By Vanne Elaine Terrazola
Voting 12-0-7, the Senate on Monday adopted a resolution seeking to ask the Supreme Court (SC) to rule on whether not the chamber's concurrence is needed in the abrogation of treaties and international agreements.
Senate of the Philippines building (Senate of the Philippines official Facebook)
Senate Resolution No. 337 was initiated by Senate President Vicente Sotto III, who, along with other senators, is planning to file a petition for a declaratory relief and mandamus before the High Court to clarify the Upper Chamber's authority over the termination of treaties.
Aside from Sotto, co-authors to the resolution were Majority Leader Juan Miguel Zubiri, Minority Leader Franklin Drilon, and senators Panfilo Lacson and Richard Gordon.
Those who also voted in favor of the measure's adoption were Senate President Pro Tempore Ralph Recto and senators Sonny Angara, Nancy Binay, Risa Hontiveros, Lito Lapid, Francis Pangilinan, and Joel Villanueva.
Meanwhile, senators Aquilino "Koko" Pimentel III, Ronald "Bato" dela Rosa, Christopher Go, Imee Marcos, Ramon Revilla Jr., Cynthia Villar, and Francis Tolentino, who are known to be allies of the Duterte administration, abstained on the resolution.
During the debates on the resolution, Sotto said the measure simply seeks the SC's intervention to interpret and clarify the Senate's role on the termination of treaties.
The 1987 Constitution states that no treaties or international agreements shall be valid and effective without the concurrence of the Senate, but it did not provide rules on how to go about the abrogation of such deals.
The adopted resolution will be attached to the petition that the Senate leadership will file before the SC within the week.
'No need'
Pimentel, in explaining his abstention, said that while the resolution was "harmless" -- as it did not include President Duterte's controversial withdrawal of the Philippines' membership from the International Criminal Court and this termination of the Visiting Forces Agreement with the United States -- he said he needed to be satisfied with the "details" on how the Senate will ask the SC's opinion.
Go said he abstained from voting on the resolution as he maintained that President Duterte, whom he served for more than two decades, has the power and prerogative to terminate treaties.
He also said the Senate should not dictate to the SC as there are pending cases in the tribunal regarding the Senate's concurrence on the termination of agreements.
"As a co-equal branch of the government, the Senate must not dictate upon the Supreme Court as to how and when to do its job," Go said.
Dela Rosa, whose U.S. visa cancellation triggered the President's decision to scrap the VFA with the United States, for his part said there is no need to seek the SC's interpretation on the issue since the Constitution "clearly" limited the Senate's role to ratification of treaties.
"There is no need for this body to ask the Supreme Court because the Constitution is clearly written and for me, pasensya na kayo (I'm sorry) I'm not a lawyer, but ang alam ko meron tayong (I know that we have a) legal maxim na nagsasabi na (which says) what the law does not include, it excludes.
“So hindi ko na kailangan tanungin, kasi very clearly sinabi sa Constitution, hanggang saan lang sinabi sa Constitution, doon lang ako (I don't need to ask the SC because it was very clearly stated in the Constitution, and I limit myself to what the Constitution says)," he said.
Not dictating
Drilon, however, clarified to the chamber that Senate does not intend to impose its position on the SC.
"All that we are asking the SC is to define our constitutional boundaries. Nothing else, nothing more. We are not dictating on the SC, we are in fact asking the SC to rule on this issue. For all we know, the Supreme Court may rule that the Senate's concurrence is not necessary," Drilon, who admitted being saddened over how the chamber voted, said.
Zubiri, for his part, said, "There are actions or issues that sometimes need a conscience vote. You want to be a statesman, you want to protect the institution. There are issues we need to protect this institution to assert our right as a co-equal branch of government," he said.
Lacson also corrected the perspective of the administration-allied senators.
"I voted not against the President, I voted for the institution where I belong called the Senate of the Philippines," he said.
Pacquiao, who was not able to vote on the measure, said he also supports the Senate's move to go to the SC, although he maintained his view that the "interpretation of the Constitution is the power of the executive."
Like Pacquiao, Sen. Pia Cayetano was also not able to register her vote on the resolution. She earlier abstained on the adoption of the Senate resolution calling on Duterte to reconsider his decision to terminate the VFA.