidelines in the Negotiation of International Agreements and its Ratification

[8] Commissioner of Customs v. Eastern Sea Trading, 3 SCRA 351

[9] Joaquin G. Bernas, S.J., The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines: A commentary, 2009 Edition, p.935

[10] Art. 1 of Enhance Defense Cooperation Agreement.