Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago will sponsor a proposed resolution on the controversial Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (Edca) between the Philippines and the United States when she returns to the plenary session on Monday.
In a statement on Friday, Santiago said the proposed resolution stated that any treaty or international agreement including the Edca requires a Senate concurrence.
Santiago, chair of the Senate foreign relations committee, will submit the resolution for adoption by the majority of senators amid reports that the Supreme Court is set to rule on the validity of the Edca ahead of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) world leader’s meeting this November.
Once sponsored, the resolution will be opened to debate on the Senate floor where a simple majority of senators present in a quorum is required to adopt a resolution.
Santiago earlier sent to the Supreme Court a copy of the proposed Senate resolution signed by Santiago and 12 other senators.
Among those who signed the resolution were Juan Edgardo Angara, Pia Cayetano, Joseph Victor “JV” Ejercito, Jose “Jinggoy” Estrada, Teofisto Guingona III, Lito Lapid, Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr., Sergio Osmeña III, Aquilino Pimentel III, Ralph Recto, Ramon “Bong” Revilla Jr., and Cynthia Villar.
The resolution decried “how the Senate, with which the President shares treaty-making powers, was sidestepped on the EDCA signed by Manila and Washington in April 2014.”
The resolution, however, clarified that “the Senate is not forcing the President to submit any treaty to the Senate for concurrence, abiding by the Supreme Court ruling in the 2005 case of Pimentel v. Office of the Executive Secretary.”
“By this resolution, the Senate merely takes a definitive stand on the non-negotiable power of the Senate to decide whether a treaty will be valid and effective, depending on Senate concurrence,” the resolution said.
But Santiago said that Malacanang’s decision to implement Edca without Senate concurrence “is a betrayal of a co-equal branch of government.”
“This contretemps does not indicate good faith on the part of the two presidents. The use of guile in diplomacy should be limited to state-to-state situations, and should not include a situation involving only two branches of the same government,” Santiago has earlier said.