First Patriot missiles to defend Turkey against Syria go active

source: Reuters through www.gmanetwork.com

ADANA, Turkey - The first of six Patriot missile batteries being sent by NATO countries to defend Turkey from possible attack from Syria went operational on Saturday.

The United States, Germany and the Netherlands are each sending two batteries to Turkey and up to 400 soldiers to operate them after Ankara asked NATO for help. The Patriots are capable of shooting down hostile missiles in mid-air.

The frontier has become a flashpoint in the 22-month insurgency against President Bashar al-Assad, with Syrian government shells frequently landing inside Turkish territory, drawing a response in kind from Ankara's military.

"Behind us there is the first NATO Patriot battery in Turkey which is operational at the moment. That means that it is up and running. It is under NATO command and control," said Polish Army Lieutenant Colonel Dariusz Kacperczyk, NATO spokesman for the Patriot deployment.

A battery sent by the Netherlands, consisting of five missile launchers, has been deployed next to an airport on the edge of Adana, a city of around 1.6 million 120 km (75 miles) from the Syrian border. A second battery of seven launchers is at a U.S.-Turkish air base east of the city.

At Adana airport, the truck-mounted launchers were raised in the air, pointing at Syria.

"Think of it as a bullet being fired from one side and we have got a fierce bullet that shoots down the other bullet," said Lieutenant-Colonel Marcel Buis, commander of the Dutch Patriots.

The batteries are being stationed around three southeastern Turkish cities and NATO says they will protect 3.5 million Turks from missile attack. All are expected to be in place and operational by the end of January.

Tensions have increased in recent weeks after NATO said it had detected launches of short-range ballistic missiles inside Syria, several of which have landed close to the Turkish border. Turkey has scrambled warplanes along the frontier, fanning fears the war could spread and further destabilise the region.

Syria has called the deployment of the Patriot batteries "provocative" while Iran and Russia, which have supported Syria throughout the uprising, have criticised NATO's decision, saying the Patriot deployment would intensify the conflict.

Turkey and NATO have strongly denied the Patriot missiles are a precursor to a no-fly zone that Syrian rebels have been requesting to help them hold territory against a government with overwhelming firepower from the air.

All six Patriot batteries will be connected directly to allied air command in Ramstein, Germany.

The Ramstein command and control center receives intelligence on missile firings in Syria and will alert the Patriot batteries to any missile launch. The Patriot batteries will then watch the arcs of the missiles and react if they threaten a Turkish city.  — Reuters

PNoy says he consulted predecessors on move vs China

source: www.gmanetwork.com

President Benigno Aquino III consulted lawmakers and two of his immediate predecessors before the Philippines made the move of dragging China before an international body to settle a territorial dispute.

Aquino told reporters covering his visit to Switzerland: “We brought the matter before them [lawmakers and former Presidents Fidel Ramos and Joseph Estrada]... Nobody objected (to going to arbitration).”

Portions of the interview were aired on government-run dzRB radio Saturday noon.

The President said he also invited members of the judiciary to get their inputs but they were having an en banc meeting at the time.

Aquino was quoted in the dzRB report as saying the Philippines had been “very patient” with China, but “unfortunately there’s no reciprocation.”

Last Tuesday, the Department of Foreign Affairs announced it is haling China before a United Nations arbitration body to settle a simmering territorial row.

DFA Secretary Albert del Rosario said this involves bringing China before an arbitral tribunal under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), "to achieve a peaceful and durable solution to the dispute over the West Philippine Sea."

The DFA, however, said that despite the move, the Philippines considers China a friend.

"We will continue to pursue an enhancement of our bilateral relations in all areas of cooperation," it said.

Meanwhile, deputy presidential spokesperson Abigail Valte on Saturday declined to comment on reports that Thailand will try to find a common position among Association of Southeast Asian Nation (ASEAN) members on the South China Sea (West Philippine Sea) issue.

A report on Bangkok Post quoted Sihasak Phuangketkaew, permanent secretary at the Foreign Ministry, as saying this (Thailand's effort) is by virtue of its being as coordinator of ASEAN-China relations.

The report said ASEAN had appointed Thailand as its country coordinator for ASEAN-China relations from July 2012 to July 2015.

It said Thailand also plans to hold separate talks with each of the countries that lay claim to disputed areas, as attempts to resolve the conflicts in larger meetings failed last year.

ASEAN members Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei lay claim to parts of the South China Sea (West Philippine Sea), along with China and Taiwan.

Asked if this will affect the Philippines’ present case against China before the UN, Valte would not comment.

“Perhaps ang international law expert na ang dapat sumagot at kasamahan sa DFA kung magkakaroon ng effect (It is best to ask international law experts and officials of the DFA on whether Thailand’s effort would affect the Philippines recent move),” she said. — LBG, GMA News

Shooting incident in SM Megamall causes panic

source: www.abs-cbnnews.com

MANILA, Philippines – A jewelry store inside SM Megamall was robbed Saturday night, causing panic among shoppers.

Mall-goers said gunshots were heard, prompting most of them to hide inside the stores.

A mall-goer, Ramilo Sevron, said he heard multiple gunshots, but could not determine where it came from.

“Naglalakad ako sa may basement tapos biglang may nagtakbuhan, akala ko kung ano nangyari. Narinig ko ‘yung iba na nagsabing may barilan daw, bigla na rin ako napatakbo kasi narinig ko na rin ‘yung putok,” he told dzMM.

Initial investigations showed that at least 4 suspects robbed F and C Jewelry Store located at the ground floor of the mall’s Building B department store at around 7:30 p.m.

Mandaluyong Police chief Sr. Supt. Florendo Quibuyen said the robbers used hammers to break the store’s jewelry case.

He said police will review footage from closed circuit television (CCTV) cameras to identify the suspects based on its rogues’ gallery.

Quibuyen said they have yet to confirm if the suspects are members of the “Martilyo Gang”, which also robbed jewelry inside a Pasay mall in August 2012.

One of the suspects was reportedly injured after breaking the glass, said Chief Supt. Miguel Laurel, district director of the Eastern Police District.

“It appears na pagtakas niya, sumabit ‘yung kamay niya kaya nasugatan,” he told dzMM.

Laurel said the suspects fired their weapons upwards to trigger a panic among the shoppers, which led to their escape.

“Nagpaputok sila pataas, tapos sinabayan nila ang tao palabas,” he said.

Laurel added that the hammers used by the suspects were bought from a hardware store inside the mall.

Mandaluyong Mayor Benhur Abalos confirmed that gunshots were fired inside the mall, but stressed that there were no casualties.

“Huwag mag-alala kung may mga kamag-anak kayo na nasa SM ngayon, wala hong nasaktan. Tapos na ito at everything is under control. Umakto kaagad ang SM management at mga pulis,” he told dzMM.

He also denied that any hostage-taking occurred inside the mall.

The suspects, however, have yet to be arrested. Police are in hot pursuit of the suspects, as of posting.

Police are still determining how much jewelry was stolen.

Two slugs from a .45 caliber firearm were recovered at the scene.

SM Supermalls President Annie Garcia, meanwhile, said the mall has resumed operations.

She said SM will cooperate with the authorities in the investigation. -- Report from Robert Mano, dzMM; ANC

Understanding the Philippines' Unclos arbitral submission

source: Philippine Daily Inquirer/Asia News Network through www.ph.news.yahoo.com

Manila (Philippine Daily Inquirer/ANN) - After almost a year since the Philippines' stalemate with China on Panatag Shoal (Scarborough Shoal), it's about time we brought the controversy to the binding and compulsory dispute settlement procedure of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos). But contrary to many media reports, the action is not before the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea (Itlos), or before the United Nations. What was initiated is ad hoc arbitration pursuant to the Unclos.

Under the dispute settlement procedure of the Unclos, state parties may specify where they will submit all disputes over the "interpretation and application" of the Convention, either to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) or the Itlos. If a state party does not specify which body it will bring these disputes to, the default choice will be through binding arbitration under Annex VII of the Convention.

Since both China and the Philippines did not choose either the ICJ or the Itlos, they are both deemed to have agreed to resolve these disputes to binding arbitration.

What happened last Tuesday was that we began the procedure of binding arbitration by serving China with a notification that we are initiating the same and providing China with a statement of our claims.

We have also chosen our arbitrator in what will be a 5-member arbitral tribunal. China should now choose its own arbitrator. Thereafter, both parties should select the rest of the arbitrators from a list maintained by the UN Secretary General. If they cannot agree on the three further arbitrators, it is the president of the Itlos who will make the appointment to complete the tribunal.

After the tribunal has been constituted, China will reply to our statement of claims. It is expected that it will challenge the jurisdiction of the tribunal by invoking its reservation on the dispute settlement procedure. This can either be that the controversy relates to the exercise of sovereign rights and/or involves an issue of maritime delimitation. Both these grounds are provided in the reservations made by China in 2006.

This raises the question as to why the Philippines did not hale China to binding arbitration under the Unclos before 2006. The first incident over Panatag occurred in 1997 during the term of President Fidel Ramos, when we arrested Chinese poachers for illegal fishing in the area and charged them before a metropolitan trial court in Zambales.

At that time, China had not yet made reservations on the dispute settlement procedure of the Unclos. Perhaps it was thought that Panatag may be resolved through bilateral negotiations? Whatever the reason, we now have to contend with China's defence that the dispute is subject to its reservations.

This notwithstanding, credit goes to the Solicitor General because our submission of claims is crafted in a manner that will exclude all of China's reservations. For instance, the submission asked the tribunal to rule on the validity of the controversial "nine-dash line," since it does not constitute either China's internal waters, territorial sea, or exclusive economic zone. This asks the tribunal to rule, as an issue of interpretation of the Unclos, whether the nine-dash lines comply with the Convention.

Likewise, China has built permanent structures on reefs such as Mischief and Subi, which are permanently under water. The submission prays that the tribunal declare that since these are neither "rocks" nor "islands," these should be declared as forming part of our country's continental shelf, or the natural prolongation of our land mass.

On Panatag, our submission asks the tribunal to declare that the six very small rocks permanently above water can generate only 12 nautical miles of territorial sea. This declaration, if made, will clarify that the waters surrounding the small rocks still form part of our 200-nautical-mile exclusive economic zone.

While our submission bodes well for a peaceful resolution of the dispute, it will still not completely resolve the West Philippine Sea disputes. The Unclos, after all, being the applicable law on the seas, cannot be utilised to resolve conflicting claims to islands. This aspect of the dispute will still be resolved on the basis of which claimant-state has the superior evidence of effective occupation. Nonetheless, a legal clarification on China's claims to alleged islands and rocks that are under water, as well as the issue of which state can exercise sovereign rights on the waters surrounding Panatag, will simplify resolution of the entire dispute.

If we are successful, what will remain for resolution is only the issue of conflicting claims to islands. While China will have to give its separate consent to litigate the status of these islands, at least the issue of freedom of navigation and the exercise of sovereign rights over a large part of the disputed waters will have a final and binding legal determination.

Lest I be accused of being overly optimistic, the truth is China may very well argue that its legal entitlement to the disputed waters is based on its "uncontroverted" sovereignty to land territories. Even if the arbitral tribunal cannot exercise jurisdiction over these claims to land territories, it may be enough to remove jurisdiction from it because the matter, as phrased by China, may no longer be an issue of "interpretation" and "application" of the Unclos. If this happens, we will be back to where we were: a standoff.

H. Harry L. Roque is director of the Institute of International Legal Studies, University of the Philippines Law Centre.

COPYRIGHT: ASIA NEWS NETWORK

Comelec to meet with media orgs regarding new campaign rules

source: www.gmanetwork.com

The Commission on Elections (Comelec) will meet with media organizations on January 31 to discuss the much contested campaign rules that are seen to have an adverse effect on media coverage of the May automated elections.

“We agreed that we’re going to set a public hearing on January 31, Thursday. So maririnig na namin lahat,” Comelec chairman Sixto Brillantes Jr. said on Friday.

Media organizations have contested Comelec’s new rules on election campaign, particularly the right to reply rule and the airtime limit.

Under the right to reply, candidates and political parties have the right to respond to accusations against them that are aired or printed in the media, with the same space or time.

Meanwhile, the Comelec has cut the airtime limit to an aggregate basis instead of a “per station basis,” which means the airtime is counted “whether appearing on national, regional, or local, free or cable television.”

Brillantes, however, noted that they are not hearing any complaints from the candidates.

“Ang general statement ko, lahat ng reactions [are] coming from media. Wala akong naririnig masyado sa kandidato. And yet, all of these rules are directed to the candidates. Hindi ‘yung media ang kalaban namin dito,” he said.

Both GMA Network Inc.and the Kapisanan ng mga Brodkaster ng Pilipinas (KBP), in separate motions, have contested the rules. KBP, for one, said the right to reply “is unconstitutional as it impinges on the editorial prerogative of the media.”

But Brillantes maintained that imposing a right to reply rule is in accordance with Comelec’s mandate in the 1987 Philippine Constitution.

He cited Article IX-C, Section 4, which states that the Comelec may “supervise or regulate” the media during the elections to “ensure equal opportunity, and equal rates therefor, for public information campaigns and forums among candidates in connection with the objective of holding free, orderly, honest, peaceful, and credible elections.”

“Pero sa batas, pag eleksyon, specific sa Constitution ‘yan – right of reply, authority ng commission ‘yun. Article 9-C of the Constitution specifically says that Comelec can impose a right to reply,” Brillantes said in an interview.

The poll chief added in his Twitter account that to say that the right to reply is unconstitutional “is akin to saying that the Constitution is unconstitutional – which is absurd.”

“The right to reply provision should not be feared by those are are already practicing balanced reporting,” Brillantes tweeted.

Brillantes maintained that they would rather choose public interest over the media entities’ business stake during the elections – regarded as earnings season for major networks due to paid campaign advertisements.

“At times, medyo matatamaan ang media. Malulugi. Ibang usapan ‘yan. We will never consider business interests against public interest. There’s no way that we can balance business interest and public interest. We cannot sacrifice public interest,” he said.

Brillantes vowed that they would go into the specifics of the new rules, particularly the right to reply. “We might go down to the clarificatory issues  like, kailan, how do you exercise it? What is the procedure? Hindi naman maski sino pwede mag-demand. We just have to screen it.”

He noted though that the Comelec would insist on the limited airtime and the right to reply. — Marc Jayson Cayabyab/KBK, GMA News

Comelec under fire over media interview rule

source: www.abs-cbnnews.com

MANILA - A Commission on Elections (Comelec) resolution that requires journalists to secure "prior approval" before candidates can be interviewed by broadcasters has come under fire.

The National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP), in a press statement Friday, called Resolution No. 9615 absurd.

"The resolution is not only absurd it is downright unconstitutional since it constitutes prior restraint," the NUJP said.

The January 15 resolution states that "To determine whether the appearance or guesting in a program is bona fide, the broadcast stations or entities must show that: (1) prior approval of the Commission was secured."

NUJP secretary-general Rowena Paraan said Comelec chairman Sixto Brillantes' later statement that they only meant "prior notice" made things worse.

"This practically precludes impromptu interviews, which are invariably better at drawing out as much of the truth from interviewees than staged or pre-arranged interviews, and could also have dire consequences in emergency situations, such as natural disasters, when officials, who may also happen to be candidates, need to get information out as quickly as possible," Paraan said.

"To be able to comply with this ridiculous edict, broadcast networks and their news staff will need to be fortunetellers who should be able to predict where and when a candidate will be at any future moment," she added.

Malaysia stops Aman boss Amalilio's departure for PHL

source: www.gmanetwork.com

Malaysian airport authorities on Friday stopped Manuel Amalilio, the businessman who is facing a multi-billion peso estafa case in the Philippines, from departing for Manila.

Justice Secretary Leila de Lima, however, said she still does not know why Amalilio was held at the Malaysian airport airport. "We are still checking the real reason," she said.

Interior and Local Government Secretary Mar Roxas said they were informed by Philippine National Police (PNP) Attaché to Malaysia, Senior Superintendent Carlo C. Collado, who remains in custody of Amalilio, that Malaysian authorities have prevented the embattled businessman from boarding the Manila-bound Cebu Pacific plane in Kota Kinabalu.

"The reason for this remains unclear," Roxas said in a brief statement.

Roxas said they Philippine Ambassador to Malaysia is "already assisting us on this matter."

A report on "24 Oras" quoted Malaysian authorities as saying that there are some things that needed to be arranged regarding Amalilio's departure.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has earlier said that Amalilio, reportedly a Malaysian, is a Filipino citizen so he should be deported.

The country has no extradition treaty with Malaysia.

For his part, National Bureau of Investigation director Nonnatus Rojas admitted to reporters being disappointed with the development, saying his agency was "in high spirits" the entire day and was looking forward to Amalilio's turnover to Philippine authorities.

Rojas also said the four NBI agents sent to fetch Amalilio has already been directed to return to Manila to report to him details of the incident at the airport.

Amalilio was supposed to arrive Friday night after he was arrested in Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia, last Wednesday for "possession of fraudulent Malaysian passport and identificiation cards."

Amalilio flew to Malaysia late last year after his company, Aman Futures Group Philippines Inc., was linked to a P12-billion scam that allegedly victimized hundreds of investors.

Aman Futures is accused of defrauding investors through the "Ponzi Scheme," in which the firm misrepresents itself as a company engaged in futures trading and lured investors by offering between 20 to 80 percent interest within eight to 20 days.

Amalilio and nine others were ordered arrested by Presiding Judge Dennis Vicoy of the Pagadian City Regional Trial Court Branch 20 in connection with the alleged scam.

Other accused who are already in government custody are Aman president Fernando Luna and his wife Nimfa Caballero-Luna; Aman incorporators Donna Coyme, Lelian Lim Gan, Wilanie Fuentes, Nazelle Rodriguez, Eduardo Lim and Lurix Lopez; and Aman employee Dhurwen Wenceslao. -- Mark Merueñas, Amita Legaspi and Gian Geronimo/KBK/ELR, GMA News