Cited Laws
Accordingly, the limitations under Article XII, Section 11 and Article XVI, Section 11(1) of the Constitution have not been violated. [62] Sixth, they argue that Article XII, Section 12 of the constitution promotes the use of Filipino goods and services but does not prohibit the entry of foreign investments into the Philippines. [63] Seventh, they claim that the JPEPA has complied with the exclusions, exemptions, and reservations provided under Philippine laws, particularly as to the practice of professions, private security agencies, private recruitment of labor, retail trade, and adjusters of insurance claims, among others. [64] On this, they argue that under Article XII, Section 14(2) of the Constitution, foreigners may not practice any profession in the Philippines, unless authorized by law. An international agreement such as the JPEPA has equal standing with Philippine statutes; thus, Japanese citizens may be employed in the Philippines upon compliance with the JPEPA 's conditions. [65] Similarly, they claim that private security agencies, private recruitment of labor, and investments in all forms of gambling and saunas, massage clinics, and other like activities are lines of business not limited by the Constitution to only Filipinos citizens. As a result, they say, amendments may be introduced through a treaty, such as the JPEPA. [66] They further contend that the retail trade business has not been included in the Schedule of Commitments, and thus, not subject to the liberalization commitments of the JPEPA. Likewise, they aver that the rule on adjusters of insurance claims has been preserved under the JPEPA. [67] Moreover, they say that reservations have been made on the following: (1) licenses for private radio communications networks; (2) contracts for the construction of defense-related structures; (3) contracts for the construction and repair of locally funded public works; (4) facility operator of an infrastructure or development project requiring a public utility franchise; (5) ownership, operation, and management of cockpits; and (6) financing companies and investment houses. [68] Eighth, they argue that while Article XII, Section 2(2) of the Constitution limits the use and enjoyment of the State's marine wealth, it allows foreign investment in the exploration and development of the State's natural resources. [69] Ninth, they say that the JPEPA's provisions do not contravene Article XII, Section 13 of the Constitution, citing this Court's ruling in Tañada v. Angara [70] to assert that the Constitution does not prohibit foreign investments' entry into the Philippine economy. [71] They further quote the speech of former Ambassador Manuel A.J. Teehankee, where he stressed that investments in service sectors are not governed by Chapter 8 but by Chapter 7 of the JPEPA. That investments in service sectors are governed by Chapter 7 is further reinforced by Article 87(3) and (4) of the JPEPA. [72] Tenth, they maintain that the Romulo-Koumura