US VS JUAN PONS

Case Digest
CONSTI 1

Court Supreme Court, Second Division

Citation G.R. No. L-11530
Date May 5, 2003
Defendant -Appellant Juan Pons
Plaintiff-Appellee United States
Relevant topic Under the syllabus
Under Branches of Government > Congress > Organization and Sessions > Journal and
Record

FACTS

• Gabino Beliso, Juan Pons and Jacinto Lasarte were charged with the crime of illegal importation of opium.
(Lasarte has not yet been arrested.) Juan Pons and Gabino Beliso were tried separately. Both were found guilty
and both appealed but Beliso later withdrew his appeal as the judgment given to him was already final.
• Pons questioned the validity of Act 2381 “An Act Restricting the Use of Opium and Repealing Act No. 1761
(*1761 is An Act to Gradually Restrict and Regulate the Sale and Use of Opium Pending the Ultimate Prohibition
of the Importation of Opium into the Philippine Islands in Whatever Form Except for Medicinal Purposes”)
• Pons main contention was that the last day of the special session of the Philippine Legislature for 1914 – when
Act 2381 was allegedly passed - was the 28th day of February; but the said Act was actually passed March 1 of
that year, and that law therefore, under which he must be punished if found guilty was not passed or approved
on February 28. Hence, Act 2381 was null and void.
• Counselor for the appellant researched and found based on the recollection of witnesses that the Assembly’s
clock was stopped on February 28, 1914 at midnight and left so until the determination of the discussion of all
pending matters.

ISSUES/ HELD RATIO

1. Whether or not the court can
look to legislative journals as
proof of when the
adjournment of Legislature
happened
Yes. Section 275 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that the existence of
the "official acts of the legislative, executive, and judicial departments of the
United States and of the Philippine Islands ... shall be judicially recognized by
the court without the introduction of proof…” Official documents may be proved
through:
The proceedings of the Philippine Commission, or of any legislative body that
may be provided for the Philippine Islands, or of Congress, by the journals of
those bodies or of either house thereof

2. Whether or not the court can
go behind the legislative
journals to determine the
date of adjournment
The court did not go behind the legislative journals when such journals are
already clear and explicit (about when Act No. 2381 was adjourned). “…to
inquiry into the veracity (accuracy) of the journals of the Philippine Legislature,
when they are, as we have said, clear and explicit, would be to … interfere with
the legitimate powers and functions of the Legislature.” The journals already
say that the Legislature adjourned at 12 midnight on February 28, 1914.
.

RULING

Citing the decision in Heron vs Smith (US Ohio case decided in 1886): “Imperative reasons of public policy require that
the authentic of law should rest upon public memorials of the most permanent character.. (they must not rest ) only in
the memory of individuals.” Thus, basically stating that what is printed in the Journal settles all disputes when there is a
question about the proceedings.

Judgment is affirmed with costs.