Practice question
The President signs an agreement that, on the stipulated facts, would be the first legal instrument permitting foreign military bases in the Philippines after the period addressed in Article XVIII, Section 25. There is no existing treaty authorizing that presence. Officials call the instrument an executive agreement and argue that the label alone eliminates every treaty requirement. Which is the best analysis?
- Any executive-agreement label conclusively eliminates constitutional treaty requirements
- The label cannot evade the express constitutional treaty conditions governing the stated foreign-base arrangement
- A local mayor may supply all missing treaty consent
- The foreign government's signature substitutes for Philippine constitutional concurrence
- Senate concurrence is unnecessary whenever the project has a defense purpose
Legal references
- 1987 Constitution, Article XVIII, Section 25: https://lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html
- 1987 Constitution, Article VII, Section 21: 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.