Facts:
Arthur D. Lim and Paulino P.
Ersando filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition attacking the
constitutionality of “Balikatan-02-1”. They were subsequently joined by
SANLAKAS and PARTIDO NG MANGGAGAWA, both party-list organizations, who filed a
petition-in-intervention. Lim and Ersando filed suits in their capacities as
citizens, lawyers and taxpayers. SANLAKAS and PARTIDO on the other hand,
claimed that certain members of their organization are residents of Zamboanga
and Sulu, and hence will be directly affected by the operations being conducted
in Mindanao.
The petitioners alleged that “Balikatan-02-1” is not covered by the Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) between the Philippines and the United States. Petitioners posited that the MDT only provides for mutual military assistance in case of armed attack by an external aggressor against the Philippines or the US. Petitioners also claim that the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) does not authorize American Soldiers to engage in combat operations in Philippine Territory.
The petitioners alleged that “Balikatan-02-1” is not covered by the Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) between the Philippines and the United States. Petitioners posited that the MDT only provides for mutual military assistance in case of armed attack by an external aggressor against the Philippines or the US. Petitioners also claim that the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) does not authorize American Soldiers to engage in combat operations in Philippine Territory.
Issue:
Is the “Balikatan-02-1”
inconsistent with the Philippine Constitution?
Ruling:
The MDT is the core of the
defense relationship between the Philippines and the US and it is the VFA which
gives continued relevance to it. Moreover, it is the VFA that gave legitimacy
to the current Balikatan exercise.
The constitution leaves us no
doubt that US Forces are prohibited from engaging war on Philippine territory.
This limitation is explicitly provided for in the Terms of Reference of the
Balikatan exercise. The issues that were raised by the petitioners was only
based on fear of future violation of the Terms of Reference.
Based on the facts obtaining, the
Supreme court find that the holding of “Balikatan-02-1” joint military exercise
has not intruded into that penumbra of error that would otherwise call for the
correction on its part.
No comments:
Post a Comment