j.• .. : .:,,;~ ';.;l,,,,, ;:l(j;; t!-·~ 1...

;:l(J;; ';.;L,,,,, .:,,;~ '\_ : ..• , :, •. J.• .. : FJ::~t:Tirv 1T!-·~ '·'1 .... ~ •

.. '; ···---~----...... ---.....

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINR~4DEC IS PH /:I/ SUPREME COURT

MANILA

EN BANC

BAGONG ALYANSANG MAKABAYAN (BA YAN), represented by its Secretary General, RENATO M. REYES, JR., et al,

Petitioners,

-versus-

DEPARTMENT SECRETARY GAZMIN, et al.,

OF DEFENSE VOLTAIRE

Respondents.

x---------------------------------------------x

RENE A.V. SAGUISAG, et al., Petitioners,

-versus-

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY PAQUITO N. OCHOA, JR., et al.,

Respondents.

x---------------------------------------------x

KILUSANG MAYO UNO, represented by its Chairperson, ELMER LABOG, et al.,

Petitioners-in-Intervention.

x---------------------------------------------x

RENE A.Q. SAGUISAG, JR., Petitioners-in-Intervention.

G.R. No. 212444

G.R. No. 212426

x-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

MEMORANDUM 2 G.R."Nos.212444,212426

MEMORANDUM

Respondents, through the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), respectfully state:

RELEVANT FACTS

1. The Mutual Defense Treaty. On 30 August 1951, the Republic of the Philippines and the United States of America (US) entered into the Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) which stipulates that the parties shall "maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack."1 The MDT, concurred in by the Philippine Senate on 12 May 1952,2 locates the parties' obligations within their commitments under the Charter of the United Nations (UN). Article I of the MDT provides:

The Parties undertake, as set forth in the Charter of the United "Nations, to settle any international disputes in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United "Nations.

2. The Visiting Forces Agreement. To implement the MDT and the objective of both parties "to strengthen their present efforts to collective defense for the preservation of peace and security,"3 the Republic of the Philippines and the US entered into the Visiting Forces Agreement (VF A) on 10 February 1998. The VF A was concurred in by the Philippine Senate

on 27 May 1999.4 It lays down the terms and conditions under which US personnels and facilities6 may be present in the Philippines.

3. Under the VF A, the Philippines and the US have participated in the annual Balikatan exercises, which involve the training of Philippine troops to enhance defense capabilities and promote interoperability of

1 MDT, Article II. 2 S.R. No. 84, 12 May 1952. 3 VF A, Preamble. 4 S.R. No. 18, 27 May 1999. 5 VF A, Article I. 6 VF A, Article VII.

MEMORANDUM 3 G.R. Nos. 212444, 212426

Philippine and US forces. 7 The VFA was recognized as an implementing agreement of the VFA in Nicolas v. Rnmulo.8

4. The Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement. To implement the MDT and the VF A,9 the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) was signed by Department of National Defense (DND) Secretary Voltaire Gazmin for the Philippines and by US Ambassador to the Philippines Philip Goldberg for the US on 28 April 2014.

ISSUE

WHETHER THE ENHANCED DEFENSE COOPERATION AGREEMENT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

I. PETITIONERS HAVE NO STANDING TO BRING THESE SUITS.

II. EXECUTIVE AGREEMENTS FIND SUPPORT IN THE

CONSTITUTION AND JURISPRUDENCE.

Ill. THE EDCA IS AN EXECUTIVE AGREEMENT WHICH

IMPLEMENTS THE MDT AND THE VFA.

A. THE EDCA IMPLEMENTS THE MDT.

B. THE EDCA IMPLEMENTS THE VFA.

C. THE EDCA PROVIDES A SYSTEM THAT DETAILS THE

CONDUCT OF ACTIVITIES ALREADY AUTHORIZED

UNDER THE MDT AND THE VFA.

D. THE MDT AND THE VFA CONSTITUTE THE

SUFFICIENT, PRIOR LICENSES FOR THE EDCA.

IV. A SENATE REFERRAL OF THE EDCA WILL CREATE

MULTIPLE FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL PROBLEMS.

V. ASSORTED ISSUES RAISED BY THE PETITIONS

7 Terms of Reference approved by Department of Foreign Affairs Secretary Teofisto T. Guingona, cited in Lim v. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 151445, 11April2002. 8 G.R. No. 175888, 11 February 2009. 9 EDCA, Preamble.


A. ON PREPOSITIONING

B. ON OPERATIONAL CONTROL AND SELF DEFENSE

C. ON TELECOMMUNICATIONS

D. ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS

E. ON DISPUTE RESOLUTION

F. ON THE APPLICABILITY OF LOCAL LAWS

DISCUSSION

I. PETITIONERS HAVE No STANDING To BRING THESE SUITS.

5. . Lack of standing to assert institutional prerogatives. Petitioners assail the constitutionality of the EDCA on the ground that it is a treaty that requires the concurrence of the Senate under Article XVIII, Section 25 of the Constitution. However, none of the petitioners is a member of the Senate.

6. The capacity of the Senate to sue as an institution in cases involving alleged impairment of its constitutional prerogatives is exemplified in Gonzales v. Macaraig. 10 In said case, 23 Senators, comprising the entire membership of the Senate, filed a petition to nullify the presidential veto of Section 55 of the 1989 General Appropriations Bill. The filing of the suit was authorized by Senate Resolution No. 381 dated 02 February 1989, which reads:

Authorizing and Directing the Committee on Finance to Bring in the Name of the Senate of the Philippines the Proper Suit with the Supreme Court of the Philippines contesting the Constitutionality of the Veto by the President of Special and General Provisions, particularly Section 55, of the General Appropriation Bill of 1989 (H.B. No. 19186) and For Other Purposes.

WHEREAS, Be it Resolved, as it is hereby Resolved, That the Senate express its sense that the veto by the President of Section 55 of the

lll G.R. No. 87636. 19 November 1990.


GENERAL PROVISIONS of the General Appropriation Bill of 1989 (H.B. No. 19186) is unconstitutional and, therefore, void and without any force and effect; hence, the aforesaid Section 55 remains;

7. In Philconsa v. Enriquez} 1 suits were filed by some members of the Senate to question the validity of a presidential veto and a condition imposed on an item in an appropriation bill without an enabling resolution for the purpose. Nevertheless, the Court allowed the suits and ruled that "[a]n act of the Executive which injures the institution of Congress causes a derivative but nonetheless substantial injury, which can be questioned by a member of Congress."12 The Court said that "[t]o the extent the power of Congress is impaired, so is the power of each member thereof, since his office confers a right to participate in the exercise of the powers of that institution."13

8. The rule, therefore, is that only the Senate itself may sue to invoke the powers of the courts on matters involving its constitutional prerogatives. This naturally makes sense given the requirement of "injury in fact" essential for the operation of the "case or controversy" component of the jurisdiction of courts in constitutional law cases. Those whose rights are allegedly violated are, of course, in the best position to fully articulate the nature and details of the injury they have suffered, creating that "concrete adverseness that sharpens the presentation of

issues."14

9. By way of exception, incumbent Senators have been allowed by courts to file cases in behalf of their institution, in cases where the court is convinced that there are sufficient grounds to dispense with the rules of agency. At a minimum, only incumbent Senators may be recognized to have standing to raise the issue of Senate concurrence because it is their constitutional function that is allegedly impaired. 15

10. Only incumbent Senators may raise this issue because they alone have "legal standing to see to it that the prerogative, powers and

11 G.R. No. 113105, 19 August 1994. 12 Id. 13 Id 14 Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962). 15 CONSTITUTION, Art. VII, Sec. 21. No treaty or international agreement shall be valid and effective unless concurred in by at least two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.


privileges vested by the Constitution in their office remain inviolate."16 It is a curious fact that only former Senators joined petitioners in filing these cases. As such, they are in no position to concur in the EDCA and thus are not injured by the alleged lack of Senate concurrence.

11. There is also no allegation that members of the Senate have been prevented from exercising their privileges. The argument that the Senate could not have joined the petitioners in filing these cases as it was not made aware of the EDCA is belied by the fact that the EDCA has been the subject of a number of Senate hearings where members of the negotiating panel from the DND and the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) were interpellated.17

12. The Senators are well-informed of the contents and coverage of the EDCA and are presumed to have seriously considered whether the EDCA is a treaty that requires their concurrence. The contents of the EDCA have been available in the public domain for several months now, or since April 2014.

13. To date, the Senate has not issued a Resolution expressing its objection to the EDCA, much less authorized any of its members to file a suit on its behalf.18 The silence and active non-participation of the Senate in the current proceedings is an affirmation of the President's characterization of the EDCA as an executive agreement.

14. Absent any clear evidence that Senators have been prevented from invoking the privileges of their institution, the Honorable Court must presume that the Senate itself sees no need for such concurrence. Consequently, no actual case or controversy exists that would warrant the exercise of the Honorable Court's power of judicial review.

15. The Honorable Court should not conflate "petitions" and "cases or controversies" under the Constitution. The mere filing of a

16 Biraogo v. The Philippine Troth Commission, G.R. No. 192935, 07 December 2010. 17 Joint Hearing by the Senate Committee on Defense and Security with the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, 13 Iv1ay 2014; Hearing by the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, 22 October 2014 and 01 December 2014. 18 Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairperson Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago said that she would ask her colleagues to adopt a resolution that will express the Senate's views that the agreement should be concurred by the Senate. See http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2014/12/01 /1397976/law-experts-tell-senate-edcaneeds-senate-concurrence


petition does not automatically present a "case" within the meaning of the "actual case or controversy" requirement of the Constitution.

16. An actual case or controversy which would trigger the exercise of the Honorable Court's judicial review powers refers to "a conflict of legal right, an opposite legal claim susceptible of judicial resolution."19 It must be "definite and concrete, bearing upon the legal relations of parties who are pitted against each other due to their adverse legal interests. "20

1 7. Here, there is no such actual conflict betiJJeen the Executive and the Senate. Thus, the issue of Senate concurrence does not present a justiciable controversy which the Honorable Court may decide. Otherwise, the Honorable Court could end up arbitrating constitutional questions in the abstract and "allocat[ing] constitutional boundaries"21 without a dispute upon the instance of third parties, however well-intentioned.

18. Inappropriateness of Taxpqyer S landing. Petitioners cannot also sue as taxpayers because the EDCA is neither a tax measure, nor one primarily directed at the disbursement of public funds. In the absence of a credible allegation of illegal or unconstitutional disbursement of public funds, the Honorable Court cannot simply take at face value petitioners' bare assertion of their right to sue as taxpayers. The Honorable Court should avoid being goaded into assuming jurisdiction at the say-so of anyone who pays taxes.

19. The Inapplicability of the 'Transcendental Importance" Exception. The mere invocation of "transcendental importance" cannot also confer standing on petitioners. In Anak Mindanao Party-List Group v. Executive Secretary,22 the Honorable Court held that "a party who assails the constitutionality of a statute must have a direct and personal interest. It must show not only that the law or any governmental act is invalid, but also that it sustained or is in immediate danger of sustaining some direct

19 David v. Amryo, G.R. No. 171396, 03 May 2006. 20 John HC!J Peoples Alternative Coalition v. Lim, G. R. No. 119775, 24 October 2003. Italics supplied. 21 Angara v. Electoral Commission, G.R. No. L-45081, 15 July 1936. 22 G.R. No. 166052, 29 August 2007.


injury as a result of its enforcement, and not merely that it suffers thereby in some indefinite way."23

20. Petitioners cannot use "transcendental importance" to cure their inability to comply with the constitutional requirement of standing. As the Honorable Court said, "[c]ourts do not sit to adjudicate mere academic questions to satisfy scholarly interest therein, however intellectually solid the problem may be."24

21. The Honorable Court should already note that the overuse of "transcendental importance" as an exception to the traditional requirements for constitutional litigation has cheapened the value of the Constitution's safeguards to adjudication-case or controversy, standing, prematurity, political questions, mootness-that have long served to protect the Supreme Court from unnecessary litigation of constitutional questions and potential clashes with the other departments of government.

22. The Supreme Court's role under the separation of powers requires it to decide only legal disputes. The Court is not the appropriate venue for airing historical grievances or vindicating purely symbolic claims.

II. EXECUTIVE AGREEMENTS FIND SUPPORT

IN THE CONSTITUTION AND JURISPRUDENCE.

23. The EDCA is an executive agreement that has already entered into force, as all internal requirements of the Philippines and the US have already been complied with. This is consistent with the representations of the parties.

24. President Benigno Aquino III ratified the EDCA on 06 June 2014.25 In the case of the US, it considers the EDCA to have entered into force on 25 June 2014, as reflected in its diplomatic note of the same date.26 Finally, the EDCA has been filed with the US Congress pursuant

23 Id. 24 Philippine Assotiation of Universities and Colleges v. Secretary of Education, G.R. No. L-5279, 31 October 1955. 25 See Annex "A". 26 See Annex "B".


to the Case-Zablocki Act which requires all international agreements entered into by the US President to be filed with the US Congress.

25. The characterization of the EDCA as an executive agreement rests on the concept that the President, as Commander-in-Chief, Chief Executive, and Chief Architect of Foreign Relations, has the authority to enter into implementing agreements pursuant to existing treaties.

26. It was argued during oral arguments, however, that the Constitution does not recognize executive agreements because Article VII, Section 21 only mentions "treaty" and "international agreement." It was argued that the EDCA requires Senate concurrence to be valid and effective, whether it is considered a treaty or an international agreement.

27. This view flies in the face of the text of the Constitution, the jurisprudence of this Honorable Court, and the long-standing practice of the Executive Department.

28. The authority to enter into executive agreements inheres in the President as Chief Executive under Article VII, Section 21 of the Constitution. By definition, executive agreements are executive or implementing devices of pre-existing laws or treaties. 27 Thus, entering into · executive agreements is, by nature, an exercise of the executive power of the President.

29. In fact, the bulk of international agreements entered into by the Philippines are executive agreements (or agreements which do not require Senate concurrence such as exchange of notes, memoranda, protocols, etc.)28 because the conduct of foreign affairs mostly consists of the implementation of major policy decisions embodied in existing laws and treaties. Limiting this otherwise constitutionally-guaranteed authority to enter into executive agreements would fundamentally compromise the powers of the President as Chief Executive and deprive him of the bulk of his foreign affairs powers under the Constitution.

30. In the US, a great majority of international agreements are not treaties but executive agreements, i.e., agreements made by the executive branch that are not submitted to the Senate for its advice and

27 Gonzales v. Hechanova, G.R. No. L-21897, 22 October 1963; Secretary oj]ustice v. Lantion, G.R. No. 139465, 18 January 2000. 28 See Annex "C".


consent. Although executive agreements are not specifically discussed in the US Constitution, they nonetheless have been considered valid international compacts under Supreme Court jurisprudence and as a matter of historical practice.29

31. For purposes of comparison, and to the extent US practice informs Philippine practice, US recognizes three types of executive agreements:

(i) the congressional-executive agreement, an international agreement entered into by the President with the approval or authorization of the entire Congress;

(ii) the executive agreement, an international agreement entered into by the President that implements a treaty; and

(iii) the sole executive agreement, an international agreement entered into by the President on his own authority. 30

32. With the exception of congressional-executive agreements, Philippine practice coincides with these categories of executive agreements. This practice is found in Executive Order No. 459,31 which provides the guidelines in the negotiation and ratification of international agreements. Executive Order No. 459 grants to the DFA the authority to determine whether an agreement is an executive agreement or a treaty. 32

29 Garcia and Mason, Congressional Oversight and Related Issues Concerning International Securiry Agreements Concluded ry the United States, Congressional Research Service, 07 June 2012, p. 2. 30 Id at pp. 2-7. 31 Providing for the Guidelines in the Negotiation of International Agreements and Its Ratification. 32 Interestingly, Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago, Chairperson of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, recognizes this authority of the DF A and the distinction between a treaty and an executive agreement. She said: " .. .it is the foreign affairs department which determines whether an agreement is an executive agreement on one hand; or a treaty on the other hand. This distinction is important, because while it is claimed that an executive agreement needs only ratification by the President, a treaty needs concurrence by the Senate. This distinction drawn between an executive agreement and a treaty is based on the 1961 case of Commissioner of Customs v. Eastern Sea Trading." Defensor-Santiago, Procedure for Senate Concttrrence to Treaties (2007), p. 2, cited in Malaya and Mendoza-Oblena, Philippine Treary Law and Practice, 35 INTEGRATED BAR OF THE PHILIPPINES JOURNAL 1 (2010).


33. Constitutional Basis of Executive Agreements. The power of the President to enter into executive agreements without Senate concurrence finds textual support in the following provisions of the Constitution-

Article VIII, Section 4(2). All cases involving the constitutionality of a treaty, international or executive agreement, or law, which shall be heard by the Supreme Court en bane, and all other cases which under the Rules of Court are required to be heard en bane, including those involving the constitutionality, application, or operation of presidential decrees, proclamations, orders, instructions, ordinances, and other regulations, shall be decided with the concurrence of a majority of the Members who actually took part in the deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon. 33

Article VIII, Section 5(2)(a). The Supreme Court shall have the following powers: xxx Review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal or certiorari, as the law or the Rules of Court may provide, final judgments and orders of lower courts in: xxx All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international or executive agreement, law, presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance, or regulation is in question.34

34. The existence of executive agreements as a distinct category of legal instruments subject to judicial review is indisputable recognition of the power of the Philippine President to enter into such agreements. The constitutional mention of executive agreements alongside treaties and international agreements is clear recognition of their separate ontological existence.

35. In fact, Article VII, Section 21 mirrors this level of specificity and distinction, mentioning treaties and international agreements, but specifically excluding executive agreements. The absence of executive agreements in the enumeration of specific legal instruments in Article VII, Section 21 that have to be concurred in by the Senate is textual evidence that the Constitution excludes executive agreements from such requirement of Senate concurrence.

36. The practice of entering into executive agreements finds support in Philippine jurisprudence. In Commissioner of Customs v. Eastern Sea Trading,35 a

33 Emphasis supplied. 34 Emphasis supplied. 35 G.R. No. L-14279, 31 October 1961.


distinction was drawn between a treaty, which requires Senate concurrence, and an executive agreement, which does not:

Treaties are formal documents which require ratification with the approval of two thirds of the Senate. Executive agreements become binding through executive action without the need of a vote by the Senate or by Congress.

International agreements involving political issues or changes of national policy and those involving international arrangements of a permanent character usually take the form of treaties. But international agreements embodying aqjustments qf detail carrying out well-established national policies and traditions and those involving arrangements of a more or less temporary nature usually take the form of executive agreements. 36

37. The Court further said that "[t]he right of the Executive to enter into binding agreements without the necessity of subsequent Congressional approval has been confirmed b long usage" and that "[t]he validity of these [executive agreements] has never been seriously questioned by our courts." These executive agreements may cover such subjects as "commercial and consular relations, most-favored-nation rights, patent rights, trademark and copyright protection, postal and navigation arrangements and the settlement of claims."

38. In Bt!Jan v. R.omulo, 37 the Honorable Court reiterated the distinction between treaties and executive agreements, and affirmed the power of the President to enter into executive agreements without Senate concurrence. More importantly, the Honorable Court recognized a "trearyauthorized or a treary-implementing executive agreement" as one rype ef executive agreement.

39. In China National Machinery and Equipment Corp. Group (CNMEG) v. S antamaria,38 the Honorable Court enumerated the requisites of an executive agreement pursuant to the Vienna Convention: "(a) the agreement must be between states; (b) it must be written; and (c) it must [be] governed by international law."

36 Italics in the original. 37 G.R. No. 159618, 01 February 2011. 38 G.R. No. 185572, 07 February 2012.


40. In Abqya v. Ebdane,39 the Honorable Court held that an exchange of notes is considered "a form of an executive agreement, which becomes binding through executive action without the need of a vote by the Senate or Congress."

41. The Honorable Court's continued affirmation of executive agreements as a category of international agreements which does not require Senate concurrence is a recognition that executive agreements are allowed by the Constitution. It is also a recognition of the impracticability of submitting each and every international agreement to the Senate for concurrence. One can imagine the substantial burden on the Senate of such novel re-interpretation of the Constitution, independent of the damage to the text of the Constitution itself.

42. In Bqyan v. Romulo,40 the Honorable Court has taken judicial notice of the fact that "the conduct of foreign affairs has become more complex and the domain of international law wider" such that executive agreements now cover human rights, the environment and the sea, defense, trade, scientific cooperation, aviation, atomic energy, environmental cooperation, peace corps, arms limitation and nuclear safety, among others.

43. Indeed, practical as well as political considerations militate against the submission of all types of international agreements to Senate concurrence. To be realistic, agreements of an administrative nature, of which hundreds are made annually to implement broad policy decisions, should not be submitted to the Senate for approval. Otherwise, very soon, the Senate would be swamped with such a multitude of agreements to consider that unless it insisted it not be troubled with minor detail, it would become an administrative organization.41

44. Putting the problem into context, the Senate would have to contend with the sheer number of international agreements, the wide scope of their subject matter, and the high level of detail of their provisions. Our Senate, after concurring in a treaty, cannot be burdened with formulating the minutest of operational details for its implementation just as Congress, in the domestic sphere, is not expected

39 G.R. No. 167919, 14 February 2007. 40 Supra note 37. 41 E. Hopson, The Executive Agreement In United States Practice, 12 A.F. L. REV. 252.


to formulate the implementing rules and regulations of the laws it passes. These are tasks better left to the Executive.

III. THE EDCA IS AN EXECUTIVE AGREEMENT WHICH IMPLEMENTS THE

MDT AND THE VFA.

45. Consistent with the Honorable Court's ruling in Commissioner

of Customs v. Eastern Sea Trading,42 the EDCA is an executive agreement because it simply involves "adjustments of detail" to carry-out the security policies in the MDT and the VF A.

46. By its own express terms, the EDCA declares itself to be an implementing agreement of the MDT and the VF A-

Article I

PURPOSE AND SCOPE

1. This Agreement deepens defense cooperation between the Parties and maintains and develops their individual and collective capacities, in furtherance of Article II of the MDT, which states that "the Parties separately and jointly by self-help and mutual aid will maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack," and within the context of the VF A.

47. Under Article 31 (1) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, "[a] treaty shall be interpreted in good faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to the terms of the treaty in their context and in the light of its object and purpose."

48. As will be discussed below, the EDCA is an implementing agreement of the MDT and the VF A not only by its express declaration, but also by its purpose, scope and operative provisions.

A. The EDCA implements the MDT.

49. In geopolitical terms, the EDCA is the evidence of the currency and credibility of the defense alliance between the Philippines and the US. It is the clearest possible communication to everyone in the region of the vitality of our half-century defense agreement with the US.

42 Supra note 35.


Its operative provisions evince a serious commitment by the US to entangle itself with the national security interests of the Philippines.

50. In entering into the MDT, the US and the Philippines seek, among others, to "declare publicly and formally their sense of unity and their common determination to defend themselves against external armed attack" and "further strengthen their present efforts to collective defense for the preservation of peace and security pending the development of a more comprehensive system of regional security in the Pacific Area."43

51. The MDT has two important operative principles. The first is the Principle of Defensive Reaction in Article IV, which involves assistance in the case of an armed attack on either of the parties in the Pacific Area. Article IV of the MDT provides-

ARTICLE IV

Each Party recognizes that an armed attack in the Pacific Area on either of the Parties would be dangerous to its own peace and safety and declares that it would act to meet the common dangers in accordance with its

constitutional processes.

Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall be

immediately reported to the Security Council of the United Nations. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.

52. The second is the Principle of Defensive Preparation in Article II which states that "[i]n order more effectively to achieve the objective of this Treaty, the Parties separately and jointly by self-help and mutual aid will maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack." The primary concern of the EDCA is the Principle of Defensive Preparation in order to enhance both parties' abilities, if required, to operationalize the Principle of Defensive Reaction.

53. As the core of the defense relationship between the Philippines and the US, the MDT seeks to enhance the strategic and technological capabilities of the parties' armed forces. The specific language of the MDT does not limit its application to situations when either party is alreacfy under armed attack.

43 MDT, Preamble. See list of island territories under Philippine jurisdiction, attached as Annex "D."


54. The objective of the MDT, as stated in Article II, is to enhance the parties' capability to prevent or resist a possible armed attack. The defensive nature of our constitution and defense agreements means that our goal is peace-oriented-to prevent war by setting up a defense structure and signaling a force posture that makes it unwise for an aggressor to attack the Philippines.

55. The purpose, scope and operative provisions of the EDCA implement the MDT. Article I of the EDCA provides that it is in "furtherance of Article II of the MDT, which states that 'the Parties separately and jointly by self-help and mutual aid will maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack.'"

56. The specific purposes of the EDCA-to "[s]upport[ ] the Parties' shared goal of improving interoperability of the Parties' forces, and for the Armed Forces of the Philippines ("AFP"), [to address its] short-term capabilities gaps, promoting long-term modernization, and helping maintain and develop additional maritime security, maritime domain awareness, and humanitarian assistance and disaster relief capabilities"44_properly fall within the MDT's objective of developing the defense capabilities of the Philippines and the US. The EDCA implements the MDT by providing for a mechanism that promotes optimal cooperation between the US and the Philippines.

B. The EDCA implements the VFA.

57. The Honorable Court ruled in Lim v. Executive Secretary45 and Nicolas v. &mufo46 that the VF A is an implementing agreement of the MDT. Consistent with the Principle of Defensive Preparation, the VF A allows into our territory (1) US troops and personnel,47 (2) equipment, materials, supplies, and other property,48 and (3) vessels, and aircraft49 so the US and the Philippines may conduct activities that promote the MDT's goal of maintaining and developing the capacity for individual and collective defense.

44 EDCA, Article I.1.a. 45 G.R. No. 151445, 11April2002. 46 S ttpra note 8. 47 VF A, Article I. 48 VF A, Article VII. 49 VF A, Article VIII.


58. The contention that the VF A is onfy an agreement relating to troops is negated l:J the text of the VFA. The term "forces" is broader than "troops." Article I defines "United States personnel" as "United States military and civilian personnel temporarily in the Philippines in connection with activities approved by the Philippine Government." Article VII is explicit that the VF A relates to the entry or removal of US facilities "in connection with activities to which [the VFA] applies." It stipulates that "United States Government equipment, materials, supplies, and other property .. .in the Philippines .. .in connection with activities to which [the VFA] applies" may be imported or exported. so Article VIII allows the entry of such facilities as vehicles, vessels and aircraft in Philippine territory.

59. The authorization of activities under the VFA serves as the operative license for allowi,ng troops, equipment, supplies, vessels, aircraft, etc. This is confirmed by the Honorable Court's decision in Lim when it said that "[t]he VFA permits United States personnel to engage, on an impermanent basis, in 'activities,' the exact meaning of which was left undefined." The Honorable Court ruled that-

After studied reflection, it appeared farfetched that the ambiguity surrounding the meaning of the word "activities" arose from accident. In our view, it was deliberately made that way to give both parties a certain leeway in negotiation. In this manner, visiting US forces may

50 VF A, Article VII (Importation and Exportation). 1. United States Government equipment, materials, supplies, and other property imported into or acquired in the Philippines by or on behalf of the United States armed forces in connection with activities to which this agreement applies, shall be free of all Philippine duties, taxes and other similar charges. Title to such property shall remain with the United States, which may remove such property from the Philippines at any time, free from export duties, taxes, and other similar charges. The exemptions provided in this paragraph shall also extend to any duty, tax, or other similar charges which would otherwise be assessed upon such property after importation into, or acquisition within, the Philippines. Such property may be removed from the Philippines, or disposed of therein, provided that disposition of such property in the Philippines to persons or entities not entitled to exemption from applicable taxes and duties shall be subject to payment of such taxes, and duties and prior approval of the Philippine Government.

2. Reasonable quantities of personal baggage, personal effects, and other property for the personal use of United States personnel may be imported into and used in the Philippines free of all duties, taxes and other similar charges during the period of their temporary stay in the Philippines. Transfers to persons or entities in the Philippines not entitled to import privileges may only be made upon prior approval of the appropriate Philippine authorities including payment by the recipient of applicable duties and taxes imposed in accordance with the laws of the Philippines. The exportation of such property and of property acquired in the Philippines by United States personnel shall be free of all Philippine duties, taxes, and other similar charges.


sojourn in Philippine territory for purposes other than military. As conceived, the joint exercises may include training on new techniques of patrol and surveillance to protect the nation's marine resources, sea search-and-rescue operations to assist vessels in distress, disaster relief operations, civic action projects such as the building of school houses, medical and humanitarian missions, and the like.

Both the history and intent of the Mutual Defense Treaty and the VF A support the conclusion that combat-related activities-as opposed to combat itself ... are indeed authorized.

60. The purpose, scope and operative provisions of the EDCA implement the VFA.

61. Article I of the EDCA provides that its purposes are to support "the Parties' shared goal of improving interoperability of the Parties' forces, and for the Armed Forces of the Philippines ("APP"), [to address its] short-term capabilities gaps, promoting long-term modernization, and helping maintain and develop additional maritime security, maritime domain awareness, and humanitarian assistance and disaster relief capabilities."

62. The Honorable Court in Lim ruled that these activities are already covered by the VF A. Under Lim, "maritime security, maritime domain awareness, and humanitarian assistance and disaster relief capabilities" are activities that are authorized to be undertaken in the Philippines under the VF A.

63. Article II of the EDCA reiterates the definition of "United States personnel" in the VFA which means "United States military and civilian personnel temporarily in the Philippines in connection with activities approved by the Philippines."

64. Article III of the EDCA provides for the "Agreed Locations" where the Philippines authorizes US to "conduct the following activities": "training; transit; support and related activities; refueling of aircraft; bunkering of vessels; temporary maintenance of vehicles, vessels and aircraft; temporary accommodation of personnel; communications; prepositioning of equipment, supplies and materiel; deploying forces and materiel; and such other activities as the Parties may agree."


65. Article IV of the EDCA authorizes the prepositioning and storing of defense equipment, supplies and materiel. Under Article IV in relation to Article III of the EDCA, the "prepositioning of equipment, supplies and materiel" is an "activity" to be approved by the Philippine Government "through bilateral security mechanisms, such as the MDB and SEB."54

66. In sum, what the EDCA does is to enhance the existing contractual security apparatus between the Philippines and the US, set up through the MDT and the VF A. It is the duty of the Honorable Court to allow this security apparatus enough breathing space to respond to perceived, anticipated, and actual exigencies.

C. The EDCA provides a system that details the conduct of activities already authorized under the MDT and the VFA.

67. The negotiation of the EDCA and its subsequent ratification are acts which pertain solely to the President in the lawful exercise of his executive and diplomatic powers. In fact, even without the EDCA, the President may rely on his broad powers, as Chief Executive and Commander-in-Chief,55 to take preparatory and preventive measures against both external and internal threats to national security.

68. In choosing to enter into the EDCA-an agreement that provides for a. more systematic framework for the fulfilment of the objectives of the MDT and the VF A-the President has made the decision to formalize pre-existing licenses into a framework agreement that clarifies the rights and obligations of the parties. Such decision is in response to the implementation gaps that the government seeks to address through the EDCA.

69. For instance, our experience with Typhoon Haiyan, one of the deadliest natural disasters ever recorded in the country, has made us

54 EDCA, Article IV. 55 Under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution, the President is the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), which is constitutionally designated as "the protector of the people and the State." Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution provides that "[t]he goal [of the Armed Forces of the Philippines] is to secure the sovereignty of the State and the integrity of the national territory" of the Philippines. Under Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution, the President, as head of State and chief representative of government, has the "prime duty to serve and protect the people." The National Defense Act also provides that "[t]he national defense policy of the Philippines" is "the preservation of the State."

~


acutely aware of the need to develop our humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR) capability. The aftermath of Typhoon Haiyan saw the government's humanitarian relief operation initially hampered by a number of significant challenges-bureaucratic problems, lack of transportation, extremely limited communications systems, and damaged infrastructure.

70. US support following Typhoon Haiyan proved invaluable. A naval task force from the USS George Washington and elements of the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit of the US comprised the majority of Joint Task Force OTF) 505 which was formed to conduct initial relief operations dubbed Operation Damqyan. US military aircraft provided reconnaissance of the affected areas, lifted aid workers into the disaster zones, transported relief supplies, and evacuated those affected by the typhoon. US Marines assisted with road clearance and with the distribution of humanitarian assistance. At its peak, US military aircraft and 12 naval vessels were involved in relief efforts, while nearly 14,000 US military personnel were deployed directly to the disaster areas. US military assistance included clearing roads, transporting aid workers, distributing 2,495 tons of relief supplies, and evacuating over 21,000 people.56

71. A significant observation during Typhoon Haiyan is that despite the resources and technological capabilities of the US forces who rendered HADR, it took days to get relief efforts underway. This is because HADR equipment and materiel were not prepositioned, i.e., still had to be transported to affected areas. This contributed to the delay in the US forces' relief efforts.

72. In the absence of the EDCA, coordination for contingency operations may be hampered by the need to clarify and renegotiate minute operational details. This includes the determination of the equipment and supplies needed and their transport and storage, as well as the security and logistical arrangements for the forces that would conduct the actual operations.

73. The EDCA seeks to address the foregoing implementation gaps and limitations by providing for mechanisms that will improve the AFP' s capacity to render HAD R. One such mechanism is the

56 Lum and Margesson, Tjphoon Haryan (Yolanda): U.S. and International Response to Philippines Disaster, Congressional Research Service, 10 February 2014.


prepositioning of equipment and materiel necessary for the conduct of HADR activities. Article IV of the EDCA provides-

Article IV

EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES, AND MATERIAL

1. The Philippines hereby authorizes United States forces, through bilateral security mechanisms, such as the MDB and SEB, to preposition and store defense equipment, supplies, and materiel ("prepositioned material"), including, but not limited to, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief equipment, supplies, and materiel, at Agreed Locations. United States forces shall notify the AFP in advance regarding the quantities and delivery schedules of defense equipment, supplies, and materiel that United States forces intend to preposition in Agreed Locations, as well as who will make such deliveries.

74. Prepositioning will allow us to respond more rapidly in times of natural disasters and other crises. Time is of the essence in these situations and as shown by our experience in Typhoon Haiyan, the transport of necessary supplies needed to support tens of thousands of Filipinos-like potable water- is a massive undertaking.

75. To put the problem into context, the equipment necessary to respond to a contingency would include vehicles of all makes, sizes and purposes; relocatable and temporary structures such as tents, barracks, or temporary medical facilities and complex, and specialized equipment for telecommunications. The transport of these equipment and the manpower required to assemble, maintain, and operate them, especially in a large scale operation, would be a huge task that circumstances simply do not allow without severely limiting the effectivity of the response. To complicate matters, relief operations, as an activity, requires going through the complicated processes and consent mechanisms under our bilateral system, taking much-needed attention away from the situation on the ground.

76. Prepositioning not only addresses these serious problems but also allows the Philippine Government to be proactive in responding to future disasters because it allows the strategic placement of HADR equipment and supplies at or near areas commonly plagued by typhoons and other disasters. It also allows the Philippine Government to make decisions prior to an emergency, providing the authorities the time to


think things through and come up with a better response with all the relevant data.

77. Furthermore, because the HADR equipment will be in the Philippines, Philippine personnel are given the invaluable opportunity to be trained in their operation and maintenance. This redounds to the benefit of the Philippines, specifically in the increased effectivity of disaster and relief operations, and generally in the raised competence of our military forces.

78. Thus, from the Philippine perspective, the objectives of the EDCA are twofold: (1) externally, to secure the territorial integrity of the Philippine State and (2) internally, to improve the country's HADR capability.

79. In ratifying the EDCA, the President has made a determination that both its external and internal aspects will advance the national security of the Philippines. The President must be given the widest latitude in balancing the nation's limited options and calibrating his responses to ensure their maximum intended effect. The Honorable Court must approach this case with deference to a national security decision already made.

D. . The MDT and the VFA constitute prior, sufficient licenses for the EDCA.

80. The MDT and the VF A are valid and subsisting international agreements that already allow the entry of US troops and facilities in the Philippines under Article XVIII, Section 25 of the Constitution. The Honorable Court has consistently affirmed the constitutionality of the MDT and the VFA in BAYAN v. Zamora,58 Lim v. Executive Secretary,59

Nicolas v. &mulo60 and Ango v. Swtjt.61

81. Both the MDT and the VFA constitute the prior, sufficient licenses for the EDCA. The EDCA simply operationalizes and articulates

58 G.R. No. 138570, 10 October 2000. 59 Supra note 45. 60 Supra note 8. 61 G.R. No. 206510, 16 September 2014.


the details of existing policies of the Philippines established under the MDT and the VF A. 62

82. With specific reference to activities to be conducted on Agreed Locations, the EDCA traces its authority from the VF A.

83. On Agreed Locations. Article V.1 of the EDCA provides that the Philippines shall retain ownership of and title to Agreed Locations. This is consistent with Article II of the VF A which recognizes Philippine sovereignty and jurisdiction over locations within Philippine territory.

84. Number of Agreed Locations. The allegation that the Agreed Locations are without limit whether in number or size is disproved by the reality that the decision to choose an Agreed Location occurs within a highly constrained decision environment.

a) The location must be owned by the Government through the AFP and this constraint places potential significant burdens on the Philippines given that a proposed Agreed Location (if private property or public property not used for military purposes) will have to be bought, converted into a military base, and used for military purposes. This means that, most likely, any Agreed Location will be within pre-existing military bases.

b) There must be a military necessity for the US to propose a particular Agreed Location.

c) There must be a corresponding military necessity on the part of the Philippines to agree to such a proposal.

d) The size and number of such Agreeed Locations entail financial, operational, and political responsibilities on both the Philippines and the US. In other words, the choice of a particular Agreed Location must be geopolitical/y appropriate, economical/y efficient, and political/y sound on the basis of the security concerns of the US and the Philippines.

62 See Annex "E".


The allegation therefore that the "Philippines and US authorities may place these so-called Agreed Locations anywhere in the Philippines" is baseless. 63

85. On Activities. Article III.1 of the EDCA authorizes US forces and vehicles, vessels, and aircraft operated by or for US forces to conduct a variety of activities with respect to Agreed locations. 64 This is not an independent authorization for new activities. Rather, this only implements Article I of the VF A which allows US military and civilian personnel temporarily in the Philippines to engage in activities approved by the Philippine Government, as well as provisions of the VF A relating to the importation of materiel65 and movement of vessels and aircraft. 66 The permission system under the EDCA is co-extensive and identical with the permission system under the VF A.

86. Because the EDCA is an executive agreement that merely implements the MDT and the VF A, the EDCA does not require Senate concurrence under Article XVIII, Section 25 of the Constitution. A Senate concurrence to the EDCA is a legal superfluity.

87. There are some, however, who argue that the EDCA cannot be couched as an executive agreement because it allegedly allows foreign military bases and foreign military facilities. Thus, it is claimed that the EDCA should be in the form of a treaty pursuant to Article XVIII, Section 25 of the Constitution.

88. A textual reading of the EDCA negates such claim.

89. First, under Article II.4 of the EDCA, all facilities and areas that may be used and accessed by the US are provided by the Philippine Government through the AFP. Article V of the EDCA clearly states that "(t]he Philippines shall retain ownership of and title to Agreed

63 BAYAN Petition, p. 29. 64 "1. With the consideration of the views of the Parties, the Philippines hereby authorizes and agrees that the United Sates forces, United States contractors, and vehicles, vessels, and aircraft operated by or for United States forces may conduct the following activities with respect to Agreed Locations: training; transit; support and related activities; refuelling of aircraft; bunkering of vessels; temporary accommodation of personnel; communications; prepositioning of equipment, supplies, and material; deploying forces and material; and such other activities as the Parties may agree." 65 VF A, Article VII. 66 VF A, Article VIII.


Locations."67 By clear consequence of law, an Agreed Location is not a situs of extraterritoriality. It remains Philippine territory and Philippine property.

90. Second, while the US may be permitted by the Philippines to construct and improve infrastructure in these Agreed Locations, the US will not be building in the concept of an owner. They will be building for the Philippines. This is because under the EDCA "[a]ll buildings, nonrelocatable structures, and assemblies affixed to the land in the Agreed Locations, including ones altered or improved by US forces, remain property of the Philippines."68

91. Third, the use of and access to Philippine military bases by the US will be restricted, and consistent with our national security interests:

(ii) such use and access will be for activities that must be approved by the Philippines;69

(iii) such use and access must be on a rotational basis, intermittent and temporary;70

(iv) the Philippine Government shall have access to the entire area of the Agreed Locations;71

(v) the Philippine Government shall retain primary responsibility for security with respect to the Agreed Locations;72

(vi) the operational control of the US is limited to construction activities;73 and

(vii) the Agreed Locations will be areas of joint use, consistent with the concept of responsibility based on proportionate use of the areas and

facilities. 74

67 EDCA, Article V.1. 68 EDCA, Article V.4. 69 EDCA, Article III.4; Art. IV.1. 70 EDCA, Article I.1.b. 71 EDCA, Article III.5. 72 EDCA, Article VI.2. 73 EDCA, Art. III, par. 4. 74 EDCA, Art. III, par. 6.

MEMORANDUM 26 G.R."Nos.212444,212426

92. These standards are sufficient to make a reasonable person conclude that the Agreed Locations are not, will not, and cannot be converted into foreign military bases or foreign military facilities.

93. No general-purpose license. Only agreements with respect to foreign military bases or foreign military facilities are constitutionally required to be concurred in by the Senate. The defining characteristic of a foreign military base is the general ability of the foreign force to define, within the base, the nature and scope of activities they wish to engage in. This plenary ability, this general-purpose license, is found only in the former Military Bases Agreement of 1947 which gave the US:

[f]he rights, power and authority within the bases which are necessary for the establishment, use, operation and defense thereof or appropriate for the control thereof and all the rights, power and authority within the limits of territorial waters and air space adjacent to, or in the vicinity of, the bases which are necessary to provide access to them, or appropriate for their control. 75

94. This plenary ability, this general-purpose license, is patently and demonstrably absent in the EDCA because of the permission system in place for every activity that will be undertaken by US forces on Philippine soil, as mandated by the VF A.

95. The Philippines has control over these Agreed Locations not only because we own them but also because we can set the parameters for their use and access by the US through the permission system in place. By this control test, the Agreed Locations are decidedfy Philippine, not foreign, Military

Bases.

96. Under the EDCA, as with the VF A, the consent mechanism is individualized, ensuring that every activity will be limited in scope and duration.76 This type of consent mechanism is highly protective of Philippine interests because it provides the Mutual Defense Board (l\1DB) and the Security Engagement Board (SEB) real opportunity to scrutinize every activity that they authorize, develop a feedback mechanism for previous authorizations, and make sure that every activity fits a larger national or geopolitical context.

75 Article III. 1, Agreement Between the Republic of the Philippines and the United States of America Concerning Military Bases. (Signed in Manila, March 14, 1947). Emphasis supplied. 76 See Flowchart, attached as Annex "F".


97. This consent mechanism is dynamic, fluid, and responsive to varying security contexts as perceived by the current and future Philippine political and military leaders. This consent mechanism, this permission system, has been consistently declared valid by this Honorable Court in Bqyan, Lim, Nicolas, and Arigo.

98. Because the EDCA involves an agreement for the improvement of Philippine military bases and Philippine military facilities, the EDCA need only be approved by the President of the Philippines as an executive agreement. It is beyond the purview of Article XVIII, Section 25. This is because the improvement of Philippine military bases or facilities is consistent with the principle of Defensive Preparation found in the MDT and the VF A.

'l:V. A SENATE REFERRAL OF THE EDCA WILL CREATE MULTIPLE

FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL PROBLEMS.

99. During the oral arguments on 18 November 2014, Justice Leanen floated the possibility of referring the EDCA to the Senate for concurrence under Article XVIII, Section 25 and Article VII, Section 21 of the Constitution.

100. With all due respect, a referral to the Senate will create multiple fundamental constitutional problems for the Honorable Court,

the President, and the Senate.

101. The Court cannot refer the EDCA to the Senate for consideration ivithout preliminari/y declaring the EDCA unconstitutional for non-compliance with Article XVIII, Section 25. On the assumption that the Honorable Court does not dismiss the present petitions for lack of standing or other jurisdictional grounds, the question is whether the EDCA is an executive agreement or a treaty, and the task of the Honorable Court is either to dismiss the petitions or grant them.

102. The Court cannot force a referral to the Senate without authority from the President. Only the President has the authority to refer international agreements to the Senate. As held in Pimentel v. Executive Secretary, "it is within the authority of the President to refuse to submit a treaty to the


Senate."77 Accordingly, the Honorable Court cannot circumvent such authority either by ordering the President to make the referral or by doing so itself.

103. The Senate cannot be compelled to accept a responsibility it did not seek or does not want to assume. The role of the Senate is limited only to giving or withholding its consent or concurrence to the ratification. 78 In the context of separation of powers, the silence of the Senate must be understood to mean nothing less than a positive endorsement of the EDCA as an executive agreement and as an executive agreement that is good for the country. We ask the Honorable Court to consider the Senate's silence as a nuanced affirmation of the powers of the President.

104. A court-mandated referral to the Senate diminishes the powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to act on matters that are within his prerogatives. The creation of a national defense apparatus and the determination of activities such as the improvement of Philippine military bases, prepositioning of defense materials, construction of military runways, barracks, and ports, are core prerogatives of a Commander-in-Chief.

105. There is only one Commander-in-Chief. Military activities are meant to consolidate decision-making in one person. The Honorable Court should therefore seriously reflect on the wisdom of undermining this decision-making structure in favor of an intervention by the Senate, an institution that speaks with multiple voices. Now, perhaps more than at any other time, the powers of our Commander-in-Chief need to be as potent as it can be.

106. A court-mandated referral to the Senate will result in an international embarrassment for the President as Sole Organ of Foreign Affairs. The ratification by the President was a representation to the US that all internal requirements for the entry into force of the EDCA have already been complied with. A referral to the Senate contradicts this guaranty of the President. Even a declaration that the EDCA is ineffectual until ratified

by the Senate achieves the same embarrassing effect for the President and the country's standing in the international community.

77 Pimentel v. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 158088, 6 July 2005. 78 Pimentel v. Executive Secretary, supra note 77.


107. A referral to the Senate is plain and simple delqy. It accomplishes nothing positive other than delay and restrict the President's ability to respond to our manifold security concerns at present. Petitioners' argument against the EDCA is not an argument for referral but an argument against the EDCA itself. On the assumption that this Honorable Court can overturn settled and fundamental constitutional doctrines and compel a referral to the Senate, a favorable action on the part of the Senate will simply bring the petitioners back to the Supreme Court to demand the nullification of the EDCA. The potential damage of such delay to our national security is incalculable.

v. ASSORTED ISSUES RAISED BY THE PETITIONS

A. On Prepositioning

108. Prepositioning cannot be equated with bases, troops, or facilities in the Constitution. In the context of the EDCA, it is a logistical detail activity geared towards the operational requirements of activities conducted under the VF A.

109. The training activities under the VFA require significant logistical efforts that may be enhanced and made more efficient by the prepositioning of supplies, equipment, and materiel prior to the actual conduct of the training activities, especially for recurring activities.

110. As our most recent experience with Typhoon Ruby shows, prepositioning is essential for HADR operations as it allows rescue and relief operations to have "one foot in" in terms of ability to respond as soon as possible.

111. Prepositioning is also justified as an implementation of the MDT's core principle of Defensive Preparation. A country that seriously intends to defend itself must construct a national defense apparatus and adopt a force posture that makes it easier to respond in the case of an actual armed attack. An important component of defensive preparation is the prepositioning of defense materials.

112. To be sure, the prepositioning of US materiel, equipment, and supplies is an activity subject to either the approval of the President as Commander-in-Chief or the consent requirements under the MDT or the


VF A. Any matter of troops in relation to any prepositioning activity is always subject to the specific rules of the VF A and must always be approved by the Philippines.

B. On Operational Control and Self Defense

Operational control in general

113. Under Article VI.3 of the EDCA:

United States forces are authorized to exercise all rights and authorities within Agreed Locations that are necessary for their operational control or defense, including taking appropriate measures to protect United States forces and United States contractors. The United States should coordinate such measures with appropriate authorities of the Philippines.

114. The operational control granted to the US does not refer to the control over a military base or activity. Control over the Philippine military base remains with the Philippine military commander while control over an activity is exercised by the Philippines when it gives its consent and when it sets the specific parameters of the activity approved. Operational control is a characteristic inherent in military command and it pertains to a much lower lever of control-that of a superior officer over a subordinate. Under the US Department of Defense glossary cited by petitioners, operational control refers to:

The authority to perform those functions of command over subordinate forces involving organizing and employing commands and forces, assigning tasks, designating objectives, and giving authoritative direction necessary to accomplish the mission.79

115. Within the framework of the permission system under the VF A, a mission necessarily refers to the activity approved by the MDB/SEB.

116. The APP has a similar concept. The Glossary of the Philippine Air Force Manual contains a similar definition:

Transferable command authority that may be exercised by

79 Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/new_pubs/jp1_02.pdf. Emphasis supplied.

MEMORANDUM 31 G.R.:Nos.212444, 212426

commanders at any echelon at or below the level of combatant command. Operational control is inherent in combatant command (command authority) (COCOM). Operational control may be delegated and is the authority to perform those functions of command over subordinate forces involving organizing and employing commands and forces, assigning tasks, designating objectives, and giving authoritative direction necessary to accomplish the mission. so

117. Operational control thus extends only to command over subordinate forces, as required for the accomplishment of a particular pre-approved activity. The Philippines, pursuant to the consent mechanisms in the MDT and the VF A, will always have a say in the activities and objectives to which operational control relates. Article VI.3 of the EDCA simply restates an inherent attribute of armed forces.

Operational control over construction activities

118. Article III.4 of the EDCA grants to the US operational control for construction activities:

The Philippines hereby grants to the United States, through bilateral security mechanisms, such as the MDB and SEB, operational control of Agreed Locations for construction activities and authority to undertake such activities on, and make alterations and improvements to, Agreed Locations. United States forces shall consult on issues regarding such construction, alterations, and improvements based on the Parties' shared intent that the technical requirements and construction standards of any such projects undertaken by or on behalf of United States forces should be consistent with the requirements and standards of both Parties.

119. In the case of construction activities to be carried out by US forces, operational control is granted through bilateral security mechanisms. This means that US forces cannot dictate the nature and scope of construction projects-. these too would be subject to the consent mechanisms under the MDT and the VF A. Once the objective for a particular construction activity is set, e.g., build a barracks with certain specifications, it makes obvious sense to give the force carrying out the construction activities the level of control necessary to achieve the

objective.

80 Glossary, Annex "A" of the Philippine Air Force Manual, available at http://www.paf.mil.ph/archive/MANUALS/annexes/ Annex%20A%20-%20Glossary.pdf. Emphasis supplied.


120. Even then, when construction activities approved by the Philippine government are undertaken by the US, operational control is always limited in terms of scope (only over the actual construction activity) and area (only where the structure being constructed is located).

S e!f defense

121. Neither does the authorization for self-defense merit inordinate concern. Pursuant to the VF A, activities are authorized by the Philippines through implementing agreements. These implementing agreements will further define the circumstances and limitations under which visiting forces may engage in combat. The terms of reference for military exercises, such as the one considered in Lim v. Executive Secretary, have consistently prohibited US forces from engaging in combat operations, except in self-defense. 81

122. In addition to the authority provided by the VF A, the right can also be located in the individual soldier's right to use force in selfdefense, generally accepted as either stemming from international law, or the municipal law of the receiving state.82

123. The authorization extended to US forces is no different from what any contingent of Philippine soldiers ought to be accorded abroad. Filipino peacekeepers, including the contingent assigned to the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force in the Golan Heights, operate under the Handbook on United Nations Multidimensional Peacekeeping Operations, which recognizes the right to self-defense:

Appropriate use of force. Since peacekeeping operations need the consent of the parties to a conflict, military forces under UN command are not usually required to use force beyond that necessary for selfdefence. Self-defence includes the right to protect oneself, other UN personnel, UN property and any other persons under UN protection.

The use of force by the military component will depend on the mandate of the peacekeeping operation and the rules of engagement; sometimes the Security Council will authorize a peacekeeping operation to use armed force in situations other than in self-defence. The circumstances under which the operation may use armed force will then be spelt out in the relevant resolution of the Council. The rules of

81 Supra note 45. 82 DIETER FLECK, ED., THE HANDBOOK OF THE LAW OF VISITING FORCES, 546 (2001).


engagement for the peacekeeping operation will clarify the different levels of force that can be used in various circumstances, how each level of force should be used and any authorizations that may need to be obtained from commanders. 83

124. Article VI.3 of the EDCA does not refer to the se!f-defense of states, legitimized through appropriate international processes and requiring the determination of just cause. Rather, the concept is grounded in specific tactical situations where an armed force is constrained to defend itself through combat. It is limited in scope (only over the troops being attacked and always subject to the rules of engagement) and area (the area of conflict). It does not refer to control over the security of the Philippine military base, the primary responsibility over which the EDCA explicitly gives to the Philippines. 84

125. Even at the tactical level, it should be noted that the use of force is not an automatic response to any attack. Both US armed forces and the APP practice weapons discipline, applying force based on rules of engagement that can be tailored based on the nature of each mission.

126. The consent mechanisms in place, the limited scope of operational control, and the explicit provisions of the EDCA granting primary responsibility over security to the Philippines ensure that the Philippine government exercises control over its military bases as well as the activities to be conducted in Philippine soil at the highest levels and prevent the US, in the guise of security, from assuming overall control.

C. On Telecommunications

127. US access to and use of a telecommunications system does not require legislative intervention in the form of a legislative franchise under Article XII, Section 11 of the Constitution. The system referred to in the EDCA should be distinguished from the telecommunications services offered to the public and covered by the Telecommunications Policy Act of the Philippines:

SECTION 3. Definitions and Interpretations. - For purposes of this Act, the following terms shall be used:

83 Handbook on United Nations Multidimensional Peacekeeping Operations, p. 57. Available at http:I/www.peacekeepingbestpractices.unlb.org/Pbps /library/Handbook%20on%20UN% 20PKOs.pdf 84 Article VI.2.


b) Public telecommunications entity - any person, firm, partnership or corporation, government or private, engaged in the provision of telecommunications services to the public for compensation. ss

128. Only telecommunications systems owned or operated by public telecommunications entities, i.e., those that provide services to the public for compensation, are required to secure a legislative franchise. 86

Clearly, the franchise requirement only applies to telecommunications providers operating public utilities.

129. The telecommunication system contemplated under the EDCA will be used exclusively by US and Philippine forces in the context of activities (such as joint exercises and maneuvers) where inter-operable communications will be required. By military necessity, these systems will not be accessible for use by the public, will not be available commercially, and will only be used for the operational requirements of US and Philippine armed forces.

130. Finally, the frequencies that will be made avaiable to the US are only those that are already available to the Philippine military.

D. On Dispute Resolution

131. The BAYAN Petition argues that the EDCA, in providing a dispute settlement mechanism in Article XI, deprives the Supreme Court of its jurisdiction under the Constitution. 87 Article XI of the EDCA provides:

RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES

The Parties agree to resolve any dispute arising under this Agreement exclusively through consultation between the Parties. Disputes and other matters subject to consultation under this Agreement shall not be referred to any national or international court, tribunal, or other similar body, or to any third party for settlement, unless otherwise agreed by the parties.

85 Republic Act No. 7295. 86 Id. SEC. 16. Franchise. - No person shall commence or conduct the business of being a public telecommunications entity without first obtaining a franchise. 87 BAYANPetition, pp. 40-43.


132. Under Article VIII, Section 5 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to determine the constitutionality of an international agreement under Philippine law. However, the Honorable Court does not have the jurisdiction to settle disputes between states. Any dispute settlement mechanism between states is subject to their consent under international law.

133. This does not mean, however, that Philippine courts are deprived of jurisdiction over other disputes. Neither does it mean that the Philippines has deprived individuals who are non-parties to the agreement of recourse to the courts. Only the parties to the EDCA-the Republic of the Philippines and the US-are bound by Article XI. Thus, only disputes between the parties in relation to the EDCA are controlled by Article XI.

E. On Nuclear Weapons

134. The EDCA does not violate the "policy of freedom from nuclear weapons" under Article II, Section 8 of the Constitution. Article IV.6 of the EDCA provides that "[t]he prepositioned materiel shall not include nuclear weapons." All prepositioning must be carried out through bilateral security mechanisms such as the MDB and the SEB. Through the MDB and SEB, the Philippine Government will regulate the equipment, supplies and facilities that may be allowed entry into the Philippines. Article IV.1 of the EDCA provides-

The Philippines hereby authorizes United States forces, through bilateral security mechanisms, such as the MDB and SEB, to preposition and store defense equipment, supplies and materiel ("prepositioned materiel"), including, but not limited to, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief equipment, supplies and materiel, at Agreed Locations. United States forces shall notify the AFP in advance regarding the quantities and delivery schedules of defense equipment, supplies and materiel that United States forces intend to preposition in Agreed Locations, as well as who will make such deliveries.

135. The argument that Article IV.1 of the EDCA only applies to prepositioned materiel and would not bar the entry of US vessels and aircraft carrying nuclear weapons is specious and contradicted by the express provisions of the EDCA. The EDCA is premised on "full respect for the Philippine Constitution and Philippine laws"88 and the parties'

88 EDCA, Preamble.


obligations under international conventions against chemical and biological weapons.

136. Activities involving the entry of vessels and aircraft will require the approval of the Philippine Government. Such approval is circumscribed by a "policy of freedom from nuclear weapons" under Article II, Section 8 of the Constitution.

13 7. Article IX.1 of the EDCA expressly provides that "[t]he Parties recognize and acknowledge the importance of protection of the environment and human health and safety in the context of activities covered by this Agreement and agree to implement this Agreement in a manner consistent with the protection of the natural environment and human health and safety ... " Article IX.2 also states that "[t]he United States confirms its intent to respect relevant Philippine environmental, health, and safety laws, regulations, and standards in the execution of its policies."

F. On the applicability of local laws

138. Petitioners maintain that the EDCA violates the Labor Code, the National Internal Revenue Code, the Local Government Code, and the National Building Code, among others.

139. Two reasons should sweep aside petitioners' assorted objections to the EDCA-

140. A sovereign nation cannot be bound by the laws of another. The Republic of the Philippines, as a sovereign state, may apply its laws to its subjects and within its territory. It is inherent in statehood, and a functional requirement in international relations, that a state's local laws cannot bind another sovereign state. This immunity from jurisdiction applies to contingents of US Armed Forces allowed to enter the country.

The rule in international law is that a foreign armed forces allowed to enter one's territory is immune from local jurisdiction, except to the extent agreed upon. The Status of Forces Agreements involving foreign military units around the world vary in terms and conditions, according to the situation of the parties involved, and reflect their bargaining power. But the principle remains, i.e., the receiving State can exercise jurisdiction over the forces of the sending


State only to the extent agreed upon by the parties. 89

141. The Supreme Court in Bt!Jan v. Rnmulo recognized that states may concede aspects of sovereignty through an agreement:

By their nature, treaties and international agreements actually have a limiting effect on the otherwise encompassing and absolute nature of sovereignty. By their voluntary act, nations may decide to surrender or waive some aspects of their state power or agree to limit the exercise of their otherwise exclusive and absolute jurisdiction. The usual underlying consideration in this partial surrender may be the greater benefits derived from a pact or a reciprocal undertaking of one contracting party to grant the same privileges or immunities to the other. On the rationale that the Philippines has adopted the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land, a portion of sovereignty may be waived without violating the Constitution. Such waiver does not amount to an unconstitutional diminution or deprivation of jurisdiction of Philippine courts. 90

142. Without the consent of the US, petitioners cannot insist on the application of the country's taxes, labor laws and building codes.

143. With specific reference to taxes, the EDCA contemplates an assumption of taxes by the Philippine Government and not an exemption from taxes of the US forces and US contractors. Article VII states:

Article VII

UTILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS

1. The Philippines hereby grants to United States forces and United States contractors the use of water, electricity, and other public utilities on terms and conditions, including rates or charges, no less favourable than those available to the AFP or the Government of the Philippines in like circumstances, less charges for taxes and similar fees, which will be for the account of the Philippine Government. United States forces' costs shall be equal to their pro rata share of the use of such utilities.

144. Under the EDCA, taxes on the use of water, electricity, and other public utilities by the US forces and US contractors will be for the

89 Nico/as v. Romulo, supra note 8, citing DIETER FLECK, ED., THE HANDBOOK OF THE L'\.W OF VISITING FORCES (2001). 90 Supra note 37.


account of the Philippine Government. This is clearly not a tax exemption, which, under the Constitution, can only be granted by Congress. 91

145. The assumption of taxes by the government is not unknown in this jurisdiction. Tax assumption clauses are commonly found in BuildOperate-Transfer (BOT) contracts with the government as an incentive for private corporations to take part and invest in Philippine industries. 92

It is reasonable to assume that the assumption of taxes by the Philippine Government was in exchange for the greater benefits that the country will derive from the agreement.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that:

1) The application for a Temporary Restraining Order and/or Writ of Preliminary Injunction be DENIED; and

2) The petitions be DISMISSED for LACK OF MERIT.

Respondents pray for other just and equitable reliefs under the

prerruses.

Manila, 15 December 2014.

OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL 134 Amorsolo St., Legaspi Village

1229 Makati City Tel. No.: 8186301 to 09 (Trunkline)

Fax No.: 8176037 Website: W\Vw.osg:gov.ph Email: [email protected]

91 Article VI, Section 28(4): No law granting any tax exemption shall be passed without the concurrence of a majority of all the Members of the Congress. 92 See National Power Corporation v. Province of Quezon, G.R. No. 171586, 15 July 2009.


~·;, FWRIN if £.~(t~

Roll No. 44957 IBP Lifetime No. 08505

MCLE Exemption No. IV-001068, 5-14-13

EME~~~z Associate Solicitor Roll No. 56723

IBP No. 953502, 01-08-14 MCLE Compliance No. V-0002900, 07-09-14

IBP Lifetime No. 012977 MCLE Compliance No. N/A

MARIAG Asj;ciate Solicitor Roll No. 61899

IBP No. 954310, 1-9-14 MCLE Compliance No. N/A

~~~ Associate Solicitor Roll No. 62511

IBP No. 965933, 4-3-2014 MCLE Compliance No. V-0003278

M AssociclJ( Solicitor Roll No. 61900

IBP No. 954309, 1-9-14 MCLE Compliance No. N/A


RAMONANTO-ttt;;ANDAN Associate S olidtor Roll No. 63042

IBP No. 96846, 4-15-14 MCLE Compliance No. N/ A

AS. RUIZO ssociate S olidtor

Roll No. 63351 IBP No. 967967, 3-31-14

MCLE Compliance No. N /A

,/

MA.GOLD .MINOZA

IBP No. 968275 MCLE Compliance No. V-0004533, 11-11-14

Copy Furnished:

HARRY L. ROQUE ROMMEL R. BAGARES ETHEL C. A VISADO Roque & Butuyan Law Offices Counsel for Petitioners in G.R No. 212426 1904 Antel Corporate Center 121 Valero St., Salcedo Village Makati City

RACHELF. PASTORES AMYL YN B. SATO FRANCIS ANTHONY P. PRINCIPE SANDRAJILL S. SANTOS CARLOS A. MONTEMAYOR, JR. Public Interest Law Center Counsel for Petitioners in G.R No. 212444 4/F Kajia Bldg., 7836 Makati Avenue

MARIA KRISTINA C. CONTI MANEEKA ASISTOL SARZA National Union of People's Lawyers Coimsei for Petitioners in G.R No. 212444 3 /F Erythrina Building No. 1 Matatag cor. Maaralin Sts. Central District, Quezon City

REMEGIO D. SALADERO, JR. NOELV.NERI VICENTE JAIME M. TOPACIO Pro-Labor Legal Assistance Center Counsel for Petitioners-in-Intervention No. 33-B E. Rodriguez Sr. Avenue, Quezon City

RENE A.V. SAGUISAG, SR. Counsel for Petitioner-in-Intervention 4045 Bigasan St., Palanan 1235 Makati

Executive Secretary PAQUITO N. OCHOA, JR. Office of the President, Malacaiian Manila

Secretary VOLTAIRE GAZMIN Department of National Defense DND Bldg., Segundo A venue Camp General Emilio Aguinaldo, Quezon City

Secretary ALBERT DEL ROSARIO Department of Foreign Affairs DF A Bldg., Roxas Blvd., Pasay City

Secretary FLORENCIO ABAD Department of Budget and Management J.P. Laurel Sr. St., Malacaiian Palace, Manila

General EMMANUEL T. BAUTISTA Office of the Chief of Staff, Armed Forces of the Philippines DND Bldg., Segundo Avenue Camp General Emilio Aguinaldo, Quezon City

Undersecretary FRANCISCO BARAAN III Department of Justice Padre Faura St., Legaspi Village Makati City

Undersecretary BATINO

PIO LORENZO

Assistant Secretary RAYMOND JOSE QUILOP Department of National Defense DND Bldg., Segundo Avenue Camp General Emilio Aguinaldo, Quezon City

Ambassador LOURDES YPARRAGUIRRE DFA Bldg., 2330 Roxas Blvd., Pasay City

Ambassador]. EDUARDO MALAYA DFA Bldg., 2330 Roxas Blvd., Pasay City

EXPLANATION (Pursuant to Rule 13, Section 11 of the

l 997 Rules of Civil Procedure)

This Me111rmmdN111is being served by rcgislercd mail clue to lack of sufficient personnel i11 lhe Office of the Solicitor General lo effect personal service.

'

MARIA/~/'~· BASE

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE

(Revised as of April 1992)

I, "'::::;1ARO Y. BAU:ISTA AOV OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL ,

with Office address at 134 Amorsolo St., Legaspi Village Makati City, after being sworn to depose and say:

That on 12/15/2014 , I caused to be served a copy of the following pleading/paper:

NATURE OF THE PLEADING

MEMO..ttilNJJUM.

In case No. G.R. SP NO. 212444 I entitled BAGONG ALYANSANG MAKABAYAN (BAYAN) REP BY

VS. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE SEC. VOLTAIRE GAZMIN, DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS SEC.

-suant to Section 3,4,5 and 10, Rule 13 of the Rules of Court, as follows:

By Personal Service To:

SC

MANILA,, Philippines

By Registered Mail To:

ice Undersecretary FRANCISCO BARAAN

partment of Justice Padre Faura St., Legaspi Village Makati City , , Philippines

PIO LORENZO BATINO

Defense Undersecretary ONO Bldg., Segundo Avenue Camp General Emilio Aguinaldo, Quezon City , , Philippines

Atty. REMEGIO D. SALADERO, JR. Atty. NOEL

Pro-Labor Legal Assistance Center Counsel for Petitioners-in-Intervention No. 33-B E. Rodriguez Sr. Avenue, Quezon City , , Philippines

General EMMANUEL T. BAUTISTA

Office of the Chief of Staff, Armed Forces of the Philippines DND Bldg., Segundo Avenue Camp General Emilio Aguinaldo, Quezon City , , Philippines

RAYMOND JOSE QUILOP

DND Asst. Secretary for Strategic Assessments DND Bldg., Segundo Avenue Camp General Emilio Aguinaldo, Quezon City , , Philippines

( ) By depositing a copy to the party or his/her attorney on as shown on p __ _ ( ) By leaving a copy in his/her clerk or with a person having charge thereof on as shown on p

( ) By delivering a copy to the Court/Tribunal Office on ____ as shown on p __ _

~~ ( ) By depositing copy on ,i c)i in the Post Office at _________ a:he\/idenced by Registry Receipt(s) No.(s) ,'.\, hereto attached and indicated after the nC!me (s) of the addresse(s), and with instruction to the postmaster to return the mail to the sender after (10) days if undelivered.

Atty. HARRY L. ROQUE Atty. ROMMEL R.

ROQUE & BUTUYAN LAW OFFICES Counsel for Petitioners in G.R. No. 212426 1904 Antel Corporate Center 121 Valero St., Salcedo Village Makati City , , Philippines

Secretary VOLTAIRE GAZMIN

Department of National Defense ONO Bldg., Segundo Avenue Camp General Emilio Aguinaldo, Quezon City , , Philippines

Atty. RACHEL F. PASTORES Atty. AMYLYN B.

Public Interest law Center Counsel for Petitioners in G.R. No. 212444 47F Kajia Bldg~7836 Makati Avenue , , Philippines

Secretary FLORENCIO ABAD Department of Budget and Management J.P. Laurel Sr. St.,Malacariang Palace, Manila , , Philippines

Atty. MARIA KRISTINA C. CONTI Atty.

. ltional Union of People's Lawyers 'vounsel for Petitioners in G.R. No. 212444

3/F Erythrina Building No. 1 Matatag cor. MaaralinSts. Central District, Quezon City , , Philippines

Ambassador J. EDUARDO MALAYA

DFA Bldg., 2330 Roxas Blvd., Pasay City , , Philippines

Secretary ALBERT DEL ROSARIO Department of Foreign Affairs DFA Bldg., Roxas Blvd., Pasay City , , Philippines

Executive Secretary PAQUITO N. OCHOA, JR.

Malacaiiang Palace, J.P. Laurel Sr. St., Manila (' , ~hilippines

--; .• iy. RENE A.V. SAGUISAG, SR. Counsel for Petitioner-in-Intervention 4045Bigasan St., Palanan 1235 Makati , , Philippines

Ambassador LOURDES YPARRAGUIRRE

DFA Bldg., 2330 Roxas Blvd., Pasay City , , Philippines

Makati, Metro Manila, Phililippines l \?\

(r

p" ------------------(" .

'<fc~:··1

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me lhis of at Makati City, Philippines. Affiant exhibiting to me his r,<"•'' "' · · · "". 11 w1r.~d at Pasay City.

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll 14-014771-0014

CArAUNA SHINETA M. TARE-PALACIO

Solicitor, Officer Administering the Oath Office of the Solicitor General

•

VERIFIED DECLARATION

I, MARIA GRACIELA D. BASE, hereby declare that the documents hereto submitted electronically in accordance with the Efficient Use of Paper Rule are complete and true copies of the documents filed with the Supreme Court.

MARIA G '"' Assodate Solicitor

December 15, 2014

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me on this 3R0

day of December 2014, affiant exhibiting his OSG Employee ID No. 2013-07002.

~ CATALINA SHINETA M. TARE-PALACIO

State Solicitor

erlca····ort< .~orJJ.~City•0

·•<cc .... , . . ! . ..

•

r

(.

{.

L fi:NN E~~;:-~::·- .. -~~~-~:~,,···

No. 1082

The Embassy of the United States of America presents its compliments to

. the Department of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of the Philippines and has the

honor to refer to its-Note No,. 14-2226, dated June 18, 2014, informing the

United Sta~es of completion of the Republic of the Philippines' internal

requirements for the entry into force of the Agreement between the Government

. of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of the

Philippines on Enhanced Defense Cooperation, signed at Quezon City on April

28, 2014 (the "EDCA,,).

The Embassy of the United States of America has the honor to inform the

Department of Foreign Affairs of the .Republic of the Philippines that the

Government of the United States of America has.also completed all necessary

, internal procedures required for the entry into force of the EDCA. Therefore, in

accordance with ·Article XII of the Agreement, the .EDCA shall enter into force

on the date of this. reply note.

The Embassy of the United States of America avails itself of this

opportunity to renew to the Department of Foreign Affairs ofthe Republic of the

Philippines the assµrances of its highest consideration.

Embassy of the United States of America,

.. Manila, June 25, 2014.

DIPLOMATIC NOTE ~)-6:,/;k/l'f

( . / {PL.It

(

[Aii~~= Exec1JtiVfi! Agr~errierits 'l '13ilater:al,

Date of· · · Slgnat1,1re ·

Slovak I

iRepublic Memorandum of Understanding on the Establishment of a Political Consultations Mechanism between the Department of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of the Philippines and the Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs of the Slovak Republic

17-0ct-14'

France !Administrative Arrangement between the Chairman of the national Commission I 17-Sep-14 for Culture and the Arts of the Republic of the Philippines and the Minister of Culture and Communication of the French Republic on the 2014-2017 Executive Program of the Agreement of Cultural Cooperation between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the Government of the French Republic

jF~~~-;-------~M~mo.rand~m-~f Und;~~tanding fo-;-A~;demic Collabor~tion be-tw~enth;-·--i----ll~S-~p--l4 ! Development Academy of the Philippines (DAP), Philippines and Ecole Nationale ' d'Administration (ENA), France ,.. - .. -- -.... ___ .. __ ._ .. r ... --·---.... --- ------- _______ ..... ___________ .. _______________ .... ______ ,, _______ ._ __ ·------------· ----· --- ______ ... _ -----r--·--_ .. _______ .. ____ .. ___ .. 1Germany Cooperation Agreement between the Technical Education and Skills 14-Sep-14

Development Authority (TESDA) and the Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training (BIBB)

!Thailand !Memorandum of Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the I 12-Sep-14 Philippines and the Government of the Kingdom of Thailand on the .-------- ________

1~_r:_ocu r:_~ent of T~~~_:"_'_h it: __ ~!_~: ________ ,_._ _______________________________ ,, ___

1 .. _ .. _ -----------· .. ___ __

!Japan Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of Science and 23-Jun-14 ' Technology of the Republic of the Philippines and the Ministry of Internal Affairs

and Communication of the Government of Japan on the Cooperation in the , Field of Information and Communications Technology

l1~d~~·~si~- ---1~~::~:~~~~~~=~!~~-~~~~;~:~~:~~~t~~-:c~~~~t~fet~:~:il~~~-~~~;~deth-;··1-23-~r;.,,-;y~l4.-.· : l~xlusive Economic Zone Boundary ,- . ___ ,_., - " -------------r.----------·------.-.. --------------------.. -------------._ ________________ -------- ·---·--1··----·------ -·--- --- '. '_Egypt Memorandum of Understanding on Tourism Cooperation between the 18-May-14' · Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the Government of the Arab

r_: ___________________ ~epubl~~~~ypt --------·-.. ·------·---·-..... ____ ,, ____ ,_, _________ _, ______ .... ____ 11_., ____________ -!Egypt Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the 18-May-14' : Government of the Arab Republic of Egypt on the Waiver of Visa for Holders of I ;. ________ ... _. ___ ...

1~iplo_rn_!ti~-~~:i:i-~rt~---------------- ___________________________ .. _________ _, ___ ._ ...... ---- ..... __

1

________ .. __________ .. __ . !Egypt Memorandum of Understanding on Cooperation between the Philippine 12-May-14

Chamber of Commerce and Industry and the Federation of Egyptian Chambers of Commerce

r"'" -·- -- - -----·--fc·----·· .. ·- ------·------------------------------ ------·-.. ·--------------------.. -------.. ---- ________ l ___ ,, ___ ,, ____ -- ----- .. -!United States Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the 28-Apr-14 · iof America Government of the United States of America on Enhanced Defense Cooperation r_ - ·------·-- -----·--·-1--·-- .. ----------------- -------.. -----------------------·------.. -----------·------- ·-----------.... ---... -... ] __________ .. ____ ,,. ---- -· .. !South Korea Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of Labor and 08-Apr-14 : Employment of the Republic of the Philippines and the Ministry of Employment : and Labor of the Republic of Korea on the Sending and Receiving of Workers to ; the Republic of Korea under the Employment Permit System f" ________ ...... --~-----------------------------------------------------r-------------- -· ;Turkey 1Memorandum of Understanding for Cooperation between the Foreign Service 28-Mar-14 · Institute of the Republic of the Philippines of the Department of Foreign Affairs

of the Philippines and the Diplomacy Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Turkey

'_ ----- ·- -·---·---- ·-----------.. --------------<-··------------------------------··----·-1·---------------!Bangladesh Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the 06-Mar-14 : Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh on the Waiver of Visa

1.1.: _______________ ----r:Re~~~:_~~~~-!or Hol~_e.rs of D.,P~~~a!i~~~--?_!!i~i~!_Passpo~~----------- _________

1 _____________________ _

jMalaysia Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the Republic of 28-Feb-14 • the Philippines and the Government of Malaysia on Co-operation in the Field of i Education ,-- ---·-·---... ·----·T----·-···----- ----------·----------------·----------------------------------------- T .. --------------------iM a laysia 1Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the 1 28-Feb-14

•

iVietnam

'South Korea

~xecutive Agreement~ ~ Bilateral

·Title:

Government of Malaysia on Cultural, Arts and Heritage Co-operation

Protocol between the Government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam and the Republic of the Philippines to amend the 2010 Memorandum of Agreement between the Government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam and the Republic of the Philippines on the supply of Vietnamese Rice to the Philippines

Record of Discussions (ROD) between the Korea International Cooperation Agency of the Republic of Korea and the National Telecommunications Commission of the Republic of the Philippines on the Establishment of a Radio Frequency Monitoring and Direction Finding System in Metro Manila

I United States !Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the Republic of 1of America the Philippines and the Government of the United States of America Regarding

Cooperation in the Restoration, Operation and Maintenance of Clark Veterans Cemetery

.----·- ---·--- .. ______ [ ____________________ ----------------------------- - ---------------- ---------- ------- -------- ---------------------- ------------ ------------

:Japan Exchange of Notes on Maritime Safety Capability Improvement Project for the Philippine Coast Guard

, Date of ·,. Sign~ture

06-Jan-14

20-Dec-13

16-Dec-13

13-Dec-13

is~~th K~~;~--jR;~~~ci-~Toi;~~;~i~~ b-;t-~;~;;-th;Ko~;~ International Cooperation Agency of 11-Dec-13 the Republic of Korea and the Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration of the Republic of the Philipines on the Establishment of Communication, Ocean and Meteorological Satellite Analysis in the Philippines

i1taly I

Protocol Amending the Convention between the Republic of the Philippines and 09-Dec-13 the Italian Republic for the Avoidance of Double Taxation with Respect to Taxes

- ----i------- -----------·- ------------------------------------ -------------- ----------- ------------------------ ------- ---- ·------ -------- ---- ----- --

!---------- __________

1?~_1_~~~~~~-th:__~~~ventio~ of Fiscal Evasion _______________________________ 1. ____ ----------------"

!Myanmar Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the Republic of 05-Dec-13 the Philippines through the Department of Agriculture and the Government of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar through the Ministry of Agriculture and

: !Irrigation on Food Security and Agricultural Cooperation ,- ------- ---- -------------r--· -------- ------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------,----------------------!Myanmar

1Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the 05-Dec-13 · Government of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar on Visa Exemption for

1 ________________ 1.Ho~er~?f Ordin~i:y Pas:?~~_s__________ _ ________________ T. __________________ , !Myanmar Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the Republic of 05-Dec-13 I

1 the Philippines and the Government of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar

._: _________________________ 1!_~~-coo?~ra!io~~-~-~~-~-~-~n~nv:stme~-------------------------------r--·------------- ________ _ !Myanmar Memorandum of Understanding on Information between the Presidential 05-Dec-13.

Communications Operations Office of the Republic of the Philippines and the · , jMinistry of Information of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar ·_ ------------- --·1·------------ . ---------------------------------1------------------------_· !Myanmar Memorandum of Agreement between the Philippine Chamber of Commerce 05-Dec-13 i and Industry and the Republic of the Union of Myanmar Federation of t Chambers of Commerce and Industry

f Pola~d-----rremorandum of Understanding between the Commissio~~~ighe-;:Ed~cat-io~T- 27-Nov-Ll ; of the Republic of the Philippines and the Minister of Science and Higher : Education of the Republic of Poland on Cooperation in Higher Education :- -------------------------~-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------1--· ------· !Papua New Memorandum of Agreement on Labor Cooperation between the Government of 26-Nov-13 1Guinea the Republic of the Philippines and the Government of the Independent State of . Papua New Guinea :-. ---_---------- -----_--· ---·-·1------------------.. -------------- --------------------- ·-------------------------------------------------------------·-------------------- ·-1· ------ ------ ··----------!Israel Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the Republic of 07-Nov-13 . the Philippines and the Government of Israel on Air Services : --------- ----- --- -------·-1-·--------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------·-·--·- ------ - ------- -------- ------:Slovenia Memorandum of Understanding on the Establishment of a Political 01-Nov-13

Consultations Mechanism between the Department of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of the Philippines and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Slovenia

•

(-

(-'.

Contracting party

E><ec1Jtive.Agreements "' Bila~erc:1I

Title Date of

·.Signature ·-· -·

!.i~=y=~=~I=~ ----~po~~~-Co~~~~~«:_~--~==-t!_n.~---------------------------------- ·----------------------·-----------------------r' _ ---~-~-~~=t~!3 iSouth Korea Memorandum of Understanding on Cooperation in the Field of Sports between 17-0ct-13 ' the Philippine Sports Commission and the Ministry of Culture, Sports and

Tourism of the Republic of Korea : -- ---------·----------fi·--- --------··-------- --------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------·--- --·-------- --·1 ··-- ------- ----- ---- -- --i Mauritania oint Communique on the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations between the 30-Sep-13 , Republic of the Philippines and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania ·r--·-- ---- ------ -------------,-------------- ------------------ --·------------------------------------------ --·------·---------·------·------------------ -- ----- -- ,-- ---- ----- -Kazakhstan Memorandum of Understanding on Political Consultations between the 27-Sep-13

1 Department of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of the Philippines and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan

.,--- -·--------------------------------------------------- ------------- -------------------·----------·-·------ ---- -------- ------ --- ----- --- ---1· ---- ---- -· ---------------IJ a pan Records of Discussions between the Government of the Republic of the 13-Sep-13

Philippines and the Government of Japan on Air Services Agreement ;--- ----------· ·--·-···------!-----·----·- -------------------------·---------------------------------------------------- ---- ·r--- --- -----------·-1u nited Arab Memorandum of Understanding on Political Consultations between the 10-Sep-13 :Emirates Department of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of the Philippines and the

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the United Arab Emirates ---·-

!Germany Agreement between the Republic of the Philippines and the Federal Republic of 09-Sep-13 ---- --·-------- -------- -------------- - -------- --------------------------------- -------·--- ---·----------------·-----·- ---· ------· -- -- - ·- ·-1·· -

Germany for the Avoidance of Double Taxation with respect to Taxes on Income and on Capital

· ----- --- - ----------·---1------------------------- --- --·----------------- -- --- ----- ---------------- ---·-- ----- ---- -- -- ----- --- -- --------------- - --- -- -------- --·------ ---- - -- -- -·r··---------- ----- ----- --· ---1 Italy Records of Discussion 05-Sep-13

!Bahrain -----------,------------------ ----- ---- ---------------·------------------- -------- ----- -- ------------------ --- ·-------------- -------. ----·--------- --- ··1··-- ------ ·--- -·------ ---

Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of Foreign Affairs of 20-Aug-13 · the Republic of the Philippines and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Bahrain on Bilateral Consultations

!Poland Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of National Defense I 31-Jul-13 of the Republic of the Philippines and the Minister of National Defense of the Republic of Poland Concerning the Development of Bilateral Relations on Defense

Czech Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the I 25-Jul-13 !Republic Government of the Czech Republic on Cooperation in the Fields of Culture, : Education, Science and Sports

rii;ig;~;;-------~i;;-tPla~~TActi~~i~ Fi;lds-of Mutu~li~tere~tB~tween th;Go~er-;:;-ments- of ___ 1 ___ l0-Jul-13

' the Republic of the Philippines and the Kingdom of Belgium i-----------------i·------------------ --------------------------------------- -------·· 1···-----------·--·-----' !Germany Arrangement for the Implementation of the Project Indigenous Practices for 02-Jul-13

Conservation of Biodiversity and Climate Change Adaptation in Northeast-. Mindanao

!Switzerland Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the I 28-Jun-13 ,--------·--·---·-----,-------------------·---------·------------------------------ ----------·---·-·------·---···----------------- ---- ---··-·-·--·

I

Government of the Swiss Confederation Establishing a Joint Economic 1 1Commission ~--··--

!Thailand Convention between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the Government of the Kingdom of Thailand for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with Respect to Taxes on Income

21-Jun-13

r----------- ---- -·---------i----·-------------------------·------------- ------------·--·---·---·--------·· ---·----·-·-·------------·------- ·- --·-·· ----·-----· ·1 ----·----.--.IA~~!~~~i~ -------~R:_~ords o!_°-iscu~~ion --------------------------------- __ . ___________

1

____ !~::!~_n_~-~~-iBrazil Memorandum of Understanding between the Aeronautical Authorities of the 20-May-13 • Federative Republic of Brazil and the Republic of the Philippines ~---------··--------r-------------------·----------·--------------------------------------- -----------·- --------·,- ---··-------------------- ---··- -iSaudi Arabia 1Agreement on Domestic Worker Recruitment between the Ministry of Labor of 19-May-13

the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Department of Labor and Employment of the Republic of the Philippines

:···---.---·------IBangladesh !Cultural Exchange Programme between the National Commission for Culture

and the Arts of the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the Ministry of Cultural Affairs of the Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh for the Year 2013-2017

1----- --- ·------1·-. ---------:------------------------·------:-~----~- ---- ------------------~---:-------------------:Germany Joint Declaration of Intent between the Philippine Sports Comm1ss1on of the

13-May-13•

26-Apr-13

•

(

Contractfrig party.

~x~(:~tiv~ Agreement$.,. Bil~terah·:~ . Pate of

. Sigrwture

Republic of the Philippines and the Federal Foreign Office of the Federal l : --·-· .. -.. ________ 11~~p~~~~~f-~-=-~~~l"l_y ______________ ----------------·------·--------·---------·--··· -- --i--------···--·-·---· -····· !Papua New Record of Discussion on Air Services between the Republic of the Philippines . 24-Apr-. 13 ·

l~.~-~i~-=~-- ___

1a n~~=-~~~:_p~n_9_:~.!_~tat~of P-~~~~~~ G ~-':1_~~--------------------------- ---·r- --·-·--·-·····-··-···-- ··-------

1Ca m bod ia Memorandum of Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the 04-Apr-13 i Philippines and the Royal Government of Cambodia on Rice Trade ... ---· ··---·- ------·· ·---··r--··--·----- ·- ------· ---·----------· -· ·------- ---------·- -----·--- ·----· ------·--·---------·--·--···---· ---·--··-·---·-···· ... ····-·· ... , . ··- .... --·-·· ---------iczech Memorandum of Cooperation between the Department of Finance of the 23-Mar-13 :Republic Republic of the Philippines and the Ministry of Finance of the Czech Republic ' ·-- ·- ·-··- .. , ... --·-------·-·----····- -···-·-··- --- ---·· -------······-·--- ------·· ·---·-------·----··-----····--·-------· ------··- ------ ·--·-- -·- ....... - i -·· --··- -·· ----·-- ·-Brazil Memorandum of Understanding between the Philippine Sports Commission of 22-Mar-13

the Republic of the Philippines and the Ministry of Sport of the Federative Republic of Brazil on Sports Cooperation

~~~;---~:~~~~~:~~!~~~~~~~,r~~~ : !Mongolia Sports Cooperation . r -- -·----- ---·--·1--------·---------·------··-···-· -·--·--·-·--··---···----·--·-·-------- ··-·--------- ---· -- --·--- -- -- ·---·----·-· ·--i--·- ·- --·-· --·- ·- ---· . ·-!Germany Agreement Conc~~ning. the Placement of Fili~ino Health Professionals in 19-Mar-13 • Employment Pos1t1ons in the Federal Republic of Germany !·----·----·---··--- ----··----------------·---------·-·--·---·--------------·---,------,Spain [Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of Science and I 18-Mar-13

Technology Information and Communications Technology of the Republic of the Philippines and the State Secretariat for Telecommunications and the Information Society of the Ministry of Industry, Energy and Tourism of the Kingdom of Spain with regard to the Cooperation in the Field of Information and

r .• ------------------·C~~~.':~!ca~ion:_~~-~~ol~~L---------------·----··---·----·----------·-····-··-·· i-··---··--·-·-·--·-· iVietnam Memorandum of Understanding on Anti-Corruption between the Office of the 11-Mar-13 i Ombudsman and Republic of the Philippines and the Government of

; _____ __ _ __ 1~:~_::!_~~-~e o~:_:>_oc~~!_:~~e~~blic_~f V~tn~~------------·----------··---· ________

1

___ ···-·---·---·····----·-ISouth Korea Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of Trade and 17-Jan-13 · Industry of the Republic of the Philippines and the Ministry of Knowledge · Economy of the Republic of Korea on Trade and Economic Cooperation •.· ·--.-----· - -------~ ---- ·---·--·---·----- ·------·-·-·--------------·- ·------... -----------·-------------· -- ·---·-·----· - ·-· .. ·-·-· --··- .. _,, _____ ], ...... __ ,,_,, -- ·-··- -· .. - .

!United States Memorandum of Understanding between the Philippine National Police and 14-Dec-12 1of America New York City Police Department on Cooperation in Preventing and Combating

Transnational Crimes ' .... ____ .. ______ .... ·-·---·1·-------.. ---------··--··· .. ·------------------------·----------.. ··---------·------.. ·--·--·-·------ ··-··-- -·-· ·-- ·r·--- ....... _ ·--·-- · ·-···--·" !United oint Plan of Action between the Governments of the Republic of the 11-Dec-12 !Kingdom Philippines and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

[united-- !Agreement between the Govern~ent of the Republic ~fthe Philippine;-;;;nd thei----11~-D~~::J:2 IKingdom Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Norhtern Ireland

·.· ·-·- - -----i·~~_ri-~em~g-~~~:~~:_:: _____ ·-----------------------------------------------------r·-- ------ --- - __ , :South Korea Memorandum of Understanding Between the Department of Science and 19-Nov-121 . Technology of the Republic of the Philippines and the Ministry of Public ' Administration and Security of the Republic of Korea on Cooperation in · Information and Communications Technology r - ··------·-· ·- ---· -------,---------·----- ---------------------·------·--------------···- .. ·---------.. ·----·--·,- --·--.. -----·---- . !Taiwan Memorandum of Understanding between the Taipei Economic and Cultural 18-Nov-12

Office in the Philippines and the Manila Economic and Cultural Office in Taiwan

: ... -·------ ____ .. ____ ~,on <:9~£>-~-~~~ion H~alt~=~~~~-=-~--------- ____________________________ -----·- --,------.. -·-····--·--·--.. -·--1Thailand Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the Kingdom of 14-Nov-12 . Thailand and the Government of the Republic of the Philippines Relating to Air ' Services

:~~~:~~an·-. -- -r~~~~n~'.~~~~:e~;;i~~ ~~~:~~~~hic~:~s~~[:-~;tF~:~;~1i1Pf ~~~~~~ci- th-~-E ~-r; p-~~~··1 - o7-N~-v-i2: ~ ____ ,, _____ --.... -·-"··--i----· __________ ,, ______ ,, ____ . ______________ ,, ___ ... ___ -- -·--· -----------------------·---·---·-···----.. --.. --- -·--···· ·1·"· .................... .. 1Australia Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the 24-0ct-12

Government of Australia Relating to Air Services ,---·--·----·· ....... ________ , ________________________________ .. __ -----···----· --- --·----- -·--·------·-.... ·--- .... ...... . ----· ............. _._ ·- - - - ,,_ -·-- -· ·--·-- -

!Spain Sports Cooperaiton Programme between the Philippine Sports Commission and J 23-0ct-12

•

c;~>ntracting

party

i:x¢c;:utiv~ Agreemerits .,, ~ile1tere1I

Title -Oat~ of Signatur~

____________________________ 11!_~~--~i~~-~-~~~~!!~~~!:l~_r!_~!_~__r:>~!n_~~-~E_orts_~?-~P-~-~~-~~_n _________________________

1

__________________ _ INew Zealand Agreement on a Working Holiday Scheme between the Government of the 23-0ct-12

Republic of the Philippines and the Government of New Zealand -_ -- ---- -- ---- -- -- --- -----1----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------___ --- --_ I _______ ----_-_------- ----;spa in Agreement of Collaboration on the Mutual Recognition of Higher Education 23-0ct-12

Studies and Academic Programs between the Commission on Higher Education of the Republic of the Philippines and the Ministry of Education, Culture and

_ _ _____________ ,5.P~!~ of t~:_~!~~~~-'11--~~-~!1.~-i~------- ____ _______ _ __ __ __ _ ___ _ __________________ ___ ___ _ ________ _ !New Zealand !Memorandum of Arrangement between the Department of National Defense of I 23-0ct-12

the Republic of the Philippines and the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Ministry of Defence of New Zealand and the New Zealand Defence Force Concerning Defense Cooperation

----------- -------- -----------1------------ ---- ------------------ -- --------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- --- -- - ---i- -------------- ----i France Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the 19-0ct-12'

Government of the French Republic on the Philippine Exhibition at the Quai

l---------~1 Branly Museum_ _ ______________________________________________

1 _____________ _

!France Declaration of Intent between the Government of the Philippines and the 19-0ct-12' ! Government of the French Republic relating to a study for energy production , from biomass

-·------- ----- - -· -··---······--·-·--- ---- ---·-·----- -- ---- --------·--··· ------· ··--·-- ---··-·-·------ - . ·------ ·--- .. --·-· ·--·-·--··-· ·- -·- -- -~-- -·- - . ·---··- ·--· -------· ---·-·· -· -1Australia Memorandum of Understanding between the Philippine National Poilce and the 02-0ct-12

Australian Federal Police on Combating Transnational Crime and Developing ________________________ 1

_: Po lic~-~-?-~P:.I"~~~~ ___ ----------------------------------------------------------------[· _______________ , !South Africa Memorandum of Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the 27-Sep-12 , Philippines and the Government of the Republic of South Africa on the i Establishment of a Bilateral Consultative Forum 1-------------------- -·----------------------------------· ------------ ----------- ----------~!---------- ------1Saud i Arabia Memorandum of Understanding between the Aeronautical Authorities of the 25-Sep-12 i Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the Government of the ; Kingdom of Saudi Arabia ~------~-------------- - -----------r---------------" iPortugal Agreement on Social Security between the Republic of the Philippines and the 14-Sep-12 1

_

:----------------- -----------~P~!:!ug~es:_~-':£l~~i_c ----------------------------------------------------------------]- ________________ __ !Argentina Memorandum of Understanding between the Philippine Sports Commission of 14-Sep-12 ·

the Republic of the Philippines and the Secretariat of Sports of the Argentine Republic on Sports Cooperation

,--------------~--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- _____ ] ____ ----·--IDenmark Agreement on Social Security Between the Republic of the Philippines and the 11-Sep-12 I

l---------------~Ki~gdom_~!_~~~-a rk _______________________________________________________________________ f ________________________ _ !United Arab Confidential Memorandum of Understanding between the Aeronautical 06-Sep-12

!En:1i~a_t_es ______

1~~!-~?rl~_i_t:5-':_f_!~~-~~p-~~l~~?_!_!_h~-~~~~i~~Y and_t~e-~~~t_e~~~~b -~~!~-~-~-~~ ________

1

____________________ _ iMexico Agreement between the United Mexican States and the Republic of the 31-Aug-12

Philippines on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Custom Matters r------------- -----------1--- ·------- ----------------··--------------------------------------- ------ ---------,- ---------- ---- ------iSouth Korea 1Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of Environment and 29-Aug-12

Natural Resources of the Republic of the Philippines and the Korea Forest

. ________________________

11Se~~ce_o!_~'2_=-~~p-~~~i~_e>_!~~re~o~-~Oe>_!)_:r~~!on_i_n _t~: ~=!~_?!_~e>_~:s~ry___ __ _ __

!Armenia Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the I 15-Aug-12 Government of the Republic of Armenia on Visa Exemption for Holders of

•. i ________________ -----,~lDi ~~~-~~-~L~-~ r O~ficia I P~~s~o rt~-------------------------------- -------·--------------------

1

______________________________ _ !United States Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the 08-Jun-12 1of America Government of the United States of America on Scientific and Technological

Cooperation ,----------- ----------·-------~------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------1------- ------------:1ta ly Agreement on Debt-For-Development swap between the Government of the 29-May-12

Republic of the Philippines and the Government of the Italian Republic -- -- -- --- -----i------------- ----------------· -------· -·----·-------------------. ·--- --------------------- ----------------- ---·-- ------------- -1 ·------ -- ------- .. -llsrael Arrangement between the Department of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of the 09-May-12

Philippines and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the State of Israel on Gainful Occuptaion for Family Members of a Member of a Diplomatic Mission or

•

tontratrtfog. ·.· parr{ ,,,

Consular Post

·. Exec1.Jtive AgrE!ernE!Ot$ -:. Qil~t~r~! oat:e.of

.· · signjlture,

'f:r~ ~~~ -----iMe~~~-~-n-d ~,:;;-~{ U~de~st~ n-di~g-b~t~~-e-~th;-G-o~~~-nm~;:;-t-~f_t_h_e_R;pub-1 ic-~- --i-- --OS-May-ll~ the Philippines represented by the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) and the Agence Francaise De Developpement (AFD) on AFD's Development Cooperation Activities in the Philippines

rJ-~-.pa.~ ----Exchang; of N.otes ~. f the Jap~-~~~~ .Official De··-v_e_l_o_p_m_e_n_t_A--s-si-s-ta_n_c_e_on Non i--27-Apr--l2

Project Grant Aid for the Restoration and Disaster Prevention I . ·-- ·- ·-·--·-·--···-·1-··-·------· --·-·····-·····--·--- ·--·-··--·--- ··-····-·····-------··-·-·----------------··---------·-------- -··· ---------- ·-·------ ·1 ··-··· ---- --------·--- ... !Russian Memorandum of Understanding between the Philippines and Russia on 16-Apr-12

~~~~~~:.i~~~----,~f~0

:e~~~~?s~}~r:::;l~~~b;:::~~~~~;~l~::-:~:~. ;~;:h~R;-j;~blic-~t-th~---- --·-,----io=.A:p-;=12 Philippines and the Government of the Kingdom of Cambodia '.--·--··------ _____________ T______________________ ---------------------·----------------------···------··1-··--------·-·-

Qata r 1Memorandum of Understanding on Tourism Cooperation between the 10-Apr-12 Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the Government of the State of Qatar

1 - - ·- ---·-- - ------·---·----------- ·- . ·- -·- - .. ------ -- - • -------~--------·--· - ____________ .,__ ------~------ -------------· ---------- ---· ----. ----·-----··--- .•

!Kuwait Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the Government of the State of Kuwait on Agricultural and

23-Mar-12

Fisheries Cooperation ·-·---------·----'i--·---------------·------·-·---------------------------l--------------!Kuwait Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the 23-Mar-12·

!Kuwait

Government of the State of Kuwait on the Waiver of Visa Requirements for Holders of Diplomatic, Special and Official Passports

Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the Government of the State of Kuwait in the Field of Labor ,Cooperation ,

23-Mar-12

.-------·---··r-·-··--------------------------·--------------------------------,------------"

!Lebanon Memorandum of Understanding on Labor Cooperation between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines Represented by the Department of Labor and Employment and The Government of the Republic of Lebanon Represented by the Ministry of Labor

\~;d;~ · -1~~;.~JE~~~~~'~;::~~~~:~:~";!~!~:Ei~~~"~~::i~:~t~i Filipino

rPhilippines/Department of Labour and Employment

01-Feb-12

29-Jan-12

,---·· ----- --·-------r:· -:--------. -----·- -- -------·:-·--.---·-------. -·-----:-------=---------- ------------. ·:--------.. --- ·---------·-r-· -- ---- -----·------jCook Island Joint Communique Establishing D1plomat1c Relations between the Philippines 12-Dec-ll

1 and the Cook Islands

lF~~~~-~------,Pr~t~-ZolAme--nd_i_n_g_t-he--A-g-re-e-ment bet\.Vee-;:;the Govern~ent of the Republic oi_l __ 25~t.Jo~=ii

1the Philippines and the Government of the French Republic for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with Respect to Taxes on

:-- ---·----------· ---···---~'! nco_~~-----------------------------. ---·---------------------·· --------·----------------:-· __

1 ___________________ __

!South Korea Framework Agreement on Grant Aid between the Government of the Republic 21-Nov-11 · of the Philippines and the Government of the Republic of Korea -- ----------- ·----------,----· ---------------------------------·---~-----·----·-----~ iSouth Korea Framework Agreement on Grant Aid between the Government of the Republic 21-Nov-11

i------·· ____

1

of the Philippines ~~~~h:_~~~~me~~--?f the Republic of Korea _______

1

_________ _

' . .Pakistan Program for Cultural Exchanges between the Government of the Republic of the 04-Nov-11 . Philippines and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan for 2011-2015 , .. --- ·--------- ---·-----··-~·--·------------------------------· ---------- ----------------------·--·-------------- ··--·--1-···------ ... --·------· -· !Vietnam Memorandum of Understanding between the Philippine Navy and the Vietnam 26-0ct-11 : .... ------------·· _____

1~_:o~le~-~a~_!or E~h~~~-=~~~t_9LMu~-~~~~-eratio~nd _l_~!?r~~-!i~~-~~~ri~-~

1 ______________ _

!Vietnam Memorandum of Agreement on the Establishment of a Hotline Communication 26-0ct-11 : Mechanism between the Philippine Coast Guard and the Vietnam Marine Police ... - ---····-- ......... ·······--]----·------------·-·----------·---- --------· ----·····-------·----·-- ---- ---·----·-·--··--------·- ·-· --···--·--····---·-- -- --··1 · ------·----· ....... --·-iSpa in Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of National Defense 03-0ct-ll

of the Republic of the Philippines and the Ministry of Defense of the Kingdom of Spain Regarding Defense Cooperation

- . ·-

(

Contracting .. .. party.

,China

· Ex~c:;utive Agreemerns ; ail~te·ral· · · .. ~--,,·,!~]~ •.

Tltle . . ',

Memorandum of Understanding between the Philippine News Agency (PNA) and the Xinhua News Agency of the People's Republic of China

Date· of Signature

31-Aug-11

1China !Memorandum of Understanding between the Philippine Presidential I 31-Aug-11 Communication Operations Office (PCOO) and the State of Council Information

, _____________ .~!~~-=-J~CIOl~f Chin~~~ Fri~~~-y Exchan?es a~-~OOE_erati?._~---··------i·-----------· !South Korea Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of Labor and 30-Aug-11 · Employment, Republic of the Philippines and the Ministry of Employment and I ' Labor, Republic of Korea on the Sending and Receiving of Workers under the

, __ -·-·······- _ ___ .. _____ ~· E ~-P.-~Y~-~~~~e_r_~~t Sy~!=~~!-~~=~----- __ .. _ ________ _______________ ______ ______ ___ _ __ __

1_______ __ -·······----.

;Paraguay Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the 25-Aug-11 Government of the Republic of Paraguay on the Waiver of Visa Requirements

i.! ______ ..... ___ ·····-·-·i:f~~-~-?l?_:~_s _?f_~~~?-~~!i~~_ri~9_!ficia I~~~~~~~_:; _______________________________ --····

1

____________________ _ !Brunei Memorandum of Understanding on Tourism Cooperation between the 01-Jun-111 , Government of the Republic of the Philippines and Yang Di-Pertuan of Brunei

Darussalam r··· -------:·. ---··-··-·--r··-·--------------··-······--··-··--·-·;·----------------···-·-··---·---·---·---·-···-··· --·-··-:-·--·-··--····-i-·-·------··---·-· __ , 'Brunei Memorandum of Understanding Between the Government of the Republic of 01-Jun-11 · the Philippines and the Government of His Majesty the Sultan and Yang Di-

, ___ _t:~t~~-n.?_t.~r~_n~~~-a!_~~al~-~-~~-~p_o~!~~?.?P..:_r_a_~i_?.~----- __ _____ _ __ _ ____ . _ ____ _ ____ _ !Brunei

1Brunei

Memorandum of Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines through the Department ofTransportation and Communications and the Government of His Majesty the Sultan and Yang Di-Pertuan of Brunei Darussalam through the Ministry of Communications Concerning Cooperation in the Field of Shipping and Ports

Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines through the Department of Agriculture and the Government of His Majesty the Sultan and Yang Di-Pertuan of Brunei Darussalam through the Ministry of Industry and Primary Resources on Food Security and Agricultural

01-Jun-11

01-Jun-11

~ -----· _____________ fcl~~~~-=~~~o_n ____________ --·-- .. ···--·- ·-·-··-·····------ ----------------------------------------- -----·-·· -----· ---·1····· -------··-········ 1Dominica oint Communique on the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations between the 29-Apr-11 , Commonwealth of Dominica and the Republic of the Philippines r---------------·- -----------·-··------------------------·-----------···--·-·---,----·-·-----------··-. iltaly Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the Republic of 23-Mar-11'

the Philippines and the Government of the Italian Republic for the Italian ,Assistance to the Agrarian Reform Community Development Support Program

' -···· -·····- ·- .. -----~-----·------------------------------------····---------------------·-------··----·--···----·--····----·1····· ---····-··-· .. -·c

India Executive Program of Cultural Exchanges Between the Government of the 15-Mar-11' Republic of the Philippines and the Government of the Republic of India for the Years 2011-2013

,... " ............. [,·······"" ..• ..... ···-· ····-·-····· "··- - ······--·-·--·-----· ··-··-· --······ ·-·--- ···-----·-···---···· - . """""" ·····-······· ··-·-·-·· - ··-·--·-·" - ···------ ... ······-- ... .

ilndonesia Memorandum of Understanding Between the Philippine National Police (PNP) and the Indonesian National Police (INP) on Cooperation in Preventing and Combating Transnational Crimes and Capacity Building

08-Mar-11

r··---- ·-·------·-i·----------------·----·-- ·------------·----·--·-····----··· -·····---···-·1···-·-·--------·-··--llndonesia Memorandum of Understanding on Basic Education between the Government 08-Mar-11 of the Republic of the Philippines and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia

,---------·--·· . --------i----·-------------------·-··•····---------· -------··------------------------------,---··--·-·------------· !Uzbekistan Memorandum of Understanding on Cooperation and Bilateral Consultations 03-Mar-11

between the Department of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of the Philippines and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Uzbekistan

Iran Memorandum of Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the 17-Feb-11 ,. -·--- -·-· - -·" ·····--~- ··------------·-··-----···-···--·-·-····· ------------·-·----··-------·-······-- --·--···--·--·

Philippines and the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran on the Waiver of Visas for Holders of Diplomatic and Official Passports

;------.. -----·----·--·-----------------------·----------------···-------------~·-·----·-·-·---·---' :Brazil Undertaking Concerning the Recognition of Certificates under the Terms of

1978 STCW Convention, as amended, between the Maritime Training Council on Behalf of the Republic of the Philippines and Diretoria de Portos e Costas on

07-Feb-11

·- Exec::utiveAgreement$·rail~t~ral " ·,·_; ,.

Behalf of the Federative Republic of Brazil

· Dateof Sighature·

il-ra-~---------------[-Ex-e~-u-ti~e_p_r;gr;m-of th-;-T~urism Coope-ra-r-10-n-Memorandum betwe~;:;th~---i·----2-9--N-~~-=io-

Department of Tourism of the Republic of the Philippines an the Iran Cultural I I

Heritage and Tourism Organization of the Islamic Republic of Iran ils-r-ael-- -----1Ag~;;~~ntb~t;ee-;;-th;-G_o_v-er-n~-e-nt_o_f-th_e_R-ep~bli-~~fth~P-h_i_li_p_p .-in;s_a_n_d_t~--2-3::-N-~~~lO-

- Government of the State of Israel on Mutual Assistance in Customs Matters I ,----------- -- -- _____ [ ________________________ -------------------------------------------------------------··--- ------r----·------ -----·---·- - ----·-:switzerla nd Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the 19-Nov-10

Swiss Federal Council on the Performance of Remunerated Activities by Dependants of Members of Diplomatic Missions, Consular Posts, and Permanent Missions

jCanada 'Memorandum of Understanding Relative to Government-To-Government I 12-Nov-10 Transaction in Defense and Military-Related Equipment, Materials and Systems and/or Services between the Department of National Defense of the Republic of the Philippines (PHL-DND) and Canadian Commercial Corporation

··---·--------------------------1~~------------------------------------------------------------1·---- __________________ _, !Vietnam Memorandum of Agreement on Academic Cooperation Between The 26-0ct-10 i Commission on Higher Education of the Republic of the Philippines and The ! Ministry of Education and Training of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam ' ------ ------ - ----·----i------------·---------------- ----·-- ----------------·---------------- ----------------------- ----- - -·-!Vietnam Memorandum of Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the j Philippines and the Government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam on i Cooperation in Search and Rescue at Sea

i\tiet,;-~~---~:emorandu~ of Agreement between the Govern~ent of the Republic of th;---i·--- -26-0~t~ioJ 1

Philippines and the Government ofthe Socialist Republic of Vietnam on , Cooperation in Oil Spill Preparedness and Response ,.-- -·-·-·· ------- ----·-.-·- --r-··-------·--------~---------------- --·-··-----------~-·---·--·-----.... -·---------------- -------

!Vietnam !Memorandum of Agreement between the Department of National Defense of I 26-0ct-10 the Republic of the Philippines and the Ministry of Defense of the Socialist , _______________________ 1.~-~-publ~~~~-e_~~a~-------------·----------------·----·--------- ___

1 _____________________ _

!United States Millenium Challenge Compact between the Republic of the Philippines and the 23-Sep-10 iof America United States of America Acting through the millenium Challenge Corporation !---------- --------r.;-----------------------·--------------------------------------·---------------·---------- ------i-- --- --------------- ----~e~a m_11Memora~ um o~~~ o~ila~ra l~~~~~~~-r-28~~-~ ii ran Memorandum of Agreement Between the Government of the Republic of the 25-Jun-lQ; · Philippines and the Islamic Republic of Iran Concerning the Recognition of

Certificates of Competency of Seafarers Under the Terms of the STCW-1978

l--- ______ _____ ~~~vention_______________________ ---·------------------------------;1srael -!Memorandum of Understanding on Logistic and Defense Industry Cooperation I 08-Jun-10 1 Between the Department of National Defense of the Republic of the Philippines , and the Ministry of Defense of the State of Israel

. 'E,~ec;1.1.tiv~ p.gl'~~m~ots ~ Myitila~er~tr · . .--. -. ;-,------.-.~"~'r-·;-:;,.-.. ;.,

Organiz;:iti()n l Assoc;la~iofr!1,

• -~I

'.' .1:it1e

[European Joint Declaration on Cooperation between the Republic of the Philippines !Free Trade and the EFTA States (Iceland, the Principality of Liechtenstein, the jAssociation Kingdom of Norway and the Swiss Confederation)

e~AN =-1;;~~;~:nd-cert~~AsEA~~=no:ic~g~.~=:·_~;::ct!~~--= [_Di:M~~-i3 European Union

iAsEAN

i

Financing Agreement between the Republic of the Philippines and the European Union "EU-Philippines Trade Related Technical Assistance Project 3"

- -·r ---· - --- -- ___ ,, ____ ---- -··· ---- .. -~- ...

Third Protocol to Amend the Framework Agreement on Comprehensive Economic Cooperation between the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and the People's Republic of China

I .. --· --- ---- ... --r----------- -----------.. ---------- -... ________ .. _ ............... ________________________ .. ____ ... _. __ .. __ ----.. ------ ------ -·-·---.. -ASEAN Protocol to Incorporate Technical Barriers to Trade and Sanitary and

Phytosanitary Measures into the Agreement on Trade in Goods of the Framework Agreement on Comprehensive Economic Co-operation

I !between the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and the People's Republic of China

03-Dec-12

19-Nov-12

19-Nov-12

!---·-------.. ---------------··-- ____ .. ________________________________________ .. __ ........ 1··-------.. --------------

ASEAN Memorandum of Understanding between the Governments of the 29-Aug-12 Participating Member States of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) on the Second Pilot Project for the Implementation of a

I

I Regional Self-Certification System

'

PE MSEA ____ -- -Ag~~~~~~t-betw~~~--t-h~-G~vern ~~~-t ~fth-;·R~p-~b'l"i"Z~f"th;P-hi Ii pp-i ~~~----.

. and the Partnership in Environmental Management for the Seas of East I

I Asia (PEMSEA) Establishing the PEMSEA Resource Facility Center

31-Jul-12

1

-------.. .. ---- --------- -- ----- ---- ------ ------- ___________ .... _ -------------_______________ .. ___________ .. __ ....... - - - _r_ .. ___ -- -- -------- . - -----AS EAN Memorandum of Understanding between the Governments of the 06-Jul-12 ·

I

Member States of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and the I Government of the People's Republic of China on Health Cooperation ----· ---· ·-·----.. ,--- . -___ .. ---·--- -------------------------------------------- ............ ---- ..... - . -·--- ...... ---- ...... - -- .... ... . ..... -·-·1 ·---......... _ .............. ... .. ..... .

Global Green Global Green Growth Institute Agreement 21-Jun~12

Gro~h . Institute (GGGI) Establishmen i t as i , . I llnternat1onal 1

lorganization I I .. -- .. ---. -- .. --------~------· ------------- -------.. ·-----------.. -- ------- ---- _____ . ___ .. __________________________ ---.. -- .... ------- -----r· --- -------- ---- -........... __ _ IMO 1Maritime Labor Convention 2006 27-Apr-12 r---.. ----------·r,·----------------------------------------------------.. ·----·---- -----·-·------------.. - .. -1ASEAN 1ASEAN Agreement on Customs J 30-Mar-12

IAsE-AN-------r~~~~~~r:~:;~:~~~-:~~·!::~~:;~~~~~~~~:~~~~=~:~~~~~-i~~s---l·-----·16~0~~~11 ,.-................... ---------------~---------------------------- ------------, .. ·----------·-----

IASEAN Agreement on the Establishment of the ASE AN H umanita ria n Assista nee 17-Nov-11

Coordinating Centre on Disaster Management (AHA Centre)

I·-•'"•--- .... --·- -·-· _______________________________ ,, ________ ,, ____ , ______ ......................... _ .. __ , .. _..... _.,, ................ _ ·-ASEAN Second Protocol to Amend the Agreement on Trade in Goods under the 17-Nov-11 i Framework Agreement on Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Among 1·

I the Government of the Member Countries of the Association of

1

Southeast Asian Nations and the Republic of Korea I

f SEAN-----~P~~:~~~~oA~~~:::~~h~r~~~o~ds:;~:~:~e0~:~:p~i:~~~:~~·~;r::~:-~t-· 1-- ----i6-No~~ i l. I on Comprehensive Economic Cooperation between the Association of I I Southeast Asian Nations and the People's Republic of China

1

I................. .. ..... --- ---· --· ,.,___ ......... ___ ,, ___ .. ____________ .... , ... ____________ , ____ , .. ---·-----·-·----·----------------------· --- ·------·-·"[''"""'""' .... -------.. -· ... --· ASEAN Agreement between the Governments of the Member States of the 08-Nov-ll i Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the Republic of I I Korea on Forest Cooperation

•

Q~g~~izatiQO /~ssociati'on •....

i:><e~4ti\I~ Agr~~m~nts ~~ Nl'u1t:n~i~ra1 ·, .

UN IAgreem~nt- ;n the Establishment of the Regional Secretariat of the Coral ! ,Triangle Initiative on Coral Reefs, Fisheries and Food Security

Signatur~ 28-0ct-11

jASEAN -- ---- ---[ASENA-Pi~~-Three Emergency Rice Reserve Agreement (APTERR) ---o7~-0~t-1i

1

-------- - - - -- ------------- ------- ----------------- ---------- ------------------------ ------ --------------- ------------------------United Memorandum of Understanding between the Philippines and the United

!Nations Nations on Contributing Resources to the UN Disengagement Observer

Force (UNDOF)

llLO -- --1~~~~~:;-nti~~--i89_(_c~~~~~tion--c~-~~~;;:;i~-g-D~-~~~tw~-~kf~-roo-~;-~ti~--

IASEAN ____________ ~~~;~:~~::i~~:-~~~~~~~~~~ ~:~:~~l-~~~i-~~~~:-~~;~~~~:i~~-~---1 Challenges

[ASEAN- - -r:~~~~oJr~~-;:~;:;~;:~-:~!ho~~s~~;~~fC~~~it-~;~t;~~d-~-~th-;-[ASEA_N ______ -- --IProt~~~lt;Am~~d-t-he Ag~;~-~~~-t-;~ T~a d~i~-G~-~-u-n d;~--t h-e -------

. Framework Agreement on Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Among the Government of the Member-Countries of ASEAN and the Republic of Korea

11-Jul-11

16-Jun-11

19-May-11

04-May-11

30-Nov-10

IA-SE-AN-----~Air Tran_s_p_o_r_t _A_g-re-em~~-1-;;;-tw_e_e_n_t_h;Go_v_e_r_n-ments _o_f_t-he-M-;m~--- _ [ ____ 1_2--Nov--1-0"·

States of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and the Government 1 of the People's Republic of China and its Protocol 1

rsEAN . -T~~:~:~i~~~:,~~Edn~~!::~~ :~~h~;:i:~~~f :~;~~o~!h~~~tA;i~~ - I -12:No;-10 I -- ---- --- ------ ----·1·-------- --------------- ----------------------------------------------- --- ---- --- --- -------- --1ASEAN ASEAN Multilateral Agreement on the Full Liberalisation of Passenger Air 12-Nov-10 I Services and its Protocols 1 and 2 ASEAN ____ ----[;..g;~~-~en-t~~-~ltu_r_a_1 c~~per~-t-~-;:;t;~t;-e-;;:;th;-i.i~~;r~~;~t~fthe

Member States of the Association of Southeast Asian nations (ASEAN) and the Government of the Russian Federation

30-0ct-10

IUN ________ Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and 29-0ct-10

Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization to the Convention on Biological Diversity

/ASEAN-----------1~~~~;~~~~:~~:~:~:~-~~~~-!~~~~~~~:~~~--~~~~:c:~a~;;~k~-------------i-----29~oct~ io

JuN-- -- --- -----[~~~::~~:t~~ ~~~~~~:~~~i~:~r~:~~~~~01~te~natio~-a1Anti-c~~rupti~~----r------oi=s;;;_10~

IAS-EAN ___ ffhirdP~~t--;;~~1-;;~;~di~g th~T;eaty ;;-fAmity and Cooper~tion in _______ l _______ 23~J~l-10:

!southeast Asia ... .

• ,,

jltagatnaran ng 'mtgnapang ~anlabas II ~.

OFFICE OF g~~~~~p HECEIVEl)

DEC 1 o 2014

. BY: ~ ~epattmeMnt _1f: ttrcn ~ffatr%

MARITIME AND OCEAN AFFAIRS OFFICE

VERY URGENT

MEMORANDUM FOR THE ASSISTANT SECRET ARY, OAA

FROM

SUBJECT

DATE

. ~.~ft. Alln:.. YB ETH R. DEAPERA · Ir Acting Assistant Secretary

Kalayaan Island Group (KIG)

9 December 2014

[---··-~···--··"··~·-·----···-"····-·.--.... .,, __ _ p1q \'i:.::v" . .

.. ..:...'~'..~:i:!L:.~: .... :::.:.Jl.:::·:.:::.:::::~:~::2:::~::::: .. ·.·.·:

With reference to OAA's Memorandum dated 4 December 2014 requesting for a "list of island territories under PH jurisdiction," MOAO transmits the following:

• A matrix indicating Bajo de Masinloc and the features in the Kalayaan Island Group (within the limits of Presidential Decree No. 1596) based on· Philippine Nautical Chart No. 4723A which was provided by the National Mapping and Resource Information .Authority (NAMRIA); and

• A copy of a list of Philippine-occupied ·features in the KIG based on the information provided.by the Philippine Air Force (PAF). ·

MOAO wishes to inform that the 'Memorial submitted by the. Philippines to the Arbitral Tribunal does not contain a list of Philippine-occupied features. Further, MOAO recommends to exercise caution in referring to the geographical ~eatures as "island terrifories" since the Philippine position is that none of the features in the South China Sea is an "island" in the true meaning of Article 121 of UNCLOS.1

. .

For the Assistant Secretary's information/reference.

1 UNCLOS Article 121 states: Article 121

Regime of islands 1. An island is a naturally formed area of.land, suffoimded by water, Which is above water at high tide. 2. Except as provided for in paragraph 3, the.tenitorial sea, the contiguous zone, the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf of an island are determined in accordance with the provisions of this Convention applicable to other land territory. . 3. Rocks which carinot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own shall have no exclusive economic zone or continental shelf

2330 Jaoxtts ~lbb., ~a5ap QI:itp, 1300 ~btlippfnes • ~et .flo. 834--4000 • b.11tlh1;bfa.gob.pb

. MARITIME AND OCEAN AFFAIRS OFFICE.

VERY URGENT

MEMORANDUM FOR THE., ASSISTANT SECRETARY, .OAA

FROM /l,1_1L YBE~ DEAPERA lf Acting Assistant s~~etar¥1/A I

. "t ?"/._/ SUBJECT Kalayaan Island Group (KIG)

DATE 9 December 2014

With, reference to OAA's Memorandum dated 4 Decembed2014 requesting for a "list of island territories under PH jurisdiction," MOAG' transmits the following:

• A matrix indicating Bajo de. Masinloc. and the. features in the Kalayaan Island Group (within the limits of Presidential Decree No, .. 1596) based on Philippine Nautical Chart· No. 4 723A which was provided· by the National Mapping and Resource Information Authority· (NAMRIA); and

• A copy of a list of Philippine-occupied features in the KIG based on the information provided py the Philippine Air Force (PAF).

MOAO wishes to inform.that the Memorial submitted by. the· Philippines to.the Arbitral Tribunal does not contain a list of Philippine~occupied features. Further, MOAO recommends to exercise caution in referring to the geographical features as "island territories" since the Philippine position is. that none of the features in the South China Sea is an "island" in the true meaning of Article 121 of UNCLOS.1

For the Assistant Secretary's information/reference.

1 UNCLOS Article 121 states: Article 121

Regime of islands 1. All island is a naturally formed area of land, surrounded by water, which is above water at high tide.

· 2; Except as provided for in paragraph 3, the tetTitorial sea, the contiguous zone, the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf of an island are determined in accordance with the provisioi1s of this Convention applicable to other land te1Titory. 3. Rocks which cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own shall have no exclusive economic zone or continental shelf

•

No.

l

2

3

4

5

6

7

8 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

11·

18

19

20

21

22

2.3

24

25

26

27

28 29.

30

31 32 33

34

35

36

37

38

SCARBOROUGH SHOAL AND KALAYAAN ISLAND GROUP (WITHIN THE Lll\1ITS OF PD 1596)

FEATURES

Latitude Longitude. · Distance to nearest Baselines (RA9522)

Features Name deg. . min. I sec. deg. min. sec.

Nautical Miles (NM) (approximate center)

Parola Island 11 27 21.l 114 21 21.0 239.58 Likas· Island 11 04 53.l 115 01 16.9 195.21 Pag~asa Island 11 03 12.5 114 16 ·53. l 228.05 Paqata Island 10 43 46.9 114 21 02.7 213.27 Kota Island 10 40 08.3 114 25 22.3 207.69 .. Patag Island 10 49 07.5 115 49. 19.8 . 150.26

Lawak Island 10 44 OJ.7 115 '48 06.5 147.59 Rizal Reef 08 21 34.8 115 14 · 11.1 101.02

Zamora Reef 10 55 10.l 114 05 44.8 232.13 Gaven Reefs 10 12 30 .. 0 114 13 40.0 202.88 ChiguaReef 09 54 20.0 114 29 15.0 180.46

Panganiban Reef 09 52 45.0' 115 31 50.0 116.94 Mabini Reef 09 41 00:0 l14. 15 45.0 185.17

· Kagitingan Reef 09 39 30.0 112 59 00.0 252.32 Calderon Reef 08 51 30.0 112 . 50 00.0 247.05

.. Pugad Island 11 25 45.0 114 20 00.0 239.60 Bisugo Shoal 11 21 00.0 114 36 45.0 223.92

Sand Cay 10 22 30.0 114 29 15.0 194.74

PetleyReef 10 24 30~0 114 35 20.0 190.77 MalvarReef 10. 20 50.0 114 42 00.0 183.28 Paredes Reef 10 03 50.0 113 51 . 00.0 217.83 Binago Island IO 10 45.0 114 22 20.0 194.62 Rurok Island 09 52 40.0 114 19 30.0 187.92 Collins Reef 09 45 20.0 114 13 40.0 189.16

Lendao Reef 09 45 30.0 114 22 00.0 182.18 Sin Cowe East Reef 09 52 20.0 114 35 20.0. 174.27

Kanluran Reef 08 51 00.0 112 13 30.0 282.60 Gitna Reef 08 ~4 30.0 112 21 05.0 275.80

Silangan Reef 08 49 00.0 112 35 . 05.0 261.14

Hizon Reef 08" . 57 00.0 113 41 . 15.0. . 198.87

De Jesus Reef 08 48 15:0 113 59 00.0 179.61 Osmefia Reef 08 43 . 00.0 114 11 00.0 166.80

Pigeon Reef 08 51 10.0 . 114 39 00.0 142.59 Mascardo Reef 08 10 00.0 113 18 10.0 214.01

Kalantiaw Cay 07 53 19.5 112 54 54.5 236.66 Mariveles Reef 07 58 20.0 113 54 40.0 177.28

Antonio Luna Bank OT 44 30.0 114 16 10.0 156.26

Ligaw Island 10 22 20.0 114 22 45.0 200.11

Source: Philippines Nautical Chart No 4723A

' 39 Leslie Bank 11 05 20.0 117 28 00.0 90.26

40 Dalag Bank 11 04 30.0 117 16 30.0 99.96 41 Baybayin Dagat Shoal 10 48 00.0 117 46 20.0 66.,37

42 KahoyBank 10 36 30.0 . 117 10 20.0 85.73

43 Kayumanggi Bank 10 41 15.0. 117 22 15.0 81.00

44 Recto Bank 11 25 50.0 116 53 00.0 130.15

45 Marie Louise Bank 11 . ·. 58 33.0 116 ' 56 07.0 142.11 46 Nares Bank . 11 25 50.0 116 10 00.0 ' 162.26 47 Hirane Shoal 10 53 . 00.0 116 26 00.0 127.86 48 Hopkins Reef 10 48 30.0 116 11 00.0 134.92 49 Del Pilar Reef 10 50 45.0 116 51 20.0 108.92 50 ·Baker Reef 10 43 3o.o·· 116 09 00.0 132.72 51 Amy Douglas Bank 10 50 00.0 116 14 30.0 133.59 52 l1i0quois Reef 10 35· 30.0 116 10 00.0 126.32 53 Magat Salamat Reef 10 30 10.0 116 40 10.0 101.84 54 Katimugan Banks 10 20 oo,o 116 29 30.0 101.88 55 Huba Iteef 10 07 45.0 116 07 20.0 108.82 56 Sabina Shoal 09 45 00.0 116 30 00.0 77.05 57 Rajah Soliman Reef 09 35 50.0' 116 10 20.0 86.39 58 Abad Santos Shoal 09. 27 20.0 116 55 20.0 46.79

59 Dalagang Bukid Shoal 09 ' 10 15.0 116 28 00.0 57.23 60 Kanduli Shoal 09 03 00.0 . 116 39 45.0 43:57 61 Hasa-hasa Shoal 08 51 20.0. 116 16 20.0 57..43 62 Quirino Atoll 10 29 50.0 115 45 20.0 139.67

63 Diego Silang Reef 10 ' 15 20.0 115 21 40.0 148.40 .

64 Jacinto Reef fo 11 45.0 115 17 50.0 149.29 65 Ayungin Shoal 09 44 10.0 ' 115 51 45.0 106.06

66 Arellano Reef 09 22 55.0 115 26 50.0 115.57

67 Bulig Shoal 09 19 33.8 115 55 '33.6. 89.43

68 Tatlong-tulis Shoai 11 28 15.0 114 40 10.0 226.21 . 69 Lakandula Reef 11 10 00.0 114 47 '45.0 208.58

70 Balagtas Reef 10 52 30.0 114 55 oo:o 192.03

71 Burgos Reef 10 01 40.0 114 02 . 00.0 207.37

72 Loveless Reef 09 50 00.0 114 15 30.0 189.99 73 Holiday Reef 09 57 20.0 114 33 40.0 178.21,

74 Julian Felipe Reef 10 00 00.0 114 39 20.0 174.73

75 Gabriela Silang Reef 08 . 06 30.0 114 08 00.0 164.40.

76 Pawikan Shoal 08 07 50.0 114 39 40.0 133.19 77 Gomez Reef 10 14 00.0 113 38 40.0 233.46

78 Dagohoy Reef 09 12 30.0 113 40 00.0 204.76

79 Magsaysay Reef 08 04 20.0 113 10 00.0 221.81

80 Mariano Cay 08 30 00.0 114 21 00.0 154.39

81 Thomas Claudio Shoal 07' 59.· 20.0 114 52 00.0 120.41

82 Scarborough Shoal 15 11 00 117 45 00 121.48

Source: Philippines Nautical Chart No 4723A

:

FEATuRES OCCUPIED BY THE PHILIPPINES IN THE SPRA TL Y ISLAND1

Philippine Name International Name

1. Rizal Reef ·Commodore Reef 2. Patag Island Flat Island 3. Panata Island LankiamCay 4. Kota Loaita Island 5. Lawak Nanshan Island 6. Parola Northeast Cay 7. Pagasa Thitu Island 8. Likas West York Island 9. Ayungin Second Thomas Shoal

1 Based on the information provided by the Philippine Air Force.

• .~

.Jaran n~ mi~napanu ~anlaban

w ~ JDepartment of jf ordgn ©:ffaitSJ

OFFICE OF AMERICAN AFFAIRS

OAA~ efU'-01-2014-M /apls

l\llEMORANDUM FOR THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY, MARITIME AND OCEAN. AFFAIRS OFFICE

COPY The Undersecretary for Policy The Assistant Secretary for Legal Affairs

FROM

··' /) / /.,,/ . /L._/ 7t0ct !' ' A;~/«4, ~" /&~~~'{ . MARIA ANDRELIT A S. AUSTRIA Assistant Secretary

SUBJECT Request for a List of Island Territories under PH Jurisdiction

DATE 04 December 2014

Reference is made to the recently concluded Oral Arguments on ·the PH-US Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) conducted by the Supreme Court on 19 and 26 November 2014. ·

We would like to request for a list of island territories under PH jurisdiction, for onward transmittal to the Office of.; the .solicitor-General OAA notes that the list should be consistent with what was contained· in the PH arbitration case filed in Marth 20-14.

This will be a supporting document to the Final Memorandum to be submitted by the . Solicitor General to the Supreme Court in defense of EDCA.

We would appreciate receiving the requested information on or before 09 December 2014.

Thank you. r 0.'1 0 :t 6 3 ·~

MARITIME AND OCEAN AFFAIRS OFHc; R·ecE 1

.:-: n ¥,. y · i11. {Lt..-<.f~· • Jill •• • r. 7 k • ......._.

01.\-:--r: ___JlE._Ji s 2014 · _ · "i\ '.I""· ::Y" if" f!1v '~' ··-·-·-~---.. ' f !!

{.

EDCA Provision

Article I PURPOSE AND SCOPE

1. This Agreement deepens defense cooperation between the Parties and maintains and develops their individual and collective capacities, in furtherance of Article II of the MDT, which states that "the Parties separately and jointly by self-help and mutual aid will maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack," and within the context of the VF A. This includes:

(a) Supporting the Parties' shared goal of improving interoperability of the Parties' forces, and for the Armed Forces of the Philippines ("AFP"), addressing shortterm capabilities gaps, promoting long-term modernization, and helping maintain and develop additional maritime security, maritime domain awareness, and humanitarian assistance and disaster relief capabilities; and

Relevant Treaty Provision

Restates and recgfirms the principle of defensive preparation found in Art. II of the MDT.

L4N N EX " -~E· ,,,.;,_.,,.

Constitutional Powers of the President

Recognizes the VFA as one of the mechanisms through which J 1987 CONSTITUTION, Art. VII, Sec. 18. defensive preparation can be accomplished.

The President, as Commander-in-Chief, mcry order the armed forces to MDT: Art. II: I take steps necessary to carry out the purpose of the MDT. In

con_;imction with hzs power as chief architect of foreign relations, he "In order more effectively to achieve the objective of \ mcry enter into agreements implementing defense treaties. this Treaty, the Parties separately and jointly by self-help and mutual aid will maintain and develop their CONST., Art. VII, Sec. 17. individual and collective capacity to resist armed The President, as the Chief Exemtive tasked with the faithful attack." exm1tion of the laws, mcry take steps necessary to implement the

The goals enumerated in Art. I, 1 (a) of the EDCA fall under the MDT obligation to maintain and develop their individual and collective capaciry to resist armed attack.

VFA: Art. I (l't paragraph):

provisions of the MDT and VF A.

As the chief architect of foreign poliry (Pimentel v. Exemtive Secretary, G.R No. 158088, Ju!J 6, 2005), the President mcry enter into agreements implementing existing treary obligations.

(b) Authorizing access to "As used in this Agreement, "United States personnel" Agreed Locations in the territory of the means United States military and civilian personnel Philippines by United States forces on a temporarily in the Philippines in connection with rotational basis, as mutually determined by activities approved by the Philippine Government ... " the Parties.

..

VF A: Art. III, 1:

"1. The Government of the Philippines shall facilitate the admission of United States personnel and their departure from the Philippines in connection with activities covered by this agreement."

VF A: Art. VI, 1-2:

1. Except for contractual arrangements, including United States foreign military sales letters of offer and acceptance and leases of military equipment, both governments waive any and all claims against each other for damage, loss or destruction to property of each other's armed forces or for death or injury to their military and civilian personnel arising from activities to which this agreement applies.

2. For claims against the United States, other than contractual claims and those to which paragraph 1 applies, the United States Government, in accordance with United States law regarding foreign claims, will pay just and reasonable compensation in settlement of meritorious claims for damage, loss, personal injury or death, caused by acts or omissions of United States personnel, or otherwise incident to the non-combat activities of the United States forces.

Access to Agreed Locations necessary to carry out the operational requirements of "activities" referred to in the above provisions of the T/F A

q.

2. In furtherance of the MDT, the Parties mutually agree that this Agreement provides the principal provisions and necessary authorization with respect to Agreed Locations.

3. The Parties agree that the United States may undertake the following types of activities in the territory of the Philippines in relation to its access to and use of Agreed Locations: security cooperation exercises; joint and combined training activities; humanitarian assistance and disaster relief activities; and such other activities as may be agreed upon by the Parties.

Article II DEFINITIONS

1. "United States personnel" means United States military and civilian personnel temporarily in the territory of the Philippines in connection with activities approved by the Philippines, as those terms are defined in the VFA.

VFA: Art. I (1st par.); Art. III, 1; Art. VI, 1-2

Access to Agreed Locations is necessary to carry out the operational requirements of "activities" referred to in the above provisions of the VF A.

VFA: Art. I (1st par.); Art. III, 1; Art. VI, 1-2

Under the VFA, US Forces are permitted to carry out a broad range of "activities" (Lim v. Executive Semtary, G.R No. 151445, April 11, 2002)

VFA: Art.1

"As used in this Agreement, "United States personnel" means United States military and civilian personnel temporarily in the Philippines in connection with activities approved by the Philippine Government. Within this definition:

1. The term "military personnel" refers to military members of the United States Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Coast Guard.

CONST., Art. VII, Sec. 17.

The President, as the Chief Executive tasked with the faithjit! execution of the law, mqy take steps necessary to implement the provisions of the MDT and VF A, including providing the armed forces of a treary al(y access to and authoriz.ation to perform adivities in locations owned ry the AFP.


The President, as the Chief Exeezttive tasked with the faithful execution of the laws, mqy take steps necessary to implement the provisions of the MDT and VF A, including providing the armed forces of a treary al(y access to and authoriz.ation to p~iform activities in locations owned ry the AFP.


The President, as the Chief Exeezttive tasked with the faithfitl execution of the laws, mqy take steps necessary to implement the provisions of the MDT and l/F A, including providing the armed forces qf a treary al(y access to and authoriz.ation to perform activities in locations owned ry the AFP.

•

2. "United States forces" means the entity comprising United States personnel and all property, equipment, and materiel of the United States Armed Forces present in the territory of the Philippines.

2. The term "civilian personnel" refers to individuals who are neither nationals of nor ordinarily resident in the Philippines and who are employed by the United States armed forces or who are accompanying the United States armed forces, such as employees of the American Red Cross and the United Services Organization."

The VF A a!reac!J authorizes the presence of the components that constitute 'Vnited States forces":

Personnel-

VFA: Art. I:

"As used in this Agreement, "United States personnel" means United States military and civilian personnel temporarily in the Philippines in connection with activities approved by the Philippine Government ... "

VFA: Art. III, 1:



The President, as the Chief Executive tasked with the faithjit! execution of the laws, mqy take steps necessary to implement the provisions of the MDT and VF A.

3. "United States contractors" means companies and firms, and their employees, under contract or subcontract to or on behalf of the United States Department of Defense. United

Property, Equipment, Material -

VF A: Art. VII, 1:

"1. United States Government equipment, materials, supplies, and other property imported into or acquired in the Philippines by or on behalf of the United States armed forces in connection with activities to which this agreement applies, shall be free of all Philippine duties, taxes and other similar charges."

Aircraft and Vessels -

VF A: Art. VII, 1-2:

"1. Aircraft operated by or for the United States armed forces may enter the Philippines upon approval of the Government of the Philippines in accordance with procedures stipulated in implementing arrangements.

2. Vessels operated by or for the United States armed forces may enter the Philippines upon approval of the Government of the Philippines. The movement of vessels shall be in accordance with international custom and practice governing such vessels, and such agreed implementing arrangements as necessary."

5 !ates and armed forces have the inherent right to contract with I CONST., Art. VII, Sec. 18. and procure the senJices qfprivate entities.

The President, as Commander-in-Chiej; mC!Jl allow civilian These private entities, inc!itding foreign persons or corporations I contractors, domestic or foreign, to perform activities (sttch as

States contractors are not included as part of I have the right to do business in the Philippines unless speczjicaljy I construction) on locations owned ry the APP. the definition of United States personnel in prohibited ry law or the Constitution.

this Agreement, including within the context of the VFA.

4. "Agreed Locations" means facilities and areas I VFA: Art. I (1"' par.); Art. III, 1; Art. VI, 1-2: that are provided by the Government of the Philippines through the AFP and that United Access to Agreed Locations is necessary to carry out the States forces, United States contractors, and operational requirements of ''activities" referred to in the above others as mutually agreed, shall have the right provisions of the VF A. to access and use pursuant to this Agreement. Such Agreed Locations may be listed in an annex to be appended to this Agreement, and may be further described in implementing arrangements.

5. "Designated Authorities" means, respectively, The l/'F A gives duties to governments of the state parties (e.g., the Philippine Department of National facilitate admission and departure of personnel). The EDCA Defense, unless the Philippines otherwise clarifies the specific office responsible for implementing these provides written notice to the United States, provisions of the VF A. and the United States Department of Defense, unless the United States otherwise provides written notice to the Philippines. I VF A: Art. III, 1:



The President, as the Chief Executive tasked with the faithful execution of the laws, m<ry take steps necessary to implement the provisions of the MDT and l/'F A, including providing the armed forces of a treary aljy access to and authorization to perform activities in locations owned ry the APP.


The President, as the Chief Executive tasked with the faithful execution of the law, m<ry take steps necessary to implement the provisions of the MDT and l/'F A.

Article III AGREED LOCATIONS

VFA: Art. I (1st par.); Art. III, 1; Art. VI, 1-3.

Access to Agreed Locations is necessary to carry out the operational requirements of "activities" refemd to in the above provisions of the VF A.

1. With the consideration of the views of the Parties, the Philippines hereby authorizes and agrees that the United Sates forces, United States contractors, and vehicles, vessels, and aircraft operated by or for United States forces may conduct the following activities with respect to Agreed Locations: training; I a) transit; support and related activities;

The conduct of the em1merated activities is also a necessary consequence qf the authorization under the VF A for:

The admission and departure of personnel (VF A: Art. I; Art. III, 1);

refuelling of aircraft; temporary I b) The importation of equipment, materials, supplies (VFA: Art. VII, 1); accommodation of personnel;

communications; prepositioning of j c) The entry of aircraft and vessels (VF A, Art. VII, 1-2) equipment, supplies, and materiel; deploying

forces and material; and such other activities as the Parties may agree.

2. When requested, the Designated Authority of the Philippines shall assist in facilitating transit or temporary access by United States forces to public land and facilities (including roads, ports, and airfields), including those owned or controlled by local governments, and to other land and facilities (including roads, ports, and airfields).

The VF A gives duties to governments of the state parties (e.g., facilitate admission and departure of personne~. The EDCA clarifies the specific office responsible for implementing these provisions of the VF A.

VF A: Art. III, 1:



The President, as the Chief Executive tasked with the faithful execution of the laws, mqy take steps necessary to implement the provisions of the MDT and VF A, including providing the armed forces of a treaty al!J access to and authorization to perform activities in locations owned by the AFP.

As Chief Architect of foreign relations, the President mqy enter into agreements that implement existing treaty obligations.

1. Given the mutuality of benefits, the Parties agree that the Philippines shall make Agreed Locations available to United States forces without rental or similar costs. United States forces shall cover their necessary operational expenses with respect to their activities at the Agreed Locations.

2. The Philippines hereby grants to the United States, through bilateral security mechanisms, such as the MDB and SEB, operational control of Agreed Locations for construction activities and authority to undertake such activities on, and make alterations and improvements to, Agreed Locations. United States forces shall consult on issues regarding such construction, alterations, and improvements based on the Parties' shared intent that the technical requirements and construction standards of any such projects undertaken by or on behalf of United States forces should be consistent with the requirements and standards of both Parties.

Access to Agreed Locations is necessary to carry ottf the operational requirements of "activities" authorized ry the VFA.

Operational control extends onfy to command over subordinated forces, as required for the accomplishment of a particular mission. It is an inherent attribute of armed forces that is not subsumed when visiting another country.

Recourse to MDB and SEB implements the consultation


The President, as the Chief Executive tasked with the faithful execution of the law, mcry take steps necessary to implement the provisions of the MDT and VF A.

requirement of the MDT as provided for in the following I As Chief Architect offoreign relations, the President mcry enter into agreements: agreements that implement existing treary obligations.

"Establishment of Mutual Defense Board and Assignment of Military Liaison Officers (Agreement effected by exchange of notes)", Signed at Manila 15 May 1958. TIAS No. 4033.

"Agreement to establish a Security Engagement Board (Effected by exchange of notes)", Signed at Manila 11-12 April 2006.

3. The Philippine Designated Authority and its authorized representative shall have access to the entire area of the Agreed Locations. Such access shall be provided promptly consistent

This is consistent with Philippine sovereignty over Agreed Locations, as recognized by the VF A provision on mpect far the law of the host country.

with operational safety and security I VF A: Art. II requirements in accordance with agreed procedures developed by the Parties. "It is the duty of United States personnel to respect

the laws of the Republic of the Philippines and to abstain from any activity inconsistent with the spirit of this agreement, and, in particular, from any political activity in the Philippines. The Government of the United States shall take all measures within its authority to ensure that this is done."


The President, as the Chief Executive tasked with the faithful execution of the laws, mqy take steps necessary to implement the provisions of the MDT and VF A.

4. United States forces shall be responsible on the basis of proportionate use for construction, development, operation, and maintenance costs at Agreed Locations. Specific funding arrangements may be defined in implementing arrangements.

Construction, development, operation, and maintenance of I As Chief Architect of foreign relations, the President mcry enter into Philippine facilities in Agreed Locations are activities agreements that implement existing treaty obligations.

Article IV EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES, AND

MATERIEL

authorized by the VF A. Burden of costs and specific funding arrangements implement the requirements of carrying out these activities.

The entry of US equipment, materials, supplies, and other property is authorized under the T-/f" A.

1. The Philippines hereby authorizes United I VFA: Art. VII, 1: States forces, through bilateral security mechanisms, such as the MDB and SEB, to "1. United States Government equipment, preposition and store defense equipment, materials, supplies, and other property imported supplies, and materiel ("prepositioned into or acquired in the Philippines by or on behalf of materiel"), including, but not limited to, the United States armed forces in connection with


The President, as the Chief Executive tasked with the faithful execution of the laws, mqy take steps necessary to implement the provisions of the MDT and VF A, including providing the armed farces of a treaty al!J access to and authorization to peiform activities in locations owned by the AFP.

humanitarian assistance and disaster relief equipment, supplies, and materiel, at Agreed Locations. United States forces shall notify the AFP in advance regarding the quantities and delivery schedules of defense equipment, supplies, and materiel that United States forces intend to preposition in Agreed Locations, as well as who will make such deliveries.

2. The Parties share a recognition of the benefits that such prepositioning could have for humanitarian assistance and disaster relief. The Parties also recognize the value of such prepositioning to the enhancement of their individual and collective defense capabilities.

3. The prepositioned materiel of United States forces shall be for the exclusive use of the United States forces, and full title to all such equipment, supplies, and materiel remains with the United States. United States forces

activities to which this agreement applies, shall be free of all Philippine duties, taxes and other similar charges. Title to such property shall remain with the United States, which may remove such property from the Philippines at any time, free from export duties, taxes, and other similar charges. The exemptions provided in this paragraph shall also extend to any duty, tax, or other similar charges which would otherwise be assessed upon such property after importation into, or acquisition within, the Philippines. Such property may be removed from the Philippines, or disposed of therein, provided that disposition of such property in the Philippines to persons or entities not entitled to exemption from applicable taxes and duties shall be subject to payment of such taxes, and duties and prior approval of the Philippine Government."

HADR is a component of national security. Failure to deliver an effective HAD R response leaves the country vulnerable to both internal and external aggressors. Thus, the development of HAD R capabilities through prepositioning implements the parties' obligation to develop defense capabilities under Art II of the MDT

The provision flows from the acknowledgment in Art. VII, 1 of the VF A that the materials are property of the United States (i.e. these are 'Vnited States equipment, materials, supplies, and other property').


The President, as the Chief Executive tasked with the faithfitl execution of the laws, may take steps necessary to implement the provisions of the MDT and VF A, including providing the armed forces of a treaty alfy access to and authorization to perform activities in locations owned I?) the AFP.


The President, as the Chief Executive tasked with the faithful execution of the laws, may take steps necessary to implement the provisions of the MDT and VF A, includinJ, providin,P, the armed

shall have control over the access to and disposition of such prepositioned materiel and shall have the unencumbered right to remove such prepositioned materiel at any time from the territory of the Philippines.

4. United States forces and United States contractors shall have unimpeded access to Agreed Locations for all matters relating to the prepositioning and storage of defense equipment, supplies, and materiel, including delivery, management, inspection, use, maintenance, and removal of such equipment, supplies and materiel.

5. The Parties share an intent that United States contractors may carry out such matters in accordance with, and to the extent permissible under, United States laws, regulations, and policies.

6. The prepositioned materiel shall not include nuclear weapons.

This is consistent with Philippine sovereignty over Agreed Locations, as recognized f?y the l/F A provision on respect for the law of the host country (which includes the constitutional prohibition against nuclear weaponJ).

VFA: Art. II

"It is the dutv of United States personnel to respect

forces of a treaty al/y access to and authorization to pe1form activities in locations owned f?y the AFP.

The President, as the Chief Exec11tive tasked with the faithful execution of the law, recognizes US forces title to the prepositioned model


The President, as the Chief Executive tasked with the faithful execution of the laws, mqy take steps necessary to implement the provisions of the MDT and VF A, including providing the armed farces of a treaty al/y access to and authorization to perform adivities in locations owned f?y the AFP.

•

the laws of the Republic of the Philippines and to The President, as the Chief Executive tasked with the faithful abstain from any activity inconsistent with the spirit of execution of the laws, should implement the constitutional prohibition this agreement, and, in particular, from any political against nuclear weapons.

Article V OWNERSHIP

1. The Philippines shall retain ownership of and title to Agreed Locations.

activity in the Philippines. The Government of the United States shall take all measures within its authority to ensure that this is done."

Recognition of legal title over Agreed Locations is consistent with Philippine sovereignty, as recognized by the VF A provision on respect for the law of the host country (VFA: Art. II).

2. The United States shall return to the Recognition of legal title over Agreed Locations is consistent with Philippines any Agreed Locations, or any Philippine sovereignty, as recognized by the VF A provision on portion thereof, including non-relocatable respect for the law of the host country (VFA: Art. II). structure and assemblies constructed, modified, or improved by the United States, once no longer required by United States forces for activities under this Agreement. The Parties or the Designated Authorities shall consult regarding the terms of return of any Agreed Locations, including possible compensation for improvements or construction.

3. United States forces and United States I The provision flows from the acknowled,f,ment in Art. Vil, 1


The President, as the Chief Executive tasked with the faithful execution of the laws, mcry take steps necessary to implement the provisions of the MDT and VFA.

contractors shall retain title to all equipment, of the VFA that the materials are properry of the United materiel, supplies, relocatable structures, and States (z:e. these are 'Vnited States equipment, materials, other moveable property that have been supplies, and other properry '). imported into or acquired within the territory of the Philippines by or on behalf of United States.

4. All buildings, non-relocatable structures, and Recognition of legal title over Agreed Locations is consistent with assemblies affi..'Ced to the land in the Agreed Philippine sovereignty, as recognized by the VF A provision on Locations, including ones altered or improved respett for the law of the host country (VFA: Art. II). by United States forces, remain the property of the Philippines. Permanent buildings constructed by United States forces become the property of the Philippines, once constructed, but sh~ be used by United States forces until no longer required by United States forces.

5. The Parties may consult regarding the This provision implements the Military Assistance possible transfer or purchase of equipment Agreement (MAA) and the Military Defense determined to be excess, as may be allowed Assistance Agreement (MDAA) by United States laws and regulations.

MAA:Art.1:


The President, as the Chief Exeeittive tasked with the faithful execution of the laws, mC!J take steps necessary to implement the provisions of the MAA and MDAA.

As Chief Architect of foreign relations, the President mC!J enter into "Subject to mutual agreements, the Government of j agreements that implement existing treaty obligations. the United States of America will furnish military assistance to the Government of the Republic of the Philippines in the training and development of armed forces ... "

Article VI SECURI1Y

1. The Parties shall cooperate to take such measures as may be necessary to ensure the protection, safety, and security of United States forces and United States contractors, and the protection and security of official United States information in the territory of the Philippines.

MAA:Art. 6:

"For the purposes of this Agreement the military assistance authorized in Article 1 hereof is defined as the furnishing of arms, ammunition, equipment and supplies; certain aircraft and naval vessels, and instruction and training assistance by the Army and Navy of the United States ... "

MDAA, Paragraph 1:

"The Government of the United States will continue to make available to the Government of the Republic of the Philippines equipment, materials, services, or other assistance in accordance with such terms and conditions as may be agreed."

Furthermore, mch transfers or purchase of equipment fu!fill the Principle of Defensive Preparation in Art. II of the MDT

Consistent with Philippine soven:ignry over Agreed Locations as recognized by the VF A provision on mpect for the law of the host country (VF A: Art. II).


The President, as the Chief Executive tasked with the faithful execution of the laws, mqy take steps necessary to implement the provisions of the MDT and VF A.

2. The Philippines retains primary responsibility for security with respect to Agreed Locations.

3. United States forces are authorized to exercise all rights and authorities within Agreed Locations that are necessary for their operational control or defense, including taking appropriate measures to protect United States forces and United States contractors. The United States should coordinate such measures with appropriate authorities of the Philippines.

Consistent with Philippine sovereign!J over Agreed Locations as recognized by the l/F A provision on respect far the law of the host country (VF A: Art. II).

See Respondents' lvlemorand11m: Inherent attribute of operational control and right of self defense of armed farces subsist even when visiting another country.

This authoriZfZtion far operational control and self defense also enhances the capabilities of an allied armed farce, an objective of the Mutual Defense Treaty.

The President, as Commander-in-Chief, is responsible far the securi!J of the national tem'tory, including locations owned by the AFP.

•

4. The Parties shall take all reasonable measures The provision flows from the acknowledgment in Art. VII, 1 to ensure the protection, safety, and security of the VFA that the materials are properry of the United of United States property from seizure by or States (i.e. these are 'Vnited States equipment, materials, conversion to the use of any party other than supplies, and otherproperry'). the United States, without the prior written consent of the United States.

Article VII UTILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS

1. The Philippines hereby grants to United States forces and United States contractors the use of water, electricity, and other public utilities on terms and conditions, including rates or charges, no less favorable than those available to the AFP or the Government of the Philippines in like circumstances, less charges for taxes and similar fees, which will be for the account of the Philippine Government. United States forces' costs shall be equal to their pro rata share of the use of such utilities.

2. The Parties recognize that it may be necessary for United States forces to use the radio spectrum. The Philippines authorizes the United States to operate its own telecommunication systems telecommunication is defined in Constitution and Convention

(as the 1992 of the

Pariry with AFP serves to improve interoperabiliry between US and Philippine armed forces, which serves the objectives of the Mutual Defense Treaty.

EDCA contemplates an assumption of taxes !:ry the Philippine Government and not an exemption from taxes of the US forces and US contractors.

The telecommunication system contemplated under the EDCA will be used exclusivefy !:ry US and Philippine forces in the context of activities (such as joint exercises and maneuvers) where inter-operable communications will be required By military necessiry, these systems will not be accessible for use !:ry the public, will not be available commmialfy, and will onfy be

(


The President, as the Chief Executive tasked with the faithful execution of the laws, mqy take steps necessary to implement the provisions of the MDT and T/F A.

0

International Telecommunication Union ("ITU"). This shall include the right to utilize such means and services as required to ensure the full ability to operate telecommunication systems, and the right to use all necessary radio spectrum allocated for this purpose. Consistent with the 1992 Constitution and Convention of the ITU, United States forces shall not interfere with frequencies in use by local operators. Use of the radio spectrum shall be free of cost to the United States.

Article VIII CONTRACTING PROCEDURES

1. United States forces may contract for any materiel, supplies, equipment, and services (including construction) to be furnished or undertaken in the territory of the Philippines without restriction as to choice of contractor, supplier, or person who provides such materiel, supplies, equipment, or services. Such contracts shall be solicited, awarded, and administered in accordance with the laws and regulations of the United States.

used )or the operational requirements of US and Philippine armed forces.

S fates and armed farces have the inherent right to contract with and procure the seroices of private entities.

These private entities, includingfareign persons or corporations, have the right to do business in the Philippines unless specifical!J prohibited by law or the Constitution.

No local law limits US armed farces' choice in contracting, or the manner in which contracts are solicited, awarded, and administered.

(

..

•

2. United States forces shall strive to use Philippines suppliers of goods, products, and service to the greatest extent practicable in accordance with the laws and regulations of the United States.

Article IX ENVIRONMENT, HUMAN HEALTH, AND

SAFETY

1. The Parties recognize and acknowledge the importance of protection of the environment and human health and safety in the context of activities covered by this Agreement and agree to implement this Agreement in a manner consistent with the protection of the natural environment and human health and safety and to pursue a preventative rather than reactive approach to environmental protection. To this end, the Parties shall cooperate to ensure problems that may arise are dealt with immediately in order to prevent any lasting damage to the environment or endangerment of human health and safety.

Consistent with Philippine sovereignty over Agreed Locations as recognized by the VF A provision on respect jor the law of the host country (VF A: Art. II).


The President, as the Chief Executive tasked with the faithful exemtion of the laws, mqy take steps necessary to implement the provisions of the MDT and VF A.

The President, as the Chief Executive tasked with the faithful execution of the law, should implement the country's laws 011

environment, health, and safety.

i'

•

•

2. The United States confirms its intent to respect relevant Philippine environmental, health, and safety laws, regulations, and standards in the execution of its policies. The Philippines confirms its policy to implement environmental, health, safety laws, regulations, and standards with due regard for the health and safety of United States forces and United States contractors. The parties shall fully cooperate in the timely exchange between the competent representatives of the Parties of all relevant existing information concerning environmental and health protection at Agreed Locations. The environmental compliance standards applied by United States forces shall reflect, in accordance with its policies, the more protective of United States, Philippine, or applicable international agreement standards. To that end, during the development and periodic review of such environmental practices, the Parties shall cooperate and consult to ensure that Philippine standards are accurately reflected.

3. United Sates forces shall not intentionally release any hazardous materials or hazardous waste owned by it, and, if a spill occurs, shall expeditiously take action in order to contain and address environmental contamination resulting from the spill .

Consistent with Philippine sovereignty over Agreed Locations as recognized by the VF A provision on respect for the law of the host country (VF A: Art. II).

Consistent with Philippine sovereignty over Agreed Locations as recognized by the VF A provision on respect for the law of the host country (VF A: Art. II).

\

..

Article X IMPLEMENTATION

1. All obligations under this Agreement are subject to the availability of appropriated funds authorized for these purposes.

2. As appropriate, the Parties or the Designated Authorities may enter into implementing arrangements to carry out the provisions of this Agreement, including with respect to activities at Agreed Locations and funding. Implementing arrangements concluded by the Designated Authorities shall enter into force upon the date of their signature.

3. Implementing arrangements may address additional details concerning the presence of United States forces at Agreed Locations and the functional relations between United States forces and the AFP with respect to Agree Locations.

MDT: Art. III:

"The Parties, through their Foreign Ministers or their deputies, will consult together from time to time regarding the implementation of this Treaty and whenever in the opinion of either of them the territorial integrity, political independence or security of either of the Parties is threatened by external armed attack in the Pacific."

VFA: Art. VIII, 1-2:

"1. Aircraft operated by or for the United States armed forces may enter the Philippines upon approval of the Government of the Philippines in accordance with procedures stipulated in implementing arrangements .


The President, as the Chief Executive tasked with the faithful exemtion of the laws, mg take steps necessary to implement the provisions of the MDT and VF A.

..

4. The Parties or their Designated Authorities intend to consult regularly concerning the implementation of this Agreement.

2. Vessels operated by or for the United States armed forces may enter the Philippines upon approval of the Government of the Philippines. The movement of vessels shall be in accordance with international custom and practice governing such vessels, and such agreed implementing arrangements as necessary."

Article XI I I CONST., Art. VII, Sec. 17. RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES MDT: Art. III:

The President, as the Chief Executive tasked with the faithful The Parties agree to resolve any dispute ansmg "The Parties, through their Foreign Ministers or their I exeetttion of the Jaws, mqy .take steps necessary to implement the under this Agreement exclusively through deputies, will consult together from time to time provisions of the MDT and VF A. consultation between the Parties. Disputes and regarding the implementation of this Treaty and other matters subject to consultation under this whenever in the opinion of either of them the Agreement shall not be referred to any national or territorial integrity, political independence or security international court, tribunal, or other similar of either of the Parties is threatened by external armed body, or to any third party for settlement, unless attack in the Pacific." otherwise agreed by the Parties .

c

rAN N - v -;;----··-·------.. ·--. EA _.t: __ ·---·-·-··-·--·~--------:l::: _____ w•-···· •

The MDB-SEB Process

The initial process for the Mutual Defense Board-Security Engagement Board (MDB-SEB) involves deliberations in the level of Standing Committees. These Standing Committees make the initial plans for the activities to be implemented next year.

Standing Committees are organized using different fields/objectives, such as: Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief (HADR), Maritime Security, Intelligence, Logistics, Training, and Civil Military Operations (construction of buildings, repair of educational facilities).

It is worthy to emphasize that these Standing Committees are composed of officers of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and the US Pacific Command (USPACOM). Through these Standing Committees, proposed activities are discussed and agreed upon, discussing basic operational details, including venue, size of troops, and dates. The outputs of all standing committees are then collated and submitted for the consideration by the Executive Committee (EXECOM).

The EXECOM is composed of officials of the Philippine and US Governments led by Assistant Secretary for Strategic Assessment Raymund Jose G. Quilop and Deputy Chief of Staff for Plans, AFP (J5). The US Representatives are led by the counterpart of J5 from USPACOM. The EXECOM studies the proposed list of activities submitted by the Standing Committees, and issues its recommended list for submission to the MDB-SEB.

The MDB-SEB is headed by the Chief of Staff, Armed Forces of the Philippines (CSAFP) for the Philippine Government and the Commander of the USPACOM. They will then consider the proposed list of activities, and issue any amendments, as they deem fit, and/or approve the list of activities.

This list of activities as approved by CSAFP and the Commander of USPACOM would then be submitted to the Council of Foreign Ministers. It is worthy to recall that the Mutual Defense Treaty already refers to this mechanism of consultation of Foreign Ministers through its Article 3. This Council of Foreign Ministers is reiterated in the Bohlen-Serrano Exchange of Notes, through Item 1 of the Note issued by Ambassador Charles Bohlen. In the Romulo-Kenney Exchange of Notes in 2006, which provides for the Security Engagement Board that caters to non-traditional security concerns, such as terrorism, transnational crimes and disasters, it is provided that the SEB shall compliment and coexist with the MOB.

Historically, the Council of Foreign Ministers would issue policy guidelines for the conduct of the activities. At times, the Council of Foreign Ministers would make amendments or issue insertions to the submitted list of activities.

Once the list of activities has been approved by the Council of Foreign Ministers, this would then start further planning for the finer operational details of each activity, including but not limited to physical arrangements, accommodation of participating troops, and materiel to be used.

To give a clearer picture, the process for Standing Committees would be around one week each. The MDB-SEB, as led by CSAFP and Commander, USPACOM, would ordinarily study and approve the list of activities for two days.

en t/J w CJ 0 a: a. al w

"' llliiliiiliii; m Q

I :E

I

I I I", ",.,..,1..,••11t>< ,.u.,..,....,~.,:.. "'""'''''~···~!'

'it

,...,..,..__ __ ,,.,...._._________ - -~- •. - - ·-- • • """! ;

MDB/SEB PROCESS I j

1 · sAs1;c Rl:FERENces: I

1. In August 30, 1951, the Mutual Defense Treaty between the Republic of the Philippines and the United States of America was signed in Washington, D.C.

2. In May 19 1958, the Mutual Defense Board was established through the Bohlen and Serrano Exchange of Notes to manage the implementation of the MDT.

3. In February 10, 1998, the Visiting Forces Agreement was signed defining the treatment of United States personnel visiting the Republic of the Philippines.

4. In Nov 21, 2002, the Mutual Logistics Support Agreement signed provides for reciprocal logistics support, supplies services between the Philippines and the United States of America.

5. April 12, 2006 the Romufo-Kennedy Exchange of Notes established the Security Engagement Board (SEB) to enhance the cooperation on non-traditional security concerns under the Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the

- Philippin_es and the Government of the United States of America Regarding the Treatment of United States Armed Forces Visiting the Philippines.

-- ' .. . -

6. -- April 28,.--201:4, Jh~ Entiqnced Q~f~11se Coop.erafiol'l ~gn~ement was signed to de~pen defens~ cooperation bEf1weerl the- Parties and maintains and develops their indivfdual

--- capacitjes.: --

I

--\

~ \

•

I>

'~ - . -"-"' ~~~ __ .,,..........,,._ ......... __ -- -------~ ... -~~-..-,~

t l i MDB/SEB PROCESS I ! ~ ; ~- -

( 2014 ENHANCED

Basis of Engagement

: DEFENSE I COOPERATION I AGREEMENT • MDB/SEB '-., - z- . - _:::.:..z__~.. -____,.,,,,...."""~'=""~-,--.....:.=.~~.'

( 2006 ROMULO-

l ~~;~CHANGE }''"' ''~~ 2002MUTUAL LoGISTics SUPPORT Security

.-~-·---~~~REE~ENT > Engagement i 1998 VISITING . Board (SEB) I FORCES AGREEMENT .

• ---- H --~-~ .J ... __ :__:_:_:.::..::.L __ -- _:_:. ) i 1958 BOHLEN· I SERRANO EXCHANGE l OFNOTES . ) z ···~--·--·--·· --~--~

I

! 1951 MUTUAL Mutual Defense Board(MDB) l DEFENSE TREATY :

L:.c~_=-z.__ ' 1947 MILITARY

1 ASSISTANCE

l AGREEMENT ;

j ) ,, J

•

~

. ~-·~··'~"'"- 4 ~- . ~

i t

t MD· BJSEB· P·ROC C' e·ss· I I .. ·. ,..·.i }·· .. • ,l.- .·· i .· _... i ~ i 1

0_

MDB/SEB Establishment

• In May 19 1958, the Mutual Defense Board was established through the Bohlen and Serrano Exchange of Notes to manage the implementation of the MDT.

• April 1.2, 2006 the Romulo-Kennedy Exchange of Notes established the Security Engagement Board (SEB) to enhance the cooperation on non-traditional security concerns under the Agreement between the Government of .. the Republic of fh~ _Philippines and th~ Gover_nment of the . Unite<:t Stotes of .America Regarding. the Treatmertt of United States Arm-ed Forces Yisffing the Philippines.

-( i

< J \

j.• .. : .:,,;~ ';.;l,,,,, ;:l(j;; t!-·~ 1...

Documents