TANADA v.

ANGARA
Facts
Navarro, Sec of DTI, representing the Government of Phil, signed in Morocco the Final Act
submitting to the ROP the WTO Agreement for consideration of respective competent
authorities
the President sent the Senate the Final Act for concurrence
Senate concurred in the ratification by the President the Agreement
Petitioners assail the constitutionality of the WTO and the Philippines' adherence to it on
several grounds
A. WON WTO Agreement is antithetical to Economic Nationalism
Petitioners argue that the letter, spirit and intent of the Constitution mandating "economic
nationalism" (Art 2 Sec 19: the state shall develop a self-reliant and independent national
economy effectively controlled by Filipinos) is violated by WTO's parity provisions and
"national treatment" clauses
specifically, they assail the fact that the WTO provides that each of its member shall accord
to the nationals of the other Members treatment no less favorable than it accords to its own
nationals with regard to protection of intellectual property, services, and suppliers
Court:
the principles in Art 2 are not intended to be self-executing
they are used merely as guides
Also, as can be gleaned from Secs 1 and 13 of Art 12, "the goals of national economy are
more equitable distribution of opportunities, income and wealth"...."state shall promote
industrialization and full employment based on sound agricultural development and agrarian
reform, through industries...in both domestic and foreign markets"
these ideals of economic nationalism is not intended to be an isolationist policy
it's goal is not to isolate the country from foreign markets but to protect the national
economy from unfair foreign competition
Also, the WTO, contrary to petitioner's argument, is helpful for developing countries
within the WTO, developing countries can form powerful blocs to push their economic
agenda than outside the organization
economic self-reliance is one that is keenly aware of overdependence on external assistance
but it does not mean autarky or economic seclusion but merely avoiding mendicancy in
the international community
Petitioner assails the provision in the WTO providing that "each member shall ensure the
conformity of its laws, regulations and administrative procedures with its obligations as
provided in the annexed Agreements"
petitioners argue that such unduly restricts and impairs Philippine sovereignty and the
legislative power of congress
Court:
while sovereignty has been traditionally deemed absolute and all-encompassing on the
domestic level, it is subject to restriction and limitations voluntarily agreed to by the
Philippines, expressly or impliedly, as a member of the family of nations
Constitution did not evision a hermit type isolation
proof of which is under Art 2 Sec 2, Phils "adopts the generally accepted principles of
international law as part of the law of the land..."
we thus adhere to pacta sunt servanda which require the states to perform international

agreements in good faith

this is "concept of sovereignty as auto-limitation"
by which a portion of sovereignty may be waived without violating the Constitution
based on the rationale that the Phils "adopts the generally accepted principles of
international law as part of the law of the land and adheres to the policy of...cooperation
and amity with all nations"