75 Phil 113

CO KIM CHAM, petitioner,

vs.
EUSEBIO VALDEZ TAN KEH and ARSENIO P. DIZON, Judge of First Instance of
Manila, respondents.

Facts:

Petitioner Co Kim Chan had a pending Civil Case (No. 3012) in Court of First Instance
of Manila. He filed a motion for mandamus for respondent Judge to be ordered to
continue the proceeding in the said case. The proceeding was initiated under the
regime of the so-called Republic of the Philippines, which was established on
October 14, 1943, during the Japanese military occupation.

The respondent judge refused to take cognizance of and continue the proceedings
in the said case on the ground that on October 23, 1944, General Douglas McArthur
issued a proclamation nullifying and invalidating all laws, regulations, and
processes of any other government in the Philippines other than that of the
Commonwealth. The respondent judge also contended that the lower courts have
no jurisdiction to take cognizance and continue proceedings pending in the defunct
Republic of the Philippines in the absence an enabling law; and that the
governments established in the Philippines during the Japanese military occupation
cannot be considered as de facto governments.

Issues:

1. WON the governments (Philippine Executive Commission and Republic of

Philippines) established in the Philippines during Japanese military occupation were
de facto governments.

2. WON the judicial acts and proceedings of the courts existing in the Philippines
during Japanese military occupation were good and valid even after the liberation or
reoccupation of the Philippines by the US and Filipino Forces.

3. WON the present courts of the Commonwealth have jurisdiction and can continue
the proceedings pending in courts at the time the Philippines was under Japanese
military occupation.

Held:

1. Yes. The Philippine Executive Commission and the so-called Republic of the
Philippines were established by the military forces of occupation and
therefore a de facto government of the second kind.

There are three (3) kinds of de facto governments:

1) the government that gets possession and control of the rightful legal
government by force or by the voice of the majority.
 2) the government that is established and maintained by the military forces
who invade and occupy a territory of the enemy in the course of war.
3) the government that is established as an independent government by the
inhabitants of a country who rise in insurrection against the mother state.

2. Yes. In political and international law, all acts and proceedings of the legislative,
executive, and judicial departments of a de facto government are good and valid.
Since the governments during the Japanese occupation were considered de facto
governments of the second kind, it follows that the judicial acts and proceedings of
the courts of justice of those governments, which are not political in nature, were
good and valid, and, by virtue of the principle of postliminy in international law, they
remained good and valid after the liberation or reoccupation of the Philippines.

3. Yes. If proceedings pending in different courts prior to the Japanese occupation

had been continued during the Japanese military administration, the Philippine
Executive Commission, and the so-called Republic of the Philippines, having been in
continued existence by virtue of principle of postliminy, the same courts may
continue the proceedings without the need of enacting law conferring jurisdiction
upon them to continue said proceedings.

The respondent judge was directed to take cognizance and continue proceedings of
Civil Case No. 3012.