{"id":17424,"date":"2014-06-28T16:10:56","date_gmt":"2014-06-28T08:10:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=17424"},"modified":"2014-06-28T16:10:56","modified_gmt":"2014-06-28T08:10:56","slug":"palace-still-ready-to-defend-edca-after-3rd-suit-filed-before-sc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2014\/06\/28\/palace-still-ready-to-defend-edca-after-3rd-suit-filed-before-sc\/","title":{"rendered":"Palace still ready to defend EDCA after 3rd suit filed before SC"},"content":{"rendered":"<figure id=\"attachment_11519\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-11519\" style=\"width: 300px\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\"><a href=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/05\/Malacanang_palace_view.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-11519\" src=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/05\/Malacanang_palace_view-300x224.jpg\" alt=\"Wikipedia photo\" width=\"300\" height=\"224\" srcset=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/05\/Malacanang_palace_view-300x224.jpg 300w, https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/05\/Malacanang_palace_view.jpg 510w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/a><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-11519\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Wikipedia photo<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>MANILA &#8212; Despite the number of petitions filed before the Supreme Court (SC) questioning the constitutionality of the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA), Malacanang on Saturday said that it is still ready to defend it.<\/p>\n<p>The EDCA is an agreement between the Philippines and the United States signed last April 28 which aims to advance the implementation of the Philippine-U.S. Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT).<\/p>\n<p>Presidential spokesperson Edwin Lacierda, in an interview over state-run dzRB radio, raised the issue after a third petition questioning the defense pact was filed by labor groups from the public and private sectors.<\/p>\n<p>The petition, filed Friday, argued that the EDCA violated the 1987 Philippine Constitution for allowing US troops to establish and operate military bases in the Philippines without paying for the of space and facilities.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThis is a free country. If you feel there is an issue you want to raise before the court, in this case the EDCA, any citizen can file petition questioning the legality,\u201d Lacierda said.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWe believe that it (the EDCA) is constitutional so we are prepared to defend the outcome before the Supreme Court,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n<p style=\"color: #000000;\"><span style=\"font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;\">Lacierda added that there have already been previous petitions against the EDCA and for the third time around, the government was still willing to defend it.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>MANILA &#8212; Despite the number of petitions filed before the Supreme Court (SC) questioning the constitutionality of the Enhanced Defense &hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":44,"featured_media":11519,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[95],"tags":[6119,2825,4154,2942],"class_list":["post-17424","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-news-ph","tag-3rd-suit","tag-edca","tag-palace","tag-sc","mauthors-azer-n-parrocha","mauthors-philippines-news-agency"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17424","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/44"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=17424"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17424\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/11519"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=17424"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=17424"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=17424"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}