Anda di halaman 1dari 2

G.R. No.

183591 October 14 2008


Province of North Cotabato vs Government of the Republic of the Philippines

Doctrine:
No province, city, or municipality, not even the ARMM, is recognized under our laws as having
an associative relationship with the national government. Indeed, the concept implies powers that
go beyond anything ever granted by the Constitution to any local or regional government. It also
implies the recognition of the associated entity as a state. The Constitution, however, does not
contemplate any state in this jurisdiction other than the Philippine State, much less does it
provide for a transitory status that aims to prepare any part of Philippine territory for
independence.

Facts:
On August 5, 2008, the Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and the MILF,
through the Chairpersons of their respective peace negotiating panels, were scheduled to sign a
Memorandum of Agreement on the Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) Aspect of the GRP-MILF
Tripoli Agreement on Peace of 2001 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

The MOA-AD was preceded by a long process of negotiation and the concluding of several prior
agreements between the two parties beginning in 1996, when the GRP-MILF peace negotiations
began.

Invoking the right to information on matters of public concern, the petitioners involving public
officers from Zamboanga, Iligan City and North Cotabato, among others, seek to compel
respondents to disclose and furnish them the complete and official copies of the MA-AD and to
prohibit the slated signing of the MOA-AD and the holding of public consultation thereon. They
also pray that the MOA-AD be declared unconstitutional. The Court issued a TRO enjoining the
GRP from signing the same.

Issue:
Whether or not the MOA-AD that embodies BJE runs counter to the national sovereignty and
territorial integrity of the Republic
Ruling:
YES. The BJE (Bangsamoro Juridical Entity) is a far more powerful entity than the autonomous
region recognized in the Constitution. It is not merely an expanded version of the ARMM, the
status of its relationship with the national government being fundamentally different from that of
the ARMM. Indeed, BJE is a state in all but name as it meets the criteria of a state laid down in
the Montevideo Convention, namely, a permanent population, a defined territory, a government,
and a capacity to enter into relations with other states.

Even assuming arguendo that the MOA-AD would not necessarily sever any portion of
Philippine territory, the spirit animating it – which has betrayed itself by its use of the concept of
association – runs counter to the national sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic.
The defining concept underlying the relationship between the national government and the BJE
being itself contrary to the present Constitution, it is not surprising that many of the specific
provisions of the MOA-AD on the formation and powers of the BJE are in conflict with the
Constitution and the laws. The BJE is more of a state than an autonomous region. But even
assuming that it is covered by the term “autonomous region” in the constitutional provision just
quoted, the MOA-AD would still be in conflict with it.

Anda mungkin juga menyukai