General principles of international law Appointment of 2 American lawyers is not violative of the

nation’s sovereignty.
Kuroda vs. Jalandoni
Co Kim Chan v. Valdez Tan Keh
- Kuroda, the Commanding General of the Japanese
Imperial Forces in the Philippines during the Japanese - Respondent Judge refused to take cognizance of and
occupation, was charged before the Philippine Military continue the proceedings in petitioner’s civil case on the
Commission of war crimes. ground that the proclamation issued on October 23, 1944,
- He questioned the constitutionality of E.O. No. 68 that by General Douglas MacArthur had the effect of
created the National War Crimes Office and prescribed invalidating and nullifying all judicial proceedings and
rules on the trial of accused war criminals. judgments of the court of the Philippines under the
- He contended the Philippines is not a signatory to the Philippine Executive Commission and the Republic of the
Hague Convention on Rules and Regulations covering Philippines established during the Japanese military
Land Warfare and therefore he is charged of crimes not occupation, and that, furthermore, the lower courts have
based on law, national and international.  no jurisdiction to take cognizance of and continue judicial
proceedings pending in the courts of the defunct Republic
I: W/N EO 68 is unconstitutional. of the Philippines in the absence of an enabling law
granting such authority.
R: EO 68 is valid and constitutional.
I: Whether or not the government established during the
Art. 2 Sec. 3 of 1987 Constitution: “The Philippines renounces
Japanese occupation was a de facto government
war as an instrument of national policy and adopts the generally
accepted principles of international law as a part of the law of R: Yes. Government established was a de facto government.
the nation.”
It is a legal truism, in political and international law that all acts
In accordance with generally accepted principle of international and proceedings of the legislatives, executive and judicial
law including the Hague Convention, Geneva Convention and department of a de facto government are good and valid.
other international jurisprudence established by United Nations,
all those persons, military or civilian, who have been guilty of 3 kinds of De Facto Government:
planning, preparing or waging war of aggression and of
a. Government de facto in a proper legal sense – government
commission of crimes and offenses consequential and
that gets possession and control of, or usurps, by force or by the
incidental thereto, in violation of law and customs of war, of
voice of the majority, the rightful legal government and
humanity and civilization, are held accountable.
maintains itself against the will of the latter.
The rules and regulations of convention forms part of and are
b. Government of paramount force - that which is established
wholly based on generally accepted principles of international
and maintained by military forces who invade and occupy a
law.
territory of the enemy in the course of war.
- These rules and principles were accepted by 2
Characteristics:
belligerent nations, US & JAPAN—signatories to
the 2 conventions. 1. Existence is maintained by active military powers within
the territories, and against the rightful authority of an
When the petitioner was charged, PH was under the sovereignty
established and lawful government;
of US and thus were equally bound together w US and Japan.
2. It must necessarily be obeyed in civil matters by private
- Rights and obligations were not erased by
citizens
assumption of full sovereignty.
- Full sovereignty entitles us to enforce the right, c. That established as an independent government
on our own, of trying and punishing those who
committed crimes against our people. powers and duties under de facto government during Art 42
Sec 3 of Hague Convention are the ff:
These rules form part of the law of the land even if the PH was
not a signatory to the conventions because our Constitution has 1. The belligerent occupant shall take the steps in his
been deliberately general and extensive in its scope and not power to re-establish and insure public order and
confined to the recognition of rule and principle of international safety while respecting unless absolutely prevented
law as continued in treaties to which our government may have the laws in force in the country.
been or shall be a signatory. 2. Belligerent occupant has the right and his burdened by
the duty to insure public order and safety during
I: W/N the participation of attorneys Hussey and Port is a military occupation.
diminution of our personality as an independent state and 3. He can suspend old laws and promulgate new ones
their appointment is a violation of our Constitution. and make changes as he may see fit.
4. He is enjoined to respect municipal laws in force
R: No. Respondent Military Commission is a special military which enforce public order and regulate the social and
tribunal governed by special law and not by the Rules of Court commercial life of the country.
which govern ordinary civil court. There is nothing in EO 68 5. Laws of political nature are considered suspended or
which requires that counsel appearing before said commission in abeyance during military occupation.
must be attorneys qualified to practice law in the Philippines in 6. The occupant may suspend all processes including
accordance with the Rules of Court. those under judicial administration, in practice, the
 local ordinary tribunals are authorized to continue Petitioner is a Chinese merchant who questions the
administering justice; judges and judicial officers kept constitutionality of RA 1180 “An Act to Regulate the Retail
their post if they accept the authority if the belligerent Business” on the following grounds:
occupant.
a) It is a violation of the Equal Protection of the Law Clause,
Being a de facto government, the judicial acts and proceedings denies them of their liberty, property and due process of
of the courts of justice of those governments, which are not of law
political complexion, were good and valid, and, by virtue of the b) It is a violation of the constitutional requirement that a
principle of postliminy (postliminium) in international law, bill’s title must reflect the subject matter of the same
remained good and valid after the liberation or reoccupation. because “regulate” does not really mean “nationalize” and
“prohibit”
According to the principle of postliminy, the fact that a c) the Act violates International treaties and Laws
territory which has been occupied by an enemy comes again
into the power of its legitimate government or sovereignty, does I: Whether or not the RA 1180 violates treaty or
not, except in few cases, wipe out the effects of acts done by an international obligations
invader, which for one reason or another it is within his
competence to do. R: No.

The judicial acts done under his control, if not of a political The United Nations Charter imposes no strict or legal
complexion, remain good. Otherwise, the whole social life of a obligations regarding the rights and freedom of their subjects;
community would be paralyzed by an invasion. and the Declaration of Human Rights contains nothing more
than a mere recommendation, or a common standard of
I: w/n proclamation of Gen. McArthur invalidated all achievement for all peoples and all nations.
judgments and judicial acts and proceedings of the courts.
The Treaty of Amity between the Republic of the Philippines
R: No. and the Republic of China is also claimed to be violated by the
law in question
In interpreting the phrase “processes of any other government”
- all that the treaty guarantees are equality of treatment to
- According to well-known principle of international law the Chinese nationals upon the same terms as the
that ALL JUDGMENTS AND JUDICIAL nationals of any other country.
PROCEEDINGS WHICH ARE NOT OF A POLITICAL - But the nationals of China are not discriminated against
COMPLEXION WERE GOOD AND VALID BEFORE because nationals of all other countries, except those of
AND REMAID SO AFTER THE OCCUPIED the United States, who are granted special rights by the
TERRITORY HAD COME AGAIN INTO POWER. Constitution, are all prohibited from engaging in the retail
trade.
- To declare them null and void would be tantamount to
suspending in said courts the rights and action of the Gonzales v. Hechanova
nationals of the territory during the military occupation
thereof by the enemy. A law that enjoins a person to do - Hechanova authorized the importation of 67,000 tons of
something will not at the same time empower another to foreign rice to be purchased from private sourcers.
undo the same - Petitioner argues that 1.) importation of foreign rice was
done without jurisdiction or in excess of jurisdiction
I: w/n same courts may continue those proceedings pending because RA 3452, which repealed RA 2207, explicitly
in the said courts. prohibits the importation of rice and corn by the Rice and
Corn Administration or any other government agency. 2.)
R: Yes.
They contended that the government has already constitute
The invader does not usually take the administration of justice valid executive agreements with Vietnam and Burma, that
into his own hands, but continues the ordinary courts or tribunal in case of conflict between RA 2207 and 3542, the latter
to administer the laws of the country if not absolutely should prevail and the conflict be resolved under the
prevented. American jurisprudence.

“law once established continues until changed by some I: Whether the contracts entered with Vietnam and Burma
competent legislative power. It is not changed merely by be considered as an executive agreement, and thus
change of sovereignty. Courts, being a creatures of statutes constitutional.
and their existence depends upon laws which create and confer
R: No. The parties to said contracts do not appear to have
upon them their jurisdiction, the same continues absent any
regarded the same as executive agreements.
legislative acts repealing such law”
The President may, under the American constitutional system,
(except in laws that are political in nature)
enter into executive agreements without previous legislative
- Enabling laws or acts providing proceedings will continue authority, he may not, by executive agreement, enter into a
and are not required by mere change of government or transaction which is prohibited by statutes enacted prior thereto.
sovereignty. They are necessary only in case former Under the Constitution, the main function of the Executive is
courts are abolished or their jurisdiction changed. to enforce laws enacted by Congress. The former may not
Ichong vs. Hernandez interfere in the performance of the legislative powers of the
latter, except in the exercise of his veto power.
He may not defeat legislative enactments that have acquired the Article 2 Sec. 3 of the Constitution: "adopts the generally
status of laws, by indirectly repealing the same through an accepted principles of international law as part of the law of
executive agreement providing for the performance of the very Nation."
act prohibited by said laws.
According to Universal Declaration of HR which the PH is a
Although the President may, under the American constitutional member, the right to life and liberty and all other fundamental
system, enter into executive agreements without previous rights as applied to all human beings were proclaimed.
legislative authority, he may not, by executive agreement, enter
into a transaction which is prohibited by statutes enacted prior - It was resolved that “all human beings are born free and
thereto; equal in degree and rights” (Art 1)
- "Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedom set
Treaties entered into by the President shall be null and void forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind,
without a prior authorization from the Senate. such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or
other opinion, nationality or social origin, property,
In case of conflict between a treaty and a statute, the one with
birth, or other status" (Art. 2)
the latest shall prevail.
- "Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the
I: Whether an international agreement may be invalidated competent national tribunals for acts violating the
by the Courts. fundamental rights granted him by the Constitution or
by law" (Art. 8); that "No one shall be subjected to
R: Yes. arbitrary arrest, detention or exile" (Art. 9)
According to Section 2 Article 8 of the 1987 Constitution: US vs Nichols: has the power to release from custody an alien
who has been detained an unreasonably long period of time by
Supreme Court may not be deprived "of its jurisdiction to
the Department of Justice after it has become apparent that
review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal, certiorari,
although a warrant for his deportation has been issued, the
or writ of error, as the law or the rules of court may provide,
warrant cannot be effectuated.
final judgments and decrees of inferior courts in — (1) All
cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, Paquete v. Habana
law, ordinance, or executive order or regulation is in
question". - 2 fishing vessels under Spanish flag was caught fishing in
Cuba Coast. They were stopped by squadron and had no
The alleged consummation of the aforementioned contracts knowledge of the existence of war. US navy condemned the
with Vietnam and Burma does not render the case academic. 2 fishing vessel and their cargoes as prizes of war.
Mejoff vs. Dir. of Prisons I: Whether or not both vessels were unlawfully captured.
- Boris Mejoff, an alien was arrested as a Japanese spy, by R: Yes.
U. S. Army Counter Intelligence Corps. and later there
was an order for his release.   International law is part of our law, and must be ascertained and
- the Board of Commissioners of Immigration declared that administered by the courts of justice of appropriate jurisdiction
Mejoff had entered the Philippines illegally in 1944 and as often as questions of right depending upon it are duly
ordered that he be deported on the first available presented for their determination.
transportation to Russia. 
Where there is not treaty and no controlling executive or
- He was transferred to Cebu Provincial Jail and then legislative act or judicial decisions, resort must be had to the
Bilibid Prison customs and usage of the nation.
- He then filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus on the
basis that too long a detention may justify the issuance of It is an established rule of international law that coast fishing
a writ of habeas corpus vessels with their implements and supplies, cargoes and crews
(unarmed and pursuing in peaceful of catching and bringing in
I: WON Mejoff should be released from prison pending his fresh fish) are exempt from capture as prize of war.
deportation
- this rule is one which prize courts, administering the
R: Yes. law of nations, are bound to take judicial notice of,
Foreign nationals, not enemy against whom no charge has been and to give effect to, in the absence of any treaty or
made other than that their permission to stay has expired, may other public act of their own government in relation to
not indefinitely be kept in detention. the matter.

The protection against deprivation of liberty without due Mijares v. Ranada

process of law and except for crimes committed against the
- action was bought by 10 filipino citizens representing 10k
laws of the land is not limited to Philippine citizens but extends
members who each alleged having suffered human rights
to all residents, except enemy aliens, regardless of nationality.
abuses such as arbitrary detention, torture, rape in the
Mejoff’s entry into the Philippines was not unlawful; he was hands of police and military forces during Marcos regime
brought by the armed and belligerent forces of a de facto - Alien Tort act was invoked
government whose decrees were law during the occupation. - Petitioners filed a complaint w RTC.
- The Estate of Marcos however, filed a MTD alleging the
non-payment of the correct filing fees.
- RTC of Makati dismissed the Complaint stating that the allowing the losing party an opportunity to challenge the same,
subject matter was capable of pecuniary estimation as it and for the court to properly determine its efficacy.
involved a judgment rendered by a foreign court ordering
the payment of a definite sum of money allowing for the  The party attacking a foreign judgment has the burden
easy determination of the value of the foreign judgment. of overcoming the presumption of its validity.

I: Whether or not foreign judgments can be recognized and POLICY OF PRECLUSION: seeks to protect party
enforced in the Philippines expectations resulting from previous litigation; to safeguard
against the harassment of defendants; to insure that the task of
R: Yes. courts not be increased by never-ending litigation of the same
disputes; and to promote “rest and quietness”.
Foreign judgments are expressly recognized in our
jurisprudence subject to the conditions required and outlined in  If every judgment of a foreign court were reviewable
Sec. 48 Rule 39 of Rules of Civpro for its recognition and on merits, then the plaintiff would be forced back on
enforcement. his/her original cause of action and rendering the
previously concluded litigation immaterial.
RULES OF COMITY, UTILITY AND CONVENIENCE OF
NATIONS have established a usage among civilized states by No obligatory rule derived from treaties or convention that
which final judgments of foreign courts of competent require the PH to recognize foreign judgments, or allow a
jurisdiction are RECIPROCALLY RESPECTED and procedure for the enforcement, generally accepted principle of
RENDERED EFFICACIOUS under certain condition that may international law by virtue of incorporation clause, form part of
vary in different countries. This principle is expressly the law of the land even if they do not derive from treaty
recognized in our jurisprudence. obligations.

CONDITIONS REQUIRED, as PROCEDURAL RULE, by the The classical formulation in international law sees to those
Philippines for recognition and enforcement of a foreign customary rules accepted as binding result from the
judgment were outlined in Section 48, Rule 39 of the Rules of combination of TWO ELEMENTS:
Civil Procedure to wit:
(a) The established, widespread, and consistent practice on the
Effect of Foreign Judgments. The effect of a judgment of a part of the States; and
tribunal of a foreign country, having jurisdiction to pronounce
the judgment is as follows: (b) A psychological element known as the OPINION JURIS
SIVE NECESSITATES (opinion as to law of necessary). Here,
(a) In case of judgment upon a SPECIFIC THING, the a belief that the practice in question is rendered obligatory by
judgment is conclusive upon the TITLE to the thing; the existence of a rule of law requiring it.
(b) In case of judgment against a PERSON, the judgment
is PRESUMPTIVE EVIDENCE of a right between PHARMACEUTICAL AND HEALTH CARE
the parties and their successors in interest by a ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINESvs. HEALTH
subsequent title; SECRETARY FRANCISCO T. DUQUE III

In either case, the judgment or final order may be repelled by - EO No. 51- Milk Code was issued by Pres. Aquino
evidence of a want of jurisdiction, want of notice to the party, - Milk Code states that the law seeks to give effect to
collusion, fraud or clear mistake of law or fact. Article 112 of the International Code of Marketing of
Breastmilk Substitutes (ICMBS), a code adopted by the
Distinction between a foreign judgment in an action in rem World Health Assembly (WHA) in 1981. From 1982 to
and one in personam 2006, the WHA adopted several Resolutions to the effect
that breastfeeding should be supported, promoted and
Action in rem the foreign judgment is deemed conclusive protected, hence, it should be ensured that nutrition and
upon the title to the thing. health claims are not permitted for breastmilk substitutes.
In personam the foreign judgment is PRESUMPTIVE, NOT - DOH issued RIRR which was to take effect on July 7,
conclusive, of a right as between the parties and their 2006. a petition for certiorari seeking to nullify “Milk
successors in interest by a subsequent title Code,” assailing that the RIRR was going beyond the
provisions of the Milk Code, thereby amending and
In both cases—the foreign judgment is susceptible to expanding the coverage of said law.
impeachment in our local courts on the grounds of want of
jurisdiction, want of notice to the party, collusion, fraud, I: Whether or not Administrative Order No. 2006-0012 or
mistake of law or fact. the Revised Implementing Rules and Regulations (RIRR)
issued by the Department of Health (DOH) is not
 the party aggrieved by the foreign judgment is entitled constitutional.
to defend against the enforcement of such decision in
the local forum and it is essential that there should be R: Except Sections 4 (f), 11 and 46, the rest of the provisions of
an opportunity to challenge the foreign judgment, in the RIRR are in consonance with the objective, purpose and
order for the Philippine Courts to properly determine intent of the Milk Code, constituting reasonable regulation of
its efficacy. an industry which affects public health and welfare and, as
such, the rest of the RIRR do not constitute illegal restraint of
It is necessary for an action to be filed in order to enforce a trade nor are they violative of the due process clause of the
foreign judgment, even if such judgement has conclusive effect Constitution
as in the case of in rem actions, if only for the purpose of
I: Whether or not pertinent international agreements - 3 months after the rebellion, Torre fled to the Colombian
entered into by the Philippines are part of the law of the Embassy in Lima, Peru
land and may be implemented by the DOH through the - Colombian Ambassador confirmed that Torre was granted
RIRR; If in the affirmative, whether the RIRR is in accord diplomatic asylum.
with the international agreements. - Ambassador also stated Colombia had qualified Torre as a
political refugee in accordance with Article 2 Montevideo
R: The provisions of the WHA Resolutions cannot be
Convention on Political Asylum of 1933
considered as part of the law of the land that can be
- Peru refused to accept the unilateral qualification and
implemented by executive agencies without the need of a law
refused to grant safe passage.
enacted by the legislature; only the provisions of the Milk
Code, but not those of subsequent WHA Resolutions, can be I: Whether or not Colombia is competent, as the country
validly implemented by the DOH through the subject RIRR. that grants asylum, to unilaterally qualify the offence for
the purpose of asylum under treaty law and international
WITH REGARD TO THE ISSUE ON WHETHER THE
law
INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS ENTERED INTO BY
THE PHILIPPINES ARE PART OF THE LAW OF THE R: No.
LAND
There was no expressed or implied right of unilateral and
 For an international rule to be considered as definitive qualification of the state that grants asylum under
customary law, it must be established that such rule is the Havana Convention or relevant principles of international
being followed by states because they consider it law.
obligatory to comply with such rules (opinio juris).
o Respondents failed to establish that the Montevideo Convention of 1933 which accepts rights of
provisions of pertinent WHA Resolutions unilateral qualification was not ratified by Peru.
are customary international law that may be
 It was not binding on Peru and based on low numbers
deemed part of the law of the land
of ratifications—it cannot be said to reflect customary
 legislation is necessary to transform the provisions of
international law.
the WHA Resolutions into domestic law. The
provisions of the WHA Resolutions cannot be International custom: referred to evidence of a general practice
considered as part of the law of the land that can be accepted by law.
implemented by executive agencies without the need
of a law enacted by the legislature.  The party which relies on a custom of this kind must
prove that this custom is established in such a manner
WITH REGARD TO DOH'S IMPLEMENTATION OF THE that it has become binding on the other party.
WHA RESOLUTIONS BY VIRTUE OF ITS POWERS AND
FUNCTIONS UNDER THE REVISED ADMINISTRATIVE I: Whether or not Peru, as the territorial State, was bound
CODE EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF A DOMESTIC LAW: to give a guarantee of safe passage.

 Section 3, Chapter 1, Title IX of the Revised R: No. There was no legal obligation on Peru to grant safe
Administrative Code of 1987 provides that the DOH passage either because of the Havana Convention or customary
shall define the national health policy and implement law.
a national health plan within the framework of the
In the case of the Havana Convention, a plain reading of Article
government's general policies and plans, and issue
2 results in an obligation on the territorial state (Peru) to grant
orders and regulations concerning the implementation
safe passage only after it requests the asylum granting State
of established health policies.
(Colombia) to send the person granted asylum outside its
o nowhere in A.O. No. 2005-0014 is it
national territory (Peru).
declared that as part of such health policy,
the advertisement or promotion of I: Whether or not Colombia violated Article 1 and 2 (2) of
breastmilk substitutes should be absolutely the Convention on Asylum of 1928 (hereinafter called the
prohibited. The national policy of protection, Havana Convention) when it granted asylum and is the
promotion and support of breastfeeding continued maintenance of asylum a violation of the treaty.
cannot automatically be equated with a total
ban on advertising for breastmilk substitutes. R:

Milk Code which does not contain a total ban on the advertising Art 1- No. Torre’s accusation related to a military rebellion,
and promotion of breastmilk substitutes, but instead, which the court concluded was not a common crime and as
specifically creates an IAC which will regulate said advertising such the granting of asylum complied with Article 1 of the
and promotion, it follows that a total ban policy could be Convention.
implemented only pursuant to a law amending the Milk Code
Article 1 of the Havana Convention states that “It is not
passed by the legislature. Thus, only the provisions of the Milk
permissible for States to grant asylum… to persons accused or
Code, but not those of subsequent WHA Resolutions, can be
condemned for common crimes… (such persons) shall be
validly implemented by the DOH through the subject RIRR
surrendered upon request of the local government.”
Colombia v. Peru
Art. 2 Yes. In this case, including the 3 months that passed
- Peru issued an arrest warrant against Victor Raul Haya de between the rebellion and the time when asylum was sought,
la Torre “in respect of the crime of military rebellion”  did not establish the urgency criteria in this case
Article 2 (2) of the Havana Convention states that “Asylum There is no portion that is beyond its power. Within its limits,
granted to political offenders in legations, warships, military its decrees are supreme, its commands are paramount. Its laws
camps or military aircraft, shall be respected to the extent in govern therein, and everyone to whom it applies must submit to
which allowed, as a right or through humanitarian toleration, by its terms.
the usages, the conventions or the laws of the country in which
granted and in accordance with the following provisions: First: That is the extent of its jurisdiction, both territorial and
Asylum may not be granted except in urgent cases and for the personal. Necessarily, likewise, it has to be exclusive. If it were
period of time strictly indispensable for the person who has not thus, there is a diminution of its sovereignty.
sought asylum to ensure in some other way his safety.”  Clark airforce is not a foreign territory for purposes of
 An essential pre-requisite for the granting of asylum is income tax legislation. They retain their status as
the urgency or, in other words, the presence of “an native soil. Hence, still subject to its authority.
imminent or persistence of a danger for the person of  Tax exemptions from foreign sources under Art XII of
the refugee” the agreement does not apply to income derived in the
 Asylum may be granted on “humanitarian grounds to basis which are derived in the PH.
protect political prisoners against the violent and Auto-limitation concept of sovereignty: Any state may by its
disorderly action of irresponsible sections of the consent, express or implied, submit to a restriction of its
population sovereign rights.
o Torre was not in such a situation at the time
when he sought refuge in the Colombian Agustin v Edu
Embassy at Lima.
- This is a petition questioning the validity of a Letter of
Territorial Asylum (Extradition) vs. Diplomatic Asylum Instruction providing for an early warning device mandatory
for motor vehicles.
Territorial Asylum (extradition): - It is assailed in this prohibition proceeding as being violative
- the refugee is within the territory of the State of refuge. to the constitutional guarantee of due process in as far as the
- A decision with regard to extradition implies only the rules and regulations for its implementation are concerned. 
normal exercise of the territorial sovereignty. I: Whether or not the letter of instruction issued by
- The refugee is outside the territory of the State where the President Marcos is unconstitutional?
offence was committed, and a decision to grant him
asylum in no way derogates from the sovereignty of that R: No.  the letter of Instruction No.229, as well as the
State. implementing rules and regulations were valid and
constitutional as a valid measure of police power.
diplomatic asylum
The Vienna Convention on Road signs and signals and the
- the refugee is within the territory of the State where the United Nations Organization was ratified by the Philippine
offence was committed. local legislation for the installation of road safety signs and
- A decision to grant diplomatic asylum involves a devices.
derogation from the sovereignty of that State.
- It withdraws the offender from the jurisdiction of the It cannot be disputed then that this Declaration of Principle
territorial State and constitutes an intervention in matters found in the Constitution possesses relevance, between the
which are exclusively within the competence of that State. International law and municipal law in applying the rule
o Such a derogation from territorial sovereignty municipal law prevails.
cannot be recognized unless its legal basis is The 2968 Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals is
established in each particular case impressed with the character of “generally accepted principles
Reagan v. CIR of international law” which under the Constitution the
Philippines adopts as part of the law of the land
- Petitioner questioned the payment of an income tax
assessed on him by public respondent on an amount Vienna Convention, which was ratified by the Philippine
realized by him on a sale of his automobile to a member of Government under P.D. No. 207, recommended the enactment
the US Marine Corps, the transaction having taken place at of local legislation for the installation of road safety signs and
the Clark Field Air Base. devices: * * *:”
- Petitioner contends that the base is outside Philippine It cannot be disputed then that this Declaration of Principle
territory and therefore beyond the jurisdictional power to found in the Constitution possesses relevance: “The Philippines
tax.  * * * adopts the generally accepted principles of international
law as part of the law of the land, * * *
I: Whether or not the sale was made outside Philippine
territory and therefore beyond our jurisdictional power to Republic vs. Sandiganbayan
tax.
- PCGG created an AFP anti graft board tasked to
R: No. The said foreign military bases are not a foreign soil or scrutinize the reports of unexplained wealth and corrupt
territory for purposes of income tax legislation. Philippine practices by any AFP personnel.
jurisdictional rights including the power to tax are preserved.   - the AFP Board investigated various reports of alleged
Philippine being independent and sovereign, its authority may unexplained wealth of respondent Major General
be exercised over its entire domain. Josephus Q. Ramas
 - Aside from the military equipment/items and exchange on the basis of equality and reciprocity, frowning
communications equipment, the raiding team was also only on foreign competition that is unfair.
able to confiscate money in the amount of
₱2,870,000.00 and $50,000 US Dollars in the house of The constitutional policy of a self-reliant and independent
Elizabeth Dimaano national economy does not necessarily rule out the entry of
foreign investments, goods and services. It contemplates neither
- This money was never declared in the Statement of
economic seclusion nor mendicancy in the international
Assets and Liabilities of respondent. There was an
community.
intention to cover the existence of these money because
these are all ill-gotten and unexplained wealth. I: Whether the provisions of the WTO Agreement restricts
and impairs Philippine sovereignty, specifically the
I: Whether the protection accorded to individuals under the
legislative power vested in the Congress.
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
("Covenant") and the Universal Declaration of Human R: No.
Rights ("Declaration") remained in effect during the
interregnum. While sovereignty has traditionally been deemed absolute and
all-encompassing on the domestic level, it is however subject to
R: Yes. restrictions and limitations voluntarily agreed to by the
Philippines, expressly or impliedly, as a member of the family
Even in the absence of a Constitution, the right against
of nations.
unlawful seizure can be found in the Universal Declaration of
HR and International Covernant on Civil and Political Rights. The Constitution did not envision a hermit-type isolation of the
country from the rest of the world. By the doctrine of
As stated in Art. 2 of the Covenant: “the state is required to
incorporation, the country is bound by generally accepted
respect and to ensure to all individuals within its territory and
principles of international law, which are considered to be
subject to its jurisdiction the rights recognized in the present
automatically part of our laws.
covenant”
A treaty engagement is not a mere moral obligation on the
The Declaration, to which the Philippines is also a signatory,
parties. By their inherent nature, treaties really limit or restrict
provides in its Article 17(2) that "[n]o one shall be arbitrarily
the absoluteness of sovereignty.
deprived of his property."
The Philippines has effectively agreed to limit the exercise of
Although the signatories to the Declaration did not intend it as a
its sovereign powers of taxation, eminent domain and police
legally binding document, being only a declaration, the Court
power.
has interpreted the Declaration as part of the generally accepted
principles of international law and binding on the State. Thus, The underlying consideration in this partial sovereignty is the
the revolutionary government was also obligated under reciprocal commitment of the other contracting states in
international law to observe the rights of individuals under the granting the same privilege and immunities to the Philippines,
Declaration. its officials and its citizens. The same reciprocity characterizes
the same commitments under WTO-GATT.
The revolutionary government did not repudiate the Covenant
or the Declaration during the interregnum. The Court considers A portion of sovereignty may be waived without violating the
the Declaration as part of customary international law, and that Constitution, based on the rationale that the Philippines adopts
Filipinos as human beings are proper subjects of the rules of the generally accepted principles of international law as part  of
international law laid down in the Covenant. the law of the land and adheres to the policy of cooperation and
amity with all nations.
Tanada v. Angara
Bayan Muna v. Romulo
- Petitioners assails the constitutionality of PH acceding to
World Trade Organization (WTO) for being violative of - The petitioner BAYAN MUNA sought to nullify the Non-
provisions which are supposed to give preference to Surrender Agreement concluded between the Republic of
Filipino workers and economy on the ground that it the Philippines and the United States of America.
infringes legislative and judicial power. - They claimed that the agreement contravened the
- Respondent Rizalino Navarro, then Secretary of the obligations of the Philippines under the Rome Statute of
Department of Trade and Industry (Secretary Navarro, for the International Criminal Court (ICC), which had been
brevity), representing the Government of the Philippines, signed (but not ratified) by the Philippines.
signed in Marrakesh, Morocco, the Final Act Embodying - also argued that the Agreement was void ab initio because
the Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral it created obligations that were immoral or that were
Negotiations (Final Act, for brevity). contrary to universally recognized principals of
I: Whether the WTO Agreement violated the mandated international law. Alberto Romulo, Executive Secretary,
economic nationalism by the Constitution argued that the Non-Surrender Agreement was
constitutional and valid because it was in the nature of an
R: NO. executive agreement.

The Constitution did not intend to pursue an isolationist policy. I: W/N the respondents gravely abused their discretion in
It did not shut out foreign investments, goods and services in concluding the RP-US Non Surrender Agreement in
the development of the Philippine economy. It allows an contravention of the Rome Statute.

R: No.
The Agreement does not contravene or undermine, nor does it It is well-established that “[t]he conduct of the foreign
differ from, the Rome Statute.  Far from going against each relations of our government is committed by the Constitution to
other, one complements the other. the executive and legislative—‘the political’—departments of
the government, and the propriety of what may be done in the
Art. 1 of the Statute, the jurisdiction of the ICC is to “be exercise of this political power is not subject to judicial inquiry
complementary to national criminal jurisdictions [of the or decision.”
signatory states].” the Rome Statute expressly recognizes the
primary jurisdiction of states, like the RP, over serious crimes The US Supreme Court has further cautioned that decisions
committed within their respective borders, the complementary relating to foreign policy are delicate, complex, and involve
jurisdiction of the ICC coming into play only when the large elements of prophecy. They are and should be undertaken
signatory states are unwilling or unable to prosecute. only by those directly responsible to the people whose welfare
they advance or imperil. They are decisions of a kind for which
Under international law, there is a considerable difference the Judiciary has neither aptitude, facilities nor responsibility.
between a State-Party and a signatory to a treaty.
Not all cases implicating foreign relations present political
Under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a questions, and courts certainly possess the authority to construe
signatory state is only obliged to refrain from acts which would or invalidate treaties and executive agreements. However, the
defeat the object and purpose of a treaty. question whether the Philippine government should espouse
 The Philippines is only a signatory to the Rome claims of its nationals against a foreign government is a foreign
Statute and not a State-Party for lack of ratification by relations matter, the authority for which is demonstrably
the Senate. Thus, it is only obliged to refrain from acts committed by our Constitution not to the courts but to the
which would defeat the object and purpose of the political branches.
Rome Statute.  In this case, the Executive Department has already
 Any argument obliging the Philippines to follow any decided that it is to the best interest of the country to
provision in the treaty would be premature. waive all claims of its nationals for reparations against
I: W/N the agreement is valid, binding and effective without Japan in the Treaty of Peace of 1951. The wisdom of
the concurrence by at least 2/3 of all the members of the such decision is not for the courts to question. Neither
Senate. could petitioners herein assail the said determination
by the Executive Department via the instant petition
R: International agreements may be in the form of treaties that for certiorari.
require legislative concurrence after executive ratification; or
executive agreements that are similar to treaties but except The US Supreme Court held that “[t]he President is the sole
do not require legislative concurrence and are usually less organ of the nation in its external relations, and its sole
formal and deal with a narrower range of subject matters than representative with foreign relations.”
treaties. The Executive Department has determined that taking up
Based from the constitution and by the nature of Office of the petitioners’ cause would be inimical to our country’s foreign
President, as head of state and government, is the sole organ policy interests, and could disrupt our relations with Japan,
and authority in the external affairs of the country. thereby creating serious implications for stability in this region.

The Constitution vests in the President the power to enter Not infrequently in affairs between nations, outstanding claims
into international agreements, subject, in appropriate cases, by nationals of one country against the government of another
to the required concurrence votes of the Senate country are “sources of friction” between the two sovereigns;

Vinuya v. Romulo  To resolve these difficulties, nations have often

entered into agreements settling the claims of their
- The petitioner Malaya Lolas is an organization respective nationals; As one treatise writer puts it,
established for the purpose of providing aid to the international agreements settling claims by nationals
victims of rape by Japanese military forces in the of one state against the government of another “are
Philippines during World War II. established international practice reflecting traditional
- filed a petition to compel the respondents to espouse international theory.
their claims for official apology and other forms of
The State, therefore, is the sole judge to decide whether its
reparations against Japan before the International Court
protection will be granted, to what extent it is granted, and
of Justice and other international tribunals. According to
when will it cease. It retains, in this respect, a discretionary
them, the general waiver of claims by the Philippine
power the exercise of which may be determined by
government in the peace treaty with Japan is void. 
considerations of a political or other nature, unrelated to the
I: Whether or not the Executive Department committed particular case.
grave abuse of discretion in not espousing petitioners’
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY
claims for official apology and other forms of reparations
against Japan. The Holy See v. Rosario
R: No. From a Domestic Law Perspective, the Executive - Petition arose from a controversy over a parcel of land.
Department has the exclusive prerogative to determine whether under the name Holy See,
to espouse petitioners’ claims against Japan. - The land was donated by the Archdiocese of Manila to the
Papal Nuncio, which represents the Holy See, who
 exercises sovereignty over the Vatican City, Rome, Italy, As expressed in Sec. 2 Art II of the 1987 Constitution,
for his residence. generally accepted principles of International Law are adopted
- the squatters refuse to vacate the lots, a dispute arose by our Courts and thus shall form part of the laws of the land
between the two parties because both were unsure as a condition and consequence of our admission in the society
whose responsibility was it to evict the squatters from of nations.
said lots
Article 31(A) of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic
- respondent filed a suit against petitioner. Relations that diplomatic envoy shall be granted immunity
- The Holy See and Msgr. Cirilos moved to dismiss the from civil and administrative jurisdiction of the receiving state
petition for lack of jurisdiction based on sovereign over any real action relating to private immovable property.
immunity from suit The Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) certified that the
I: Whether or not the Holy See is a sovereign State Embassy of the Holy See is a duly accredited diplomatic
missionary to the Republic of the Philippines and is thus
R: Yes. exempted from local jurisdiction and is entitled to the immunity
rights of a diplomatic mission or embassy in this Court. 
Before the annexation of the Papal States by Italy in 1870, the
Pope was the monarch and he, as the Holy See, was considered The Holy See is immune from suit because the act of selling the
a subject of International Law. With the loss of the Papal States lot of concern is non-propriety in nature. The lot was
and the limitation of the territory under the Holy See to an area acquired through a donation from the Archdiocese of Manila,
of 108.7 acres, the position of the Holy See in International not for a commercial purpose, but for the use of petitioner to
Law became controversial construct the official place of residence of the Papal Nuncio.

In 1929, Italy and the Holy See entered into the Lateran Sapphire Case
Treaty, where Italy recognized the exclusive dominion and
sovereign jurisdiction of the Holy See over the Vatican City. - A collision between the American ship, Sapphire and the
French transport Euryale
It also recognized the right of the Holy See to receive foreign - Euryale was considerably damaged. A libel was filed in
diplomats, to send its own diplomats to foreign countries, and the name of the Emperor Napoleon III, then Emperor of
to enter into treaties according to International Law the French, as owner of the Euryale.
- The Sapphire’s owner challenged the “right of the
The Lateran Treaty established the statehood of the Vatican
Emperor of France to have brought suit in the US courts.”
City "for the purpose of assuring to the Holy See absolute and
visible independence and of guaranteeing to it indisputable I: Whether or not the Emperor of France have the right to
sovereignty also in the field of international relations". have brought suit in the US courts, and if rightly brought,
the suit had not become abated by the deposition of the
The Vatican City fits into none of the established categories of
Emperor Napoleon III
states, and the attribution to it of "sovereignty" must be made in
a sense different from that in which it is applied to other states R: Yes.
In a community of national states, the Vatican City A foreign sovereign, as well as any other foreign person, who
represents an entity organized not for political but for has a demand of a civil nature against any person here, may
ecclesiastical purposes and international objects. Despite its prosecute it in our courts. To deny him this privilege would
size and object, the Vatican City has an independent manifest a want of comity and friendly feeling.
government of its own, with the Pope, who is also head of
the Roman Catholic Church, as the Holy See or Head of The reigning sovereign represents the national sovereignty, and
State, in conformity with its traditions, and the demands of that sovereignty is continuous and perpetual, residing in the
its mission in the world. Indeed, the world-wide interests proper successors of the sovereign for the time being. Napoleon
and activities of the Vatican City are such as to make it in a was the owner of the Euryale, not as an individual, but as
sense an "international state sovereign of France. This is substantially averred in the libel.

On his deposition the sovereignty does not change, but merely

Pope prefers to conduct foreign relations and enter into
the person or persons in whom it resides.
transactions as the Holy See and not in the name of the
Vatican City, one can conclude that in the Pope's own view, A change in such representative works no change in the
it is the Holy See that is the international person national sovereignty or its rights.

 The Republic of the Philippines has accorded the Holy The next successor recognized by our government is competent
See the status of a foreign sovereign. The Holy See, to carry on a suit already commenced and receive the fruits of
through its Ambassador, the Papal Nuncio, has had it.
diplomatic representations with the Philippine
A deed to or treaty with a sovereign as such enures to his
government since 1957. This appears to be the universal
successors in the government of the country.
practice in international relations
If a substitution of names is necessary or proper it is a formal
I: Whether or not Holy See can invoke sovereign immunity.
matter, and can be made by the court under its general power to
R: Holy See may properly invoke sovereign immunity for its preserve due symmetry in its forms of proceeding.
non-suability.
People vs Perfecto
 - the newspaper La Nacion – edited by herein respondent
Gregorio Perfecto – published an article against the
Philippine Senate.
- Perfecto was alleged to have violated Article 256 of the
Spanish Penal Code – provision that punishes those who
insults the Ministers of the Crown.

I: Whether or not Article 256 of the Spanish Penal Code is

no longer in force.

R: Yes.

It is a general principle that public law that on acquisition of

territory the previous political relations of the ceded region are
totally abrogated.

POLITICAL- is used to denominate the laws regulating the

relations sustained by the inhabitants to the sovereign.

According to Justice Field – all laws, ordinances and

regulations in conflict with the political character, institutions
and constitutions of the new government are at once displaced.
Upon a cession of political jurisdiction and legislative power

It cannot be said that the king of spain, could by treaty or

otherwise, must hold it subject to the constitution and laws of
its own government and not according to those of the
government abandoning it.

When the American claimed sovereignty the municipals laws of

the Philippines affecting private rights and properties and
providing for the punishment of crime were nominally
continued in force in so far as they were compatible with the
new order of things.

The courtheld that art 256 of the SPC was enacted by the
government of spain to protect Spanish officials who were
representatives of the king. Due to the change of sovereignty in
the Philippines it makes no sense that the Spanish penal code
will still apply