WIGBERTO E. TAÑADA, ET AL.
vs.
EDGARDO ANGARA, ET AL.

Facts:

As the WTO opens its access to foreign markets, major trading partners, experienced through reduction of tariffs on its exports specifically on agricultural and industrial products. It further associates with exporting and more investment in the country. The signatory Senators viewed this agreement as a “free market” system since there would be more investment and exporting activities with in the member countries. The “Filipino First Policy” of the Constitution was set aside as it gives way to foreign trading. Thus, this petition.


Issue:

Whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of the Senate in giving its concurrence of the WTO agreement.

Ruling:

By the doctrine of incorporation, the country is bound by generally accepted principles of international law, which are considered automatically part of our own laws. In its Declaration of Principles and state policies, the Constitution “adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land, and adheres to the policy of peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation and amity, with all nations.

With WTO, the sovereignty of the state cannot in fact and reality be considered as absolute because it is a regulation of commercial relations among nations. The Senate only did their part in the valid exercise of authority. It remains as the only viable structure for multilateral trading and the veritable forum for the development of international trade law. Its alternative is isolation, stagnation if not economic self-destruction. Thus, the people are allowed, through their duly elected officers to make their free choice.

Petition is DISMISSED for lack of merit.