And in Civil Liberties Union v. Executive Secretary,13 we said: PROTECTOR OF THE PEOPLE AND THE STATE.

E PEOPLE AND THE STATE. ITS GOAL IS TO SECURE

THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE STATE AND THE INTEGRITY OF THE
A foolproof yardstick in constitutional construction is the intention underlying the NATIONAL TERRITORY.”
provision under consideration. Thus, it has been held that the Court in
construing a Constitution should bear in mind the object sought to be
accomplished by its adoption, and the evils, if any, sought to be prevented or
remedied. A doubtful provision will be examined in the light of the history of the
times, and the condition and circumstances under which the Constitution was
framed. The object is to ascertain the reason which induced the framers of the
Constitution to enact the particular provision and the purpose sought to be
accomplished thereby, in order to construe the whole as to make the words
consonant to that reason and calculated to effect that purpose.

The authoritativeness of text is no excuse to provide an unworkable result or

one which undermines the intended structure of government provided in the
Constitution. Text is authoritative, but it is not exhaustive of the entire universe
of meaning.

There is no compelling reason why we should blind ourselves as to the meaning

of "representative of Congress" and "ex officio." There is no compelling reason
why there should only be one representative of a bicameral Congress.

WHETHER OR NOT THE RESPONDENTS COMMITTED CULPABLE

VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION AND/OR BETRAYAL OF PUBLIC
TRUST WHEN HE BLATANTLY (VOCALLY ) DISREGARDED THE
COUNTRY’S RIGHT TO EXPLORE THE KALAYAAN GROUP OF ISLANDS
AND SCARBOROUGH SHOAL BY ISSUING A STATEMENT THAT THE
COUNTRY CANNOT DO ANYTHING TO STOP CHINA FROM BUILDING ON
SCARBOROUGH OR PANATAG SHOAL AND THUS FAILING TO MEET AND
OBSERVE THE STRINGENT STANDARDS OF THE FOLLOWING
CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS, TO WIT:

SEC. 1 ARTICLE 12 OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION WHICH STATES THAT:

“...
SEC. 17 ARTICLE 7 OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION STATES THAT THE
PRESIDENT SHALL HAVE CONTROL OF ALL THE EXECUTIVE
DEPARTMENTS, BUREAUS, AND OFFICES. HE SHALL ENSURE THAT
THE LAWS BE FAITHFULLY EXECUTED.

SEC. 18 ARTICLE 7 OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION WHICH STATES THAT

“ THE PRESIDENT SHALL BE THE COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF OF ALL ARMED
FORCES OF THE PHILIPPINES…”

SEC.3 ARTICLE 2 OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION WHICH STATES

THAT “...THE ARMED FORCES OF THE PHILIPPINES IS THE
WHETHER OR NOT THE RESPONDENT COMMITTED CULPABLE
VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION AND/OR BETRAYAL OF PUBLIC
TRUST WHEN HE DELIBERATELY DISREGARDED THE COUNTRY’S
RIGHTS TO EXPLORE THE SCARBOROUGH SHOAL AND THE
KALAYAAN GROUP OF ISLANDS BY ISSUING A (PUBLIC) STATEMENT
THAT THE PHILIPPINES CANNOT DO ANYTHING TO STOP CHINA
FROM BUILDING ON SCARBOROUGH OR PANATAG SHOAL AND THUS
FAILING TO MEET AND OBSERVE THE STRINGENT STANDARDS OF
SEVERAL PROVISIONS OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION PARTICULARLY
SECTION 1 OF ARTICLE XII, SECTIONS 17 AND 18 OF ARTICLE VII AND
SECTION 3 OF ARTICLE II.
Section 1, Article XII of the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines
provides that:
“…The state shall protect the nation’s marine wealth in its Archipelagic Waters,
Territorial Sea, and Exclusive Economic Zone, and reserve its use and enjoyment
exclusively to Filipino Citizen.” (Emphasis Supplied)
Section 17, Article VII of the same Constitution provides that:
“The President shall have the control of all the Executive Departments, Bureaus, and
Offices. He shall ensure that the laws be faithfully executed.” (Emphasis Supplied)
Section 18, Article VII also provides that:
“The President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of all Armed Forces of the
Philippines…”
Section 3, Article II of the same Constitution provides that:
“…the Armed Forces of the Philippines is the protector of the people and the state. Its
goal is to secure the sovereignty of the state and the integrity of the National
Territory.” (Emphasis Supplied)
A. The Kalayaan Group of Islands and Scarborough Shoal lies on the
Philippine’s Exclusive Economic Zone, thus the country has the rights to
explore and benefit all economic resources which includes but not
limited to fishing, mining, oil exploration and others.
1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scarborough_Shoal
The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), to
which the Republic of the Philippines and People’s Republic of China
defined the following:
1. Territorial Waters or Territorial Sea- a belt of coastal waters
extending at most 12 nautical miles from the baseline of a coastal state.
The term “territorial waters” is also sometimes used informally to refer
to any area of water over which the state has jurisdiction.
2. Contiguous Zone- a band of water extending from the outer edge of the
territorial sea to up to 24 nautical miles from the baseline, within which
a state can exert limited control for the purpose of preventing or
punishing "infringement of its customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary
laws and regulations within its territory or territorial sea.
3. Exclusive Economic Zone- extends from the outer limit of the territorial
sea to a maximum of 200 nautical from the territorial sea baseline, thus it
includes the contiguous zone. A coastal nation has control of all
economic resources within its exclusive economic zone, including
fishing, mining, oil exploration, and any pollution of those resources.
However, it cannot prohibit passage or loitering above, on, or under the
surface of the sea that is in compliance with the laws and regulations
adopted by the coastal State in accordance with the provisions of the UN
Convention, within that portion of its exclusive economic zone beyond its
territorial sea.
The Scarborough Shoal is about 198 kilometers (123 NM) west of Subic Bay. The
nearest landmass is Palauig, Zambales on Luzon Island in the Philippines, about 220
kilometers (137 NM) due east. 1 From its geographical location, Scarborough Shoal is
within the Philippine’s Exclusive Economic Zone thus the country has the rights to
explore its resources which includes living and non-living things.
Similarly, The Kalayaan Group of Islands rests ___ nautical miles from the Philippine
baselines.
B. The claim of China that Scarborough Shoal and Kalayaan Group of
Islands are part of their territory banking on the “nine-dash line” claim
was held by the International Panel of Judges at the Permanent Court of
Arbitration (PCA) in the Hague to be bereft of legal basis.
 The five member Arbitral Tribunal upheld the Manila’s position that China’s
“nine-dash line” maritime claim is excessive and encroached into the
Philippines’ 200-nautical mile Exclusive Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).
The judges ruled that : There was no legal basis for China to claim historic
rights to resources within the sea areas falling within the “nine-dash line”, thus
none of the Spratlys Island grant China an EEZ.
China had palpably violated Philippines' sovereign rights in its EEZ by
interfering with fishing and petroleum exploration, constructing artificial
islands, and failing to prevent Chinese fishermen from fishing in the zone.
C. Under Republic Act 9522, which defines the archipelagic baselines of the
Philippines, claimed sovereignty over the Kalayaan Island Group and the
Scarborough Shoal under Section 2, sub-paragraph A.
*insert discussion here*
D. The respondent, in his capacity as the President of the Philippines,
willfully and negligently uttered the words “we cannot do anything to stop
China from building on Scarborough Shoal” thus expressly or impliedly
putting aside Philippine Sovereignty on the disputed territory.
On _______, President Rodrigo Dutere, before leaving for Myanmar, said that
the country cannot do anything to stop China from building on Scarborough
or Panatag Shoal.
The uttering of willful and negligent remark was subjected to a comment of
no less than Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio which
made it clear that any statement that the Philippines cannot stop China from
building on Scarborough Shoal "actually encourages China to build on
Scarborough Shoal.” The said remark would tantamount to implied
renunciation of our rights.
It is the constitutional duty of the President of the Republic of the Philippines,
as the Commander-in Chief of the Armed forces of the Philippines to secure
the sovereignty and integrity of our national territory. He should be, at least,
exercise his capacity as a leader to initiate actions to fight and maintain for our
rights.
*insert more arguments*
E. Despite the longstanding issue of the territorial dispute, the respondent
willfully neglected to contest our claim, albeit the well-defined and
established territorial right vested by RA 9522, UNCLOS and the
favorable decision by the PCA over the Maritime Arbitration Case
against China.
For over a year of serving as the President, the respondent has not commenced
any direct or overt act to fight for our claim over the Kalayaan Group of Islands
and Scarborough Shoal.
He should have done, at least, any of the following:
1. Filed a strong formal protest against the Chinese building activity, which is
the least thing that a President should do. This has been dictated by the history
with what the Vietnamese did recently when China sent cruise tours to the
disputed Paracels.
2. Send the Philippine Navy to patrol Scarborough Shoal. If the Chinese attack
Philippine navy vessels, the President can always invoke the Philippines-
U.S. Mutual Defense Treaty, which covers any armed attack on Philippine
navy vessels operating in the South China Sea.
3. Ask the United States to declare that Scarborough Shoal is part of
Philippine territory for purposes of the Philippines-US Mutual Defense
Treaty since the shoal has been part of Philippine territory even during the
American colonial period. This was done when the Senkaku islands
sourced a dispute between Japan and China in the East China Sea. The
U.S. has successfully declared the Senkakus as part of Japanese territory
for purposes of the US-Japan mutual defense treaty.
4. Accept the standing U.S. offer to hold joint naval patrols in the South
China Sea, which includes Scarborough Shoal.Thiswill demonstrate joint
Philippine and US determination to prevent China from building on
Scarborough Shoal.
5. Lastly, he should have avoided any act, statement or declaration that
expressly or impliedly waives Philippine sovereignty to any Philippine
territory in the West Philippine Sea.
*to be continued**