Parity Rights 2l2665

Recalde, Gabriel John D.

10837396

Parity Rights (Gabriel John D. Recalde) Under the Bell Trade Act President M. Roxas believed that Philippines needed assistance from the Americans to be able to rehabilitate its economy. He wanted from them financial assistance (aid and investments) immediately in order to carry out his plans of lessening the radicals in the country. In exchange of the financial assistance, Roxas promised that the Philippines will remain loyal to the U.S. Along with this, he even assured of sacrificing the country’s sovereignty to accommodate the demands of the Americans. On a speech, he emphasized that the Philippines could be an ideological bridge between the east and the west. The part of the Bell Trade Act which could be cited as the most oppressive was the parity. This grants the U.S. citizens and corporations the same rights, parity rights, as the Filipinos to develop and exploit the country’s natural resources and operation of the public utilities. In exchange, the U.S. provided the Philippines with the disparity of rights. Americans refused to give the same parity rights they received. The U.S. State Department said that there was no need for the parity amendment since the provision of the Bell Trade Act and their capital was enough. However, since many huge companies wanted to have more privileges for their investments in this country, they insisted to have the parity amendment. (Constantino, 1978) It was a great advantage for the American investors the inclusion of the parity amendment in the constitution. Because of this, the issue on the national patrimony comes in. since, the Americans are free to exploit the natural resources that this country have, it would result in the depletion of our natural resources. There is a possibility that time would come and nothing will be left for our generation and the future generations. On the issue of the capital

Recalde, Gabriel John D.

10837396

formation, there were few companies that monopolize the exports from the Philippines. Thus, only a number of companies had the capital and earn from this. Moreover, the exchange rate of the Philippine peso to the U.S. dollar was fixed to two pesos is to one dollar. (Constantino, 1978) This deprived the Philippines of its currency sovereignty. Also, the use of the currency was prevented. The result would be, more American investors would have huge capital, in fact double, to invest in our country. Filipinos had minimal capital to invest. In order for the parity amendment to be ed, there must be an approval of at least three fourths of the of the congress. The Roxas istration knew that they could not meet the required number of votes since there were only 13 in the senate and 60 in the congress both coming from the Liberal party. In order to have the amendment ed, the opposing were set to dismissal. These were subject to their pending investigation of alleged fraud and terrorism in their election. To have more affirming , Roxas persuaded them and offered and pork barrel funds to them. Moreover, Roxas even sought for Osmena’s help to convince the other Nacionalistas. The argument raised by Roxas to the opposing was that the Bell Trade Act is the key so that financial aid could be given to the country. Despite of the numerous disadvantages the Bell Trade Act has, it was still amended. In fact, when the amendment was ed, there was a minimal approval of during the final vote. This only proves that many of the congress dislike this. (Constantino, 1978) Under the Laurel-Langley Agreement The Laurel-Langley Trade Agreement was signed on December 1954. It was the result of negotiations headed by Jose P. Laurel and James M. Langley. This was a revision of the Bell

Recalde, Gabriel John D.

10837396

Trade Act. Unlike the Bell Trade Act which is limited to the exploitation of resources; the Laurel-Langley Trade Agreement opened the entire Philippine economy to different U.S. corporations. The extension of the parity privileges on all business activities would later on have a negative effect on the Philippine economy. Recto opposed the Laurel-Langley Trade Agreement by stating that Filipinos’ parity rights to the U.S.’ natural resources were subject to federal control and regulations. Actually, Filipinos has nothing to exploit since there was hardly anything left. Lichauco stressed out that the American citizens and corporations accorded national statuses. With this, they are treated as Filipinos. However, they were exempted to Filipinization. Moreover, U.S. had surplus capital that could be invested; Philippines had none. This would result in the increase of the American investments in the Philippines. (Constantino, 1978) On the issue of the foreign aid, Americans were willing to help. Though, the form of help they want to extend in the Philippines was direct investment. The result would be economic invasion. Economic invasion in a sense that the infant economy of our country would be killed. Mining Act of 1995 The Mining Act of 1995 grants the foreign mining companies 100% ownership and control of the mineral resources of Philippines. The mining sector of the Philippines remained to be the exploration, extraction and exportation of minerals by transnational corporations. This is the result of the government’s policy towards mining – foreign investment-led and exportoriented. These transnational corporations took advantage of the dying industry and suggested that foreign investments and liberalized regulatory environment would be of great help. (Confronting TNC Control in RP Mining, 2005)

Recalde, Gabriel John D.

10837396

The Republic Act 7492 was the result of the recommendation of the World Bank to the Ramos’ istration - to legislate a mining law that would liberalize the mineral industry. The Mining Act of 1995 aims to increase foreign investments, with $50 Million as the minimum investment. Aside from the 100% ownership and control of the mineral resources of Philippines, the Mining Act of 1995 provided a set of incentives to the investors. The set of incentives include that foreign companies could claim up to 81,000 hectares to 324,000 hectares depending on the location; investors could repatriate the profits, equipment and investments; foreign companies are guaranteed of expropriation; tax holidays are allowed until all costs are recovered; excise duties are lowered from five percent to two percent; the government ensures the removal of all obstacles to mining; foreign companies have the right to sell gold directly to the international market; lastly, mining leases lasts for 25 years and it could be extended for another 25 years. Within these incentives, the issue of parity rights could be seen. Americans have the opportunity to exploit our natural resources whereas the Philippines could not. The Marcopper incident in 1996 opened up the consciousness of the Filipino people to the negative effects of large-scale mining. As a result, the Mining Act of 1995 was not fully enforced. Since the Mining Act of 1995 was hard to implement, the government sent out documents to pursue the mining investments in the Philippines. One of these is the National Minerals Policy (NMP). It aims to balance the need for investments as well as the need to protect the environment and the people. NMP strengthens the Mining Act by maintaining the rights of and incentives already given to corporations. Another was the Mineral Action Plan (MAP). MAP aims to provide strategic directions for the exploration, development and utilization of the country’s mineral resources. The negative effects of these laws affect the people in the mining

Recalde, Gabriel John D.

10837396

sites. The People’s Mining Policy was formulated to highlight the demands of the people towards a mining industry that is pro-people and pro-environment.

References Confronting TNC Control in RP Mining. (2005). IBON Facts and Figures, 1-15. Constantino, R. &. (1978). The Philippines: the continuing past. Quezon City: Tala Publishing.