Provisions that could hand foreign investors sweeping authority over a proposed special economic zone drew sharp scrutiny from Senator Imee Marcos on Wednesday, August 12, as she pressed the government to fast-track its examination of the Pax Silica initiative before any agreement is locked in.
At the heart of her worry is a draft framework she said reached her hands, a document reportedly making the rounds among government offices ahead of possible approval. Marcos was careful to flag that the material remained under deliberation rather than finalized. “I’m hoping that I’m wrong and that this document is not true,” she told reporters at a press conference.
The senator zeroed in on how land would be handled under the arrangement. She could not reconcile why a joint venture would be created to hold title if the property was meant to stay in government hands, nor why an outside firm would be handed the role of “master tenant” with wide latitude to run the zone. “If it’s the BCDA who will own 60 percent of the JV and the foreign company will own 40 percent, shouldn’t it pay for that 40 percent?” she asked.
According to Marcos, the framework spans 1,619 hectares and could hand effective control to a foreign party through a lease running 99 years. She flagged additional language that would reportedly stand up a joint zone authority and committee empowered to rule on leasing, management, and related decisions.
Dispute resolution emerged as another sticking point. Marcos said the draft could shift jurisdiction to New York by way of a proposed “Pax Silica Court of Commerce” operating under the U.S. Federal Arbitration Act. She added that the material reportedly folds in sovereign immunity clauses, investor safeguards, enforcement waivers, and guarantees shielding investments from disturbance even past the 99-year mark. “This is even beyond 99 years. It’s quite alarming,” she said.
That extended horizon fed into her question over the deal’s legal classification. Marcos argued the government needs to settle whether the arrangement amounts to a treaty or a mere executive agreement, and whether its terms reach past routine administrative matters. “If it changes Philippine law, if the period is so long that it goes beyond 99 years, I think that is a different matter and needs to be examined carefully,” she said.
The senator also turned to the people living on the affected land. She pointed to accounts that farmers in Camp O’Donnell, Barangay Aranguren, and Sta. Lucia in Tarlac were reportedly being offered P300,000 for five hectares, with anything beyond that acreage supposedly falling outside compensation. Marcos said this warranted a closer look, especially if the parcels would end up folded into Pax Silica. “Why not buy it? Won’t the farmers who are being deprived of their land at P300,000 benefit from this?” she said, contending that anyone selling should be paid fair market value. She raised parallel concerns for Indigenous Peoples whose burial grounds could be disturbed, saying their situation deserved attention in any inquiry.
Marcos was clear that her alarm should not read as blanket opposition. She said the country genuinely needs investment, singling out advanced manufacturing, artificial intelligence, and similar industries capable of producing thousands of jobs. The catch, in her view, is that officials must weigh precisely what they are conceding in return.
She also cautioned that the stakes run wider than data centers and AI. The project touches strategic assets including the Philippines’ critical mineral reserves, its long-standing semiconductor assembly, testing, and packaging sector, and its position near the Taiwan Strait. Given how much those mineral and chip supply chains matter to the United States amid its rivalry with China, Marcos warned the deal could deepen the country’s geopolitical exposure. She said such an inquiry should move quickly, given reports the framework could be wrapped up as early as November.
