Tinio: "Joint governance" of proposed US industrial hub in Clark will violate sovereignty

PRESS RELEASE Rep. Antonio Tinio ACT Teachers PL April 26, 2026

Tinio: “Joint governance” of proposed US industrial hub in Clark will violate sovereignty

ACT Teachers Representative and Deputy Minority Leader Antonio Tinio today condemned the proposed establishment of a 4,000-acre “Economic Security Zone” (ESZ) in the Luzon Economic Corridor, warning that the arrangement - as publicly described by the United States government - would constitute a grave and unconstitutional surrender of Philippine sovereignty, and demanding that the Marcos administration provide a full and transparent accounting of what it has already agreed to behind closed doors.

Tinio highlighted a social media post by US Under Secretary of State for Economic Affairs Jacob Helberg today (April 26) commenting on the official State Department fact sheet dated April 16 that revealed the true character of the proposed zone. Writing on X, Helberg described the project in explicit terms: “We are working with the Philippines to build a FORWARD DEPLOYED INDUSTRIAL BASE in Luzon - a peaceful platform designed to secure vital supply-chain inputs for American and aligned companies.”

“‘Forward deployed’ is not the language of economic partnership. It is the language of military strategy - of pre-positioning assets in theater ahead of anticipated need. Helberg has told us, in plain terms, that this industrial zone is conceived by the U.S. national security establishment as a military-industrial installation on Philippine soil, designed to serve American and allied companies. Not Filipino companies. Not the Filipino people,” Tinio said. “The open declaration by the US government of its military purpose makes the proposed hub an inevitable military target, thus exposing so-called industrial development to the perrenial risk of destruction in the event of war.”

At the center of Tinio’s condemnation is the concept of “joint governance” embedded in the ESZ model and elaborated in the State Department release. He noted that this has no basis whatsoever in current Philippine law. “Walang konsepto ng ‘joint governance’ sa Konstitusyon at batas ng Pilipinas.”

“The ‘Economic Security Zone’ is described in the U.S. announcement as ‘a new model’ - the first of its kind. That description is an admission: this legal category does not exist in Philippine law. It is a legal fiction invented in Washington. It was apparently specifically for the U.S.-led Pax Silica Initiative - a foreign-designed investment architecture that the Marcos administration appears to have signed on to without public disclosure or congressional authorization,” Tinio said.

Tinio noted that the ESZ’s announced governance features - “internationally enforceable contracts,” “expert dispute resolution,” and “American expertise in institutions and legal regimes” - amount to a comprehensive suspension of Philippine law within the zone’s boundaries.

“What they are describing is a foreign enclave on Philippine soil, where U.S.-designed legal standards replace Philippine law. This is extraterritoriality. This is what we dismantled in 1991 when the Senate rejected the bases treaty,” he said.

“Walang ‘Economic Security Zone’ sa batas ng Pilipinas. Imbento ito ng Washington para sa interes ng Washington. At tila pumayag ang administrasyon Marcos - nang walang batas, walang tratado, walang pahintulot ng Kongreso, at lingid sa kaalaman ng mamamayan,” Tinio stressed.

Tinio drew a sharp and pointed comparison to the furor that erupted in early April over the prospect of Philippine-China joint oil exploration in the West Philippine Sea - a controversy in which lawmakers, legal experts, and civil society groups invoked precisely the same constitutional principles now at stake in the ESZ.

“Kung anong galit sa proposal ni Pang. Marcos na ‘joint development’ with China, dapat ganoon din ang galit o higit pa sa ‘joint governance’ na inanunsiyo ng US State Department na ipaiiral sa industrial hub na ito sa Central Luzon,” said Tinio. “Sa ilalim ng Marcos Jr. administration, tila babalik tayo sa pagiging kolonya ng US.”

He noted that official pronouncements from Malacanang, Armed Forces of the Philippines, as well as media coverage has so much as mentioned or explained this feature of the ESZ.

Tinio called on President Marcos to immediately and publicly clarify what the Philippine government has agreed to, when those agreements were made, what legal instruments have been signed, and whether any commitments have been made regarding the governance structure of the ESZ that have not been disclosed to Congress or the public.

“President Marcos must explain: What did you agree to? When did you agree to it? What did you sign? What does ‘joint governance’ mean, concretely, in terms that can be measured against the Constitution?” Tinio demanded.

He further called on Congress to immediately conduct an investigation into the ESZ arrangement, its constitutional implications, and the process by which the Marcos administration arrived at its commitments to Washington. ###

References:

1. Office of the Spokesperson, US Department of State, “Fact Sheet: U.S. and Philippines Plan the Launch of Historic 4,000 Acre Economic Security Zone to Shore Up Supply Chains” https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/2026/04/u-s-and-philippines-plan-the-launch-of-historic-4000-acre-economic-security-zone-to-shore-up-supply-chains

2. X post by US Under Secretary of State for Economic Affairs Jacob S. Helberg https://x.com/UnderSecE/status/2048081937672343946