{"id":220625,"date":"2019-06-27T19:45:15","date_gmt":"2019-06-27T23:45:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=220625"},"modified":"2019-06-27T19:45:15","modified_gmt":"2019-06-27T23:45:15","slug":"prrd-did-not-commit-impeachable-offense-over-chinese-in-ph-waters","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2019\/06\/27\/prrd-did-not-commit-impeachable-offense-over-chinese-in-ph-waters\/","title":{"rendered":"PRRD did not commit impeachable offense over Chinese in PH waters"},"content":{"rendered":"<figure id=\"attachment_220626\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-220626\" style=\"width: 1280px\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\"><a href=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/maxresdefault.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-220626\" src=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/maxresdefault.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"1280\" height=\"720\" srcset=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/maxresdefault.jpg 1280w, https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/maxresdefault-768x432.jpg 768w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1280px) 100vw, 1280px\" \/><\/a><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-220626\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Presidential Spokesperson Salvador Panelo insisted that it was \u201cspeculative\u201d to assume that the Chinese vessel which allegedly rammed and abandoned a Filipino fishing boat in the Recto Bank (Reed Bank) was indeed fishing in the area when it could have merely been passing through. (PCOO File photo)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p><strong>MANILA<\/strong>\u00a0&#8212; Malaca\u00f1ang believes that President Rodrigo Duterte did not commit an impeachable offense because he never allowed Chinese to fish within Philippines\u2019 Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in the first place.<\/p>\n<p>Presidential Spokesperson Salvador Panelo insisted that it was \u201cspeculative\u201d to assume that the Chinese vessel which allegedly rammed and abandoned a Filipino fishing boat in the Recto Bank (Reed Bank) was indeed fishing in the area when it could have merely been passing through.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cUnder the Constitution,\u00a0<em>merong<\/em>\u00a0(there are) provisions on impeachment.\u00a0<em>Kung naniniwala sila na may ginawa siyang impeachable ground, e di mag-file<\/em>\u00a0(if they believe that he did something impeachable ground, then, they should file a case),\u201d Panelo said in a Palace briefing on Thursday.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cBut you cannot stop the President from doing measures, steps that to his mind is the correct way to obey the Constitutional command to him to protect and to serve the Filipino people,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n<p>Critics including former Foreign Affairs Secretary Albert del Rosario earlier warned that allowing Chinese to fish in territorial waters violates the 1987 Constitution.<\/p>\n<p>Del Rosario said Duterte&#8217;s failure to defend the country&#8217;s territory, including the EEZ, violates the Constitution and is a basis for impeachment.<\/p>\n<p>Following calls of Filipino fishermen for the President to ban Chinese from fishing within Philippine waters, Panelo said Duterte saw no need to prevent them from doing so.<\/p>\n<p>Panelo clarified that Duterte trusts China would not allow their nationals to fish within the country\u2019s 200-nautical mile EEZ since the two countries consider each other as \u201cfriends.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIt is not necessary to prevent them from fishing because they will not do that. In other words, why should I prevent somebody to do something he is not going to do that?\u201d Panelo said.<\/p>\n<p>On Monday, Duterte himself was quoted saying: \u201cI don\u2019t think that China would do that (fish within Philippine EEZ). Why? Because we\u2019re friends.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><strong>Constitutional<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Panelo defended Duterte following concerns that entering into a mutual agreement with Chinese President Xi Jinping on fishing rights without the concurrence of Congress is unconstitutional.<\/p>\n<p><em>\u201cAno ba ang<\/em>\u00a0unconstitutional\u00a0<em>doon sa napag-usapan nila na wag magkagulo doon sa isang lugar. Kasi tandaan ninyo<\/em>\u00a0(What\u2019s unconstitutional about agreeing to prevent conflict in the area. Because remember) this is a disputed territory,\u201d Panelo said.<\/p>\n<p>Duterte earlier admitted the Philippines could not stop China from fishing within the Philippine EEZ because of their previous agreement to allow both Chinese and Filipinos to fish in the area.<\/p>\n<p><em>\u201cKasi nagtanong sila<\/em>\u00a0(Because they asked), \u2018Will you allow the Chinese to fish?\u00a0<em>Sabi ko<\/em>\u00a0(I said) \u2018Of course,\u00a0<em>\u2018yan ang pinag-usapan namin noon<\/em>\u00a0(that was what we agreed upon),\u201d Duterte said.<\/p>\n<p>Citing the President, Panelo explained that sovereignty in the 1987 Constitution is \u201cnot absolute\u201d and allowed certain actions that effectively diminish the sovereignty of this country.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWe allow it, because\u00a0<em>kailangan din natin iyon<\/em>\u00a0(because we need it), and for that matter\u00a0<em>lahat ng bansa ganyan<\/em>\u00a0(all countries are that way),\u201d Panelo said.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe logic there is we are in a world, we are not in an island\u00a0<em>ng tayo-tayo lang<\/em>\u00a0(with just ourselves). We have to deal with nations of the world,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n<p>Panelo, however, said Duterte was merely goading the United States, Great Britain, and France when he asked them to help the Philippines claim its territories.<\/p>\n<p><em>\u201cSa akin, ang tingin ko doon nangangantiyaw siya<\/em>\u00a0(For me, I think he was only teasing them),\u201d Panelo said.<\/p>\n<p>Duterte posed this challenge to the three Western countries amid criticism that he has failed to confront China over its aggression in the contested waters.<\/p>\n<p><em>\u201cIto ang hamon ko, ang hamon ko sa<\/em>\u00a0America, Britain, France,\u00a0<em>mag-assemble tayo dito sa Palawan tapos diretso na tayo doon sa<\/em>\u00a0Spratly. Agawin na natin kung maagaw natin (This is my challenge, my challenge to America, Great Britain, France is that we assemble in Palawan and go straight to Spratly. Let\u2019s claim it if we can),\u201d Duterte said in his speech during the 122nd founding anniversary of the Presidential Security Group (PSG) at Malaca\u00f1ang Park on Wednesday (June 26) night.<\/p>\n<p>Panelo, however, said Philippine government will prosecute the Chinese crew if proven that they were fishing within Philippine waters.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThen we will enforce the law. If it\u2019s unlawful for them to enter, then we will enforce the law,\u201d Panelo said.<\/p>\n<p><em>\u201cBasta<\/em>\u00a0violation\u00a0<em>ng batas<\/em>\u00a0(As long as it is a violation of the law), under our jurisdiction, we will prosecute,\u201d the Presidential Chief Legal Counsel added.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>MANILA\u00a0&#8212; Malaca\u00f1ang believes that President Rodrigo Duterte did not commit an impeachable offense because he never allowed Chinese to fish &hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":33,"featured_media":220626,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1145,16,95],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-220625","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-headline","category-news","category-news-ph","mauthors-azer-parrocha","mauthors-philippine-news-agency"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/220625","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\/33"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=220625"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/220625\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":220627,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/220625\/revisions\/220627"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/220626"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=220625"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=220625"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=220625"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}