On the 4th State of the Nation Address

By: Augusto B. Agosto

State of the Nation Address or SONA is an annual event wherein the achievements, policies, and programs of the president are discussed. The last SONA is no different from the past. The President highlighted the campaign program on illegal drugs, and corruption and proposed a resolution by reinstating the death penalty.

President Duterte also highlighted the Manila Bay Rehabilitation, the creation of the Department of Water Resources, the tax reform package, the National Land Use Act, and the West Philippine Sea Dispute.

On the Re-imposition of the Death Penalty

President Duterte asked Congress to reinstate the death penalty for heinous crimes related to illegal drugs and plundering.

However, the 1987 Constitution prohibits the use of the death penalty by stating in Article III, Section 19. (1) Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading, or inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall the death penalty be imposed, unless, for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it.

Under Republic Act 9636, “The imposition of the penalty of death is hereby prohibited. Furthermore, Republic Act 8177, otherwise known as the Act Designating Death Penalty by Lethal Injection is hereby repealed.

Also, reinstating the death penalty would violate the Philippine international legal obligations under the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 1, (1) No one within the jurisdiction of a State Party to the present Protocol shall be executed and (2) Each State Party shall take all necessary measures to abolish the death penalty within its jurisdiction.

On the Manila Bay Rehabilitation

President Rodrigo Duterte again threatened to go after establishments that pollute waterways leading to Manila Bay, which is currently being rehabilitated by the government.

In the MMDA v. CONCERNED RESIDENTS OF MANILA BAY G.R. Nos. 171947-48 December 18, 2008 Mandamus, the Supreme Court rendered a landmark decision, ordering the 13 government agencies “to clean up, rehabilitate and preserve Manila Bay, and restore and maintain its waters to SB Level (Class B sea waters per water Classification Tables under DENR Administrative Order 34 (1990) to make them fit for swimming, skin-diving and other forms of contact recreation.

The case started when, on January 29, 1999, concerned residents of Manila Bay filed a complaint before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) in Imus, Cavite, against several government agencies, among them, the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Education, Health, Agriculture, Public Works and Highways, Budget and Management, Philippine Coast Guard, PNP Maritime Group, and Department of the Interior and Local Government, for the cleanup, rehabilitation and protection of Manila Bay. The complaint alleged that the quality of the Manila Bay had fallen way below the allowable standards set by law, specifically Presidential Decree 1152 of the Philippine Environment Code. The complainants alleged the continuing neglect of these government agencies in abating the pollution of Manila Bay.

Furthermore, as a national park, Manila Bay deserves the full protection of the law from commercial and exploitative activities. In Proclamation No. 41, Manila Bay was specifically designated as a national park and prohibited the settlement and sale of the area. Issued by then President Ramon Magsaysay in 1954, the law is clear as to its purpose. It must be emphasized that the State is duty-bound to protect our culture and heritage. This part of Manila Bay is of huge historical significance. The site of numerous naval engagements, heroic battles of our ancestors, and commercial activities in early times, these historic events and personalities will soon be forgotten once Manila Bay is reclaimed.

The people also have the right to aesthetics. We may belittle this right, but it exists. And there are many laws protecting this right – Presidential Decree No. 1151 and Proclamation No. 2146 – not to mention tons of US cases enunciating the right of the people to protect things of beauty.

On the National Land Use Act

The National Land Use Act has been languishing in Congress for two decades. It was even certified as urgent by then-president Benigno Aquino. President Duterte had asked Congress to pass the NLUA in the last SONA.

The proposed law will violate the provision in the Local Government Code particularly Section 20, Reclassification of Lands,  which state as follows:

(a) A city or municipality may, through an ordinance passed by the Sangguniang after conducting public hearings for the purpose, authorize the reclassification of agricultural lands and provide for the manner of their utilization or disposition in the following cases: (1) when the land ceases to be economically feasible and sound for agricultural purposes as determined by the Department of Agriculture or (2) where the land shall have substantially greater economic value for residential, commercial, or industrial purposes, as determined by the sanggunian concerned: Provided, That such reclassification shall be limited to the following percentage of the total agricultural land area at the time of the passage of the ordinance:

(1) For highly urbanized and independent component cities, fifteen percent (15%);

(2) For component cities and first to the third-class municipalities, ten percent (10%); and

(3) For fourth to sixth-class municipalities, five percent (5%): Provided, further, That agricultural lands be distributed to agrarian reform beneficiaries pursuant to Republic Act Numbered Sixty-six hundred fifty-seven (R.A. No. 6657). otherwise known as “The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law”, shall not be affected by the said reclassification, and the conversion of such lands into other purposes shall be governed by Section 65 of said Act.

Also with the Joint Memorandum Circular (MC-54-1995) by the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB), Department of Agriculture (DA), Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR), and Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG),   It also includes the reversion of non-agricultural lands to agricultural use (DAR, 2002).

However, it is the policy of the State to ensure that local government units share with the national government the responsibility of managing and maintaining an ecological balance within their territorial jurisdiction.

On the West Philippine Sea Dispute

President Duterte justifies his purported “fishing deal” with China, arguing that the deal is a way to avert war over the West Philippine Sea was

The disputed  Kalayaan Islands or regime of islands lies about 118 nautical miles west of Zambales province and within the Philippines’ 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ), which is part of the national territory and specified by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

Under the Philippine Constitution, Article II, the national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced therein, and all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial, and aerial domains, including its territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular shelves, and other submarine areas. The waters around, between, and connecting the islands of the archipelago, regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the Philippines.

Under UNCLOS, a coastal state has the exclusive right to fish within its exclusive economic zone (EEZ), an area 200 nautical miles from the coastal state’s baselines or edges. Thus the Philippines has sovereign rights over the disputed islands.

The policy of the State expressly stated in the Philippine constitution Article II Section 2 that the  Philippines renounces war as an instrument of national policy, adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land, and adheres to the policy of peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity with all nations.

Thus the current administration should continue defending our national territories through the adoption of international law as part of the law of the land and pursue a policy of cooperation, peace equality, justice, and freedom with all nations.

On the Revival of ROTC

President Duterte also urged Congress to revive the mandatory Reserve Officers Training Corps (ROTC) to strengthen the defense-related mechanism and instill discipline and patriotism among the youth.  Under Republic Act 9163, the ROTC program is only one of the options under the National Service Training Program (NSTP).

This view on patriotism is narrow and myopic. Under the 1987 Constitution, Section 3 (2) that all educational institutions are mandated to inculcate patriotism and nationalism, foster love of humanity, respect for human rights, and appreciation of the role of national heroes in the historical development of the country.

Examining the intent of the framers of the 1986 Constitutional Commission, in the deliberation of Article XIV of the 1987 Constitution, Commissioner Rene Sarmiento said that there are at least three dominant definitions for nationalism – the “barangay-Tagalog” nationalism which refers to regionalist notions; the “tinikling” nationalism which reduces nationalism to mere symbolism; and a third, more comprehensive type, which he discussed as follows.

“Filipino nationalism is the determination to uphold the sovereignty of the Filipino people, the right of the Filipinos to freely decide the destiny of the nation — that is, the kind of government we should have and who should run it; what is the common good and how to attain it; how our society should be structured; how the wealth of our land and seas should be used, developed and shared; and how our culture should be preserved and enhanced. Filipino nationalism is more than patriotism. It is more than the love of land and people, loyalty to flag and country, and readiness to sacrifice personal interest for the common good. It is the firm resolve never to allow our people to be dominated, or controlled by foreign powers or domestic tyrants and to oppose totalitarianism, imperialism, and hegemony with all the means at our command.”

This kind of nationalism will teach the youth not only how to love the country but also to battle the ills of society such as poverty, hunger, illiteracy, and other problems. The kind of nationalism that cannot be taught by welding guns and marching under the heat of the sun.