MANILA, Philippines: The Supreme Court upheld the validity of the Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement (JPEPA).

The JPEPA is a comprehensive agreement aimed at increasing trade and investment opportunities between Japan and the Philippines and

strengthening economic relations between the two countries by encouraging a freer transborder flow of goods, services, and capital.

The agreement was signed in 2006 by then president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and then Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi in Helsinki, Finland.

In 2008, the Senate concurred with the JPEPA's ratification.

Two petitions were then filed before the Court assailing the JPEPA. The first petition, filed by Initiatives for Dialogue and Empowerment through Alternative Legal Services, Inc., (IDEALS), claimed, among others, that the JPEPA violates the people's right to health and to a balanced ecology under the Constitution, along with other laws and international commitments, by allowing the indiscriminate importation of toxic and hazardous wastes into the Philippines.

The second petition, filed by Fair Trade Alliance, argued that the JPEPA violates the constitutional provisions reserving certain sectors of economic activities to Filipino citizens and specific juridical entities. The petition further claimed that the Philippines' commitments under the JPEPA, specifically to give Japanese investors national treatment, among others, violate the Constitution and numerous Philippine laws imposing nationality requirements.

The second petition also asserts there is a gross imbalance in the parties' agreement on tariff concessions, making the JPEPA an inequitable agreement that grossly disadvantages the Philippines while greatly favoring Japan.

In a decision penned by Senior Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, the Supreme Court en banc denied the consolidated petitions for certiorari and prohibition filed by IDEALS and Fair Trade Alliance challenging the validity of the JPEPA.

In denying the petitions, the Court ruled that the JPEPA does not facilitate the indiscriminate importation of hazardous and toxic wastes in the Philippines.

The Court further ruled that the JPEPA sufficiently protects the constitutional mandate on both ownership and exploration, development, and utilization of natural resources.

The Supreme Court also held that while the Philippines committed to grant market access through commercial presence to certain public utility sectors, this commitment is subject to the limitation on ownership of public utilities by foreign entities imposed under Article XII, Section 11 of the Constitution.