Cha-cha for inclusion of WPS as PH territory, foreign ownership of public utilities eyed

A proposal amending the 1987 Constitution to include the West Philippine Sea as part of Philippine territory and lifting restrictions on foreign ownership has been filed anew in the House of Representatives.

Ako Bicol party-list Rep. Alfredo Garbin made the proposal under Resolution of Both Houses 1 which amends Articles 1, 12, 14, and 16 of the Constitution.

"The National Territory definition is silent on the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf na ipinanalo na natin sa arbitral tribunal. At ito ay dapat, kumbaga isaad natin. We should enshrine it in our Constitution," Garbin told reporters in an interview.

(We have already won in the arbitral tribunal. This should be enshrined it in our Constitution.)

Under Garbin’s proposal, Article 1 on National Territory is amended to include the phrase “the Philippines exercises sovereign rights over its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) extending 200 nautical miles from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured, and its continental shelf as defined under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, including the West Philippine Sea, in accordance with international law."

"Though it also speaks of all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, which might arguably include the exclusive economic zone, but in my humble view, it is much better that we should expressly incorporate the exclusive economic zone sa ating Saligang Batas," Garbin added.

“It is imperative and long overdue that these hard-won sovereign rights, embodying the Filipino people's unyielding resolve to defend their patrimony, be enshrined in the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, to unequivocally reflect the nation's unwavering commitment to its territorial integrity, maritime heritage, and national dignity in the West Philippine Sea, in full consonance with the principles of international law and the enduring aspirations of the Filipino nation,” Garbin’s resolution read.

Foreign investors

In the same resolution, Garbin proposed that Article 12 Section 10 be amended to “Congress shall, upon recommendation of the economic and planning agency and when the national interest dictates, reserve certain areas of investment to citizens of the Philippines or, unless otherwise provided by law, to corporations or associations at least 60% of whose capital is owned by such citizens, or such higher percentage as Congress may prescribe, certain areas of investments."

Under the current Charter, the qualifiers “certain” and “unless otherwise provided by law” are not present. This means that as it is, all areas of investment are reserved for Filipino citizens or corporations or associations that are 60% owned by Filipino citizens.

Garbin also wants the qualifying phrase “unless provided for by law” inserted in Articles 12, 14, and 16 to allow foreign ownership of public utilities, educational institutions, mass media and advertising industry instead of the existing limitations such as:

• Public utilities and educational institutions should be at least 60% owned by Filipino citizens
• Mass media should be 100% owned by Filipino citizens
• Advertising company must be 70% owned by Filipino citizens and
• The state should encourage equity participation in public utilities by the general public.

“The burgeoning global interest in Asia continues to position the Philippines as a prime destination for foreign investments, bolstered by its robust economic growth... This underscores the urgent need to maximize economic opportunities through constitutional reforms to ensure inclusive and sustainable growth for all Filipinos,” Garbin added.

There had been several attempts in previous Congresses to amend the 1987 Constitution, but all have failed. One factor is the public's opposition.

Garbin, however, believes the public will be enlightened if the proposed amendments are fully explained.

"Paano magiging against ang publiko sa RBH1 kung ito ay sumasang-ayon at inilalagay lang natin yung ipinanalo natin sa arbitral tribunal sa The Hague? Paano magiging against ang publiko kung papalawakin natin yung pagnenegosyo sa ating bansa by encouraging foreign direct investment to come in and giving Congress the flexibility to legislate those economic provisions whenever there's a need to amend the same," said Garbin.

(How will the public be against RBH1 if it is agreed upon and we are just putting what we won in the arbitral tribunal in The Hague? How will the public be against it if we are trying to expand business in our country by encouraging foreign direct investment to come in and give Congress flexibility to legislate those economic provisions whenever there's a need to amend the same.) —VAL, GMA Integrated News