RP – beyond redemption?

UP law professor Harry Roque explains to anchors – Anthony Taberna and Gerry Baja – of ‘Dos por Dos’ in a radio interview this morning his thoughts on the 3-week old Archipelagic Baselines Law which he deems as unconstitutional. Offhand, he points out that a petition is about ready for filing with the Supreme Court to ask for a temporary restraining order that would effectively block the law from being registered or deposited with the United Nations. If not blocked in a race against time, the law cannot be undone as soon as it becomes part of international law.

It is hoped that such petition must now have been filed and that the Supreme Court can now – with some urgency – turn on the red light – to tell the Philippine government to restrain itself until the constitutionality issue would have been finally resolved. May Philippine Permanent Ambassador to the UN Hilario Davide please take a turtle walk toward the Office of the UN Secretary General please if not keep the copy of the law in the bank vault for a while, please?

The whole discussion over DZMM is nothing but a wealth of expertise no matter how the Biazons in text messages sent later otherwise claim that Roque is reading the new Philippine Baselines Law out of its proper constitutional context. Certainly, from where I stand, we ought to leave it to the experts in international law and constitutional law to argue their case since arguments from pure politicians are almost always bereft of its historicism.

The listening audience has become properly enlightened on the implications of the newly-signed Republic Act 9522 that must have been un-studiedly passed into law. Roque did not fail to express his suspicions why this law must have been forged using as he did such street lingo as “tongpats”.

If I can follow his drift, it becomes clear that some sort of “advance payments” may have been made by the Chinese government toward the ‘eventual sale of Philippine territory’ as what those NBN-ZTE and other deals mentioned by the good professor would indicate. In other words, in exchange of ongoing concessions between governments, it is as if Republic Act 9522 is actually being sold to the Chinese government. Is our sovereignty for sale?

Be that as it may, what is clearly stated is the fact that with this new law, some 14,000 square nautical miles of Philippine territory will be given away – an area – which Roque approximates to be a dismemberment of half of the Philippine archipelago. Further, what used to be internal waters of the Philippines for its full and exclusive use will now be open to any foreign vessel, ship, submarine, or any other boat for whatever military, commercial, or scientific use by virtue of the universally-adhered-to right of innocent passage. It follows that aircrafts can likewise fly Philippine airspace.

Roque argues that so-called ‘regime of islands’ applies only where the proximity to the mainland is taken into account in which case, no part of the archipelago can be cut away.

All told, there were to be two main arguments against the law – one, its effect of having to drastically reduce the true area or size of Philippine territory and two, its effect of having to surrender Philippine sovereignty to a foreign power.

In a syndicated press release today across all newspapers, it is clear that Roque only summarized and echoed the contents of their petition challenging the constitutionality of the GMA-signed baselines law. RA 9522 thus further weakens our position in the Sabah claim as well as that of the Kalayaan Island Group and the Scarborough Shoal.
Needless to mention, so much interests go with the possibility of taking advantage of our natural resources over these newly delineated areas within the Philippine territorial archipelago to the extent of violating all other existing laws in force and in effect.

There just might be one more day left to save the pond. Can it be saved?

It seems disconcerting to know how our leaders across the bureaucracy can express their acquiescence on a law that has very serious constitutional implications. How indeed did our senators and congressmen get to agree of having passed the law is beyond us. Why do we draft a law that will badly affect us such as dismember a very significant part of our territory?

Why do we draft a law that will allow foreign governments to pass through our internal waters and all other waters that on account of this Republic Act 9522 would not longer be part of what used to be by every legal right part and parcel of our archipelago?

On whose authority and by what compelling instrument can we open the door to selling any part of our own territorial domain, the constricting the reach and limits of our national sovereignty, and crippling the full and supposed-to-be exclusive enjoyment of our marine wealth and other natural resources – not for us – as a country and people, but rather for foreign governments, foreign militaries, foreign capitalists. If this is not anarchy, I don’t know what is – RP is doomed.

Popularity: 1% [?]