PBBM handled WPS rows well, say maritime experts SC UPHOLDS SANDIGAN JUNKING OF P1-B CASE VS MARCOSES, PALS

By Malou Talosig-Bartolome @maloutalosig

P rof. Jay Batongbacal, Director of the Institute for Maritime Affairs and Law of the Sea of the University of the Philippines Law Center, echoed Amador’s assessment. “ I would rate it very highly at this point. So far, the signals have been good so I hope that this is sustained over the longer period,” Batongbacal said.

I n a press conference via Zoom, the two maritime experts called on President Marcos to declare the proposed Maritime Zone Law as a priority bill in his upcoming State of Nation Address (SONA) to enable the country to implement the arbitral award and transition the Philippines to the blue economy.

tatives approved on third and final reading the Maritime Zone bill. This provides for the harmonization of domestic and international laws and regulations, identifying the maritime zones such as internal waters, archipelagic waters, territorial sea, contiguous zone, exclusive economic zone (EEZ), and continental shelf.

A mador said they need the support of the Senate to push the legislation forward.

B atongbacal said the enactment of the Maritime Zone law would “cement” the legacy of Marcos Jr.’s father, former President Ferdinand E. Marcos.

for reconsideration of the PCGG.

THE Supreme Court (SC) has affirmed the dismissal by the Sandiganbayan of the P1.050-billion civil forfeiture case filed against the late strongman Ferdinand Marcos Sr., former First Lady Imelda Marcos and several associates who allegedly acted as their dummies in acquiring expensive artworks, clothes, jewelry, and properties here and abroad, including franchises to operate tourist duty-free shops.

However, the challenge to the administration is how to enforce the 2016 international arbitral tribunal award, which invalidated China’s nine-dash line claim over the South China, Sea, and affirmed the Philippine claim over the islands and reefs as part of its exclusive economic zone.

Julio Amador III, founder and CEO of Amador Research Services, said he would give a seven “7” rating to Marcos’s performance on the

West Philippine Sea dispute. “ First, there’s consistency in the way that the administration has been going about in terms of the South China Sea. It has allowed the appropriate agencies such as the Department of Foreign Affairs to regularly make a statement on the South China Sea arbitration ruling. There are no conflicting messages in terms of our victory in the arbitral tribunal which I think is quite good,” Amador said.

What we need are concrete measures to actually move the process forward, make sure that we are implementing the arbitration award because it is binding on us,” Amador said.

A lthough the Philippines is the second largest archipelago in the world, with a 36,000-km coastline, most of the legislation are geared towards an economy anchored on land-based industries.

I n May, the House of Represen -

It was during the first Marcos administration when the Philippines fought for the maritime rights of archipelagic states in the international community. The enactment of a maritime zone law would actually cement the legacy of his father to the nation and really conclude in a sense the effort of the Philippines -- the government and the nation as a whole—to try to establish for itself the maximum extent of what we now know as the Philippine archipelago,” Batongbacal said.

I n a 25-page decision made public on July 19, the SC First Division dismissed for lack of merit the petition for review filed by the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG), seeking the reversal of the Sandiganbayan’s decision of September 25, 2019, dismissing the expanded complaint against the Marcoses and the Tantoco family , namely Bienvenido R. Tantoco, Jr., Dominador R. Santiago, Bienvenido R. Tantoco, Sr., Gliceria R. Tantoco, and Maria Lourdes Tantoco- Pineda, for insufficiency of evidence.

T he SC also affirmed the Sandiganbayan’s November 20, 2019 resolution which denied the motion

In order to consider petitioner’s evidence as sufficient to prove the allegations of its expanded complaint, the Court has to perform many leaps of logic, engage in presumptions, and create inferences based on other inferences in order to bridge the gaps in the evidence adduced. In the face of such gaps; petitioner’s allegations in its expanded complaint are reduced to mere speculations, insinuations· and conjectures,” the SC said in a decision penned by Associate Justice Ricardo Rosario.

Thus, while it is truly disappointing that nothing has come of this case despite the lapse of 36 years spent in litigation, the Court agrees with the Sandiganbayan that petitioner’s evidence is insufficient to support the allegations of its Expanded Complaint by a preponderance of evidence,” it added.

T he SC noted that while the PCGG submitted numerous pieces of evidence, many were excluded because they were not disclosed during the discovery process and others were excluded for violating the “Best Evidence Rule.”

Continued on A4