{"id":221346,"date":"2019-07-03T02:24:02","date_gmt":"2019-07-03T06:24:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=221346"},"modified":"2019-07-03T02:24:02","modified_gmt":"2019-07-03T06:24:02","slug":"malacanang-maintains-duterte-not-surrendering-ph-sovereignty","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2019\/07\/03\/malacanang-maintains-duterte-not-surrendering-ph-sovereignty\/","title":{"rendered":"Malaca\u00f1ang maintains Duterte not surrendering PH sovereignty"},"content":{"rendered":"<figure id=\"attachment_204196\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-204196\" style=\"width: 1350px\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\"><a href=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/Duterte-6.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-204196\" src=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/Duterte-6.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"1350\" height=\"900\" srcset=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/Duterte-6.jpg 1350w, https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/Duterte-6-300x200.jpg 300w, https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/Duterte-6-768x512.jpg 768w, https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/Duterte-6-1024x683.jpg 1024w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1350px) 100vw, 1350px\" \/><\/a><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-204196\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">FILE: President Rodrigo Roa Duterte delivers his speech during the General Assembly of the League of Municipalities of the Philippines held at the Manila Hotel in Manila on February 26, 2019. SIMEON CELI\/PRESIDENTIAL PHOTO<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p><strong>MANILA<\/strong>\u00a0\u2013 Malaca\u00f1ang on Tuesday downplayed an argument that President Rodrigo Duterte is surrendering Philippine sovereignty by not aggressively pursuing an arbitral ruling against China\u2019s massive claims in the disputed West Philippine Sea (WPS).<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIt is absolutely fallacious to argue that the President is surrendering our sovereignty by not aggressively pursuing the arbitral ruling in our favor rendered by the Permanent Court of Arbitration,\u201d Presidential Spokesperson Salvador Panelo said in a Palace press briefing.<\/p>\n<p>In July 2016, the Hague-based Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) ruled in favor of the Philippines\u2019 arbitration case filed against China\u2019s nine-dash line which nearly covers the whole of WPS or South China Sea.<\/p>\n<p>Duterte has decided to temporarily shelve the PCA verdict to maintain peace, stability, and cordial relations among claimant countries in the region. The President, however, said he will raise the ruling \u201cmaybe once\u201d before his term ends in 2022.<\/p>\n<p>Panelo defended Duterte from critics anew, citing how a provision in the Constitution stipulates that the Philippines \u201crenounces war as an instrument of national policy\u201d which explains the chief executive\u2019s decision to resort to diplomatic means in dealing with the sea row.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe President\u2019s measured tack, as I described it before as calibrated responses, is consistent with Section 2 of Article 2 of the Constitution stating: \u2018The 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, freedom, cooperation, and amity with all nations,\u2019\u201d Panelo said.<\/p>\n<p>Panelo emphasized that Duterte believes that aggressively enforcing the arbitral award \u201cwill only precipitate or trigger an armed conflict that could escalate into continuing bloody encounters detrimental to the national interest.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>\u201cLet me remind the critics, the issue here is not about which country has a better claim based on its constitution or laws, nor it is the enforcement of our upheld rights which unfortunately until now, no entity or country is inclined to perform,\u201d Panelo said.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWhat is the issue? The issue is how to go about getting the benefits without endangering the lives of our countrymen and bringing us to the precipice of war,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n<p>Contrary to critics\u2019 claims, Panelo said the Duterte administration has maintained claims with respect to the country\u2019s territory and executive economic zones (EEZs) while maintaining friendly relations with all nations.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThis Administration has been filing diplomatic protests against the activities of China and their elements. We have been raising specific issues and concerns through Bilateral Consultation Mechanism. We have been fighting for, and enjoining other countries in crafting a code of conduct, that will be observed by all stakeholders in the disputed areas of water,\u201d Panelo said.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWe reiterate that we remain steadfast in maintaining our claims with respect to our territory and exclusive economic zones,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n<p><strong>President\u2019s prime duty<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>While acknowledging that the Constitution contains a provision that reserves use and enjoyment of the nation\u2019s marine wealth to Filipinos (Section 2, Article 12), Panelo said this provision should not be read in \u201cisolation\u201d but in \u201crelation\u201d to other provisions.<\/p>\n<p>Panelo emphasized the importance of Section 4, Article 2 of the Constitution which states: \u201cThe prime duty of the Government is to serve and protect the people.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cSection 2 of Article 12 of the Constitution, reserving the use and enjoyment of the nation\u2019s marine wealth to Filipino citizens, should &#8211; as it must be &#8211; read in relation to primordial duty of the President to serve and to protect the Filipino people,&#8221; Panelo said.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;If you go over the Constitution, most of the provisions, if not all, relative to the protection of the State and its people emanate from that (Section 4, Article 2). That is the basic premise,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n<p>He said the provision in the Constitution protecting the natural resources and marine wealth is actually designed to safeguard their very existence and survival.<\/p>\n<p>\u201c&#8230;In the hierarchy of rights, the right to life takes precedence over the right to property,\u201d Panelo said.<\/p>\n<p>Panelo further said that the framers of the Constitution could never have intended to &#8220;chain&#8221; the President in performing his constitutional duty by placing provisions in the Constitution in derogation of such obligation.<\/p>\n<p>Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio earlier pressed Duterte to defend the Philippines\u2019 EEZ after the chief executive bared that he has made a verbal deal with Chinese President Xi Jinping.<\/p>\n<p>Last week, Duterte said he and Xi agreed to allow Chinese to fish within the Philippines\u2019 EEZ so that China would also allow Filipinos to fish in the Panatag (Scarborough) Shoal.<\/p>\n<p>Carpio, a staunch critic of Duterte\u2019s handling of the sea row with China, insisted that Philippine marine wealth cannot be \u201cshared with or given away to foreign nationals\u201d as stated in the 1987 Constitution.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>MANILA\u00a0\u2013 Malaca\u00f1ang on Tuesday downplayed an argument that President Rodrigo Duterte is surrendering Philippine sovereignty by not aggressively pursuing an &hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":44,"featured_media":204196,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1145,16,95],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-221346","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\/221346","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=221346"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/221346\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":221347,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/221346\/revisions\/221347"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/204196"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=221346"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=221346"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=221346"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}