THE country’s strong macroeconomic fundamentals debunk claims by international groups of lawyers that foreign investments have been or will be affected by the human rights and extrajudicial killings, Malacanang said on Tuesday.
Presidential Spokesman and Chief Presidential Legal Counsel Salvador S. Panelo said in a briefing that there is no direct correlation between human rights and the economy, contrary to what was pointed out by critics.
Panelo argued that the country’s robust foreign investments are anchored on principal considerations, such as macroeconomic fundamentals, no or minimal restriction on foreign equity on investment areas and activities, ease of doing business, good infrastructure, nonrestrictive labor laws and consistent policy milieu.
“In the first two full years of the Duterte Administration, when the media propaganda war against the campaign on illegal drugs was virulent, the Philippines had an unprecedented $20.1 billion in net foreign investments in 2017 and 2018 (about $10 billion yearly in both years) as compared to the first two full years of the Aquino Administration, which registered $2 billion in 2011 and $3.2 billion in 2012,” Panelo said in a statement.
Panelo attributed the strong investor confidence in the economy to the President’s strong political will for pushing reforms which include the signing of Ease of Doing Business Act.
That the country even jumped 48 notches to 19th place out of 193 countries in the e-Participation Index of the United Nations underscores the administration’s notable performance to streamline the business registration process in the country, he added.
Moreover, the government’s “Build, Build, Build” program is now full steam ahead, citing the Duterte administration’s strong commitment to more infrastructure compared to previous administrations.
“In his first two years in office (2017 and 2018), the President obligated 6.3 percent of GDP to infrastructure, which is two to three times as much as his previous predecessors—1.7 percent under Ramos, 1.8 percent under Estrada, 1.6 percent under Arroyo, 3.0 percent under Aquino,” he said.
“These are hard facts and figures, which cannot be disputed and which should be relayed by those in capable positions to the public, including those in the international community. They are more reliable than some anecdotes that are politically colored by some groups or interests,” he added.
In a related development, International Criminal Court (ICC) Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda also issued a statement on Tuesday, saying that “its independent and preliminary examination into the situation in the Philippines continues even after its withdrawal” as the Court retains its jurisdiction over crimes committed during the time in which the State was party to the Statute.
However, Panelo reiterated that the Philippines will not cooperate with the ICC probe because the country was never a party to the Rome Statute which created the ICC in the first place.
Panelo has also said that ICC cannot even come to the country as it would be considered intruding into the country’s sovereignty.
The Philippines has also officially withdrawn from the International Criminal Court (ICC) last March 17, a year after it told the United Nations its decision to quit.
The Philippines moved for the withdrawal after the ICC launched a preliminary examination in 2018 of President Duterte’s crackdown on drugs.
Nonetheless, Panelo said the ICC verdict on the case of Philippines would not matter since the body has no jurisdiction over the country in the first place.
The ICC has jurisdiction in situations where the alleged perpetrator is a national of a State Party or where the crime was committed in the territory of the State Party.
These crimes include genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression.