Case Nos.

64 and 65
Article II – Declaration of Principles and State Policies
Section 2 – Generally Accepted Principles of International Law

SAGUISAG v. ES BAYAN v. DND SEC. GAZMIN

G.R. No. 212426 G.R. No. 212444

FACTS:

 Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement is an executive agreement entered between the Republic of
the Philippines and United States of America (U.S.) which authorizes the U.S. military forces to have
access to and conduct activities within certain "Agreed Locations" in the country. The same was not
transmitted to the Senate on the executive's understanding that to do so was no longer
necessary. Accordingly, in June 2014, the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) and the U.S. Embassy
exchanged diplomatic notes confirming the completion of all necessary internal requirements for the
agreement to enter into force in the two countries.

 The petitioners respectfully pray that the court RECONSIDER, REVERSE, AND SET - ASIDE its
decision dated January 12, 2016, and issue a new Decision GRANTING the instant consolidated
petitions by declaring the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) entered into by the
respondents for the Philippine government, with the United States of America, UNCONSTITUTIONAL
AND INVALID and to permanently enjoin its implementation. The petitioners argued that it should
have been in the form of a treaty concurred in by the Senate, not in an executive agreement instead.

 Respondents argue that petitioners lack standing to bring the suit. To support the legality of their actions,
respondents invoke the 1987 Constitution, treaties, and judicial precedents.

ISSUE(S):

 Whether the President may enter into an executive agreement on foreign military bases, troops, or
facilities? – YES.

 Is EDCA a treaty or an international agreement that requires Senate concurrence? – NO.

RULING:
 The President who carries the mandate of being the sole organ in the conduct of every foreign relations,
the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines who is duty-bound to protect and
preserve the sovereignty and territorial integrity, who holds the most confidential and complex
information about other foreign countries that may impact our external affairs with other countries, may
enter into an executive agreement deemed necessary to secure national interests. Furthermore, no court
can tell the President to desist from choosing an executive agreement over a treaty to embody
an international agreement, unless the case falls squarely within Section 21 of Article 2.

 In general it can be said that agreements that are permanent and original should be embodied in a treaty
and have to be concurred by the Senate. On the other hand, agreements, which are temporary or are
mere implementations of treaties or statues, do not need concurrence.

 EDCA states in its Preamble the "understanding for the United States not to establish a permanent
military presence or base in the territory of the Philippines." Further on, it likewise states the
recognition that "all United States access to and use of facilities and areas will be at the invitation of the
Philippines and with full respect for the Philippine Constitution and Philippine laws."

Page 1 of 2
 The entry of US troops has long been authorized under a valid and subsisting treaty, which is the
Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA). Reading the VFA along with the longstanding Mutual Defense
Treaty led this Court to the conclusion that an executive agreement such as the EDCA was well within
the bounds of the obligations imposed by both treaties.

 Thus, we find no reason for EDCA to be declared unconstitutional. It fully conforms to the Philippines'
legal regime through the MDT and VFA. It also fully conforms to the government's continued policy
to enhance our military capability in the face of various military and humanitarian issues that
may arise.

Page 2 of 2