SECRETARY OF JUSTICE VS LANTION
be addressed. Respondent, then requested for copies of all the
G.R. No. L-139465 January 18, 2000
SECRETARY OF JUSTICE, petitioner,
vs.
HON. RALPH C. LANTION, Presiding Judge,
Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 25, and MARK B.
JIMENEZ, respondents.
Facts:
This is a petition for review of a decision of the Manila
Regional Trial Court (RTC). The Department of Justice
received a request from the Department of Foreign Affairs for
the extradition of respondent Mark Jimenez to the U.S. The
Grand Jury Indictment. The warrant for his arrest, and other
supporting documents for said extradition were attached along
with the request. Charges include:
Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud the US
Attempt to evade or defeat tax
Fraud by wire, radio, or television
False statement or entries
Election contribution in name of another
The Department of Justice (DOJ), through a designated panel
proceeded with the technical evaluation and assessment of the
extradition treaty which they found having matters needed to
documents included in the extradition request and for him to be
given ample time to assess it. The Secretary of Justice denied
request on the following grounds:
He found it premature to secure him copies prior to the
completion of the evaluation. At that point in time, the DOJ is
in the process of evaluating whether the procedures and
requirements under the relevant law (PD 1069 Philippine
Extradition Law) and treaty (RP-US Extradition Treaty) have
been complied with by the Requesting Government. Evaluation
by the DOJ of the documents is not a preliminary investigation
like in criminal cases making the constitutionally guaranteed
rights of the accused in criminal prosecution inapplicable.
The U.S. requested for the prevention of unauthorized
disclosure of the information in the documents.
The department is not in position to hold in abeyance
proceedings in connection with an extradition request, as
Philippines is bound to Vienna Convention on law of treaties
such that every treaty in force is binding upon the parties.
Mark Jimenez then filed a petition against the Secretary of
Justice. RTC presiding Judge Lantion favored Jimenez.
Secretary of Justice was made to issue a copy of the requested
papers, as well as conducting further proceedings. Thus, this
petition is now at bar.
Issue/s:
Whether or not respondents entitlement to notice and hearing
during the evaluation stage of the proceedings constitute a
breach of the legal duties of the Philippine Government under
the RP-US Extradition Treaty.
obligations to the government of another state. This is so
although we recognize treaties as a source of binding
obligations under generally accepted principles of international
law incorporated in our Constitution as part of the law of the
land.

Discussions:

The doctrine of incorporation is applied whenever municipal

tribunals are confronted with situations in which there appears
to be a conflict between a rule of international law and the
provisions of the constitution or statute of a local state. Efforts
should be done to harmonize them. In a situation, however,
where the conflict is irreconcilable and a choice has to be made
between a rule of international law and municipal law,
jurisprudence dictates that municipal law should be upheld by
the municipal courts. The doctrine of incorporation decrees that
rules of international law are given equal standing, but are not
superior to, national legislative enactments.

Ruling/s:

No. The human rights of person, Filipino or foreigner, and the

rights of the accused guaranteed in our Constitution should take
precedence over treaty rights claimed by a contracting state.
The duties of the government to the individual deserve
preferential consideration when they collide with its treaty