Subject: Law 102 B – Consti 1
G.R. No. L-5
Parties CO CHAM (alias CO CHAM), petitioner, vs. EUSEBIO VALDEZ TAN
KEH and ARSENIO P. DIZON, Judge of First Instance of Manila,
respondents
Date September 17, 1945
Ponente FERIA, J
Digester KEITH JASPER MIER
FACTS
Petition for mandamus was filed by petitioner whom prays that the respondent’s
judge of lower court be ordered to continue with proceedings initialed under the
prior regime established on times of Japanese military occupation.
Respondent’s judge refused to take notice of and continue proceedings on the
ground that proclamation issued by General Douglas MacArthur had
invalidated and nullified all judicial proceedings and judgements of the court of
previous regimes.
Respondent further claims that the lower courts have no jurisdiction of
determining said pending cases.
ISSUES
I. Whether the judicial acts and proceedings of the courts existing in the
Philippines under the Philippine Executive Commission and the Republic of the
Philippines were good and valid and remained so even after the liberation or
reoccupation of the Philippines by the United States and Filipino forces
II. Whether the proclamation issued on October 23, 1944, by General Douglas
MacArthur, Commander in Chief of United States Army, in which he declared
"that all laws, regulations and processes of any other government in the
Philippines than that of the said Commonwealth are null and void and without
legal effect in areas of the Philippines free of enemy occupation and control," has
invalidated all judgments and judicial acts and proceedings of the said courts;
III. Whether the present courts of the Commonwealth, If the said judicial acts and
proceedings have not been invalidated by said proclamation, may continue those
proceedings pending in said courts at the time the Philippines were reoccupied
and liberated by the United States and Filipino forces, and the Commonwealth of
the Philippines was reestablished in the Islands.
RULINGS & RATIONES DECIDENDI
Court adjudged and decreed that writ of a mandamus issue, directed to the respondent
judge of the Court of First Instance of Manila ordering him to take cognizance of and
continue to final judgement the proceedings in civil case No. 3012 for the following
reasons:
1) It is a legal truism in political and international law that all acts and proceedings
of the legislative, executive, and judicial department of a de facto government are
good and valid. It is evident that the Philippine Executive Commission, which
was organized by the Commander of the Japanese Forces, was a civil
government established by the military forces of occupation and therefore a de
facto government of the second kind. And in a somehow similar manner, the so-
called Republic of the Philippines was in truth and reality a government
established by the belligerent occupant or the Japanese forces of occupation. Both
being de facto governments makes it true that the judicial acts and proceedings of
the court of justice of those governments, which are not of political complexion,
were good and valid, and, by virtue of postliminy (postliminium) in
international law, remained good and valid after liberation or reoccupation of
the Philippines by American and Filipino forces under the leadership of General
Douglas McArthur. This applies not only judicial but also legislative acts of the
said type of governments.
2) Taking into consideration the aforementioned legal truism in political and
international law, it should be presumed that it was not, and could not have
been, the intention of General Douglas McArthur as he proclaimed “processes of
any other government” that it refers to judicial processes and that he was
referring to governmental processes for in accordance to well-known rule of
statutory construction as set forth in 25 R. C., p. 1028 which states “a statute
ought never to be construed to violate the law of nations if any other possible
construction remains”. It is, therefore, evident that the proclamation of General
MacArthur has not invalidated the judicial acts and proceedings, which are not
of political complexion, of the courts of justice in the Philippines.
3) As stated in the Executive Order of President McKinley “in practice, they (the
municipal laws) are not usually abrogated but are allowed to remain in force and
to be administered by the ordinary tribunals substantially as they were before
the occupation. This enlightened practice is to be adhered to on the present
occasion. In addition, Commander in Chief of the Japanese Forces proclaimed
that “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,”. Upon inauguration of Republic of the Philippines, the SC, Court of
Appeals, Court of First Instance and justices of the peace courts were continued
with no substantial change in the organization and jurisdiction same as
Philippine Executive Commission prior. It stands to reason that the same courts
may continue the proceedings of pending cases of each courts without enacting a
law to confer jurisdiction to them to continue the said proceedings.
