RP-Aussie SOVFA encounters rough sailing at Senate hearing

An international law expert and various groups on Friday slammed the RP-Australia Status of Visiting Forces Agreement (SOVFA) during the first public hearing on the treaty at the Senate. The Senate foreign relations committee, chaired by Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago, heard the strong opposition against the treaty from Prof. Merlin M. Magallona, a former dean from the UP College of Law and an international law expert, and civil society groups. SOVFA sets out the legal framework concerning the rights and obligations of the visiting forces of the Philippines or Australia and the status of those forces when in the country of the other. The Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA), however, urged Senate concurrence in the treaty. Under the Constitution, a treaty or international agreement must be accepted by at least two-thirds of all the members of the Senate to be valid and effective. The DFA said that the SOVFA will benefit the Philippines in terms of education and training, capacity building, humanitarian assistance and disaster response. The SOVFA also provides for systematic sharing of information, resources and best practices, which would aid in the modernization and professionalization of the Armed Forces of the Philippines. According to the DFA, Australia and the Philippines have already been doing joint military exercises, but these are covered only by a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed in 1995. The MOU does not have the legal effect of a treaty. On the other hand, SOVFA will be binding in international law. SOVFA represents an improvement over the MOU by providing a transparent and accountable set of legal and administrative rules governing the temporary presences of military personnel in either country, the DFA said. For instance, SOVFA will provide clearer rules on issues such as entry-exit guidelines, criminal jurisdiction and custody, and environmental protection. Santiago noted that SOVFA is not a bases agreement. “The SOVFA does not involve any permanent basing of forces or military facilities in either country," Santiago said. “It is made and pursued to only address issues regarding the temporary presence of Australian forces in the Philippines." Australia already has similar agreements with France, the Kyrgyz Republic, Malaysia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Singapore and the US. “In the case of the Philippines, it is the only SOVFA that has provisions on environmental protection and mortuary affairs," Santiago said. “If concurred in by the Senate, the RP-Australia accord will be the country’s second SOVFA or SOFA (Status of Forces Agreement). The first is the RP-US Visiting Forces Agreement." During the hearing, Magallona raised his opposition to SOVFA. “The Philippines does not have the intention nor the capability to send visiting forces to Australia. The fundamental and essential basis of this agreement is thus non-existent, and its reciprocal and mutual character would be illusory," Magallona said. “If in practice, this agreement would be realized and become operational only on the side of Australia being the Sending State, with the Philippines being relegated as a Receiving State of an Australian visiting force, the entire treaty regime embodied in this agreement becomes one-sided and unequal," Magallona said. “The agreement may be a mere implementation of Australian foreign policy in the Philippine territory. It becomes, therefore, a pivotal question for this honorable Senate committee to clarify whether the preconditions or presuppositions of this agreement exist." Magallona also took exception to the “open-ended" scope of the activities that Australian visiting forces may conduct in the Philippines under the agreement. “The central issue confronting the Senate is what is the magnitude of the military presence of Australia which this agreement authorizes? The open-ended scope of the activities that the parties may approach does not make a full disclosure of relevant considerations to enable the Senate to calculate the costs entailed by this agreement in terms of derogation of sovereignty and of the threat to the security of the people," Magallona said. Magallona called on the Senate to reject the treaty. On the other hand, Rep. Loretta Rosales, the chairperson emeritus of Akbayan, decried the alleged abuses by the US visiting forces in Philippines soil. “The VFA between the US and the Philippines should be reviewed and scrapped in the meantime. Pending the review, there should be no effort to try and ratify another flawed VFA, this time with the staunch ally of the US, the Australian military in the Asia Pacific," Rosales said. “The Philippines is not a boot camp for foreign military forces where live fire exercises can be conducted, thereby causing risk to the life and limb of the Filipino people," Rosales said. Santiago said her committee will refer Magallona’s position paper to the Department of Justice (DOJ), and Rosales’ position paper to the Department of National Defense (DND), both for comments. She said her committee will decide whether to conduct another public hearing once it has received the opinion of the DOJ and the DND. - GMANews.TV