1.

Volunteers against International Occupation has legal standing

2. South China Sea Treaty is Unconstitutional
3. There is legal basis for release of treaty information

1. This petition is of great importance because it concerns a public right stipulated in EO 2 series of
2016 and its object is to compel the performance of a public duty, thus, it is not needed to show
any specific interest for the petition to be given due course.

At any event, the primordial importance to Filipino citizens in general of the issue at hand impels
the Court to brush aside the procedural barrier posed by the traditional requirement of locus
standi, as what the court held in a long line of earlier cases, notably in the old but oft-cited
emergency powers cases and Kilosbayan v. Guingona, Jr. In cases of transcendental importance,
court wrote again in Bayan v. Zamora, ―The Court may relax the standing requirements and
allow a suit to prosper even where there is no direct injury to the party claiming the right of
judicial review.

Sec 5 para 2, Article 8 of 1987 constitution, Court has given the power to Review, revise,
reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal or certiorari,
(a) All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international or executive
agreement, law, presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance, or regulation
is in question.

As the rule of checks and balance provides the court given the review the other co-equal
branches of the government if there was been a grave abuse of powers and discretion.

This was been ruled out in Tañada V Tuvera case, where the private citizen was given legal
personality because If petitioners were not allowed to institute the proceeding, it would indeed
be difficult to conceive of any other person to initiate the same, considering that the Solicitor
General, the government officer generally empowered to represent the people, has entered his
appearance for respondents in this case. Clearly the right sought to be enforced by petitioners
herein is a public right recognized by no less than the fundamental law of the land.

2. Treaty is unconstitutional

Article 12 section 2 provides the exploration, development, and utilization of natural resources
shall be under the full control and supervision of the State. The State may directly undertake
such activities, or it may enter into co-production, joint venture, or production-sharing
agreements with Filipino citizens, or corporations or associations at least sixty per centum of
whose capital is owned by such citizens. The State shall protect the nation’s marine wealth in its
archipelagic waters, territorial sea, and exclusive economic zone, and reserve its use and
enjoyment exclusively to Filipino citizens.

The President may enter into agreements with foreign-owned corporations involving either
technical or financial assistance for large-scale exploration, development, and utilization of
minerals, petroleum, and other mineral oils according to the general terms and conditions
provided by law, based on real contributions to the economic growth and general welfare of the
country. In such agreements, the State shall promote the development and use of local scientific
and technical resources.
 This provision is clearly not congruence of what the treaty provides.

3. There is a legal basis for the release

E.O 2 series of 2016 or the freedom of information which mandates the executive branch to
operationalize the people’s constitutional right (Section 7, Article III) to information and state
policies to full public disclosure and transparency in the public service.

As defined in section 1 of the said EO Information shall mean any records, documents, papers,
reports, letters, contracts, minutes and transcripts of official meetings and etc.