Treaty Commitment Preferences: The Case of the Philippines on the Proposed ASEAN Extradition

Abstract

Treaty commitment preference provides for the guidelines being observed by States before concluding an agreement. In the Western context, Wagner (2003), Lupu (2014), Simmons (2002) and Parillo (2009) concluded that the general treaty commitment preferences are the form of government, incumbent administration’s priority plans, State’s capacity to comply, and its foreseen benefits. In this regard, this study was conducted to examine the applicability to the Philippines of said general treaty commitment preferences before binding itself to the proposed ASEAN Extradition Treaty. Following are the theoretical propositions of the study on the basis of the above studies: (1) The Philippines considers the form of government of the other Contracting Party/ies as a treaty commitment preference; (2) The Philippines depends on the incumbent administration’s priority plans before it decides to enter into the proposed ASEAN extradition treaty; (3) The Philippine Government examines its capacity to comply with the commitments and obligations set forth in the proposed ASEAN extradition treaty; and (4) the Philippine Government ensures that the country will gain much benefit from the proposed ASEAN extradition treaty. Interviews with the prominent negotiators of extradition law and other ASEAN instruments were conducted to validate the propositions and/or to identify other relevant preferences that may be deemed applicable. The results of the study presented that the form of government and incumbent administration’s priority plans are not considered as treaty commitment preferences of the Philippines. On the other hand, in addition to the capacity to comply and foreseen benefits variables, the following preferences are also identified as part of the Philippines ‘treaty commitment preferences: (1) challenges, (2) status/situation of transnational crimes in the region, and (3) legal framework of the Contracting Parties.