The Palace on Thursday insisted that the verbal agreement between President Rodrigo Duterte and Chinese President Xi Jinping in 2016 to allow Chinese fishermen to operate in the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone was legally binding.
“What the President said was very clear. He already narrated what exactly transpired,” said Presidential Spokesman Salvador Panelo, who was asked about a contrary view expressed by Foreign Secretary Teodoro Locsin Jr. “There is no room for any interpretation.”
READ: Locsin junks ‘verbal deal’ with China
On separate occasions, Locsin and Cabinet Secretary Karlo Nograles said they believed the agreement between Duterte and Xi was not state policy.
“The verbal agreement cannot be enforced on us because it's verbal. You need a document to prove an agreement,” Locsin said in an interview with the ANC news channel.
Nograles said the government would have to enforce the law.
“Whatever is written in the Fisheries Code…we will enforce it,” he said.
But Panelo said Locsin and Nograles were not yet part of the Cabinet when the deal was struck in 2016.
“What I am saying is what the President said. If the interpretation of our colleagues is different, they are entitled to their own interpretation,” Panelo said.
“They were not there. They were absent when the deal was made,” he added.
Panelo also said there was no need for any document to prove the agreement.
“He [Duterte] narrated it exactly as it transpired. Whatever he said. We trust the President’s words,” he said.
Chinese activity in the Philippines EEZ became an issue again after a Chinese vessel hit and sank a Filipino fishing boat near Recto Bank in the West Philippine Sea on June 9, then left the Filipino crew of 22 fishermen in open water.
Recto Bank falls with the Philippines’ 200-nautical mile EEZ, which under the Constitution should be reserved and enjoyed exclusively by Filipinos.
Panelo also said Thursday the government has yet to confirm the report by the University of the Philippines’ Maritime Science Institute that the country is losing about P33.1 billion annually from the damaged reef ecosystems at Panatag Shoal and the Spratly Islands mainly due to China’s reclamation activities and illegal fishing operations.
Marine scientists from the institute said that the figure was a “conservative estimate,” given the complex marine biodiversity in the area.
Senator Risa Hontiveros, meanwhile, said the verbal agreement between the two presidents should not prevail over the Constitution.
“It is clear in the Constitution that what belongs to the Philippines should be ours. EEZ is for the Filipinos. So any verbal agreement with China is not valid and should not prevail,” she said.
Calling the deal “grossly unconstitutional,” Hontiveros said she would call on her colleagues to exercise parliamentary oversight into the executive department’s foreign policy and agreements.
The Constitution grants the Senate the power to ratify treaties in line with its check and balance powers.
But the Palace dismissed a call from former solicitor general Florin Hilbay for a Senate inquiry into the verbal agreement between Duterte and Xi.
“He is no longer the solicitor general, so he should just shut up,” Panelo said.
Hilbay earlier said it is important to know the things that Duterte “bargained away,” the specific terms the two agreed upon, and whether or not the verbal agreement itself “undermines” the provision of the Fisheries Code and article 12 of the Constitution.
“Informal agreements are okay but how can that be valid and binding when you have a clear provision of Fisheries Code reserving to Filipinos our EEZ, and Article 12 provision exclusively reserving to Filipinos our marine wealth?” Hilbay said.
He said there is no way under Philippine laws and the Constitution that the verbal deal could be valid and binding.
READ: China barred from fishing in PH—Carpio
READ: PH-China joint probe avoids poaching issue
READ: Joint probe gets Rody's go-ahead