Talumpati Tungkol Sa Visiting Forces Agreement

Ang VFA ay nilagdaan noong Pebrero 1998, sa ilalim ng termino ni Pangulong Fidel V. Ramos, at sinundan ng isang counterpart agreement noong Oktubre, tungkol sa mga tauhan ng Pilipinas na bibisita sa US. Ito ay agad napagtibay sa administrasyon ni Pangulong Joseph “Erap” Estrada, ang kahalili ni Ramos, at opisyal na ipinatupad noong Hunyo 1999 kasunod ng pagsang-ayon ng Philippine Senate. The Agreement on Enhanced Defence Cooperation (EDCA), signed in April 2014 under then-President Benigno Aquino III, aims to operationalize the VFA. Military activities authorized by the Philippines are also insinuated in the context of the VFA. The executive agreement provides for an increased military turnover of U.S. troops, aircraft and ships in the Philippines and allows them greater access to military bases in the country. It is considered an agreement that complements the Mutual Defence Treaty (MDT), another agreement between the Philippines and the United States, which ensures that both countries provide military assistance if their metropolitan areas or Pacific territories are attacked by a foreign force. The VFA provides for rules on the entry and exit of U.S.

personnel to the Philippines, the transfer of military ships and aircraft, and the importation and export of equipment and goods related to the activities covered by the agreement. The second challenge, Suzette Nicolas y Sombilon Vs. Alberto Romulo, et al. / Jovito R. Salonga, et al. Vs. Daniel Smith, et al. / Bagong Alyansang Makabayan, et al.

Vs. President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, et al., on 2 January 2007, was re-decided by the Supreme Court on 11 February 2009. In deciding this second challenge, Court 9-4 (with two judges who inhibit) ruled that “the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) concluded on February 10, 1998 between the Republic of the Philippines and the United States is in accordance with the Constitution … The decision continued, particularly with respect to the subic Rape case, “… the Romulo-Kenney agreements of 19 and 22 December 2006 are not in accordance with the VFA and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, respondent, is responsible for negotiating without delay with the representatives of the United States the corresponding agreement on detention centres under the Philippine authorities, in accordance with Article V, para. VFA, until the status quo is maintained until further decisions of the Court. [13] UP professor Harry Roque, an adviser to former Senator Jovito Salonga, one of the petitioners in the case, said in a telephone interview about the decision on the consistency of the VFA. “We`re going to appeal… We hope to be able to convince the other judges to join the four dissenters. [14] Meanwhile, Bagares argued that executive agreements based on the VFA “would have no leg to stand on” if the VFA were abolished. – with reports from Sofia Tomacruz/Rappler.com CNN Philippines, Revisiting the Jennifer Laude murder case, 24 February 2015 ABS-CBN News, Philippines, Japan again on visitation agreements, 11 October 2018 Paradoxically, the fatal blow to the VFA could come from Washington itself instead of shackle.

Asked about Duterte`s denunciation of the agreement, Trump said, “I don`t mind them wanting to do it. It will save a lot of money. … My opinions are different from the others. Trump`s statement underscores his general lack of esteem for international agreements and alliances in favor of his “America First” policy.

Comments are closed.