Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Romulo (2005) Issue #2 W/N the executive has the ministerial duty to
Facts transmit a copy of the signed statute to the Senate? NO
Petition for Mandamus: compel the Exec Sec. and the President is regarded as the sole organ and authority
DFA to transmit the signed copy of the Rome Statute in external relations, a s the sole representative with
of the International Criminal Court to the Senate foreign nations.
o Why? Petitioners say they will have to o Hence Pres. is vested w/authority to deal
concur with it as per 6-21 of the Consti. with foreign states, extend recognition,
Rome Statute maintain diplomatic relations, enter into
The RS establishes the International Criminal Court treaties, etc.
w/c has the power to exercise JD over persons for the Despite the press sole authority to negotiate and
most serious crimes of international concern enter into treaties, the consti provides a necessary
(complementary to national JD) requisite concurrence of 2/3 of the members of the
o Genocide, Crimes vs Humanity, war crimes, Senate for the validity of the treaty entered into by
aggression as defined y the statute. him.
PH signed December 31, 2000 at the UNHQ. o Ever since the 1935 constitution, na-
Arguments of petitioners recognize na yung participation ng legislative
Ratification of a treaty is a function of the Senate. branch by providing a check on the executive
Hence the executive dept MUST transmit a copy of field of foreign relations.
the signed statute to allow the Senate to exercise o Healthy system of checks and balances.
their discretion
Petitioners also say they have a ministerial duty under Pets interpret 6-21 to mean that the power to ratify belongs
treaty and customary law. They say na the Vienna to the senate. We disagree
Convention enjoins the PH from refraining from acts Justice Cruz, in his PIL book, usual steps in treaty-
which would defeat the object and purpose of a making: Negotiation, signature, ratification, exchange
treaty when they have signed prior to ratif unless of the instruments of ratification.
may clear intention not to be come part. o Nego: may be by head of state or by his
Solicitor General representative. They submit drafts of the
Questioned standing of the senators. proposed treaty which, together with
Violated the rule on hierarchy of courts. counter-proposals, become the basis for the
Executive has no duty to transmit the Rome Statute. negotiations.
o Signatures: after nego, sasign na. Step is a
Issue #1 W/N petitioners have sufficient standing? means of authenticating the instrument and
Court will only exercise power of judicial review only to show good faith of the parties
if the case is brought before it by a party who has the DOES NOT INDICATE FINAL
legal standing (personal and substantial interest in CONSENT OF THE STATE WHERE
the case such as the party has sustained or will sustain RATIFICATION OF A TREATY IS
direct injury as a result of the government act that is REQUIRED.
being alleged) o Ratification: formal act by which a state
Pets in this case: Senators and Congressmen and confirms and accepts the treaty.
women as members of the Senate and of the HOR. Purpose: enable the contracting
Members of the Philippine Coalition of the states to examine the treaty more
Establishment of the ICC. Families of Victims of closely and give an opportunity to
Involuntary Disappearances. Bianca and Harrison refuse to be bound.
Roque (2) and (1) suing under the doctrine of inter- ^ kaya usually ang nagraratify ay
generational rights. another dept of govt.
SC: SI PIMENTEL LANG MAY STANDING. Others are o Exchange of Instruments of Ratif: last step.
advocates and defenders however di nila napakita na Signifies effectivity.
may direct injury from non-transmittal. WE DISAGREE: petitioners equate signing ith
o Contention na mawawala rights nila does ratification. It should be underscored that they are
not persuade. Rome statute is intended to different. Signature is intended as a means of
complement national laws and courts. authentication and signifying good faith. Ratification
Sufficient remedies exist in the national is the formal act of acceptance to be bound by it. It is
sphere naman. generally held to be an executive act.
o Pimentel as a legislator has the right to
maintain his prerogatives, powers, and That it is an executive act is supported by Executive Order 459.
privileges vested by the Consti in their Issued by Fidel Ramos, provides guidelines in nego of
office. international agreements and its ratification. Mandates that
after signing, the same is transmitted to the DFA. The DFA
prepares the ratification papers and forwards a signed copy to no legal obligation to ratify a treaty, but it goes without saying
the president for ratification. After ratif by the president, the that the refusal must be based on substantial grounds and not
DFA submits it to the President for concurrence. on superficial or whimsical reasons
B. Treaties.
Thus, the President has the discretion even after the signing of
the treaty by the Philippine representative whether or not to
ratify the same. The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties
does not contemplate to defeat or even restrain this power of
the head of states. If that were so, the requirement of
ratification of treaties would be pointless and futile. It has been
held that a state has no legal or even moral duty to ratify a
treaty which has been signed by its plenipotentiaries. There is
World Health Organization & Verstuyft vs. Aquino (CFI Judge) determination by the executive. here the plea of diplomatic
Facts immunity is recognized and affirmed by the executive branch
Verstuyft was assigned to the WHO Regional Office in of the government as in the case at bar, it is then the duty of
Manila, as Acting Assistant Director of Health the courts to accept the claim of immunity upon appropriate
Services. He is entitled to diplomatic immunity suggestion by the principal law officer of the government, the
pursuant to the HOST AGREEMENT executed Solicitor General in this case,
between the PH and the WHO. Courts may not so exercise their JD by seizure or
o Immunity carries with it, among others detention of property as to embarrass the executive
Personal inviolability, inviolability of the arm of the govt in conducting foreign relations.
officials properties, exemption from local
JD, exempton from taxation and customs 2. Denial of quashal cannot be justified on mere allegation that
duties the crates contained contraband, especially in light of the
When Verstuyfts baggage (12 crates) entered the assurances made by other government agencies na immunity
Philippines, they weer accordingly allowed entry free nga.
from duties and taxes. The crates were stored at PH is bound by the procedure laid down in Article 7
Eternit Corporations warehouse in Manda, Rizal of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities
pending his relocation into permanent quarters of the Specialized Agencies of the UN
upon the offer of the VP of Eternit who Verstuyft o Consultations muna re: abuse alleged
knew o Treaty force and effect of law.
Aquino issued a search warrant at the instance of Even if may basis yung suspicion, the warrant is not
Constabulary Offshore Action Center (COSAC) officers the proper remedy. He should, nevertheless, in
for the search and seizure of the personal effects of deference to the exclusive competence and JD of the
Dr. Verstufyt from the WHO. executive branch, have acceded to the quashal
o 10 crates consigned to Eternit Corporation o Forward dapat findings to the DFA for them
containing highly dubitable goods beyond to deal with it in accordance with the treaty.
the needs of Verstuyft. 3. Bakit walang coordination sa executive. Normally, dapat the
Dr. Dy (WHO Regional Director) protested. Secretary position of the Secretaries of Foreign Affairs and of Finance na
of Foreign Affairs Romulo wired Judge Aquino many immunity should be enough na to enjoin the COSAC
advising him of Verstuyfts immunity. officers from securing a warrant in the first place.
o Aquino set the DFA Secs request for hearing
and heard the same. The seriousness of the matter is underscored when the
o But Aquino eventually issued an order provisions of Republic Act 75 enacted since October 21, 1946
maintaining the validity of warrant. to safeguard the jurisdictional immunity of diplomatic officials
Judge Aquino refused to quash the search warrant on in the Philippines are taken into account. Said Act declares as
the ground of diplomatic immunity duly recognized null and void writs or processes sued out or prosecuted
by the executive branch of the PH govt. whereby inter alia the person of an ambassador or public
Sol Gen joined the prayer for quashal Verstuyft is minister is arrested or imprisoned or his goods or chattels are
entitled to immunity, he did not abuse his immunity, seized or attached and makes it a penal offense for "every
and court proceedings in the host state are not the person by whom the same is obtained or prosecuted, whether
proper remedy in case of abuse. as party or as attorney, and every officer concerned in
o Both SOLGEN and WHO joined Verstuyft in executing it" to obtain or enforce such writ or process.
his petition.
Original action for certiorari and prohibition
o Restraining order issued.
o Answer: seizure was the only way to reach
the articles and effects for purposes of
taxation (yung highly dubious shit)
\\\\\\ Art. III, Section 4. The specialized agencies, their property and
assets, wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall enjoy
The rapid growth of international organizations has paved the immunity from every form of legal process except insofar as in
way for the development of the concept of international any particular case they have expressly waived their immunity.
immunity It is now usual for the constitutions of international It is, however, understood that no waiver of immunity shall
organizations to contain provisions conferring certain extend to any measure of execution.
immunities
Sec. 5. The premises of the specialized agencies shall be
Three reasons why: inviolable. The property and assets of the specialized agencies,
Intl Institutions should have a status which protects wherever located and by whomsoever held shall be immune
them against control or interference by governments from search, requisition, confiscation, expropriation and any
No country should derive national financial advantage other form of interference, whether by executive,
by levying charges upon them, as they use administrative, judicial or legislative action. (Emphasis
international funds supplied).
They should be accorded the facilities for the conduct
of their official business.
\\\\\\
Held
YES,from the foregoing, it is apparent that when JUSMAG took
the services of privaterespondent, it was performing a
governmental function on behalf of the United Statespursuant
to the Military Assistance Agreement dated March 21, 1947.
Hence, we agreewith petitioner that the suit is, in eect, one
against the United States Government, albeitit was not
impleaded in the complaint. Considering that the United States
has not waivedor consented to the suit, the complaint against
JUSMAG cannot prosper.
Liang vs. People
the immunity mentioned therein is not absolute, but subject
Petitioner is an economist working with the Asian to the exception that the act was done in "official capacity." It
Development Bank (ADB). Sometime in 1994, for allegedly is therefore necessary to determine if petitioners case falls
uttering defamatory words against fellow ADB worker Joyce within the ambit of Section 45(a). Thus, the prosecution should
Cabal, he was charged before the Metropolitan Trial Court have been given the chance to rebut the DFA protocol and it
(MeTC) of Mandaluyong City with two counts of grave oral must be accorded the opportunity to present its controverting
defamation docketed as Criminal Cases Nos. 53170 and 53171. evidence, should it so desire.
Petitioner was arrested by virtue of a warrant issued by the
MeTC. After fixing petitioners bail at P2,400.00 per criminal Third, slandering a person could not possibly be covered by the
charge, the MeTC released him to the custody of the Security immunity agreement because our laws do not allow the
Officer of ADB. The next day, the MeTC judge received an commission of a crime, such as defamation, in the name of
"office of protocol" from the Department of Foreign Affairs official duty. The imputation of theft is ultra vires and cannot
(DFA) stating that petitioner is covered by immunity from legal be part of official functions. It is well-settled principle of law
process under Section 45 of the Agreement between the ADB that a public official may be liable in his personal private
and the Philippine Government regarding the Headquarters of capacity for whatever damage he may have caused by his act
the ADB (hereinafter Agreement) in the country. Based on the done with malice or in bad faith or beyond the scope of his
said protocol communication that petitioner is immune from authority or jurisdiction. It appears that even the governments
suit, the MeTC judge without notice to the prosecution chief legal counsel, the Solicitor General, does not support the
dismissed the two criminal cases. The latter filed a motion for stand taken by petitioner and that of the DFA.
reconsideration which was opposed by the DFA. When its
motion was denied, the prosecution filed a petition for Fourth, under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations,
certiorari and mandamus with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of a diplomatic agent, assuming petitioner is such, enjoys
Pasig City which set aside the MeTC rulings and ordered the immunity from criminal jurisdiction of the receiving state
latter court to enforce the warrant of arrest it earlier issued. except in the case of an action relating to any professional or
After the motion for reconsideration was denied, petitioner commercial activity exercised by the diplomatic agent in the
elevated the case to this Court via a petition for review arguing receiving state outside his official functions. As already
that he is covered by immunity under the Agreement and that mentioned above, the commission of a crime is not part of
no preliminary investigation was held before the criminal cases official duty.
were filed in court.
Finally, on the contention that there was no preliminary
The petition is not impressed with merit. investigation conducted, suffice it to say that preliminary
investigation is not a matter of right in cases cognizable by the
First, courts cannot blindly adhere and take on its face the MeTC such as the one at bar Being purely a statutory right,
communication from the DFA that petitioner is covered by any preliminary investigation may be invoked only when
immunity. The DFAs determination that a certain person is specifically granted by law. The rule on criminal procedure is
covered by immunity is only preliminary which has no binding clear that no preliminary investigation is required in cases
effect in courts. In receiving ex-parte the DFAs advice and in falling within the jurisdiction of the MeTC. Besides, the
motu proprio dismissing the two criminal cases without notice absence of preliminary investigation does not affect the courts
to the prosecution, the latters right to due process was jurisdiction nor does it impair the validity of the information or
violated. It should be noted that due process is a right of the otherwise render it defective.
accused as much as it is of the prosecution. The needed inquiry
in what capacity petitioner was acting at the time of the
alleged utterances requires for its resolution evidentiary basis
that has yet to be presented at the proper time. At any rate, it
has been ruled that the mere invocation of the immunity
clause does not ipso facto result in the dropping of the charges.
"Officers and staff of the Bank including for the purpose of this
Article experts and consultants performing missions for the
Bank shall enjoy the following privileges and immunities:
Scalzo on his counterclaims that he had acted in the discharge Side Facts
of his official duties as being merely an agent of the Drug Minucher is an Iranian national. He studied in UP. He
Enforcement Administration of the United States Department was appointed Labor Attache for the Iranian
of Justice. Embassies in Japan and Manila. When the Shah of Iran
was deposed, Minucher became a refugee of the UN
Scalzo subsequently filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on and contined to stay in the PH.
the ground that, being a special agent of the United States o He became the leader of the Iranian National
Drug Enforcement Administration, he was entitled to Resistance Movement in the PH.
diplomatic immunity. He attached to his motion Diplomatic Minucher came to know Scalzo in 1986 when Scalzo
Note of the United States Embassy addressed to DOJ of the was brought to Ms house and introduced him by Igo,
Philippines and a Certification of Vice Consul Donna an informer of the Intelligence unit of the military.
Woodward, certifying that the note is a true and faithful copy o Scalzo expressed interest in buying Caviar.
of its original. Trial court denied the motion to dismiss. He bought 2 kilos of caviar from minulcher.
o Minucher also sold carpets, pistachio, and
ISSUE other Iranian products.
Scalzo gave Minucher a calling card showing na he
Whether or not Arthur Scalzo is indeed entitled to diplomatic was working at the US embassys DEA.
immunity. Minucher expressed his desire to obtain a US visa for
his wife and his friend and his friends wife. Scalzo told
RULLING him he can help for a certain fee.
HELD: The Court held that Holy See may properly invoke
sovereign immunity for its non-suability. As expressed in Sec.
2 Art II of the 1987 Constitution, generally accepted principles
of International Law are adopted by our Courts and thus shall
form part of the laws of the land as a condition and
consequence of our admission in the society of nations.