{"id":246901,"date":"2020-03-03T21:00:11","date_gmt":"2020-03-04T02:00:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=246901"},"modified":"2020-03-03T21:00:11","modified_gmt":"2020-03-04T02:00:11","slug":"sc-has-final-say-on-vfa-abrogation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2020\/03\/03\/sc-has-final-say-on-vfa-abrogation\/","title":{"rendered":"SC has final say on VFA abrogation"},"content":{"rendered":"<figure id=\"attachment_239619\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-239619\" style=\"width: 720px\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\"><a href=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/12\/SC-facade-June-19_5b28a08f669b72_83636362.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-239619\" src=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/12\/SC-facade-June-19_5b28a08f669b72_83636362.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"720\" height=\"377\" srcset=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/12\/SC-facade-June-19_5b28a08f669b72_83636362.jpg 720w, https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/12\/SC-facade-June-19_5b28a08f669b72_83636362-300x157.jpg 300w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 720px) 100vw, 720px\" \/><\/a><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-239619\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">FILE: Facade of Supreme Court of the Philippines (PNA photo)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p><strong>MANILA<\/strong>\u00a0&#8212; Malaca\u00f1ang on Tuesday maintained that the fate of the scrapped Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) between the Philippines and the United States lies in the hands of the Supreme Court (SC).<\/p>\n<p>Presidential Spokesperson Salvador Panelo said the SC has the final say on President Rodrigo Duterte\u2019s recent decision to abrogate VFA, a 1998 military pact that stipulates conditions for US troops who visit the Philippines.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThen we will let the Supreme Court decide on that,\u201d Panelo told Palace reporters. \u201cLet\u2019s wait for the Supreme Court to resolve it. It\u2019s a legal issue, a constitutional issue of that.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>He issued the statement in response to senators\u2019 move on Monday to adopt a resolution seeking SC\u2019s clarification on whether the Senate\u2019s concurrence is needed before Duterte can terminate VFA.<\/p>\n<p>Senate Resolution 337, sponsored by Senate President Vicente Sotto III, was adopted Monday by 12 senators. Only seven senators abstained.<\/p>\n<p>Sotto on Monday said the resolution \u201csimply seeks to find out if the power to ratify carries with it the power to concur in abrogation.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The VFA permits American forces to visit the Philippines sans passport and visa to allow them to take part in joint military drills in the host country.<\/p>\n<p>Duterte has ordered the revocation of VFA after the US cancelled the visa of his staunch ally, erstwhile police chief and now Senator Ronald dela Rosa.<\/p>\n<p>The Philippines\u2019 formal notice of termination of the 22-year-old military accord was sent to the US on February 11.<\/p>\n<p>The military deal is deemed terminated 180 days after Manila sent a termination notice to Washington.<\/p>\n<p>Panelo earlier guaranteed that the Palace would heed SC in case the high court rules that the termination of VFA needs prior consent from the Senate.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>MANILA\u00a0&#8212; Malaca\u00f1ang on Tuesday maintained that the fate of the scrapped Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) between the Philippines and the &hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":44,"featured_media":239619,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1145,16,95],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-246901","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-headline","category-news","category-news-ph","mauthors-ruth-abbey-gita-carlos","mauthors-philippine-news-agency"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/246901","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=246901"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/246901\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":246902,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/246901\/revisions\/246902"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/239619"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=246901"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=246901"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=246901"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}