TANADA VS.

ANGARA AUTHOR: Castillo

G.R. NO. 118295; May 2, 1997
TOPIC: A self-reliant and independent economic order
PONENTE: Panganiban, J.
CASE LAW/DOCTRINE: Constitution mandates preference of Filipino goods, labor and services, but it recognizes the
need for business exchange with the rest of the world on bases of equality and reciprocity. It limits the protection of
Filipino enterprises on foreign competition and trade practices which are unfair.
FACTS:
- The emergence on January 1, 1995 of the World Trade Organization, abetted by the membership thereto of the vast
majority of countries has revolutionized international business an economic relations amongst states. It has irreversibly
propelled the world towards trade liberalization and economic globalization.
- To hasten worldwide recovery from the devastation wrought by the Second World War, plans for the establishment of
the World Bank, International Monetary Fund and the International Trade Organization. However, for a variety of
reasons, including its non-ratification by the United States, the ITO, unlike the IMF and WB, never took off.
- Like many other developing countries, the Philippines joined WTO as a founding member with the goal, as articulated
by President Fidel V. Ramos in two letters to the Senate, of improving Philippine access to foreign markets, especially
its major trading partners, through the reduction of tariffs on its exports, particularly agricultural and industrial
products. The President also saw in the WTO the opening of new opportunities for the services sector and more
investments into the country.
- On April 15, 1994, Respondent Rizalino Navarro, then Secretary of the DTI representing the GRP signed in Marrakesh,
Morocco, the Final Act Embodying the Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Negotiations (Final Act, for
brevity). By signing the Final Act,Secretary Navarro on behalf of the Republic of the Philippines, agreed:
(a) to submit, as appropriate, the WTO Agreement for the consideration of their respective competent authorities, with a
view to seeking approval of the Agreement in accordance with their procedures; and
(b) to adopt the Ministerial Declarations and Decisions.
- Senate concurred and the President of the Philippines signed the Instrument of Ratification. Hence, this petition by Sen.
Tanada with other lawmakers, taxpayers and NGOs to nullify the WTO Agreement and prohibit its implementation.
According to the petitioners, it is repugnant to the Constitution because it requires the Philippines to place nationals of
member countries same footing as Filipinos and local products. It is in contravention of the Constitutional provision to
develop self-reliant and independent national economy effectively controlled by Filipinos. The Constitution gives
preference to Filipino labor, materials and goods.
ISSUE(S): WON the WTO Agreement is unconstitutional.

HELD: NO. DISMISSED FOR LACK OF MERIT.

RATIO:
- Constitution mandates self-reliant and independent national economy effective controlled by Filipinos, but not
necessarily rule-out entry of foreign investments, goods, and services. It does not contemplate economic seclusion.
- WTO has built-in advantages to protect weak and developing countries, which is majority of its members, especially
because WTO decisions are based on sovereign equality, thus, poor countries can effectively negotiate with developed
countries.
- Constitution mandates preference of Filipino goods, labor and services, but it recognizes the need for business exchange
with the rest of the world on bases of equality and reciprocity. It limits the protection of Filipino enterprises on foreign
competition and trade practices which are unfair.
- Economic nationalism should be read with other Constitutional mandate for balance development of economy.
Furthermore, the Constitution favors the Filipino consumers and not enterprises or business. It ensures availability to
consumers.