Panelo twits Roque, says no Rody-Xi pact on SCS

The former chief legal counsel of ex-President Rodrigo Duterte denied the existence of any “gentleman’s agreement” with Chinese President Xi Jinping on the West Philippine Sea.

Salvador Panelo squarely contradicted the statement of Duterte’s former spokesperson, Harry Roque, that a verbal deal was reached between the two leaders to maintain the status quo in Ayungin Shoal.

“There’s no such animal,” Panelo said.

“This is what President Duterte said: ‘I did not enter into any gentleman’s agreement whatsoever,’” he added.

However, in a Facebook post yesterday afternoon, Roque shot back at those who seemed to have forgotten the “gentleman’s agreement to maintain the status quo sa West Philippine Sea.”

“For those who have forgotten, now you know,” Roque wrote in his caption to a link to a Reuters story, “Philippines says China agrees on no new expansion in South China Sea.”

But Panelo said Duterte told him twice that no such deal existed.

He said the former President even raised the arbitral ruling to Xi during his first visit to China in 2016.

“We were surprised with the reaction of Xi. He said, ‘Do not forcethat because if you force it, there will be trouble.’ We were shocked,” Panelo said.

“The President responded that if we cannot come to an agreement, let us at least have peace,” he said.

Panelo said he is willing to attend a Senate inquiry into the gentleman’s deal disclosed by Roque if he is asked to.

“If I am called to testify, why not?” Panelo said.

Senate Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel III said Roque should prove his claim.

Roque, however, said all Pimentel must do is do a quick Google search.

“The evidence is in the news since 2017. So all you have to do is type ‘China Philippines no new development 2017’ and all the news articles will come out,” Roque told ABS-CBN News.

“There was nothing secret about it. It was an agreement to maintain status quo and it worked because we had more peaceful relations with China then,” he added.

Pimentel said since the agreement was informal, unwritten, and unrecorded, it is considered void and non-binding.

Senator Risa Hontiveros said such a deal can be considered an act of treason.

In her Senate Resolution No. 982 calling for a probe into the deal,

Hontiveros said if the agreement is true, it would be tantamount to the surrender of Philippine sovereignty.

“And, in the words of former Philippine Navy flag officer-in-command Eduardo Santos, an act of treason. This ‘gentleman’s agreement’ is treasonous,” she said. — Macon Ramos-Araneta