Macariola Vs.

Asuncion
114 SCRA 77, A.M. No. 113-J May 31, 1982

Complainant: Bernardita Macariola

Respondent: Judge Asuncion

Issue:
- On May 31, 1982, Macariola alleged the respondent Judge Asuncion in violation of Article 14,
paragraph 1 & 5, under the Code of Commerce in the Philippines. When he associated himself
with the Traders Manufacturing and Fishing Industry Inc., as a STOCKHOLDER and a
RANKING OFFICER.

Art. 14 – The following cannot engage in commerce, in person or by proxy. Nor hold office
or have any direct, administrative, or financial intervention in commercial or industrial
companies within the limits of districts, provinces, or town in which they discharge their
duties.

1) Justices of the Supreme Court, Judges and officials of the department of Public
prosecution IN ACIVE SERVICE. This provision is not applicable to mayors,
municipal judges, and municipal prosecuting attorneys nor those who by chance are
temporarily discharging the functions of judge or prosecuting attorney.

5) Those who by the virtue of laws or special provisions may not engage in
commerce in a determinate territory.
Held:
- Although that the petition was incorporated with the Code of Commerce it can still partakes in
the nature of political law because it still regulates the relationship between the government and
the public official, like judges and justices such as Judge Asuncion himself.
- Note that POLITICAL LAW, by definition, deals with the organization and operation of the
government organs of the state and defines the relationship of its inhabitants with the state.
- It is significant to highlight that the PRESENT CODE OF COMMERCE IS THE SPANISH
CODE OF COMMERCE IN 1885, whish was extended to the Philippines by Royal Decree of
August 6, 1888, and took effect in this jurisdiction on December 1, 1888.
- Upon the transfer of the sovereignty from Spain to the United States (Treaty of Paris, 1898) and
later on from the United States to the Philippines, Article 14 of the Code of Commerce deemed to
be abrogated due to the transfer of the sovereignty.
- When there is a transfer of sovereignty the political laws of the former sovereignty are
automatically abrogated whether is it compatible or not, unless, the new sovereignty expressly re-
enacted by affirmative act those said political laws. Municipal laws if not in conflict with the new
sovereignty will continue its force in the new sovereignty.

Decision:
Whereas, there is no affirming or enabling act to continue the effectivity of the said provision
under the Code of Commerce after the change of sovereignty from Spain to the United States, then to the
Philippines. Thus, the Article 14 of the Code of Commerce has no legal and biding effect and cannot
apply to the respondent.
 ALFONSO MONTEBON VS THE DIRECTORS OF PRISONS
G.R. No. L-1352 April 30, 1947

Complainant: Montebon
Respondents: Assistant Solicitor General Gianzon and Solicitor Alejandro

Issue & facts:

- A petition for Hebeas Corpus was filed by Alfonso Montebon on behalf of Elpidio S. Cruz, a
prisoner at the Iwahig Penal Colony.

- Similar petition was filed in the same name of the prisoner by Felicisima Santiago (Siantiago vs
Director of Prisons, 77 Phil., 927) a petition which was denied by the SC in a decision
promulgated on January 30, 1947. Thr grounds of the first petition was the alleged illegality of
one of the petitioners three convictions of estafa.

- The petitioner raised question to the validity of the recommitment to serve his unexpired portion
of the maximum aggregate sentences that was paroles by the BOARD OF INDETERMINATE
SENTENCE on June 26, 1941 which he still has 5 years to serve.

- Having the Board of Determinate abolished, the powers, duties and functions thereof shall
henceforth be assumed and exercised by the Commissioner of Justice. (A.O no. 21 dated June
21,1942) approved by the Chairman of Executive Justice.

Hence, As to Laws Which Are Not Political in Nature;

Rule:
- As to whether the Indeterminate Sentence Act was in force during the occupation, the answer is
in the affirmative.

- A proclamation of the Commander-in-Chief of the Japanese forces of January 2, 1942, directed

that
"so far as the military administration permits, all the laws now in force in the
Commonwealth, as well as executive and judicial institutions, shall continue to be
effective for the time being as in the past."

- This was nothing more than a confirmation of the well-known rule of the Law of Nations that
municipal laws, as contra-distinguished from laws of political nature, are not abrogated by a
change of sovereignty. (Kim Cham vs. Valdes Tan Keh and Dizon (75 Phil., 113)

- The Indeterminate Sentence Law is not a political law. It does not affect political relations.

- In fact, it is a part of the Commonwealth's criminal and penal system directly related to the
punishment of crime and the maintenance of public peace and order, which Article 43 of Section
III of the Hague Regulations of 1907 compels the belligerent occupant to take all steps in his
power to reestablish and insure as far as possible.