Senate probe into commercial fishing within 15-km municipal waters sought
Under proposed Senate resolution no. 11, Pangilinan called on the Senate committee on agriculture, food, and agrarian reform to conduct a comprehensive inquiry, in aid of legislation, into such impacts and the scientific basis—or lack thereof— for the 15-km municipal water delineation and the 12.8-meter depth restriction.
To recall, the Supreme Court (SC) upheld a regional trial court (RTC) ruling that declared certain provisions of the Philippine Fisheries Code and its implementing rules and regulations unconstitutional.
The RTC had permanently barred authorities from enforcing the 15-kilometer municipal waters limit.
Pangilinan pointed out that the 15-kilometer municipal water zone for small-scale fishers is 'crucial for the sustainability of marine ecosystems, the preservation of fish stocks, and the food and livelihood security of millions of Filipinos living in coastal areas."
He said the proposed probe would thus explore possible legislative interventions and amendments to existing laws and policies to protect the rights and welfare of small-scale fishers.
'This is about more than boundaries,' the returning senator said. 'It's about protecting the very communities who have long been the stewards of our seas—and ensuring that our oceans remain a source of life and livelihood, not a battleground for survival.'
Several fisherfolk groups have been protesting against the SC ruling to allow commercial fishing within the 15-kilometer boundary of municipal waters.
The Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) has also filed a motion for reconsideration before the SC to reconsider its ruling. —VAL, GMA Integrated News
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
GMA Network
an hour ago
- GMA Network
Romualdez: Free college law should include stipend, address dropouts
The Universal Access to Quality Tertiary Education Act should be expanded to reduce, if not eradicate college dropouts, Leyte Representative Martin Romualdez on Wednesday. In a statement, Romualdez said that according to the latest report of Second Congressional Commission on Education, nearly four in 10 students still drop out despite the passage of the Free College Law. 'Free tuition was a landmark achievement, but the work is far from over. Nearly four out of 10 students in state universities and colleges are still dropping out. In some regions, the situation is even more alarming,' he said. 'These are not just statistics. They are shattered dreams and interrupted futures, often because students cannot afford transportation, food, rent, books or internet. We need to protect and build on the gains of the Free Higher Education Law by ensuring students have the means to actually finish school,' Romualdez added. He said the government must consider strategic interventions such as monthly stipends, transport subsidies, food allowances and digital access programs. 'These [additional support] are gaps we must urgently fill if we truly want free higher education to be a ladder out of poverty,' Romualdez said. Based on a Pulse Asia survey conducted in January 2024 and commissioned by Senate Committee on Basic Education chairperson Sherwin Gatchalian, 8 percent of Filipinos support free tuition in state-run colleges and universities. Romualdez then said the expansion of the Free College law should start with the review of the measure as provided under House Resolution 61 filed by Bicol Saro party-list Representative Terry Ridon. 'We owe it to our students to fund this law properly. We owe it to every Filipino family to give their children a real chance at a better future, and we owe it to the nation to make education a powerful equalizer, not an unfinished promise,' Romualdez said. — BM, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
4 hours ago
- GMA Network
House to SC: Queries on impeach rap vs VP Sara best settled before Senate court
Questions on the validity and other matters about the impeachment complaint filed against Vice President Sara Duterte are best settled first before the Senate impeachment court, the House of Representatives prosecution panel said Wednesday. The House made this assertion in its answer to the Supreme Court (SC) which required the Lower Chamber to give details about the impeachment complaint it filed against Duterte and transmitted to the Senate. The same SC order also asked the House how it resolved the three prior impeachment complaints which were archived by the House after the fourth impeachment complaint was signed by over 215 House members, a figure that is way over the constitutionally-required one-third of the House members for the Senate to immediately start the impeachment trial. 'The clarifications sought by this Honorable Court through the above inquiries emphasize one thing: that the issues in this case involve questions which necessitate that this Honorable Court act as a trier of facts. Respectfully, this cannot be done, especially as the Constitution vests jurisdiction of the impeachment trial with the Senate,' the House prosecution panel said. Likewise, the House prosecutors cited that the Senate had already convened itself into the Senate impeachment court last June 10. 'As provided by Article XI, Section 3 (6) of the Constitution, 'the Senate shall have the sole power to try and decide all cases of impeachment. Respondents [House] thus submit that matters regarding the validity of the transmitted Articles of Impeachment, along with the factual inquiries in this Honorable Court's July 8, 2025 Resolution, should, if at all, fall in the first instance to the jurisdiction of the Senate impeachment court,' the House said. 'These matters are necessarily entwined with the case of impeachment now pending before them, and may be settled once the trial proper begins,' it added. Further, the House said that the High Court's questions on which office prepared the Articles of Impeachment, when it was circulated among members of the House, and if the evidence for each Article were attached in the Articles of Impeachment circulated among the House members are internal House proceedings which are beyond the SC's jurisdiction. The House cited the SC decision on the Santiago v. Guingona case which states that 'the principle of separation of powers ordains that each of the three great branches of government has exclusive cognizance of and is supreme in matters falling within its own constitutionally allocated sphere. Constitutional respect and a becoming regard for the sovereign acts of a coequal branch prevents this Court from prying into the internal workings of the Senate.' 'It is the position of the House that these matters pertain to its internal proceedings, which have always been regarded as beyond the jurisdiction and scrutiny of this Honorable Court. This is especially because the matters referred to — the preparation, circulation, and perusal of the impeachment complaint, as well as its attachments — are not governed by any specific constitutional provision or House rule,' the House said. 'This [position] is grounded on no less than the separation of powers enshrined in our Constitution. Being a co-equal branch, the Congress is entitled to respect with regard to those matters which are within its exclusive jurisdiction,' it added. Still, the House maintained that the fourth impeachment complaint consisting of seven Articles of Impeachment that the House filed against Duterte and transmitted to the Senate are in accordance with the Constitution and the House Rules as stated in House Resolution 328 submitted to the Senate impeachment court last June 25. 'On the status of the first three complaints filed by private citizens, the House directed these to be transmitted to the archives of the House on February 5, 2025 after they were mooted by the fourth impeachment complaint, which had already been acted upon by the plenary [with over 215 lawmakers signing off on the fourth impeachment complaint]. The House Resolution attests that the fourth impeachment complaint fully complied with Article XI, Section 3, Paragraph 5 of the 1987 Constitution,' the House said. 'It is submitted that this is sufficient to affirm the regularity and validity of the fourth impeachment complaint, insofar as the House is concerned. Any further inquiry into the House's internal proceedings, absent a constitutional basis, is unwarranted,' it added. The seven Articles of Impeachment vs. Duterte include: conspiracy to assassinate President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Marcos, and Speaker Martin Romualdez; malversation of P612.5 million in confidential funds with questionable liquidation documents; bribery and corruption in the Department of Education during Duterte's tenure by handing out cash to former DepEd Undersecretary Gloria Jumamil-Mercado (Procurement Head), Bids and Awards Committee Member Resty Osias, DepEd Chief Accountant Rhunna Catalan and Special Disbursing Officer Edward Fajarda; unexplained wealth and failure to disclose assets in the Vice President's Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth where her wealth increased by four times from 2007 from 2017; involvement in extrajudicial killings in Davao City; destabilization, insurrection, and public disorder efforts, which include: boycotting the State of the Nation Address (SONA) while declaring herself "designated survivor," leading rallies calling for Marcos' resignation, obstructing congressional investigations by ordering subordinates not to comply with subpoenas, threatening bodily harm against the First Couple and Romualdez, among others; the totality of the Vice President's conduct as the second highest official of the land. —KG, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
5 hours ago
- GMA Network
US immigration policies not tackled during meeting with Trump
President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. meets with US President Donald Trump in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., July 22, 2025. REUTERS/ Kent Nishimura President Ferdinand ''Bongbong'' Marcos Jr. said the issue of the United States' immigration policies was not discussed during his meeting with US counterpart Donald Trump at the White House on Tuesday. At a press conference with the Philippine media delegation, Marcos said that there had been no significant difference in the US immigration policies since Trump began his second term in January. Trump has vowed tough enforcement of immigration law and mass deportation of illegal migrants in the US. ''It's not been raised; it was not, not in this forum, but of course we are well aware of the situation,'' Marcos said. ''I think in our estimation with what the United States is doing now... It's not anything different [from] what they were doing before. Ito 'yung mga may record, mga wanted, convicted, lalong-lalo na kung sila ay illegal, TNT sila, 'yun ang mga pinapauwi nila (these are those with criminal records, wanted, convicted, and illegally staying),'' he added. The Philippine Embassy is providing assistance to undocumented Filipinos through immigration lawyers who offer legal advice and outline available options for them. However, Philippine Ambassador to the US Jose Manuel Romualdez has advised illegal immigrants—those who entered the US on tourist visas and then overstayed—to consider voluntarily leaving the country rather than waiting for the possibility of deportation. Recently, a Filipino was among at least 11 illegal aliens convicted of various crimes who were arrested during separate operations by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) authorities. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) identified the individual as a 29-year-old illegal alien from the Philippines. He was arrested in Middlesex, Massachusetts. —VBL, GMA Integrated News
