Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
ANGARA
272 SCRA 18
Facts:
On April 15, 1994, respondent Navarro, Secretary of Department of Trade and Industry and a representative of the Philippine government, signed in
the Final Act Embodying the Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Negotiations. Bys signing the Final Act, the Philippines agreed to submit
the agreement establishing the World Trade Organization that require the Philippines, among others, “to place nationals and products of member-
countries on the same footing as Filipinos and local products”. To that effect, the President ratified and submitted the same to the Senate for its
concurrence pursuant to Section21, Article VII of the Constitution. Hence the petitioner assailed the WTO Agreement for violating the mandate of the
1987 Constitution to “develop a self-reliant and independent national economy effectively controlled by Filipinos . . . (to) give preference to qualified
Filipinos (and to) promote the preferential use of Filipino labor, domestic materials and locally produced goods”.
Issue: Whether the provisions of the Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization contravene the provisions of Sec. 19, Art. II, and Secs.
10 and 12, Art. XII, all of the 1987 Philippines Constitution.
Held:
Article II of the Constitution is a "declaration of principles and state policies." These principles in Article II are not intended to be self-executing
principles ready for enforcement through the courts. They are used by the judiciary as aids or as guides in the exercise of its power of judicial review,
and by the legislature in its enactment of laws.
The provisions of Sec. 10 and 12, Article XII of the Constitution, general principles relating to the national economy and patrimony, is enforceable
only in regard to “the grants or rights, privileges and concessions covering national economy and patrimony” and not to every aspect of trade and
commerce. While the Constitution mandates a bias in favor of Filipino goods, services, labor and enterprises, at the same time, it recognizes the
need for business exchange with the rest of the world on the bases of equality and reciprocity and limits protection of Filipino enterprises only against
foreign competition and trade practices that are unfair. In other words, the Constitution did not intend to pursue an isolationist policy.
On the other hand, there is no basis on the contention that under WTO, local industries will all be wiped out and that Filipino will be deprived of
control of the economy, in fact, WTO recognizes need to protect weak economies like the Philippines.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
such that statutes of limitations shall not apply until the fate and whereabouts of the victim
are established.[111]
Binding Effect of UN
Action on the Philippines
To date, the Philippines has neither signed nor ratified the Convention, so that the country is
not yet committed to enact any law penalizing enforced disappearance as a crime. The
absence of a specific penal law, however, is not a stumbling block for action from this Court,
as heretofore mentioned; underlying every enforced disappearance is a violation of the
constitutional rights to life, liberty and security that the Supreme Court is mandated by the
Constitution to protect through its rule-making powers.
Separately from the Constitution (but still pursuant to its terms), the Court is guided, in acting
on Amparo cases, by the reality that the Philippines is a member of the UN, bound by its
Charter and by the various conventions we signed and ratified, particularly the conventions
touching on humans rights. Under the UN Charter, the Philippines pledged to "promote
universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all
without distinctions as to race, sex, language or religion."[112] Although no universal
agreement has been reached on the precise extent of the "human rights and fundamental
freedoms" guaranteed to all by the Charter,[113]it was the UN itself that issued the Declaration
on enforced disappearance, and this Declaration states:[114]
As a matter of human right and fundamental freedom and as a policy matter made in a UN
Declaration, the ban on enforced disappearance cannot but have its effects on the country,
given our own adherence to "generally accepted principles of international law as part
of the law of the land."[115]
Under the 1987 Constitution, international law can become part of the sphere of domestic law
either by transformation orincorporation. The transformation method requires that
an international law be transformed into a domestic law through a constitutional mechanism
such as local legislation. The incorporation method applies when, by mere
constitutional declaration, international law is deemed to have the force of
domestic law.
38(1) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, which provides that the Court shall
apply "international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law."
State practice" and "opinio juris" requirements of international law.[121] We note the following
in these respects:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------