People v.

Wong Cheng
1922
Romualdez
Alycat

SUMMARY: Wong Cheng was accused of having illegally smoked opium aboard the merchant vessel Changsa, an
English vessel, while it was anchored in Manila Bay. Wong Cheng alleged the CFI’s lack of jurisdiction. As such, the
CFI dismissed the case. The SC reversed, holding that the CFI did have jurisdiction, in view of the English rule.

DOCTRINE: There are two fundamental rules on this particular matter in connection with International Law:
(1) French rule – Crimes committed aboard foreign merchant vessels should not be prosecuted in the courts of
the country within whose territorial jurisdiction they were committed, unless their commission affects the
peace and security of the territory
(2) English rule – Crimes perpetrated under such circumstances are in general triable in the courts of the
country within territory they were committed.

Of these two rules, it is the English rule that obtains in this jurisdiction, because at present, the theories and
jurisprudence prevailing in the United States on this matter are authority in the Philippines, which is now a territory of
the United States.

FACTS:
× An information was filed accusing Wong Cheng of having illegally smoked opium aboard the merchant
vessel Changsa.
o Changsa is an English vessel.
o The vessel was anchored in Manila Bay, 2 ½ miles from the shore of Manila.
× Wong Cheng presented a demurrer to the information.
o The demurrer alleged the CFI’s lack of jurisdiction.
× The CFI issued an order sustaining the demurrer, and dismissd the case.
× Hence, this appeal by the Attorney-General for the revocation of the order.
o “The idea of a person smoking opium securely on board a foreign vessel at anchor in the port of
Manila in open defiance of the local authorities, who are impotent to lay hands on him, is simply
subversive of public order. It would be possible then for a foreign ship may come into the port of
Manila and allow or solicit Chinese residents to smoke opium on board.”

ISSUE: WON the courts of the Philippines have jurisdiction over a crime committed aboard merchant vessels
anchored in our jurisdiction waters

RATIO:
There are two fundamental rules on this particular matter in connection with International Law:
(3) French rule – Crimes committed aboard foreign merchant vessels should not be prosecuted in the courts of
the country within whose territorial jurisdiction they were committed, unless their commission affects the
peace and security of the territory