Republic of the Philippines

Supreme Court
Metro Manila

Gentlemen and Mesdames:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of the Court En Banc

dated: 22 August 2016

“G.R. Nos. 22082016 and 24082016 (Victims against International

Occupation (VIO) vs. Executive Secretary”)

After considering the petitions filed in the Special Civil Actions for
Certiorari, Prohibition, and Mandamus, the Court RESOLVED to:

(1) GIVE due course to the petitions;

(2) REQUIRE the parties to file their statement of issues and

outline of arguments on 28 August 2016; and

(3) SET this case for ORAL ARGUMENT on 29 August 2016.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) RALPH C. BORJA

Clerk of Court

Cc: Victims Against International Occupation (for petitioners)

Suite 1002, Ermita Center Building
1350 Roxas Boulevard, City of Manila

The Solicitor General (for respondents)

134 Amorsolo St.,
Legaspi Village, Makati City

1
 THE CASE CONCERNING THE
WEST PHILIPPINE SEA/SOUTH CHINA SEA TREATY

1. In 2013, the Philippines filed a case with the Permanent Court of Arbitration
(PCA) regarding the disputed claims within the South China Sea. China is
claiming most of the South China Sea even up to the land areas of the other
countries in the Nine-Dash Line. The Nine-Dash Line encompasses the Spratly
Island Group, the Paracel Island Group, and Scarborough Shoal, among others.

2. China has refused to take part in the “illegal arbitration” and stated that it will
not take part nor will honor the said ruling. Among the other reasons China
gave, it stated that the Philippines did not enter into negotiations first before
filing the said case. However, China merely says that “China has undisputed
sovereignty over the area and there is nothing to talk about” every time the
parties meet to start the bilateral talk.

3.On July 12, 2016, the PCA issued its ruling pursuant to the case filed with it. In
the case, the PCA ruled in favor of the Philippines in all of its 15 prayers.

4. China refused to acknowledge the PCA ruling and stated that it is illegal and is
just a heap of paper and should be junked or just archived.

5.On July 14, 2016, Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte announced that he would
send former President Fidel V. Ramos to start bilateral talks between the
Philippines and China. However, China has made it clear that it will only enter
into bilateral talks if these two conditions are met:

A. The Philippines will recognize China’s undisputed sovereignty over the

islands and its adjacent waters, and
B. The bilateral talks will not be based on the PCA’s ruling.

6.On July 18, 2016, former President Ramos flew to Beijing to meet with the

2
 Chinese officials and commence the bilateral talks.

7.In the meantime, on July 23, 2016, President Duterte signed Executive Order No.
02, series of 2016, which operationalizes in the Executive Branch the people’s
constitutional right to information and the state policies to full public disclosure
and transparency in the public service.

8. On August 1, 2016, former President Ramos returned to the Philippines with a

signed treaty entitled “West Philippine Sea/South China Sea Treaty.” The Treaty
states, among others:

Article II. (a)

For the purposes of this Treaty, the area within the Chinese Nine-
Dash line and the Philippine Exclusive Economic Zone as defined
under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
(UNCLOS) will be referred to as the “Disputed Waters”.

Article III (a)

The Philippines and China will not engage in any exploration or
development of petroleum within the Disputed Waters without the
consent of the other party.

Article III (b)

The Philippines and China will enter into separate bilateral
agreements concerning the joint exploration and development of
petroleum in the area within the Disputed Waters.

Article IV (a)
China will have the right to occupy the artificial islands already
constructed provided that China will not develop nor expand the
current artificial islands within the Disputed Waters. However, repair
and maintenance of current structures are permitted.

3
 Article IV (b)
The Philippines will continue to occupy the islands currently being
administered within the Disputed Waters provided that the
Philippines will not construct or develop structures within the
Disputed Waters. However, repair and maintenance of current
structures are permitted.

Article V
The Philippines and China will not militarize the islands within the
Disputed Waters. However, security personnel solely for the security
of the islands will be allowed, provided only small arms will be
permitted.

Article VI
The Philippines and China will have concurrent fishing rights within
the Disputed Waters. No country will have the right to prevent the
other party from fishing on the basis of the laws of their home
country.

9. On August 8, 2016, Victims against International Occupation (VIO), an

organization formed after the Japanese occupation with the primary objective of
preventing another foreign occupation, wrote a letter to the Department of
Foreign Affairs (DFA) and the Office of the President (OP) requesting the
government to release the transcript, the minutes of the meeting, and other
relevant information conducted between former President Ramos and his
counterparts in Beijing pursuant to Executive Order No. 02. VIO is fearful that
the Philippine delegation might have agreed to the terms of China to start the
bilateral talk namely to recognize Chinese sovereignty over the waters.

10.On August 15, 2016, both the DFA and the OP rejected VIO’s request to release
the said information. Both offices allege that the request for information is
denied for falling under Sec. 4 of Executive Order No. 2.

4
11. The Treaty was ratified by China on August 8, 2016. The Philippine Senate
ratified it on August 16, 2016, after a special session was called for this
purpose.

12. On August 18, 2016, VIO filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari and Prohibition
with the Supreme Court en banc against the Executive Secretary alleging that
the Treaty is unconstitutional and derogates Philippine sovereignty.

13. VIO also filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus with the Supreme Court to
order the DFA and the Office of the President to release the requested
information alleging that: (a) it does not fall under any of the exceptions, and (b)
in case of doubt regarding the classification, Art. II, Sec. 28 of the Constitution
should be construed in favor of the release of information.

14.The Executive Secretary stated in a press release that there is nothing illegal in
the treaty since what was only given is the right to occupy the existing artificial
islands. These “islands” are not even Philippine Territory under the PCA ruling
since these are ruled to be “not islands.” Further, the country is bound by the
principle of pacta sunt servada for having signed and ratified the treaty. The
Executive Secretary also reiterated the denial of the request for information on
the ground that it falls squarely under the exceptions already provided for under
law and jurisprudence.

15.The parties agreed to address the following issues:

a. Is the West Philippine Sea/South China Sea Treaty” constitutional?

b. Are there legal grounds to require the release of the requested
information?

16. Upon motion by the petitioners, the Supreme Court has scheduled the case for
oral argument before the court en banc.