9/17/2019 Philippine Constitutional Law Digests: Bayan v. Zamora, G.R. No.

138570, October 10, 2000

Higit Pa Bumuo ng Blog Mag-sign in

Philippine Constitutional Law

Digests
A site for digests of landmark Constitutional Law cases in the Philippines.

Home Privacy Policy Musings on Law All That Matters

Wednesday, July 11, 2012

Bayan v. Zamora, G.R. No. 138570, October 10, 2000

DECISION
(En Banc)

BUENA, J.:

I. THE FACTS

The Republic of the Philippines and the United States of America entered into an Blog Archive
agreement called the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA). The agreement was treated as a
▼
▼ 2012 (26)
treaty by the Philippine government and was ratified by then-President Joseph Estrada
▼
▼ July (8)
with the concurrence of 2/3 of the total membership of the Philippine Senate.
Arnault v. Nazareno, G.R. No. L-
3820, July 18, 195...
The VFA defines the treatment of U.S. troops and personnel visiting the
In re Garcia, G.R. No. _____, August
Philippines. It provides for the guidelines to govern such visits, and further defines the 15, 1961
rights of the U.S. and the Philippine governments in the matter of criminal jurisdiction,
Tatad v. Executive Secretary, G.R.
movement of vessel and aircraft, importation and exportation of equipment, materials and No. 124360, Nov...
supplies.
Angara v. Electoral Commission,
G.R. No. L-45081, ...
Petitioners argued, inter alia, that the VFA violates §25, Article XVIII of the 1987
Bayan v. Zamora, G.R. No. 138570,
Constitution, which provides that “foreign military bases, troops, or facilities shall not be October 10, 2000...
allowed in the Philippines except under a treaty duly concurred in by the Senate . . . and
Tañada, et al., v. Angara, et al., G.R.
recognized as a treaty by the other contracting State.” No. 118295...
Kuroda v. Jalandoni, G.R. No. L-
II. THE ISSUE 2662, March 26, 19...
Manila Prince Hotel v. GSIS, G.R.
Was the VFA unconstitutional? No. 122156, Febr...

III. THE RULING ►

► April (1)
►
► March (3)
[The Court DISMISSED the consolidated petitions, held that the petitioners did not ►
► February (11)
commit grave abuse of discretion, and sustained the constitutionality of the VFA.]
►
► January (3)

NO, the VFA is not unconstitutional. ►

► 2011 (11)

Section 25, Article XVIII disallows foreign military bases, troops, or facilities in the
Followers
country, unless the following conditions are sufficiently met, viz: (a) it must be under
a treaty; (b) the treaty must be duly concurred in by the Senate and, when so required Followers (19)
by congress, ratified by a majority of the votes cast by the people in a national
referendum; and (c) recognized as a treaty by the other contracting state.

There is no dispute as to the presence of the first two requisites in the case of the
VFA. The concurrence handed by the Senate through Resolution No. 18 is in accordance
with the provisions of the Constitution . . . the provision in [in §25, Article XVIII] requiring
ratification by a majority of the votes cast in a national referendum being unnecessary
since Congress has not required it.
Follow

philippineconstitutionallawdigests.blogspot.com/2012/07/bayan-v-zamora-gr-no-138570-october-10.html 1/4
9/17/2019 Philippine Constitutional Law Digests: Bayan v. Zamora, G.R. No. 138570, October 10, 2000
xxx xxx xxx About Me

Atty. Ed
This Court is of the firm view that the phrase “recognized as a treaty” means
View my complete profile
that the other contracting party accepts or acknowledges the agreement as a treaty. To
require the other contracting state, the United States of America in this case, to submit the
VFA to the United States Senate for concurrence pursuant to its Constitution, is to accord Labels
strict meaning to the phrase.
2011 bar exam results (1)
20th century fox v. CA (1)
Well-entrenched is the principle that the words used in the Constitution are to be
given their ordinary meaning except where technical terms are employed, in which case 3 readings on separate days (1)

the significance thus attached to them prevails. Its language should be understood in the 349 pepsi crowns case (1)
sense they have in common use. abadilla 5 (1)
actual case or controversy (1)
Moreover, it is inconsequential whether the United States treats the VFA only as alibi (1)
an executive agreement because, under international law, an executive agreement is as angara v. electoral commission (1)
binding as a treaty. To be sure, as long as the VFA possesses the elements of an ARMM elections (1)
agreement under international law, the said agreement is to be taken equally as a treaty. arnault v. nazareno (1)
arroyo v. de lima (1)
xxx xxx xxx bar exams (1)
bayan v. zamora (1)
The records reveal that the United States Government, through Ambassador
cacho-olivares v. ermita (1)
Thomas C. Hubbard, has stated that the United States government has fully committed to
chavez v. gonzales and ntc (1)
living up to the terms of the VFA. For as long as the United States of America accepts or
checkpoints case (1)
acknowledges the VFA as a treaty, and binds itself further to comply with its obligations
under the treaty, there is indeed marked compliance with the mandate of the Constitution. china bank v. CA (1)
columbia pictures v. flores (1)
combinations and restraint of trade (1)
Posted by Atty. Ed at 3:31 PM
comprehensive agrarian reform program
Labels: bayan v. zamora, foreign military troops in the phils., treaty, visiting forces agreement (2)
Location: Lapu-Lapu City, Philippines constitutionality of checkpoints (2)
contempt power of senate (1)
control test (1)
No comments:
custodial investigation (1)

Post a Comment david v. arroyo (1)

decision in in re charges of plagiarism v.
justice del castillo (1)
Enter your comment... delegation of power (1)
dissent of justice ma. lourdes sereno (1)
economic protectionism (1)
election synchronization (1)
Comment as: eulacarlota.mo Sign out equity structure in public utilities (1)
exclusionary rule (1)
filipino first policy (2)
Publish Preview Notify me
foreign military troops in the phils. (1)
fortun v. arroyo (1)
Links to this post freedom of expression (1)
freedom of religion (1)
Create a Link
freedom of speech (1)
freedom of the press (3)
gamboa v. teves (1)
general warrant (1)
globalization (1)
GMA TRO (1)
grosjean v. american press (1)
hacienda luisita (2)
hello garci (1)
HLI v. PARC decision july 5 2011 (1)
HLI v. PARC resolution nov. 22 2011 (1)
holdover of elected ARMM officials (1)
iglesia ni cristo v. CA (1)
impeachment of cj corona (1)
implied powers (1)
Newer Post Home Older Post
in re garcia (1)
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom) incompatible offices (1)
incorporation clause (2)
ineligibility of the President to run for re-
election (1)
philippineconstitutionallawdigests.blogspot.com/2012/07/bayan-v-zamora-gr-no-138570-october-10.html 2/4
9/17/2019 Philippine Constitutional Law Digests: Bayan v. Zamora, G.R. No. 138570, October 10, 2000

inherent powers (1)

investigation in aid of legislation (1)
jose midas marquez (1)
justice mariano del castillo (2)
justice sereno's dissent in in re charges
of plagiarism vs. justice del castillo (1)
kida v. senate (1)
kuroda v. jalandoni (1)
laserna v. ddb (1)
liban v. gordon (1)
lis mota (1)
lumanog v. people (1)
maguindanao massacre (1)
mandatory drug testing (1)
manila hotel (1)
manila prince hotel v. gsis (1)
martial law (1)
meaning of the term capital in Sec. 11
Art. XII of the Constitution (1)
monopolies (1)
moot and academic cases (1)
national patrimony (1)
new york times v. U.S. (1)
office search (1)
oil deregulation (1)
one title-one subject (1)
p.s. bank v. senate impeachment court
(1)
people v. exala (1)
Philippine National Red Cross (1)
pimentel v. comelec (1)
piracy (1)
plagiarism (3)
police lineup (1)
pollo v. david (1)
pormento v. estrada (1)
power to promulgate rules of procedure
(1)
presentation of master tape in piracy
cases (1)
president's power to appoint ARMM
OICs (1)
prior restraint (3)
privacy of communications and
correspondence (1)
probable cause for issuance of warrant
of arrest (1)
probable cause for the issuance of a
search warrant (1)
RA 9165 (1)
requisites of judicial review (2)
resolution in in re charges of plagiarism
v. justice del castillo (1)
review/censorship of religious tv
programs (1)
right against self-incrimination (1)
right against unreasonable search and
seizure (2)
right of privacy (1)
right to travel (1)
roberts v. CA (1)
search and seizure (4)
search warrant (1)
secrecy of foreign currency deposits (1)
self-executing provision (1)
sjs v. ddb (1)
speedy disposition of cases (1)

philippineconstitutionallawdigests.blogspot.com/2012/07/bayan-v-zamora-gr-no-138570-october-10.html 3/4
9/17/2019 Philippine Constitutional Law Digests: Bayan v. Zamora, G.R. No. 138570, October 10, 2000
stock distribution option (2)
stop-and-frisk (1)
suspension of privilege of the writ of
habeas corpus (1)
tañada v. angara (1)
tatad v. executive secretary (1)
terry search (1)
terry v. ohio (1)
treaty (3)
TRO vs. senate impeachment court (1)
university of cebu college of law (1)
valid form of warrantless search (1)
valmonte v. de villa (2)
vinuya v. executive secretary (2)
visiting forces agreement (1)
warrant of arrest (1)
warrantless arrests (1)
warrantless search and seizure (1)
world trade organization (1)

TopBlogs.com.ph

Legal - Top Blogs Philippines

Feedjit

Total Pageviews

371,288

Copyright 2011-2012 by Atty. Ed. Simple theme. Powered by Blogger.

philippineconstitutionallawdigests.blogspot.com/2012/07/bayan-v-zamora-gr-no-138570-october-10.html 4/4