Scribd
Upload
58 views2 pages

Sangguian Vs - Ochua

The document summarizes a case regarding the constitutionality of the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) between the Philippines and United States. It was signed in 2014 to allow increased U.S. military presence in Philippine bases against the backdrop of maritime disputes with China. Petitioners argued it required Senate concurrence as a treaty. However, the court held that as an executive agreement implementing existing treaties like the 1999 Visiting Forces Agreement, it did not require Senate approval to be valid. Executive agreements can adjust details carrying out established policies without congressional approval. The EDCA was consistent with prior treaties allowing U.S. troop presence and therefore constitutional.

Uploaded by

Seah Fuego
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
58 views2 pages

Sangguian Vs - Ochua

The document summarizes a case regarding the constitutionality of the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) between the Philippines and United States. It was signed in 2014 to allow increased U.S. military presence in Philippine bases against the backdrop of maritime disputes with China. Petitioners argued it required Senate concurrence as a treaty. However, the court held that as an executive agreement implementing existing treaties like the 1999 Visiting Forces Agreement, it did not require Senate approval to be valid. Executive agreements can adjust details carrying out established policies without congressional approval. The EDCA was consistent with prior treaties allowing U.S. troop presence and therefore constitutional.

Uploaded by

Seah Fuego
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

G.R. No. 212426 & 212444 Saguisag v.

Ochoa January 12, 2016

FACTS:

The Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) is an executive agreement that gives U.S. troops,
planes and ships increased rotational presence in Philippine military bases and allows the U.S. to build
facilities to store fuel and equipment there. It was signed against the backdrop of the Philippines'
maritime dispute with China over the West Philippine Sea.The US embassy and DFA exchanged
diplomatic notes confirming all necessary requirements for the agreement to take force. The agreement
was signed on April 2014. President Benigno Aquino III ratified the same on June 2014. It was not
submitted to Congress on the understanding that to do so was no longer necessary.Petitions for
Certiorari were filed before the Supreme Court assailing the constitutionality of the agreement. Herein
petitioners now contend that it should have been concurred by the senate as it is not an executive
agreement. The Senate issued Senate Resolution No. 105 expressing a strong sense that in order for
EDCA to be valid and binding, it must first be transmitted to the Senate for deliberation and
concurrence.

ISSUES:

Whether or Not the EDCA between the Philippines and the U.S. is constitutional

HELD:

- The EDCA is an executive agreement and does not need the Senate's concurrence. As an executive
agreement, it remains consistent with existing laws and treaties that it purports to implement.-
Petitioners contend that the EDCA must be in the form of a treaty duly concurred by Senate. They hinge
their argument under the following Constitutional provisions:o Sec. 21, Art. VII: “No treaty or
international agreement shall be valid and effective unless concurred in by at least 2/3rds of all the
Members of the Senate.”o Section 25, Article XVIII: “ xxx Military Bases, foreign military bases, troops, or
facilities shall not be allowed in the Philippines except under a treaty duly concurred in by the Senate xxx
” The President, however, may enter into an executive agreement on foreign military bases, troops, or
facilities, if (a) it is not the instrument that allows the presence of foreign military bases, troops, or
facilities; or (b) it merely aims to implement an existing law or treaty. In Commissioner of Customs v.
Eastern Sea Trading: Executive Agreements are defined as international agreements embodying
adjustments of detail carrying out well-established national policies and traditions and those involving
arrangements of a more or less temporary nature. Treaties are formal documents which require
ratification with the approval of two-thirds of the Senate. The right of the Executive to enter into binding
agreements without the necessity of subsequent Congressional approval has been confirmed by long
usage.The Visiting Forces Agreement – a treaty ratified by the Senate in 1999 – already allowed the
return of US troops. EDCA is consistent with the content, purpose, and framework of the Mutual
Defense Treaty and the VFA. The practice of resorting to executive agreements in adjusting the details of
a law or a treaty that already deals with the presence of foreign military forces is not at all unusual in
this

You might also like