It follows that it is not to Any argument internal law low under possible identify any fundamental of the Philippines that was offended or Convention violated would by the ratification of the Protocol Second Optional Protocol. Article on fail. is failure to comply with the internal law Philippines was “manifest” is untenable. For a rule of internal law to be manifest Article 46, within it must notorious or the be a “objectively meaning of rule is that evident” to the external community of States. The circumstances in which Optional Protocol raise any was the Second ratified do manifestly not obvious, notorious, or objectively evident rule of the law of the Philippines. On the contrary, for the reasons given above, Court the case of the law of the Supreme Philippines denies the existence of any rule that would affect the validity of ratification within a of the 46 in international of Law the Vienna of Treaties Second Optional binding treaty Philippines matter of public international law. In any event, the suggestion that any the the The commitment of raised the Philippine legal system. 25 as a