Practice question
An international executive agreement is challenged in an actual case as violating an express constitutional restriction. The government argues that diplomatic sensitivity makes every international agreement immune from judicial review, while the challenger asks the court to decide solely whether a different agreement would be wiser. Which answer is best?
- Diplomacy makes the Constitution inapplicable
- Constitutional legality is reviewable in a proper case, but that is distinct from judicial selection of preferred foreign policy
- The judiciary must negotiate a replacement agreement
- The agreement's title conclusively resolves every constitutional issue
- Only a foreign tribunal may interpret the Philippine Constitution
Legal references
- 1987 Constitution, Article VII, Sections 1, 16 and 21; Article VIII, Section 1: https://lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html
- Saguisag v. Ochoa, G.R. Nos. 212426 and 212444, January 12, 2016, main decision: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/61546
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.