REMARKS

Hon. ENRIQUE A. MANALO

Secretary for Foreign Affairs

Launch of the Monograph for the Proceedings of the August 2024 Roundtable Discussion on "Examining the Rules-based International Order from Perspectives in International Law"

25 June 2025

President Angelo Jimenez of the University of the Philippines,

Professor Jay Batongbacal, Acting Dean of the UP College of Law,

Distinguished panelists,

Esteemed scholars of international law and international relations,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Good morning.

It is an honor to join you today for the formal launch of this monograph, which encapsulates the proceedings of our roundtable discussion last year, where we examined the rules-based international order through the lens of international law.

When we convened last August, we did so with a shared understanding that the rules-based international order is not sustained by the logic of power or the expediencies of politics, but by the enduring authority of norms and institutions underpinned by international law. That understanding shaped every exchange, every line of inquiry, every challenge posed in our discussions.

Together, we explored questions confronted by international lawyers and diplomats alike: How can we preserve the legitimacy of multilateral 1 institutions amid growing fragmentation and geopolitical tension? How do we defend the Charter's authority when the use of force bypasses collective decision-making? And how must the rules-based order evolve to respond to normative gaps in emerging domains such as climate governance and Al?

The colloquium gathered leading voices in international law and diplomacy, including the Secretary General of the Permanent Court of Arbitration Dr. Marcin Czepelak; Member of the International Law Commission Dr. Nilüfer Oral; former Judge of the International Criminal Court Judge Raul Pangalangan; Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Marvic Leonen; Dean Antonio La Viña, and Commissioner Johannes Bernabe, who led us in discussions in international dispute settlement, conflict prevention, the progressive development of international law, climate change, and international trade.

II.

These discussions were an exploration of Philippine thought leadership in multilateral spaces. It unpacked the many ways the Philippines contributes and can further contribute to an international rules-based order towards greater inclusion and accountability. Also salient were thoughts on the values of justice and equity that the Philippines carries in its abiding engagement as a responsible global actor in the regional, UN and other international fora.

The ideas were not only academically robust and intellectually engaging, but also directly relevant to the agenda in multilateral fora and negotiating tables, where we, as diplomats, continue to sit today.

They also offer an important contribution to the growing body of thought on the future of global governance.

Our exchanges affirm that diplomacy is not removed from international legal discourse, but integral to it; and that legal norms debated in academic forums must also be found in diplomatic arenas, where global rules are made and unmade.

For this, I am grateful not only to our esteemed speakers, but also to all participants whose interventions helped shape this timely and important volume.

I also: wish to commend the team at the Institute of International Legal Studies of the University of the Philippines Law Center led by Professor Rommel Casis, for their hard work in this collaboration with the DFA.

Our work, however, does not end with the roundtable discussion or with the printing of this monograph. It invites to deepen and sustain this discourse.

III.

We live in unsettled times.

Across regions, we see States retreating from multilateral commitments just as global challenges, like pandemics, cyber threats, climate change, and environmental degradation, demand coordinated and rules-based solutions.

We also witness instances of unilateral use of force that strain the fabric of Charter-based restraint and challenge notions of peaceful resolution.

Eight decades ago, the UN Charter was also forged in the shadow of global war and born out of a collective resolve to prevent the return of great power conflict.

But, unlike the clear rupture of that earlier era, today's tumult is more diffuse, characterized not by overt conflict among great powers, but by the quiet erosion of the international order: where trust is fragile, institutions are contested, and the consensus that once underpinned cooperation is steadily weakening.

What we are confronting is not merely a crisis of compliance, but a deeper contestation over the legitimacy, scope, and function of international law itself.

This erosion of faith in international law and multilateral institutions, whether due to deadlock, inequity, or politicization, has given rise to competing legal interpretations, selective adherence to norms, and frequent recourse to unilateralism.

We also see a hardening of divisions between blocs, ideologies, and regional systems fueling a climate of polarization and threatening to replace dialogue with confrontation.

These developments have contributed to increasing unpredictability, instability and uncertainty of the international system.

IV.

For diplomacy, this poses a profound challenge. The conduct of foreign policy can no longer rest on the assumption that shared norms or multilateral commitments will be respected as a matter of course. The diplomat must now defend not only the substance of a position, but the very legitimacy of the multilateral process itself. It requires skill, certainly, but also clarity of conviction, fluency in the language of law, and the ability to forge principled alliances across regions and political groupings.

For the international lawyer, these developments also present a renewed urgency. It is no longer sufficient to apply existing law; we must also interrogate its silences, refine its instruments, and clarify its thresholds. Whether on climate responsibility, cyber attribution, artificial intelligence, or the governance of outer space, the legal community must be at the frontier of norm development, ensuring that power is mediated by law, and that law is responsive to the conditions of our time.

And for Philippine diplomacy, this is both a moment of testing and of opportunity. Our country has long championed the peaceful settlement of disputes, the rule of law in maritime governance, and the centrality of the UN Charter in global affairs.

These positions are not rhetorical but strategic. They reflect a sober recognition that our own security and prosperity depend on an international order that restrains arbitrariness, affirms sovereign equality, and safeguards access to common goods, from oceans to outer space, from trade to climate action.

This is why we must remain engaged in shaping the evolution of multilateralism, not as passive observers, but as active participants in its renewal. Multilateralism, if it is to survive the weight of modern crises, must become more inclusive, more coherent, and more responsive. It must address not only the symptoms of conflict but its structural causes. It must empower smaller states without paralyzing the system. And it must place international law at its core, not as a static code, but as a living framework, capable of both restraint and imagination.

V.

To our young diplomats, I say this: your work is not merely to negotiate texts or deliver statements. It is to defend the very possibility of lawful cooperation in a world growing more adversarial.

To our legal scholars and practitioners: the future of the rules-based international order will not be written in the halls of power alone, but in the clarity of your arguments, the precision of your reasoning, and the moral integrity of the positions you take.

Let us continue to contribute, not only to the defense of international law, but to its reinvention where necessary; not only to the preservation of multilateralism, but to its meaningful transformation.

Soon, I shall have the honor of serving as Permanent Representative of the Philippines to the United Nations in New York - a role that is both responsibility and a continuation of purpose.

I shall bring with me the reflections dissected in this volume, and the convictions affirmed in this very forum: that world order cannot be an accident of power; it must be the product of rules, shared obligations, and mutual respect.

I urge the University of the Philippines and the academic community to carry forward this intellectual momentum, to bring Filipino thought and perspectives in their advocacies and engagements, whether in the Indo-Pacific region or beyond.

Allow me to close by recalling the Charter's opening that we the peoples are "determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war" and to reaffirm "faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person..." These words are not confined to the past, but an enduring summons to our present.

The Philippines is a Founding Member of the United Nations, and this week, we are marking the 80th anniversary of the signing by Carlos P. Romulo of the Charter in San Francisco on 26 June 1945. Carlos P. Romulo, framer of the UN Charter and cannon of Philippine diplomacy, also belongs to UP, having served as its President from 1962 to 1968. He has said that "the (Filipino) stake in the United Nations is the stake of identical destiny, of shared anxiety, hope and endeavor." The Department hopes to partner with the UP this year in conversations on the legacies and advocacies of the Philippines in the UN.

May this monograph, and the conversation it has begun, guide us in the quiet but urgent task of defending the rules-based international order. As we are a nation that has long turned to international law as both shield and compass, let us as Filipinos remain at the center of the work of upholding a rules-based order as a practical imperative for a more stable, just, and accountable international system.

Thank you.

END