GMA may be Impeached for Camago-Malampaya Declaration

Under the Philippine Constitution, a president may be impeached for culpable violation of the Constitution. If critics could prove that President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo consciously violated the Constitution by declaring Camago and Malampaya as beyond the territorial jurisdiction of Palawan, she could kiss the presidency goodbye.

BY ALEXANDER MARTIN REMOLLINO
Bulatlat

Arroyo made the declaration through legal representation for the national government sometime last month at the Regional Trial Court in Puerto Princesa City, Palawan’s provincial capital. The declaration was made in reaction to the Palawan provincial government’s demand that it be given what it called its due share of revenues from the oil and natural gas explorations in these fields.

The Camago natural gas field, which lies north of Palawan, was discovered in 1989. Malampaya’s oil and gas field was discovered three years after. Oil explorations off the coast of Palawan since the 1970s led to the discovery of the Camago and Malampaya fields.

The Arroyo government claims that Camago and Malampaya are beyond Palawan’s jurisdiction since they are more than 80 nautical miles from the island. Prior to the pleading before the Puerto Princesa Regional Trial Court, Arroyo had already been harping on the distance between Camago-Malampaya and Palawan: she was quoted by the newspapers last year as saying that Malampaya is “far off Palawan.”

Analyzing the claim, the implication is that the Camago-Malampaya fields are not part of Philippine territory. Palawan appears on the map as the country’s westernmost province, and the Camago-Malampaya fields are nearer to Palawan than to Luzon island. If Camago and Malampaya are not part of Palawan, then, they could not be part of any other Philippine province.

Palawan-born David V. Feliciano, now a resident of Cavite province south of Manila, in a letter to the editor of INQ7.net dated July 16, 2003, asks: “If Malampaya is not part of Palawan, then what foreign country owns it?”

Unclos III

Under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos III), coastal states like the Philippines – a signatory to the agreement – are allowed to claim as exclusive economic zone (EEZ) a continental shelf of up to 200 nautical miles from its baselines.

Unclos III also allows coastal states, under particular circumstances, to claim territory beyond the 200-nautical mile EEZ.

The Camago and Malampaya oil and gas fields are well within the 200-nautical mile EEZ of the Philippines.

They are in fact closer to the Philippine baseline than the Kalayaan island group, part of the Spratly Islands which are being claimed by seven Asian countries including the Philippines. The Kalayaan island group lies 270 nautical miles from the Philippine baselines.

Impeachable

A petition from former Interior and Local Government Sec. Cesar Sarino and members of the Kilusan (Movement) Love Malampaya, an organization of Palawan residents,   accusing Arroyo of violating the Constitution is now lodged before the Puerto Princesa Regional Trial Court.

Article I of the 1987 Philippine Constitution provides that: “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 the Constitution, a president may be impeached for culpable violation of the Constitution. If Sarino and the Kilusan Love Malampaya could prove that Arroyo consciously violated the Constitution by declaring Camago and Malampaya as beyond the territorial jurisdiction of Palawan, she could kiss the presidency goodbye. Bulatlat

Related article:

The Black Gold Chains

===========

References:

1. Philip C. Tubeza, “Macapagal Sued over Malampaya,” Philippine Daily Inquirer, June 16, 2004

2. David V. Feliciano, “Is Malampaya Part of Palawan Province?” Letter to the Editor, INQ7.net, July 16, 2003 (http://www.inq7.net/opi/2003/jul/16/letter_2-1.htm)

3. Sol Jose Vanzi, “Palawan Natural Gas Link to Subic Readied,” Philippine News Headline Online, May 26, 1998 (http://www.newsflash.org/199805/be/be000409.htm)

4. Ducky Paredes, “How GMA Bilks Palawan,” Malaya, June 17, 2004

5. The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/closindx.htm)

6. The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines

Back to top

We want to know what you think of this article.