A.
In Manila Prince Hotel vs. GSIS, GSIS lost the case because it failed to uphold the Filipino First Policy of the 1987 Philippine Constitution. According to Section 10, Article XII, Filipino citizens and entities should be given preference in cases involving the national economy and patrimony. Manila Hotel, as a cultural and historical landmark, was considered part of the national patrimony, and this made the Constitution’s preference for Filipino ownership directly applicable. The decision of GSIS to favor a foreign bidder, despite the matching bid from Manila Prince Hotel, which is a Filipino-owned company, directly contradicted this constitutional provision.
Other reasons for their loss involved their arguments of Filipino First Policy not being a self-executing provision and the mandate of the Constitution only addressing to the State and not GSIS. The Supreme Court determined that the constitutional provision at hand was “self-executing.” This means it did not require further legislation to be valid or enforceable. By overlooking the Filipino company’s matching bid and favoring the foreign bidder, GSIS ignored a direct mandate from the Constitution, which led the Court to rule that GSIS had violated Manila Prince Hotel’s constitutional right to priority in purchasing shares. Additionally, the transaction could not be carried out anyway without the approval of the State, through the Committee on Privatization.
B.
I agree with the decision made by the Supreme Court. The Manila Hotel is not just only a commercial asset, but it is also a marker of our historical and cultural identity. Built in 1912 as the oldest premiere hotel in the Philippines, it is an iconic landmark and has witnessed numerous important events, as well as hosted prominent national and international figures. By ensuring that control of the hotel remains in our hands, the Supreme Court preserved not only the economic interests of Filipinos but also the integrity of a national symbol. Allowing Filipino ownership ensures that decisions regarding the Manila Hotel will likely consider its cultural importance to the Philippines and safeguard it for future generations. Personally, this decision is a statement about prioritizing and valuing national heritage rather than economic gain.