JUSTICE Secretary Raul Gonzalez yesterday said it might be necessary for the Supreme Court to clarify a portion of its ruling on the custody case of rapist Daniel Smith.

In a press briefing, Gonzalez said the phrase in the SC ruling last Feb. 11 ordering the return of Smith, an American serviceman, to the custody of "Philippine authorities," could be subjected to various interpretations.

"I think it’s a little vague. That should be clarified, what is meant by the Supreme Court when it talks about that," Gonzalez told reporters. "That is something that could be debated."

He said the best move to resolve the issue is for an interested party to file a motion to clarify before the High Court.

"The Philippine embassy in Washington is a Philippine territory… that is when you speak of Philippine authority or jurisdiction… That’s why embassies have been used for asylum by some foreigners who ran afoul in their country… They run to their embassies to seek asylum," he said.

"The Article 2 of the Revised Penal Code, the Philippine jurisdiction includes people on-board Philippine ship or airship. Even if the crime is committed in the high seas on board a Philippine ship or airship, that is jurisdictional for us," he added.

The Tribunal ordered the Department of Foreign Affairs to negotiate with the US Embassy regarding the details of the transfer.

Talks between the two camps, however, have yet to formally begin as Foreign Affairs Secretary Alberto Romulo is out of the country while the US Embassy is still waiting for lawyers from the US State department.

Gonzalez said the Philippine government will never allow Smith to be brought back to US soil as it could be too risky.

"We will fight that. We will object to that, of course, because that is already risky on the part of the Philippines… Baka i-spirit out siya dun," he said.

Sen. Joker Arroyo slammed the "double standard" provisions in the VFA which he described as "idiotic provision."

In the confinement and visitation provision (Article IX) of the VFA, it states that the confinement imposed by a US federal or state court upon Filipino personnel "shall be served in penal institution in the United States suitable for the custody level of the prisoners chosen after consultation between two governments."

This means, he said, that Filipino personnel cannot be housed in the Philippine Embassy or in a Philippine consulate.

"In short, confinement shall always be in the US penal institution. The only `consuelo de bobo’ is that he may ask which prison he may be confined," Arroyo said.

"Idiotic provision! Why should a Filipino ask that he be confined in a military prison?" Arroyo said. He said in the case of Smith, US authorities spirited him to the US Embassy. "Downright iniquitous," he said.

"The terms on confinement are so glaringly iniquitous. Why Philippine authorities ever agreed to this reflects our residual colonial mentality," Arroyo said.

Arroyo added that the main issue in relations with the US for the past 68 years has "always been the question of jurisdiction the moment US personnel commits a crime in the Philippines."

He said that the Philippines should "either suspend, renegotiate or abrogate (the Visiting Forces Agreement); we cannot leave this alone."

He admitted, however, that it is unlikely that the government will press the US on the issue out of "colonial mentality and (an) inferiority complex."

"Not even our senators want to listen. How many signatures did (Sen. Francis Pangilinan) get for his resolution?" he asked, referring to a resolution calling for the abrogation of the treaty. Only six out of 23 senators supported the resolution.

He said he signed the resolution despite its slim chance of being passed by the Senate. "What’s the alternative, we just let it go?" he asked. – Gerard Naval and JP Lopez