UNFAIR JOINT OIL EXPLORATION

It is not yet confirmed as the MOU agreement is not yet available for the public, and its contents are yet determined as of recent, only partial issuances of the DOE on the 14 predetermined areas of joint oil explorations covered by China and the Philippines are known and not within the disputed areas of the two countries.

Let's be clear. The MOU of China and the Philippines is not in the disputed waters of the West Philippine Sea, it is in the territorial domain of the Philippines, therefore it is just right to beg this question that it is not entitled or subject to a joint exploration as this case may be, why?

Philippine Territory, not disputed.

When the subject oil exploration is the territory of the Philippines, there is no reason to drag China as a state party to any joint exploration, it is certainly our sole oil exploration and China is categorically an investor by this situation.

The matter is different when the exploration that was conducted in the SC 72  before in the Reed Bank where this questionable nine-dash line was laid, though never valid, is the most approximate understanding of any joint oil exploration.

While as stated by the DOE, the joint oil exploration is by the side of the nine-dash line of China, very well considered outside of its claims called as the 14 predetermined areas are notable that China has no business in any of these areas.

There must be no joint exploration categorically.  It must not, as China could be one of any other international investor offering investments thereto, prompting than that there is no such thing as a joint oil exploration inside the country for China, for her category then is an investor.

In this situation, China is viewed and treated as an interested investor only and there is no agreement to sign on. She may fall in line like everyone else.

NINE DASH LINE

In taking into context the nine-dash line in the MOU of Beijing and Manila, it is assuming then that we are recognizing this territorial line of China which was belied by the Permanent Court in Hague. We should not have made any mention of a said nine-dash line of whatsoever in said MOU because it becomes critical then for the country to be prejudiced by such term.

DISCARD THE JOINT AGREEMENT

We can discard the joint agreement under the context that the 14 predetermined areas of exploration are well inside the Philippine territory, we should rid of the MOU as a joint exploration. We should be specific than that it is not a joint endeavor.

At this point its viewed by constitutional experts that said joint oil exploration of the Philippines with China is unconstitutional. There this needed to be established by the supreme court, or Congress should affirm this fact, that if , said agreement must be discarded then.

disclaimer: the image picture is located