Professional Documents
Culture Documents
CASE DOCTRINE
Sources of International Law
BAYAN V. ZAMORA Section 25, Art XVIII, not section 21, Art. VII,
applies, as the VFA involves the presence of foreign
military troops in the Philippines.
LIM V. EXECUTIVE SECRETARY Both the Mutual Defense Treaty and the Visiting
Forces Agreement as in all other treaties and
international agreements to which the Philippines is a
party, must be read in the context of the 1987
Constitution. In particular, the Mutual Defense Treaty
was concluded way before the present Charter, though
it nevertheless remains in effect as a valid source of
international obligation. The present Constitution
contains key provisions useful in determining the
extent to which foreign military troops are allowed in
Philippine territory. Thus, in the Declaration of
Principles and State Policies, it is provided that:
xxx xxx xxx xxx
SEC. 2. The Philippines renounces war as an
instrument of national policy, adopts the generally
accepted principles of international law as part of the
law of the land and adheres to the policy of peace,
equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity with
all nations.
xxx xxx xxx xxx
SEC. 7. The State shall pursue an independent foreign
policy. In its relations with other states the paramount
consideration shall be national sovereignty, territorial
integrity, national interest, and the right to self-
determination.
SEC. 8. The Philippines, consistent with the national
interest, adopts and pursues a policy of freedom from
nuclear weapons in the country.
xxx xxx xxx xxx
The Constitution also regulates the foreign relations
powers of the Chief Executive when it provides that
"[n]o treaty or international agreement shall be valid
and effective unless concurred in by at least two-thirds
of all the members of the Senate." Even more
pointedly, the Transitory Provisions state:
Sec. 25. After the expiration in 1991 of the Agreement
between the Republic of the Philippines and the
United States of America concerning Military Bases,
foreign military bases, troops or facilities shall not be
allowed in the Philippines except under a treaty duly
concurred in by the Senate and, when the Congress so
requires, ratified by a majority of the votes cast by the
people in a national referendum held for that purpose,
and recognized as a treaty by the other contracting
state.
JMCRUZ REVIEWER IN PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW FINAL EXAM
BASED ON ATTY. TUPAZ’S CASE LIST
Pimentel v. Executive Secretary The President, being the head of state, is regarded as
the sole organ and authority in external relations and
is the country’s sole representative with foreign
nations. As the chief architect of foreign policy, the
President acts as the country’s mouthpiece with
respect to international affairs. Hence, the President is
vested with the authority to deal with foreign states
JMCRUZ REVIEWER IN PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW FINAL EXAM
BASED ON ATTY. TUPAZ’S CASE LIST
PHARMACEUTICAL AND HEALTCARE ASSOC. Under the 1987 Constitution, international law can
OF THE PHILS. V. DOH become part of the sphere of domestic law either by
transformation or incorporation. The
transformation method requires that an international
law be transformed into a domestic law through a
constitutional mechanism such as local legislation.
The incorporation method applies when, by mere
constitutional declaration, international law is deemed
to have the force of domestic law.
JMCRUZ REVIEWER IN PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW FINAL EXAM
BASED ON ATTY. TUPAZ’S CASE LIST
THE PROVINCE OF NORTH COTABATO V. GRP Concept of Association runs counter to the national
PEACE PANEL sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic:
No province, city, or municipality, not even the
ARMM, is recognized under our laws as having
an associative relationship with the national
government. Indeed, the concept implies powers that
go beyond anything ever granted by the Constitution
to any local or regional government. It also implies the
recognition of the associated entity as a state. The
Constitution, however, does not contemplate any state
in this jurisdiction other than the Philippine State,
much less does it provide for a transitory status that
aims to prepare any part of Philippine territory for
independence.
CBK POWER CO. V. CIR The Philippine Constitution provides for adherence to
the general principles of international law as part of
the law of the land. The time-honored international
principle of pacta sunt servanda demands the
performance in good faith of treaty obligations on the
part of the states that enter into the agreement. In this
jurisdiction, treaties have the force and effect of law.
Jurisdiction of States
ARIGO V. SWIFT The immunity of the State from suit, known also as the
doctrine of sovereign immunity or non-suability of the
State, is expressly provided in Article XVI of the 1987
Constitution which states:
Section 3. The State may not be sued without its
consent.
While the doctrine appears to prohibit only suits
against the state without its consent, it is also
applicable to complaints filed against officials of the
state for acts allegedly performed by them in the
discharge of their duties. The rule is that if the
judgment against such officials will require the state
itself to perform an affirmative act to satisfy the same,.
such as the appropriation of the amount needed to pay
the damages awarded against them, the suit must be
regarded as against the state itself although it has not
been formally impleaded.
GOV’T OF USA V. HON. PURGANAN Extradition proceedings are separate and distinct from
the trial for the offenses for which he is charged. He
should apply for bail before the courts trying the
criminal cases against him, not before the extradition
court.
GOV’T OF HONG KONG V. OLALIA Extradition has thus been characterized as the right of
a foreign power, created by treaty, to demand the
surrender of one accused or convicted of a crime
within its territorial jurisdiction, and the correlative
duty of the other state to surrender him to the
JMCRUZ REVIEWER IN PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW FINAL EXAM
BASED ON ATTY. TUPAZ’S CASE LIST
Responsibility of States
MARCOS V. MANGLAPUS It must be emphasized that the individual right
involved is not the right to travel from the Philippines
to other countries or within the Philippines. These are
what the right to travel would normally connote.
Essentially, the right involved is the right to return to
one's country, a totally distinct right under
international law, independent from although related
to the right to travel. Thus, the Universal Declaration
of Humans Rights and the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights treat the right to freedom of
movement and abode within the territory of a state, the
right to leave a country, and the right to enter one's
country as separate and distinct rights. The
Declaration speaks of the "right to freedom of
movement and residence within the borders of each
state" [Art. 13(l)] separately from the "right to leave
any country, including his own, and to return to his
country." [Art. 13(2).] On the other hand, the
Covenant guarantees the "right to liberty of movement
and freedom to choose his residence" [Art. 12(l)] and
the right to "be free to leave any country, including his
own." [Art. 12(2)] which rights may be restricted by
such laws as "are necessary to protect national
security, public order, public health or morals or enter
qqqs own country" of which one cannot be "arbitrarily
deprived." [Art. 12(4).] It would therefore be
inappropriate to construe the limitations to the right to
return to one's country in the same context as those
pertaining to the liberty of abode and the right to
travel.
The right to return to one's country is not among the
rights specifically guaranteed in the Bill of Rights,
which treats only of the liberty of abode and the right
to travel, but it is our well-considered view that the
right to return may be considered, as a generally
accepted principle of international law and, under our
Constitution, is part of the law of the land [Art. II, Sec.
2 of the Constitution.] However, it is distinct and
separate from the right to travel and enjoys a different
protection under the International Covenant of Civil
JMCRUZ REVIEWER IN PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW FINAL EXAM
BASED ON ATTY. TUPAZ’S CASE LIST