Executive agreement vs. treaty - G.R. No. 185572

G.R. No. 185572

"x x x.

Second issue: Whether the Contract Agreement is an executive agreement

Article 2(1) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (Vienna Convention) defines a treaty as follows:

[A]n international agreement concluded between States in written form and governed by international law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments and whatever its particular designation.

In Bayan Muna v. Romulo, this Court held that an executive agreement is similar to a treaty, except that the former (a) does not require legislative concurrence; (b) is usually less formal; and (c) deals with a narrower range of subject matters.[50]

Despite these differences, to be considered an executive agreement, the following three requisites provided under the Vienna Convention must nevertheless concur: (a) the agreement must be between states; (b) it must be written; and (c) it must governed  by international law. The first and the third requisites do not obtain in the case at bar.

A.                CNMEG is neither a government nor a government agency.

The Contract Agreement was not concluded between the Philippinesand China, but between Northrail and CNMEG.[51] By the terms of the Contract Agreement, Northrail is a government-owned or -controlled corporation, while CNMEG is a corporation duly organized and created under the laws of the People’s Republic of China.[52] Thus, both Northrail and CNMEG entered into the Contract Agreement as entities with personalities distinct and separate from the Philippine and Chinese governments, respectively.

Neither can it be said that CNMEG acted as agent of the Chinese government. As previously discussed, the fact that Amb. Wang, in his letter dated 1 October 2003,[53] described CNMEG as a “state corporation” and declared its designation as the Primary Contractor in the Northrail Project did not mean it was to perform sovereign functions on behalf of China. That label was only descriptive of its nature as a state-owned corporation, and did not preclude it from engaging in purely commercial or proprietary ventures.

B.                The Contract Agreement is to be governed by Philippine law.

Article 2 of the Conditions of Contract,[54] which under Article 1.1 of the Contract Agreement is an integral part of the latter, states:

APPLICABLE LAW AND GOVERNING LANGUAGE

The contract shall in all respects be read and construed in accordance with the laws of the Philippines.

The contract shall be written in English language. All correspondence and other documents pertaining to the Contract which are exchanged by the parties shall be written in English language.

Since the Contract Agreement explicitly provides that Philippine law shall be applicable, the parties have effectively conceded that their rights and obligations thereunder are not governed by international law.

It is therefore clear from the foregoing reasons that the Contract Agreement does not partake of the nature of an executive agreement. It is merely an ordinary commercial contract that can be questioned before the local courts.

x x x."