’SC ruling on JPEPA may lead to one-sided trade deals’
ABS-CBN | 17 July 2008
’SC ruling on JPEPA may lead to one-sided trade deals’
Two civil society groups have warned that the Supreme Court’s (SC) decision upholding secrecy of the negotiations on the Philippines’ first free trade agreement with Japan would set a "dangerous precedent" on future trade deals and may lead to "one-sided" accords.
The No Deal! Movement, which has actively campaigned against the Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement (JPEPA) said Thursday that the Supreme Court (SC) decision "will set a dangerous precedent on future economic pacts that the Philippines will enter into."
"In effect, the SC is legitimizing the marginalization of ordinary Filipinos from having access to pertinent information on economic treaties such as the JPEPA that will have a deep impact on their interest and livelihood," the movement, which includes left-leaning groups and activists, said.
"This will embolden the executive branch to enter into more trade and investment agreements and make commitments without due regard to their harsh effects on various sectors, especially the poor and marginalized. Trends indicate that bilateral trade and investment agreements are on the rise in recent years, with the Philippines having pending negotiations with the European Union (UN), the US, China and others aside from its economic deal with Japan," the group said.
Among the convenors of the movement are Vice-President Teofisto Guingona, Dr. Carol Araullo of Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (Bayan), Sonny Africa of Ibon Foundation, and Anakpawis Rep. Rafael Mariano.
The group criticized Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita’s statement that international agreements "should be handled with care" and with "confidentiality."
"These diplomatic concerns should be secondary only with the paramount concerns of the people about their interest and livelihood and of the country’s national patrimony and sovereignty," the movement said. "Public access to information on economic treaties under negotiations is indispensable to protect the public and national interests."
The group said the "SC ruling undermined the fundamental right of the people to know the ’compromises’ that the executive department is making on their behalf."
"Many of the questionable and controversial provisions of the JPEPA stemmed precisely from the lack of transparency and prior consultation with the concerned sector," the group said.
The No Deal! Movement has been lobbying the Senate to reject the JPEPA because of its alleged "negative effects on the country’s long-term economic development and sovereignty."
It also believes that the "supposed benefits of the JPEPA such as increased access of Filipino nurses and health workers as well as commodity exports to the Japanese market are over-hyped claims to justify the indefensible treaty."
One-side trade deals
The citizens party Akbayan warned that the SC decision affirming the executive department’s right to keep diplomatic communication on JPEPA secret may lead to "one-sided" trade deals.
In response to the SC’s decision announced Wednesday, Akbayan Rep. Risa Hontiveros said "the ruling would embolden the government to enter into one-sided, fraudulent, unconscionable and unconstitutional trade deals."
"The government could be selling our soul already and we wouldn’t know it. No one, not even Congress, would know it," Hontiveros said.
"In effect, the decision erodes the power of citizens to exact accountability and transparency from the government. Mas dadami ang mga ’bukol’ sa mga trade deals. We can’t allow the government to hide corrupt practices and kickbacks from trade deals behind executive privilege," Rep. Hontiveros said.
Akbayan legal counsel Ibarra Gutierrez III said the party "will definitely file a motion for reconsideration."
"We initially expected that the High Court would declare the petition moot and academic since it has been two years since it was filed. We are quite surprised that the ruling was an affirmation of the government’s executive privilege. This is worrying," Gutierrez said.
Dismissed
The Court, by a vote of 10-4, dismissed the petition filed by the Akbayan party-list and other individuals for a full disclosure of the "behind the scenes" negotiations on the JPEPA.
On Dec. 2005, the petitioners asked the Court to compel government to reveal the full text of the JPEPA, including the Philippine and Japan offers that were submitted during the negotiation process. At that time, negotiations on JPEPA was still being finalized. President Arroyo and Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi later signed the treaty on September 2006.
The petitioners feared that the trade agreement would include provisions on the dumping of hazardous and toxic waste products in the Philippines. The petitioners cited the right to information on matters of public concern as their main argument.
Majority ruling
But in the majority ruling penned by Justice Conchita Carpio-Morales, the High Court said the documents being sought for disclosure is cloaked with privileged character as it involved diplomatic negotiations.
The Court said the privileged character of diplomatic negotiations has already been upheld in previous cases, where they held that "secrecy of negotiations with foreign countries is not violative of the constitutional provisions of freedom of speech or of the press nor of the freedom of access to information."
During the negotiations for the JPEPA, the Court said it can be reasonably concluded that the Japanese negotiators "submitted their offers with the understanding that historic confidentiality" would govern the negotiation. "Disclosing these offers could impair the ability of the Philippines to deal not only with Japan but with other foreign governments in future negotiations," the majority decision said.
The Court recognized the fact that treaty negotiations "normally involved a process of quid pro quo and oftentimes negotiators have to be willing to grant concessions in an area of lesser importance in order to obtain more favorable term in an area of greater national interest."
Carpio joins majority
In a separate concurring opinion, Justice Antonio Carpio stressed that "offers and counter-offers in treaty negotiations are part of diplomatic secrets protected under the executive privilege."
To do otherwise would put the country in an embarrassing situation as "other countries will be reluctant to negotiate in a candid and frank manner," Carpio added. "Negotiators of other countries will know that a Philippine negotiator can be forced to disclose publicly offers and counter-offers that their countries want to remain confidential after the treaty signing."
Correct way to decide
A former justice said the ruling "shows the correct way to decide executive privilege," in oblique reference to the Romulo Neri ruling on executive privilege. The ex-magistrate said transparency may not be invoked when it involves "diplomatic privilege and military secrets."
"We will be intruding into the sovereignty of a country, its negotiations done in private, if we reveal these unilaterally. What is said in public is another matter. We should have the consent of the other country," the former justice said. — with a report from ARIES RUFO, abs-cbnNEWS.com/Newsbreak
