CONCEPT OF THE STATE

CIR v CAMPOS RUEDA relation to section 122 of our Tax Code we believe and hold, as did the
Tax Court, that the Ancilliary Administrator is entitled to exemption from
FACTS: This is an appeal interposed by petitioner Antonio Campos the inheritance tax on the intangible personal property found in the
Rueda, administrator of the estate of the deceased Doña Maria de la Philippines." There can be no doubt that California as a state in the
Estrella Soriano Vda. de Cerdeira, from the decision of the respondent American Union was lacking in the alleged requisite of international
Collector of Internal Revenue, assessing against and demanding from personality. Nonetheless, it was held to be a foreign country within the
the former the sum P161,874.95 as deficiency state and inheritance meaning of Section 122 of the National Internal Revenue Code.
taxes, including interests and penalties, on the transfer of intangible
personal properties situated in the Philippines and belonging to said
Maria de la Estrella Soriano Vda. de Cerdeira. Maria de la Estrella MAGALLONA v ERMITA
Soriano Vda. de Cerdeira (Maria Cerdeira for short) is a Spanish
national, by reason of her marriage to a Spanish citizen and was a FACTS: In March 2009, Republic Act 9522, an act defining the
resident of Tangier, Morocco from 1931 up to her death on January 2, archipelagic baselines of the Philippines was enacted – the law is also
1955. At the time of her demise she left, among others, intangible known as the Baselines Law. This law was meant to comply with the
personal properties in the Philippines." Then came this portion: "On terms of the third United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
September 29, 1955, petitioner filed a provisional estate and (UNCLOS III), ratified by the Philippines in February 1984.
inheritance tax return on all the properties of the late Maria Cerdeira.
Professor Merlin Magallona et al questioned the validity of RA 9522 as
On the same date, respondent, pending investigation, issued an they contend, among others, that the law decreased the national
assessment for estate and inheritance taxes which tax liabilities were territory of the Philippines hence the law is unconstitutional. Some of
paid by petitioner. their particular arguments are as follows:
On November 17, 1955, an amended return was filed . . . where a. the law abandoned the demarcation set by the Treaty of Paris and
intangible personal properties with were claimed as exempted from other ancillary treaties – this also resulted to the exclusion of our claim
taxes. On November 23, 1955, respondent, pending investigation, over Sabah;
issued another assessment for estate and inheritance taxes. In a letter
dated January 11, 1956, respondent denied the request for exemption b. the law, as well as UNCLOS itself, describes the Philippine waters
on the ground that the law of Tangier is not reciprocal to Section 122 of as “archipelagic” waters which, in international law, opens our waters
the National Internal Revenue Code. Hence, respondent demanded landward of the baselines to maritime passage by all vessels (innocent
the payment OF deficiency estate and inheritance taxes including ad passage) and aircrafts (overflight), undermining Philippine sovereignty
valorem penalties, surcharges, interests and compromise penalties . . . and national security, contravening the country’s nuclear-free policy,
. In a letter dated February 8, 1956, and received by respondent on the and damaging marine resources, in violation of relevant constitutional
following day, petitioner requested for the reconsideration of the provisions;
decision denying the claim for tax exemption of the intangible personal
properties and the imposition of the 25% and 5% ad valorem penalties. c. the classification of the Kalayaan Island Group (KIG), as well as the
However, respondent denied this request, in his letter dated May 5, Scarborough Shoal (bajo de masinloc), as a “regime of islands”
1956 . . . and received by petitioner on May 21, 1956. Respondent pursuant to UNCLOS results in the loss of a large maritime area but
premised the denial on the grounds that there was no reciprocity [with also prejudices the livelihood of subsistence fishermen.
Tangier, which was moreover] a mere principality, not a foreign
country. Consequently, respondent demanded the payment of ISSUE: W/N the contentions of Magallona et al are tenable.
deficiency estate and inheritance taxes including surcharges, interests
and compromise penalties HELD: No. The Supreme Court emphasized that RA 9522, or
UNCLOS, itself is not a means to acquire, or lose, territory. The treaty
ISSUE: Is T angier a foreign country? and the baseline law has nothing to do with the acquisition,
enlargement, or diminution of the Philippine territory. What controls
HELD: Yes. It does not admit of doubt that if a foreign country is to be when it comes to acquisition or loss of territory is the international law
identified with a state, it is required in line with Pound's formulation that principle on occupation, accretion, cession and prescription and NOT
it be a politically organized sovereign community independent of the execution of multilateral treaties on the regulations of sea-use
outside control bound by ties of nationhood, legally supreme within its rights or enacting statutes to comply with the treaty’s terms to delimit
territory, acting through a government functioning under a regime of maritime zones and continental shelves.
law. 9 It is thus a sovereign person with the people composing it
viewed as an organized corporate society under a government with the The law did not decrease the demarcation of our territory. In fact it
legal competence to exact obedience its commands. It has been increased it. Under the old law amended by RA 9522 (RA 3046), we
referred to as a body-politic organized by common consent for mutual adhered with the rectangular lines enclosing the Philippines. The area
defense and mutual safety and to promote the general welfare. that it covered was 440,994 square nautical miles (sq. na. mi.). But
under 9522, and with the inclusion of the exclusive economic zone, the
Correctly has it been described by Esmein as "the juridical extent of our maritime was increased to 586,210 sq. na. mi. (See
personification of the nation." This is to view it in the light its historical image below for comparison)
development. The stress is on its being a nation, its people occupying
a definite territory, politically organized, exercising by means of its If any, the baselines law is a notice to the international community of
government its sovereign will over the individuals within it and the scope of the maritime space and submarine areas within which
maintaining its separate international personality. Laski could speak of States parties exercise treaty-based rights.
it then as a territorial society divided into government and subjects,
claiming within its allotted area a supremacy over all other institutions. The Philippine Baselines
McIver similarly would point to the power entrusted to its government to Anent their particular contentions:
maintain within its territory the conditions of a legal order and to enter
into international relations. With the latter requisites satisfied, a. The law did not abandon the Sabah claim. This is evident on the
international law does not exact independence as a condition of provision of Section 2 of RA 9522:
statehood. So Hyde did opine.
Section 2. The definition of the baselines of the territorial sea of the
Even on the assumption then that Tangier is bereft of international Philippine Archipelago as provided in this Act is without prejudice to the
personality petitioner has not successfully made out a case. It bears delineation of the baselines of the territorial sea around the territory of
repeating that four days after the filing of this petition on January 6, Sabah, situated in North Borneo, over which the Republic of the
1958 in Collector of Internal Revenue v. De Lara, it was specifically Philippines has acquired dominion and sovereignty.
held by us: "Considering the State of California as a foreign country in
corporate existence and the powers that it may exercise are concerned
b. UNCLOS may term our waters as “archipelagic waters” and that we (sections 2 and 4, Commonwealth Act No. 518).
may term it as our “internal waters”, but the bottom line is that our “Government of the Republic of the Philippines" used in
country exercises sovereignty over these waters and UNCLOS itself section 2 of the Revised Administrative Code refers only to that
recognizes that. However, due to our observance of international law, government. entity through which the functions of the government are
we allow the exercise of others of their right of innocent passage. No exercised as an attribute of sovereignty, and in this are included those
modern State can validly invoke its sovereignty to absolutely forbid arms through which political authority is made effective whether they
innocent passage that is exercised in accordance with customary be provincial, municipal or other form of local government. These are
international law without risking retaliatory measures from the what we call municipal corporations. They do not include government
international community. entities which are given a corporate personality. separate and distinct
from the government and 'which are governed by the Corporation Law.
c. The classification of the KIG (or the Spratly’s), as well as the Their powers, duties and liabilities have to be determined in the light of
Scarborough Shoal, as a regime of islands did not diminish our that law and of their corporate charters.
maritime area. Under UNCLOS and under the baselines law, since As this Court has aptly said, "The mere fact that the
they are regimes of islands, they generate their own maritime zones – Government happens to be a majority stockholder does not make it a
in short, they are not to be enclosed within the baselines of the main public corporation" (National Coal Co. v cir, 46 Phil., 586-597). "By
archipelago (which is the Philippine Island group). This is because if becoming a stockholder in the National Coal Company, the
we do that, then we will be enclosing a larger area which would already Government divested itself of its sovereign character so far as respects
depart from the provisions of UNCLOS – that the demarcation should the transactions of the corporation. Unlike the Government, the
follow the natural contour of the archipelago. corporation may be sued without its consent, and is subject to taxation.
Yet the National Coal Company remains an agency or instrumentality
Nevertheless, we still continue to lay claim over the KIG and the of government." (Gov’t of the PI vs. Springer, 50 Phil., 288.)
Scarborough Shoal through effective occupation.

BACANI v NACOCO PHILIPPINE VIRGINIA TOBACCO ADM. V CIR

FACTS: The plaintiffs are court stenographers assigned in Branch VI FACTS:Private respondents filed with the CIR a petition, alleging their
of the Court of First Instance of Manila. During the pendency of Civil employment relationship, the overtime services in excess of the regular
Case No. 2293 of said court, entitled Francisco Sycip vs. National eight hours a day rendered by them, and the failure to pay them
Coconut Corporation, Assistant Corporate Counsel Federico Alikpala, overtime compensation in accordance with Commonwealth Act No.
counsel for defendant, requested said stenographers for copies, of the 444. Their prayer was for the differential between the amount actually
transcript of the stenographic notes taken by them during the hearing. paid to them and the amount allegedly due them. Petitioner Philippine
Plaintiffs complied with the request by delivering to Counsel Alikpala Virginia Tobacco Administration denied the allegations. The then
the needed transcript containing 714 pages and thereafter submitted to Presiding Judge Arsenio T. Martinez of respondent Court sustained the
him their bills for the payment of their fees. The National Coconut claims of private respondents for overtime services from December 23,
Corporation paid the amount of P564 to Leopoldo T. Bacani and P150 1963 up to the date the decision was rendered on March 21, 1970, and
to Mateo A. Matoto for said transcript at the rate of P1 per page. directing petitioner to pay the same, minus what it had already paid.
Upon inspecting the books of this corporation, the Auditor Petitioner claims that the matter is beyond the jurisdiction of the CIR as
General disallowed the payment of these fees and sought the recovery it is exercising governmental functions and that it is exempt from the
of the amounts paid. The respondents argue that National Coconut operation of C.A. 444, invoking the doctrine announced in the leading
Corporation may be considered as included in the term "Government Agricultural Credit and Cooperative Financing Administration decision,
of the Republic of the Philippines" for the purposes of the exemption of and the distinction between constituent and ministrant functions of
the legal fees provided for in Rule 1-30 of the Rules of Court. governments as set forth in Bacani v. National Coconut Corporation.

ISSUE: W/N NACOCO is a part of the Government of the Philippines ISSUE: W/N the traditional classification of function of government as
by virtue of its performance of government functions. ministrant and constituent applicable in the case at bar

HELD: No, NACOCO does not acquire that status for the simple HELD: No. The irrelevance of such a distinction considering the
reason that it does not come under the classification of municipal or needs of the times was clearly pointed out by the present Chief Justice.
public corporation. To resolve the issue in this case requires a little Under this traditional classification, such constituent functions are
digression on the nature and functions of our government as instituted exercised by the State as attributes of sovereignty, and not merely to
in our Constitution. To begin with, we state that the term "Government" promote the welfare, progress and prosperity of the people - these
may be defined as "that institution or aggregate of institutions by which latter functions being ministrant, the exercise of which is optional on
an independent society makes and carries out those rules of action the part of the government."
which are necessary to enable men to live in a social state, or which Nonetheless, as he explained so persuasively: "The growing
are imposed upon the people forming that society by those who complexities of modern society, however, have rendered this traditional
possess the power or authority of prescribing them" (U.S. vs. Dorr, 2 classification of the functions of government quite unrealistic, not to say
Phil., 332). This institution, when referring to the national government, obsolete. The areas which used to be left to private enterprise and
has reference to what our Constitution has established composed of initiative and which the government was called upon to enter optionally,
three great departments, the legislative, executive, and the judicial, and only 'because it was better equipped to administer for the public
through which the powers and functions of government are exercised. welfare than is any private individual or group of individuals,' continue
These functions are twofold: constitute and ministrant. The former are to lose their well-defined boundaries and to be absorbed within
those which constitute the very bonds of society and are compulsory in activities that the government must undertake in its sovereign capacity
nature; the latter are those that are undertaken only by way of if it is to meet the increasing social challenges of the times. Here as
advancing the general interests of society, and are merely optional. almost everywhere else the tendency is undoubtedly towards a greater
To this latter class belongs the organization of those socialization of economic forces. Here of course this development was
corporations owned or controlled by the government to promote certain envisioned, indeed adopted as a national policy, by the Constitution
aspects of the economic life of our people such as the National itself in its declaration of principle concerning the promotion of social
Coconut Corporation. These are what we call government-owned or justice."
controlled corporations which may take on the form of a private Thus was laid to rest the doctrine in Bacani v. National
enterprise or one organized with powers and formal characteristics of a Coconut Corporation, based on the Wilsonian classification of the tasks
private corporation under the Corporation Law. incumbent on government into constituent and ministrant in accor. with
But while NACOCO was organized for the ministrant function the laissez faire principle.
of promoting the coconut industry, however, it was given a corporate WHEREFORE, the appealed Order of March 21, 1970 and
power separate and distinct from our government, for it was made the Resolution of respondent Court, denying a motion for
subject to the provisions of our Corporation Law in so far as its reconsideration are hereby affirmed.
2.No. Court ruled that if legal provisions are in conflict with the political
character, constitution or institutions of the new sovereign, they
GOV’T OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v MONTE DE PIEDAD became inoperative or lost their force upon the cession of the
Philippine Islands to the United States, but if they are among "that
FACTS: About $400,000, were subscribed and paid into the treasury of great body of municipal law which regulates private and domestic
the Philippine Islands by the inhabitants of the Spanish Dominions of rights," they continued in force and are still in force unless they have
the relief of those damaged by the earthquake which took place in the been repealed by the present Government.
Philippine Islands on June 3, 1863. Subsequent thereto a central relief
board was appointed to distribute the moneys thus voluntarily From the nature and class of the subject matter, it is clear that it falls
contributed and allotted $365,703.50 to the various sufferers named in within the latter class. They are laws which are not political in any
its resolution. By order of the Governor-General of the Philippine sense of the word. They conferred upon the Spanish Government the
Islands, a list of these allotments, together with the names of those right and duty to supervise, regulate, and to some extent control
entitled thereto, was published in the Official Gazette of Manila. These charities and charitable institutions. The present sovereign, in
were later distributed up to the sum of $30,299.65, leaving a balance of exempting "provident institutions, savings banks, etc.," all of which are
$365,403.85. in the nature of charitable institutions, from taxation, placed such
institutions, in so far as the investment in securities are concerned,
Upon the petition of the governing body of the Monte de Piedad, the under the general supervision of the Insular Treasurer.
Philippine Government, by order, directed its treasurer to turn over to
the former the sum of $80,000 of the relief fund in installments of 3.Yes.The ground upon which the right of the Government to maintain
$20,000 each and were received on the following dates: February 15, the action rests on the fact that the money, being given to a charity
March 12, April 14, and June 2, 1883, and are still in the possession of became a public property, only applicable to the specific purposes to
the Monte de Piedad. On account of various petitions of the persons, which it was intended to be devoted. It is but within those limits
and heirs of others to whom the above-mentioned allotments were consecrated to the public use, and became part of the public resources
made, the Philippine Islands filed a suit against the Monte de Piedad a for promoting the happiness and welfare of the Philippine Government.
recover, "through the Attorney-General and in representation of the T o deny the Government's right to maintain this action would be
Government of the Philippine Islands," the $80.000, together with contrary to sound public policy.
interest. After due trial, judgment was entered in favor of the plaintiff.
Defendant appealed and made the following contentions:
The Supreme Court of the United States in Sohier vs. Mass. General
Hospital, ruled that: “insane persons and person not known, or not in
that the $80,000, given to the Monte de Piedad y Caja de Ahorros, being, apply to the beneficiaries of charities, who are often in capable
were so given as a donation, and that said donation had been cleared; of vindicating their rights, and justly look for protection to the sovereign
authority, acting as parens patriae. They show that this beneficient
that the Government of the Philippine Islands has not subrogated the functions has not ceased to exist under the change of government from
Spanish Government in its rights, as regards an important sum of a monarchy to a republic; but that it now resides in the legislative
money abovementioned; department, ready to be called into exercise whenever required for the
purposes of justice and right, and is a clearly capable of being
that the only persons who could claim to be damaged by this payment exercised in cases of charities as in any other cases whatever.”
to the Monte, if it was unlawful, are the donors or Chancelor Kent says: In this country, the legislature or government of
the State, as parens patriae, has the right to enforce all charities of
the cestuis que trustent, thus, the plaintiff is not the proper public nature, by virtue of its general superintending authority over the
public interests, where no other person is entrusted with it. (4 Kent
party to bring the action;that the court erred in holding in its decision Com., 508, note.)
that there is no title for
the prescription of this suit brought by the Insular Government against 4.No. In 25 Cyc., 1006, the rule, supported by numerous authorities, is
the defendant appellant. stated as follows:In the absence of express statutory provision to the
contrary, statute of limitations do not as a general rule run against the
ISSUES: sovereign or government, whether state or federal. But the rule is
- WN $80,000 received by Monte de Piedad was in form of donation. otherwise where the mischief to be remedied are of such a nature that
- WN the obligation on the part of the Monte de Piedad to return the the state must necessarily be included, where the state goes into
$80,000 to the Government, even considering it a loan, was wiped out business in concert or in competition with her citizens, or where a party
on the change of sovereignty. seeks to enforces his private rights by suit in the name of the state or
- WN the Government is a proper party to the case under the doctrine government, so that the latter is only a nominal party.
of parens patriae.
- WN the Philippine Government is bound by the statute of limitations.
In the instant case the Philippine Government is not a mere nominal
party because it, in bringing and prosecuting this action, is exercising
its sovereign functions or powers and is seeking to carry out a trust
HELD: developed upon it when the Philippine Islands were ceded to the
United States. For the foregoing reasons the judgment appealed from
1. No.Documentary evidence shows that Monte de Piedad, is affirmed.
after setting forth in its petition to the Governor-General its financial
condition and its absolute necessity for more working capital, asked
that out of the sum of $100,000 held in the Treasury of the Philippine CO KIM CHAM v VALDEZ TAN KEH
Islands, there be transferred to it the sum of $80,000. The Monte de
Piedad agreed that if the transfer of these funds should not be FACTS: Petitioner filed a motion for mandamus praying that the
approved by the Government of Spain, the same would be returned respondent judge be ordered to continue the proceedings in civil case
forthwith. It did not ask that the $80,000 be given to it as a donation. no. 3012 which was initiated under the regime of the so-called
Republic of the Philippines established during the Japanese military
The Department of Finance, acting under the orders of the occupation of the islands.
Governor-General, understood that the $80,000 was transferred to the
Monte de Piedad well knew that it received this sum as a loan interest." The respondent judge refused to take cognizance of and continue the
Furthermore, the Monte de Piedad recognized and considered as late proceedings on the following grounds: (1) the proclamation issued on
as March 31, 1902, that it received the $80,000 "as a returnable loan, October 23, 1944 by Gen. Mac Arthur had the effect of invalidating and
and without interest." Thus, there cannot be the slightest doubt the fact nullifying all judicial proceedings and judgments of the courts of the
that the Monte de Piedad received the $80,000 as a mere loan or Philippines under the Philippine Executive Commission and the
deposit and not as a donation. Republic established during the Japanese occupation;(2) the lower
courts have no jurisdiction to take cognizance of and continue judicial
proceedings pending in the courts of the defunct Republic in the occupation takes place, in practice, the invader does not usually take
absence of enabling law granting such authority; (3) the government the administration of justice into his own hands, but continues the
established in the Philippines during the Japanese occupation was not ordinary courts or tribunals to administer the laws of the country to
a de facto government. which he is enjoined, unless absolutely prevented. If the proceedings
pending in the different courts of the Islands prior to the Japanese
ISSUES: military occupation had been continued during the Japanese military
administration, the Philippine Executive Commission and the so-called
Republic of the Philippines, it stands to reason the same courts, which
1. Whether the government established during the Japanese become reestablished and conceived of as having been in continued
occupation was a de facto government. existence upon the reoccupation and liberation of the Philippines by
virtue of the principle of postliminy, may continue the proceedings in
2. Whether the judicial acts and proceedings of the courts existing in cases then pending in said courts, without necessity of enacting laws
the Philippines under the Phil. Executive Commission and the Republic conferring jurisdiction upon them to continue said proceedings.
of the Philippines were good and valid and remained so even after the
liberation or reoccupation of the Philippines by the US and Filipino
forces. PEOPLE V GOZO

3. Whether the proclamation issued by Gen. Mac Arthur declaring “all FACTS: Loreta Gozo bought a house and lot located inside the US
laws, regulations and processes of any other government in the Naval Reservation within the territorial jurisdiction of Olangapo City.
Philippines than that of the Commonwealth are null and void and She demolished the house and built another one in its place without
without legal effect in areas of the Philippines free of enemy occupation securing a building permit from the City Mayor of Olangapo City. The
and control” has invalidated al judgments and judicial acts and City Court of Olangapo found her guilty of violating a municipal
proceedings of the said courts. ordinance that requires permit from the municipal mayor for
construction of building as well as any modification, repairs or
4. Whether the courts of Commonwealth, which were the same courts demolition thereof.
existing prior to and continue during the Japanese military occupation
of the Philippines may continue those proceedings in said courts at the On appeal with the Court of Appeals, Gozo put in issue the validity of
time the Philippines were reoccupied and liberated by the US and such ordinance by invoking due process. She likewise questioned the
Filipino forces and the Commonwealth of the Philippines were applicability of the ordinance to her in view of the location of her
reestablished. dwelling within the naval base leased to the American Armed Forces;
she contended that the municipal government cannot exercise therein
HELD: administrative jurisdiction.

1. YES. The government established under the names of Philippine ISSUES:

Executive Commission and Republic of the Philippines during the
Japanese occupation was a civil government and a de facto 1. Whether municipal ordinance is valid?
government of the second kind: that which is established and 2. Whether the municipal corporation retains its administrative
maintained by military forces who invade and occupy a territory of the jurisdiction over the area where Gozo’s house was located?
enemy in the course of war. The distinguishing characteristics of this
kind of de facto government are; (1) that its existence is maintained by
active military power within the territories, and against the rightful HELD:
authority of an established and lawful government; and (2) that while it
exists it must necessarily be obeyed in civil matters by private citizens
who, by acts of obedience rendered in submission to such force, do not 1. YES, the municipal ordinance is valid. The authority to require
become responsible, as wrongdoers, for those acts, though not building permits is predicated upon the general welfare clause.
warranted by the laws of the rightful government.
Its scope is wide, well-nigh all embracing, covering every aspect of
2. YES. Being a de facto government, it necessarily follows that the public health, public morals, public safety, and the well being and good
judicial acts and proceedings of the courts of justice of those order of the community.
governments, which are not of a political complexion, were good and
valid, and, by virtue of the well known principle of postliminy in 2. YES, the municipal corporation retains its administrative jurisdiction
international law, remained good and valid after the liberation or over the said area. By the agreement, the Philippine
reoccupation of the Philippines by the American and Filipino forces.
Government merely consents that the United States exercise
3. NO. The phrase “processes of any other government” is broad and jurisdiction in certain cases. This consent was given purely as a matter
may refer not only to judicial processes, but also to administrative or of comity, courtesy or expediency. The Philippine Government has not
legislative, as well as constitutional processes of the Republic of the abdicated its sovereignty over the bases as part of the Philippine
Philippines or other governmental agencies established in the Islands territory or divested itself completely of jurisdiction over offenses
during the Japanese occupation. T aking into consideration the fact committed therein. Under the terms of the treaty, the United States
that, according to the well-known principles of international law, all Government has prior or preferential but not exclusive jurisdiction of
judgments and judicial proceedings, which are not of a political such offenses. The Philippine jurisdiction retains not only jurisdictional
complexion, of the de facto government during the Japanese rights not granted, but also such ceded rights as the United States
occupation were good and valid before and remained so after the Military authorities for reasons of their own decline to make use of.
occupied territory had come again into the power of the titular
sovereign, it should be presumed that it was not, and could not have Moreover, the concept of sovereignty as auto-limitation, is the property
been, the intention of the Gen. Mac Arthur, in using the phrase of a state-force due to which it has the exclusive capacity of legal self-
“processes of any government” to refer to judicial processes, in determination and self-restriction. x x x A state is not precluded from
violation of said principles of international law. The only reasonable allowing another power to participate in the exercise of jurisdictional
construction of the said phrase is that it refers to governmental right over certain portions of its territory. If it does so, it by no means
processes other than judicial processes, or court proceedings, for follows that such areas become impressed with an alien character.
according to a well-known statutory construction, statute ought never to They retain their status as native soil. They are still subject to its
be construed to violate the law of nations if any other possible authority. Its jurisdiction may be dimished, but it does not disappear.
construction remains. So it is with the bases under lease to the American armed forces by
virtue of the military bases agreement of 1947. they are not and cannot
4. YES. Although in theory, the authority of the local civil and judicial be foreign territory.
administration is suspended as a matter of course as soon as military
Area. Major Ruffy who was then acting as Commanding Officer for the
Bolo Area was relieved of his position. Later on or on October 19,
LAUREL V MISA 1944, Lieut. Col Jurado was slain allegedly by the petitioners. It was
this murder which gave rise to petitioner’s trial.
FACTS: Sometime in May 1945, Anastacio Laurel, herein petitioner, a
Filipino citizen, was arrested by the US Army and was interned, under The trial court convicted petitioner and he now filed this instant petition
a commitment order “for his active collaboration with the Japanese with the contention that he was not subject to military law at the time
during the Japanese occupation”. He was charged with treason as the offense for which he had been placed on trial was committed.
defined and penalized by Art. 114 of the Penal Code. But in September Petitioners contended that by the enemy occupation of the Philippines,
1945, he was turned over to the Commonwealth government and since the National Defense Act and all laws and regulations creating and
then he has been under the custody of the Director of Prisons. governing the existence of the Philippine Army including the Articles of
War, were suspended and in abeyance during such belligerent
occupation. He also assailed the constitutionality of 93d Article of War
Petitioner then filed a petition for habeas corpus mainly asserting that which provides that “any person subject to military law who commits
he cannot be prosecuted for the crime of treason for the reason (1) that murder in the time of war should suffer death or imprisonment for life,
the sovereignty of the legitimate government in the Philippines and, as the court martial may direct.” Petitioner argued that the said law was
consequently, the correlative allegiance of Filipino citizens thereto was in violation of Article VII, section 2 of the Constitution since 93d of
then suspended; and (2) that there was a change of sovereignty over Article of War fails to allow a review by the Supreme Court of
these Islands upon the proclamation of the Philippine Republic. judgments of courts martial imposing death or life imprisonment.

ISSUES: ISSUES:

1. Whether the sovereignty of the legitimate government in the 1. Whether petitioner was subject to military law at the time the alleged
Philippines and, consequently, the correlative allegiance of Filipino offense was committed.
citizens were suspended during the Japanese occupation. 2. Whether 93d of Articles of War was constitutional.

2. Whether the petitioner can be prosecuted for the crime of treason by

giving aid and support to the enemy during the Japanese occupation. HELD:

HELD: 1. YES, petitioner was subject to military law at the time the alleged
offense was committed. The rule that laws of political nature or
1. NO. The absolute and permanent allegiance of the inhabitants of a affecting political relations are considered superseded or in abeyance
territory occupied by the enemy to their legitimate government or during the military occupation, is intended for the governing of the civil
sovereign is not abrogated or severed by the enemy’s occupation, inhabitants of the occupied territory. It is not intended for and does not
because the sovereignty of the government or sovereign de jure is not bind the enemies in arms.
transferred thereby to the occupier and if its is not transferred to the
occupant it must necessarily remain vested in the legitimate By the occupation of the Philippines by Japanese forces, the officers
government; that the sovereignty vested in the titular government must and men of the Philippine army did not cease to be fully in the service,
be distinguished from the exercise of the rights inherent thereto, and though, in a measure, only in measure, they were not subject to the
may be destroyed, or severed and transferred to another, but it cannot military jurisdiction, if they were not in active duty. In the latter case,
be suspended because the existence of sovereignty cannot be like officers and soldiers on leave of absence or held as prisoners of
suspended without putting it out of existence or divesting the war, they could not be held guilty of breach of the discipline of the
possessor thereof at least during the so-called period of suspension; command or of a neglect of duty x x x; but for an act unbecoming of a
that what may be suspended is the exercise of the rights of sovereignty gentleman or an act which constitutes an offense of the class specified
with the control and government of the territory occupied by the enemy
passes temporarily to the occupant; x x x and that as a corollary of the in the 95th Article of War, they may in general be legally held subject to
conclusion that the sovereignty itself is not suspended and subsists military jurisdiction and trial.
during the enemy occupation, the allegiance of the inhabitants to their
legitimate government or sovereign subsists, and therefore there is no Moreover, petitioners, by their acceptance of appointments
such thing as suspended allegiance. as officers in the Bolo Area from the General Headquarters of the 6 th
Military District, they became members of the Philippine Army
2. YES. Article 114 of the Revised Penal Code was applicable to amenable to the Articles of War. x x x As officers in the Bolo Area and
treason committed against the national security of the legitimate the 6th Military District, the petitioners operated under the orders of a
government because the inhabitants of the occupied territory were still duly established and duly appointed commanders of the United States
bound by their allegiance to the latter during the enemy’s occupation. Army and thus covered by Article 2 of the Articles of War which
provides for persons subject to military law.
Just as a citizen or subject of a government or sovereign may be
prosecuted for and convicted of treason committed in a foreign country, 2. YES, 93d of the Articles of War was constitutional. It does not violate
in the same way a inhabitant of a territory occupied by the military Article VII, section 2 of the Constitution which provides that “the
forces of the enemy may commit treason against his own legitimate or National Assembly may not deprive the Supreme Court of its original
sovereign if he adheres to the enemies of the latter by giving them aid jurisdiction over all criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is
and comfort. death or life imprisonment”. Court Martial are agencies of executive
character, and one of the authorities “for ordering of courts martial has
been held to be attached to the constitutional functions of the President
RUFFY v CHIEF OF STAFF as Commander in Chief, independently of legislation”. Unlike courts of
law, they are not a portion of the judiciary. x x x court martial are in fact
FACTS: During the Japanese occupation, herein petitioner, Ramon simply instrumentalities of the executive power, provided by Congress
Ruffy, a Provincial Commander of the Philippine Constabulary, for the President as Commander in Chief, to aid him in properly
retreated in the mountains instead of surrendering to the enemy. He commanding the army and navy and enforcing discipline therein, and
organized and led a guerrilla outfit known as Bolo Combat Team or utilized under his orders or those of his authorized military
Bolo Area. The said Bolo Area was a contingent of the 6 th Military representatives.
District, which has been recognized and placed under the operational
control of the US Army in the South Pacific.

Sometime later, Col. Jurado effected a change of command in the Bolo