All throughout history, rival empires have fought over boundaries to define ownership of certain territories and thereby acquire control of resources. But while the Philippines is engaged in a maritime dispute with China, we also have a territorial dispute within our own shores with Makati, Taguig and now Pateros engaged in a legal battle for Bonifacio Global City in Fort Bonifacio including Pitogo and the eight “embo” barangays (Cembo, Comembo, etc).
Pateros Mayor Jaime Medina cites historical records dating back to the 18th century placing Pateros under Pasig, until the issuance of a Spanish decree in 1770 giving Pateros independence with territories that include Barrio Mamancat where Fort Bonifacio and the “embo” barangays were located. Taguig on the other hand acquired dominion of the disputed areas through Executive Order No. 40 that gave the Bases Conversion Development Authority jurisdiction of 240 hectares of Fort Bonifacio which had Taguig as location. Meantime, Makati says Fort Bonifacio has always been under its jurisdiction since Spanish times, also citing legal basis such as Presidential Proclamations 2475 and 518 that transferred parts of Fort Bonifacio to Makati, as well as census data from 1948 to 1980 charting the said areas under Makati.
Cases were filed by the contending parties, with a Makati Regional Trial Court initially ruling for Taguig but was recently overturned by a Court of Appeals decision ordering Taguig to “immediately cease and desist from exercising jurisdiction… and return the same to Makati…”
Taguig is not ready to throw in the towel and neither is Pateros — with both saying the CA ruling is appealable and therefore not final.
Mayor Junjun Binay has given notice that the local government of Makati will have its presence felt soon with the deployment of personnel who would be implementing the laws of Makati. But Binay is willing to discuss revenue sharing with Taguig – understanding that the latter’s status as a city could be affected given the potential reduction not only in revenue but in land area.
Some are saying it might be a good idea to put Metro Manila under a central authority to consolidate the efforts of all local units under a governor who will have the requisite political clout and power over legislative issues and other concerns like traffic, squatter relocation as well as disaster risk reduction programs. A case in point is the number coding scheme with some cities refusing to follow the MMDA’s window hours provision while others have no coding scheme at all, proponents say.
In any case, this internal territorial dispute will most likely go on for a few more years but no doubt it will come to a definitive conclusion either by arbitration or through a final decision from the Supreme Court. In which case, all arguments should be resolved.
Unfortunately, it seems the same could not be said regarding our decades-long territorial dispute with China that continues to fester. Observers say both countries are raising the stakes, with the Philippines deciding to elevate the issue to an international tribunal, moving to enhance the country’s minimum credible defense posture as it welcomed the arrival of a second Hamilton class cutter and announced intentions to allow the increased rotational presence of US troops.
On the other hand, China is ratcheting up its claims by employing what experts describe as a “salami-slicing” strategy using step-by-step “small actions” that are gradually giving them control in contested boundaries like what they did to the Aksai Chin plateau in the 1960s, the Paracels in 1974, the Johnson Reef in 1988, Mischief Reef in 1995 and the Scarborough Shoal last year.
While the Taguig-Makati-Pateros dispute will likely end with a Supreme Court ruling, this doesn’t seem likely with the territorial dispute involving China which refuses to submit to arbitration, claiming ownership through ancient historical data and the so-called map of the nine-dash line enclosing almost 80 percent of the whole South China Sea — something the Philippines seeks to nullify before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.
Ancient cartographic sketches are not exactly the most precise references for boundaries and the rendition of old maps have evolved all these years. In which case, the world as we know it today may not exactly be accurate as far as current geographical boundaries are concerned. It may well be that the real owners of all disputed territories — from Asia to Africa to Europe — are the descendants of dinosaurs who ruled the planet for ages.
Obviously, emotions are running high considering the stakes involved. But meantime, the Chinese and Filipinos can probably channel their repressed antagonism by fighting it out in a physical albeit less dangerous game like basketball, like what’s happening now with the FIBA Asia championship that Samahang Basketbol ng Pilipinas president Manny Pangilinan had worked so hard for to bring to the Philippines.
According to sources, the price tag for hosting the biggest basketball tournament in Asia is a hefty P70 million — but it’s a small price to pay to remind Filipinos that we can be a powerhouse in Asia as far as basketball is concerned, recalling the time when the Philippine team became FIBA Asia champion 27 years ago. MVP is bankrolling Gilas Pilipinas, and judging from the feverish response, it would seem that Filipinos are banking on the team to prove that the Philippines has a chance at beating China — if not in the military front then at least in a basketball court.
But levity aside, the court of law should be the final arbiter of territorial disputes whether local or international – something that civilized and self-respecting individuals and nations should learn to recognize and adhere to.
* * *
Email: babeseyeview@yahoo.com
source:
(The Philippine Star)