Sen. Pimentel vs Executive Secretary , G.R. No.

158088 , July 6, 2005

Facts : This is a petition of Senator Aquilino Pimentel and the other parties to ask the
Supreme Court to require the Executive Department to transmit the Rome Statute
which established the International Criminal Court for the Senate’s concurrence in
accordance with Sec 21, Art VII of the 1987 Constitution.

Petitioners contend that that ratification of a treaty, under both domestic law and
international law, is a function of the Senate. That under the treaty law and customary
international law, Philippines has a ministerial duty to ratify the Rome Statute.

Respondents on the other hand, questioned the legal standing of herein petitioners and
argued that executive department has no duty to transmit the Rome Statute to the
Senate for concurrence.

Issues : Whether or not petitioners have the legal standing to file the instant suit.

Whether or not the Executive Secretary and the Department of Foreign Affairs have the
ministerial duty to transmit to the Senate the copy of the Rome Statute signed by the
Philippine Member to the United Nations even without the signature of the President.

Ruling : Only Senator Pimentel has a legal standing to the extent of his power as
member of Congress. Other petitioners have not shown that they have sustained a
direct injury from the non-transmittal and that they can seek redress in our domestic
courts.

Petitioners’ interpretation of the Constitution is incorrect. The power to ratify treaties

does not belong to the Senate.
Under E.O. 459, the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) prepares the ratification papers
and forward the signed copy to the President for ratification. After the President has
ratified it, DFA shall submit the same to the Senate for concurrence.

The President has the sole authority to negotiate and enter into treaties, the
Constitution provides a limitation to his power by requiring the concurrence of 2/3 of all
the members of the Senate for the validity of the treaty entered into by him. Section 21,
Article VII of the 1987 Constitution provides that “no treaty or international agreement
shall be valid and effective unless concurred in by at least two-thirds of all the Members
of the Senate.” The participation of the legislative branch in the treaty-making process
was deemed essential to provide a check on the executive in the field of foreign
relations.

It should be emphasized that under the Constitution the power to ratify is vested in the
President subject to the concurrence of the Senate. The President has the discretion
even after the signing of the treaty by the Philippine representative whether or not to
ratify a treaty.

The signature does not signify final consent, it is ratification that binds the state to the
provisions of the treaty and renders it effective.
Senate is limited only to giving or withholding its consent, concurrence to the
ratification. It is within the President to refuse to submit a treaty to the Senate or having
secured its consent for its ratification, refuse to ratify it. Such decision is within the
competence of the President alone, which cannot be encroached by this court via writ
of mandamus,

Thus, the petition is DISMISSED.

PIMENTEL vs. EXEC SEC

FACTS:
On 28 December 2000, the Philippines signed the Rome Statute through Charge d’
Affairs Enrique A. Manalo of the Philippine Mission to the United Nations (PMUN).
The Rome Statue establsihed the International Criminal Court which provides “shall
have the power to exercise its jurisdiction over persons for the most serious crimes of
international concerns…”. However, the treaty’s provisions require that it be subject to
ratification, acceptance, or approval of the signatory states.
Petitioner/s filed an instant petitione compelling respondents to transmit the signed text
of the treaty to the Senate for ratification. It is on the theory that ratification of a treaty is
a function of the Senate. Hence, the duty of the executive it to sign the same and transmit
it thereafter to to the Senate for concurrence.
The OSG, representing respondents, contends that the executive department has no duty
to transmit the said treaty to the Senate for concurrence.
ISSUE: WON Respondents have the ministerial duty to transmit the copy of the subject
treaty to the Senate signed by a member of the PMUN even without the signature of the
President for concurrence?
RULING:
No. The President, being the head of the Sate, is regarded as the sole organ and authority
in external relations with foreign nations. In the realm of treaty-making, the President
has the sole authority to negotiate with other states.
Although it is correct that the Constitution, in Article VII, Section 21, provides for the
concurrence of 2/3 of all members of the Senate for validating a treaty and is deemed
essential to provide check on the executive’s foreign relations, it is not absolute. The
power to ratify does not belong to the Senate.
The process of treaty making: negotiation, signature, ratification, and exchance of th
instruments of ratification. Petitioner’s arguments equate the signing of the treaty by the
Phil. representative with ratification. However, it should be noted that signature and
ratification is two separate steps. Signature is for authentication, on the other hand,
ratification is the formal act of acceptance. the latter is generally an executive act
undertaken by the head of the state.
Moreover, under E.O. 459, issued by Pres. Ramos, provides for guidelines in the
negotiation of international agreements and its ratification. The said Order provides that
a treaty, after it was signed by the representative of the State, shall be subject to
ratification by the President. before the Senate can concur it, the President must ratify it
first.
It should be emphasized that under the Constitution, the power to ratify is vested in the
President, subject to the concurrence of the Senate. The role of the latter is limited only
to giving consent to the ratification. Hence, the President has the authority to refuse to
submit a treaty to the Senate, and/or refuse to ratify it.
Section 21. No treaty or international agreement shall be valid and
effective unless concurred
in by at least two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.