All mine to give: property rights

Last week, Acting Chief Justice Antonio T. Carpio reiterated with even more indignant passion that the Philippine government should not give up rights in the West Philippine Sea as defined by the July 2016 ruling of the Hague-based Permanent Court of Arbitration invalidating China’s “historical” claims over resources in its so-called “nine-dash line” that encroached on the Philippine waters (GMA News May 25, 2018). He warned that non-action by the Philippine government against China’s activities in the West Philippine Sea could be seen as the country giving up its rights. “Inaction is a waiver.” he said (Ibid.).
President Rodrigo Duterte, in pursuing friendlier relations with Beijing, has temporarily set aside the ruling to avoid confrontation with the Asian power (Ibid.). “Duterte earlier stressed the need to “remain meek and humble” to receive the “mercy” of the likes of Chinese President Xi Jinping. He also said Xi vowed to protect him from any plan to remove him from office,” Rappler said. (rappler.com May 25, 2018). Foreign Secretary Alan Peter Cayetano announced that “it is no longer the Philippines’ strategy to always file diplomatic protests against China, as the DFA did under (his predecessor) Albert Del Rosario” (Ibid.).
No diplomatic protest when Chinese bombers recently landed on the South China Sea’s Paracel Islands (claimed by Vietnam) even when nearly all of the Philippines “falls within the radius of the bombers,” said the Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative of the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (Ibid.). What’s new? China has constructed more than 1,600 structures in the disputed South China Sea, and nearly half (800 of these) are in waters belonging to the Philippines (Reuters May 24, 2018).
Subi, Mischief (within Philippine EEZ) and Fiery Cross reefs all have Chinese military infrastructure built between 2014 to 2017 — including emplacements for missiles, 3-km runways, extensive storage facilities, and a range of installations that can track satellites, foreign military activity and communications. The facilities each hold a regiment — between 1,500 to 2,400 troops, the wire agency reported (Ibid.).
“Stop calling it the ‘disputed’ West Philippine Sea,” Justice Carpio insists — the “dispute” has been settled (Rappler, March 5, 2018). “It’s like you have a land, you own it, somebody builds a house there and claims that he owns it also. So you go to court and finally the court says you own the land. Unfortunately the guy who built the house doesn’t want to leave. So the question of ownership is finished; it’s terminated already. You own it, because the court said you own it. It’s now a question of compliance — how to get him out of that lot. That is the situation in the West Philippine Sea,” Justice Carpio said (Ibid.).
But perhaps Justice Carpio is steeped too much in the rule of law to consider that a strong-man leader can be so sure, in his fashion, that his country is his to give away.
In early March President Duterte said joint exploration with China may be likened to co-ownership of the “disputed area.”
Jay Batongbacal, director of the University of the Philippines Institute for Maritime Affairs and Law of the Sea, echoed Justice Carpio’s opinion, saying that “In so far as territory is concerned, in so far as the exclusive economic zone and our natural resources are concerned, the constitution mandates that the benefits of our marine resources, our marine wealth up to the exclusive economic zone is reserved exclusively for Filipinos…The state cannot just share them, cannot admit any kind of co-ownership arrangement or anything similar to that for these resources” (ABS-CBN News March 2, 2018).
Former Solicitor General Florin Hilbay said Duterte’s statement may be considered an impeachable offense.
“A clear example of culpable violation of the Constitution [and] betrayal of public trust. The West Phil[ippine] Sea is exclusively ours. He’s giving it away,” Hilbay said (Ibid.). Hilbay and Justice Carpio were part of the delegation that brought China before an international tribunal to assert the Philippine’s claims in the West Philippine Sea (Ibid.).
And just as reports of Chinese long-range H-6K bombers landing for the first time and conducting exercises on Woody Island rattled his people but did not shake him, President Duterte’s strong persona weighed on a similar but “simple” case of how he protects property rights in his country.
Upon orders of the Manila Regional Trial Court Branch 7 dated Sept. 16, 2010, the 300 families who illegally lived on a lot on Legaspi St. corner Real St. in Intramuros were given final notice to self-demolish, and the private property returned to owner LG Mathieson Development. Enter Manila Mayor Joseph Estrada, former (ousted) President, populist “bad boy” leader closely aligned with Duterte: “Don’t worry, even if the court threatened me with contempt by its owner, I will not let your shanties demolished until we find a suitable resettlement for you,” Estrada said to the squatters (Manila Standard May 24, 2018). The mayor cited President Duterte’s instruction to all concerned government agencies: “No relocation, no demolition” (Ibid.).
Mayor Estrada said the Intramuros Administration has a budget of more than P410 million for the resettlement program of informal settlers living inside the historical site (Ibid.). Then why aren’t they moving on the generously promised relocation? Because there is no place to send the informal settlers to! Estrada said reclaiming 148 hectares from Manila Bay will surely expand Manila’s present land area of 42.88 square kilometers, where virtually every square inch is already occupied, mostly by informal settlers.
But is not the reclamation of Manila Bay earmarked for humongous recreation/gaming centers — one is four times the size of the Makati central business district, according to columnist Vic Agustin.
Chinese investors have reportedly met with President Duterte for operating these, and even the dredging and land-filling works are by China Harbor Engineering co., the same one that did the reclamation of 214 hectares off Davao (Ibid.)
Colliers International, a real estate company active in the Philippine property market, noted that property sales to Chinese nationals have risen in 2017 and continuing through this year, due to the influx of Philippine Online Gaming Operators (POGO) which sustained the office market and consequently impacted residential sales as POGOs often supply housing for their staff (Colliers Quarterly Q1 2018 10 May 2018). Foreigners are allowed to own condominium units in the Philippines, under certain limitations of the Constitution.
And his people’s minds loop back to the unfathomable question of why he seems so set on giving to China what his people already own by the painstaking efforts within the law, of the truly patriotic men and women of past political administrations. It is a greedy usurpation of the people’s basic right to property, along with the right to life and liberty, in the Constitutional Bill of Rights.
 
Amelia H. C. Ylagan is a Doctor of Business Administration from the University of the Philippines.
ahcylagan@yahoo.com