G.R. No. 212426 - Saguisag vs. Ochoa, Jr.

Petitioners questioned the constitutionality of the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) between the Philippines and the United States.
Petitioners alleged grave abuse of discretion by respondents for entering into EDCA as an executive agreement without Senate concurrence, violating multiple constitutional provisions.
Respondents countered that petitioners lack standing and claimed the President has the power to enter into executive agreements without Senate concurrence under certain conditions.

Article VII, Section 21 – No treaty or international agreement is valid without the concurrence of at least two-thirds of all Senate members.
Article XVIII, Section 25 – After the expiration of the US-Philippines Military Bases Agreement in 1991, foreign military bases, troops, or facilities shall not be allowed except under a treaty concurred in by the Senate and, as may be required, ratified by the people.
Article II – The prime duty of the government is to serve and protect the people; the President is Commander-in-Chief.
Article VIII, Section 1 – Vesting of judicial power in courts with power of judicial review over grave abuse of discretion.

From 1947, the US had military bases in the Philippines under a Military Bases Agreement (MBA).
MBA expired in 1991 following Senate rejection of a new bases treaty; no new treaty was ratified.
Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) of 1951 exists for collective defense.
Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) of 1998 was ratified and regulates temporary visits of US troops.
EDCA was negotiated as an executive agreement allowing US forces access to agreed locations, signed in April 2014 and ratified by the President without Senate concurrence.

Establishes “Agreed Locations” in the Philippines for use by US forces and contractors on a rotational basis.
Allows prepositioning and storage of defense equipment, permanent facilities constructed by US forces but owned by the Philippines.
Grants the US operational control over the agreed locations for construction and defensive measures.
Provides for use of utilities, communications, and access to public land and facilities.
Duration of agreement is 10 years, automatically renewing unless terminated.

Senate adopted Senate Resolution No. 105 expressing the position that EDCA requires Senate concurrence.
Two petitions for certiorari filed by petitioners assailing constitutionality of EDCA.
Oral arguments and memoranda filed; key issues raised about standing, justiciability, and substantive constitutional validity.

Whether the essential requisites for judicial review are present, including:

Whether the President may validly enter into an executive agreement concerning foreign military bases, troops, or facilities without Senate concurrence.

Whether EDCA violates Article XVIII, Section 25 and other constitutional provisions, considering:

If EDCA is properly an executive agreement or should be a treaty.
If EDCA merely implements existing treaties (MDT and VFA) or introduces new obligations.
Whether the concept of “Agreed Locations” amounts to foreign military bases or facilities prohibited without Senate concurrence.
The validity of EDCA provisions related to tax, telecommunications, and possible presence of nuclear weapons.
Whether EDCA impairs Philippine sovereignty and jurisdiction.
Whether EDCA violates the separation of powers doctrine.