Gov't told to answer petition vs Phl-Japan military exercise

MANILA, Philippines - The Supreme Court (SC) yesterday ordered the government to answer a petition seeking to stop the ongoing joint exercises between the Philippine and Japanese militaries.

In session, justices have decided to require the Palace and other concerned agencies to submit a comment on the petition filed by the Alliance for Concerned Teachers (ACT) party-list earlier this month.

The petition specifically sought issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO) on the Memorandum on Defense Cooperation and Exchanges between the country’s Department of National Defense and the Japanese Ministry of Defense, which was forged last January.

The SC gave the respondents – President Aquino, Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin, Executive Secretary Paquito Ochoa Jr., newly appointed Armed Forces chief of staff Lt. Gen. Hernando Iriberri and Philippine Navy flag officer in command Vice Adm. Jesus Millan – 10 days from receipt of notice to comply with the order.

Petitioner argued that the agreement violates Article 18 Section 25 of the Constitution, which requires a treaty with concurrence by the Senate for foreign military troops and facilities to enter the country.

Petitioner further assailed the “Japan-Philippines Joint Declaration: A Strengthened Strategic Partnership for Advancing the Shared Principles and Goals of Peace, Security, and Growth in the Region and Beyond,” which allows the two governments to “expand their security operation” through bilateral and multilateral training and exercises for capacity building.

“The substance of the Memorandum and the Joint Declaration, given that they bring the presence of Japanese military troops in the Philippine territory, require that they be via treaty.

“Being merely in the form of non-binding agreements, and not having been submitted to the Senate for concurrence and to Congress for deliberation on whether the treaty requires ratification by the people in a national referendum, they should be held unconstitutional, insofar as they are being used as legal bases for the holding of military exercises with the Japanese military,” the group argued.