|
THE
government panel, although pitted against legal
luminaries from the anti-Jpepa groups, explained
constitutional issues raised against the
Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement (Jpepa)
in Monday’s joint hearing conducted by the Senate
foreign relations and trade and commerce committees.
Ambassador Manuel A. J. Teehankee, Philippine permanent
representative to the World Trade Organization and who
was designated spokesman of the Jpepa legal panel,
allayed fears that the treaty would give Japanese
nationals the same rights as the Filipinos while doing
business in the Philippines.
Teehankee explained that the national treatment
provision in the Jpepa does not give parity rights to
Japanese businessmen. He cited specific provisions in
the treaty to prove his point.
In a
fact sheet, the Department of Trade and Industry said
the national treatment clause in the Jpepa refers only
to the nondiscriminatory treatment of Japanese and
Filipino investors as far as regulatory conditions are
concerned, such as taxes and fees, hiring, and
distribution requirements.
This
does not involve the right to own lands, exploit natural
resources and to engage in activities reserved for
Filipinos, the DTI said.
Teehankee, formerly undersecretary in the Department of
Justice, said that contrary to the observations of anti-Jpepa
groups, there is no commitment in the Jpepa for Japanese
investors to engage in the services sector—such as in
public utility, educational institutions, mass media and
advertising—because these are reserved only to
Filipino-owned companies.
Under
existing laws, foreigners can only own 40 percent in any
company, with 60 percent, or majority, owned by
Filipinos.
Teehankee also explained that under the most-favored
nation (MFN) treatment clause in Chapter 8 of the Jpepa,
the provision states that the treatment with respect to
investment activities, is the same treatment that the
country would give even to nonparty or to other
countries without a bilateral agreement with the
Philippines.
This
means that under this MFN provision, there is no special
treatment to the Japanese nationals, Teehankee said.
Monday’s
hearing dealt with constitutional issues and the
movement of goods and services.
Sen.
Miriam Defensor-Santiago, chairman of the Senate
Committee on Foreign Relations, said that although the
hearing was supposed to be the last in the scheduled
five hearings, another hearing is set with Sen. Edgardo
Angara presiding. The date is still to be announced. |
