Treaties in the Philippine Constitutional System

IF 0.4 Q3 LAW
D. Desierto
{"title":"Treaties in the Philippine Constitutional System","authors":"D. Desierto","doi":"10.1515/icl-2021-0035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract International law has always had a dual significance to the Philippine constitutional system. On the one hand, the frequent articulation of international law principles within modern Philippine constitutional norms, statutes, and administrative rules demonstrate an outward-looking normative ethos – one I have described in other scholarship to be consistent with the 1987 Philippine Constitution’s ‘universalist history’. On the other hand, the considerable volume of Philippine jurisprudence applying international law norms to date overwhelmingly illustrate how Philippine litigants have strategically deployed international law (most especially international human rights law) over the years, as an acceptable external legal basis to hold Philippine government leaders to account under the vastly expanded judicial review doctrine in the 1987 Philippine Constitution. This active individual and group resort to adjudication and legislation could explain why international law has flourished under the postcolonial and post-dictatorship 1987 Philippine Constitution. This comprehensive jurisprudential, statutory, and constitutional analysis aims to show how, and to what degree, Philippine legal culture and history reflect a continuing deep engagement with international law, in ways that are certainly unique to the Philippines’ evolving political ideologies, colonial and postcolonial history, treatment, and implementation of international treaties within the Philippine constitutional system. Most importantly, the absence of explicit methodology for the breadth of constitutional interpretation of the Incorporation Clause under the 1987 Philippine Constitution warrants normative rethinking, so as not to uniformly open the floodgates to hard international law sources (eg treaties, customs, general principles) as well as softer international instruments lacking the requisite State consent to the binding quality of such sources within the Philippine legal system. To this end, I make three proposals on how the Philippine Supreme Court could define an explicit methodology for use and interpretation of the Incorporation Clause, transparently refer to other foreign and international sources, and openly reassess its ideological bases for recognition of international law in the Philippine constitutional system, as part of the Court’s distinct judicial function.","PeriodicalId":41321,"journal":{"name":"ICL Journal-Vienna Journal on International Constitutional Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ICL Journal-Vienna Journal on International Constitutional Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/icl-2021-0035","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract International law has always had a dual significance to the Philippine constitutional system. On the one hand, the frequent articulation of international law principles within modern Philippine constitutional norms, statutes, and administrative rules demonstrate an outward-looking normative ethos – one I have described in other scholarship to be consistent with the 1987 Philippine Constitution’s ‘universalist history’. On the other hand, the considerable volume of Philippine jurisprudence applying international law norms to date overwhelmingly illustrate how Philippine litigants have strategically deployed international law (most especially international human rights law) over the years, as an acceptable external legal basis to hold Philippine government leaders to account under the vastly expanded judicial review doctrine in the 1987 Philippine Constitution. This active individual and group resort to adjudication and legislation could explain why international law has flourished under the postcolonial and post-dictatorship 1987 Philippine Constitution. This comprehensive jurisprudential, statutory, and constitutional analysis aims to show how, and to what degree, Philippine legal culture and history reflect a continuing deep engagement with international law, in ways that are certainly unique to the Philippines’ evolving political ideologies, colonial and postcolonial history, treatment, and implementation of international treaties within the Philippine constitutional system. Most importantly, the absence of explicit methodology for the breadth of constitutional interpretation of the Incorporation Clause under the 1987 Philippine Constitution warrants normative rethinking, so as not to uniformly open the floodgates to hard international law sources (eg treaties, customs, general principles) as well as softer international instruments lacking the requisite State consent to the binding quality of such sources within the Philippine legal system. To this end, I make three proposals on how the Philippine Supreme Court could define an explicit methodology for use and interpretation of the Incorporation Clause, transparently refer to other foreign and international sources, and openly reassess its ideological bases for recognition of international law in the Philippine constitutional system, as part of the Court’s distinct judicial function.
菲律宾宪法制度中的条约
国际法对菲律宾宪法制度一直具有双重意义。一方面,国际法原则在现代菲律宾宪法规范、法规和行政规则中的频繁表达表明了一种外向的规范精神——我在其他学术研究中描述过,这与1987年菲律宾宪法的“普遍主义历史”是一致的。另一方面,迄今为止大量适用国际法规范的菲律宾判例压倒性地说明了菲律宾诉讼当事人多年来如何战略性地部署国际法(尤其是国际人权法),作为1987年菲律宾宪法中广泛扩展的司法审查原则要求菲律宾政府领导人承担责任的可接受的外部法律基础。这种积极的个人和群体诉诸于裁决和立法可以解释为什么国际法在后殖民和后独裁统治的1987年菲律宾宪法下蓬勃发展。这个全面的法理、法规和宪法分析旨在展示菲律宾法律文化和历史如何以及在多大程度上反映了与国际法的持续深入接触,以菲律宾不断发展的政治意识形态、殖民和后殖民历史、对待和实施菲律宾宪法体系内国际条约的独特方式。最重要的是,由于缺乏明确的方法来解释1987年菲律宾宪法下的公司条款的宪法解释的广度,因此需要进行规范性的重新思考,以免统一地打开硬国际法来源(例如条约,惯例,一般原则)的闸门,以及缺乏必要的国家同意的软国际文书,这些来源在菲律宾法律制度内具有约束力。为此,我就菲律宾最高法院如何定义一个明确的方法来使用和解释“成立条款”提出了三个建议,透明地参考其他外国和国际来源,并公开重新评估其在菲律宾宪法体系中承认国际法的意识形态基础,作为法院独特司法职能的一部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信