This question is regarding the case filed by Senator Aquilino Pimentel vs. Executive Secretary. In that case, the Court dismissed the petition of Sen. Pimentel ruling that:
The President, being the head of state, is regarded as the sole organ and authority in external relations and is the county’s sole representative with foreign nations. As the chief architect of foreign policy, the President acts as the country’s mouthpiece with respect to international affairs. Hence, the President is vested with the authority to deal with foreign states and governments, extend or withhold recognition, maintain diplomatic relations, enter into treaties, and otherwise transact the business of foreign relations.
In addition, the Court emphasized that under the Constitution, ‘the power to ratify is vested in the President, SUBJECT TO THE CONCURRENCE OF THE SENATE.’(capitalizing letters supplied to emphasize)
MY QUESTION:
Why is it expressly stated in the Constitution and in this ruling the phrase “SUBJECT TO THE CONCURRENCE OF THE SENATE”, when such concurrence is NOT NECESSARY AND NOT BINDING?
No comments:
Post a Comment