Associate Supreme Court Justice Antonio Carpio has been the most vocal critic of PRRD, especially when it comes to Duterte admin’s pivot to China and the WPS issue.
While criticism is a hallmark of a healthy and vibrant democracy, Carpio’s criticism versus PRRD is bordering on obsession that the Assoc. SC Justice has been caught contradicting himself several times while trying to undermine PH-China’s good relation and PRRD before the public.
Former Malacanang Spokesman Harry Roque also noted Justice Carpio’s penchant for contradicting himself for the sake of scoring a point versus PRRD.
In a Facebook post, the former Malacanang exposed Carpio for what he is, a frustrated politician in disguise as disinterested magistrate.
You may read Harry Roque’s full post below for the explanation.
An Exclusive Right may be shared as a decision by a sovereign state
Its interesting that Justice Carpio, in support of his argument that a joint fishing agreement between China and the Philippines is unconstitutional, has also said that in case of conflict, the constitution should prevail over international law.
Off hand, this remark contradicts J. Carpio’s ponencia in the case of Magallona vs Executivr Secretary, a case where I argued, on behalf of my former law Dean Merlin Magallona, that the Treaty of Paris, and not UNCLOs should define the breadth and scope of the Philippine National Territory. In that case, Carpio ruled that the principle of pacta subdt servanda should prevail over the literal provisions of our 1987 Constitution that the Philippine territory comprises our “archipelago with all waters and islands embraced therein”. Accordingly, we lost vast areas of internal waters and territorial seas as a result of the ruling premised on the need for us to comply with our treaty obligations. The UNCLOS limits our territorial seas to 12 nautical miles reckoned from our basepoints. Ironically, China, until today, maintains that its territory includes historical waters which mirrors the argument that we made in the Supreme Court.
But why is J. Carpio making a 180 degree turn from his ponencia? Well clearly, it is because the once esteemed jurist has opted to join the fray of partisan politics. Anything and everything that the President does is unconstitutional- that is in the mind of J. Carpio.
Can an exclusive right to fish be waived by a sovereign state? The answer is obviously yes! Why? Because as a sovereign state, the Philippines can share what the law says is exclusive. It is no different from food that belongs to you and should be for your own consumption. Can you share it? Obviously yes, if you want to.
In any case, although our entitlement is up to 200 nautical miles of EEZ, we have inevitable overlaps from North, East, South and West. The UNCLOS provides that these overlaps must be resolved initially through agreements. Thus far, we have only concluded a deimitation agreement with Indonesia. The joint fishing agreement entered into by PRRD is an interim executive agreement which is valid until China and the Philippines resolve its many territorial disputes. And yes, finally, only a formal Treaty that requires Senate concurrence must be in writing. Executive Agreemnts and other leeser formal agreements may be oral in nature.
The moral of the story: Beware of frustrated politicians in disguise as disinterested magistrates.
Your reaction to this?
