Govt should take EU warning seriously – analyst


THE administration of President Rodrigo Duterte should take seriously the warning made recently by European Union (EU) ambassador Franz Jessen that trade relations with EU member-states might suffer if the Philippines fails to comply with its commitments to various international treaties on human rights, a political analyst said on Monday.

Institute for Political and Electoral Reform Executive Director Ramon Casiple said the matters raised by the EU envoy were legitimate.

“We should take it (warning) seriously. There are treaties covering or affecting trade that can be invoked by the EU and the international community,” he said.

Casiple pointed out that trade agreements particularly with the EU were anchored on the adherence of the Philippines to human rights treaties.

Malacañang and some senators on Sunday belittled Jessen’s statements, with presidential spokesman Ernesto Abella saying: “Non-trade accusations, especially if baseless and undeserved, should…not be linked with trade programs.”

The Philippines is a signatory to 27 international treaties and conventions on human rights, labor rights, environment and governance, among others.

Abella on Sunday said the Philippines would respect its international commitments but insisted the war on drugs of the Duterte administration “intends to protect the innocent which illegal drugs would destroy.”

Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto 3rd said the EU has no moral right to meddle with the affairs of the country, considering that some of its member-nations tolerate drug use.

Casiple said in an earlier interview that the protection of human rights has been a long-time advocacy of the EU and the United States.

“And if the EU sees that there is violation or they issued a warning on that supposed violation we could be in trouble because they are raising real issues and not partisan politics,” he said.


Please follow our commenting guidelines.


  1. EU Ambassador Franz Jessen is simply out of touch with reality. By the time the EEC starts implementing the sanctions against the Philippines, the EEC will be crumbling apart due to the succession of Great Britain from that union.

    The British will not jeopardize the jobs of their people and the stability of their banking sector to please EEC politicians. Their duty is to their people and not to EEC politicians.

    While the sanctions against the Philippines would barely affect our economic performance, it will boomerang on the EEC economy.

    By the way, the sanctions against the Philippines are very extensive. In Africa, African leaders threatened to execute homosexuals if they do not stop their homosexuality. What prompted African leaders to issue this threat is their fear of AIDS. They do not want African population to be depopulated because of AIDS. The EEC is also threatening to sanction African nations who kill homosexuals. Both the African and Philippine reasons for their policies were simply brushed aside by EEC politicians.

    Both African nations and the Philippines owe huge sums of money to European banks. If the EEC will refuse to trade with them, where will they get the money to pay their debts? Do the EEC politicians just want these nations to repudiate their debts?

    Since EEC politicians will not listen to reason, Great Britain has no other choice except to succeed from the EEC. If EEC politicians want to kill the jobs of their people, it is up to them but certainly the British will not do the same.

    Incidentally, this is the second time the British turned their backs on a treaty with European nations. The first one was when she left the Triple Entente. What prompted Great Britain to leave this alliance was the plan of the Triple Entente to send an expeditionary force to South America to restore all the independent republics there to the Spanish monarchy. Since the British could not dissuade them to change this crazy and impractical plan, they had no choice but to leave the alliance. The Triple Entente never got to send that expeditionary force and they lost the British membership for their refusal to listen to objections.

    What EEC politicians want to prove is that they are better exploiters of poor nations than the Americans. It just simply would not work as the British objected.

  2. Prinze Fisher on

    Casiple should stop giving unwarranted comments that ONLY confuses the Filipino people. He should support our leaders instead. I think he’s just keeping to get media mileage. Surely, one day, we may see Casiple running for a congressional position too.

    • Casiple is pointing out that the favorable trade agreement between the Philippines and the EU were granted after the death penalty was abolished.

      Bringing back the death penalty is a violation of the trade agreement.

      The PH government made a choice, They would rather have the death penalty than the favorable trade with the EU.

      The problem is the PH government wants to keep both and are complaining that they are being treated unfairly when in reality the whole reason for the trade agreement in the first place was due to getting rid of the death penalty.

      The PH government are like children who refuse to comply with the rules and blame everyone for what they did to themselves.

      The brain drain is starting to show.

  3. Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto 3rd said the EU has no moral right

    Neither does Sotto,

    Sotto is on the Napoles list as taking kickbacks from the pork barrel fund.

    Napoles then detailed 7 amounts totaling P225 million channeled through the NLDC from 2010 to 2012. “In all these transactions, the sole person I talked to was Jeniffer (sic) Corpuz.”

    “At one point, she asked me for a Hyundai Starex that she said will be given on the birthday of Senator Sotto’s wife.” Sotto is married to actress Helen Gamboa.

    She said in all transactions, Corpuz asked for 40% for Sotto, and 10% for herself.

    When you want to know about moral rights as a pork barrel thief like Sotto.