HOLY SEE v. ERIBERTO U. ROSARIO, GR No. 101949, 1994-12-01 an order denying...

an order denying... a motion to dismiss is not reviewable by the appellate courts, the remedy
Facts: of the movant being to file his answer and to proceed with the hearing before the trial court...
Petitioner is the Holy See who exercises sovereignty over the Vatican City in Rome, Italy, and exceptions... when it is very clear in the records that the... trial court has no alternative but to
is represented in the Philippines by the Papal Nuncio. dismiss the complaint
Private respondent, Starbright Sales Enterprises, Inc., is a domestic corporation engaged in The Republic of the Philippines has accorded the Holy See the status of a foreign sovereign.
the real estate business. The Holy See, through its Ambassador, the Papal Nuncio, has had diplomatic
private respondent filed a complaint with the Regional Trial Court, Branch 61, Makati, Metro representations with the Philippine government since 1957
Manila for annulment of the sale of the three parcels of land, and specific performance and The logical question is whether the foreign state is engaged in the activity in the regular
damages against petitioner, represented by the Papal Nuncio,... petitioner and the PRC, course of business.
without notice to private respondent, sold the lots to Tropicana petitioner has denied that the acquisition and subsequent disposal... of Lot 5-A were made
Private respondent thus prayed for: (1) the annulment of the Deeds of Sale between for profit but claimed that it acquired said property for the site of its mission or the Apostolic
petitioner and the PRC on the one hand, and Tropicana on the other; Nunciature in the Philippines. Private respondent failed to dispute said claim.
Motion for Intervention was filed before us by the Department of Foreign Affairs, claiming that The donation was made not for commercial purpose, but for the use of petitioner to
it has a legal interest in the outcome of the case as regards the diplomatic immunity of construct thereon the official... place of residence of the Papal Nuncio.
petitioner, and that it "adopts by reference, the allegations... contained in the petition of the The decision to transfer the property and the subsequent disposal thereof are likewise
Holy See insofar as they refer to arguments relative to its claim of sovereign immunity from clothed with a governmental character. Petitioner did not sell Lot 5-A for profit or gain. It
suit"... when a state or international agency wishes to plead sovereign or diplomatic immunity merely wanted to dispose off the same because the squatters living thereon made it almost...
in a foreign court, it requests the Foreign Office of the state where it is sued to convey to the impossible for petitioner to use it for the purpose of the donation.
court that said defendant is entitled to immunity. the Department of Foreign Affairs has formally intervened in this case and... officially certified
In the Philippines, the practice is for the foreign government or the international organization that the Embassy of the Holy See is a duly accredited diplomatic mission to the Republic of
to first secure an executive endorsement of its claim of sovereign or diplomatic immunity the Philippines exempt from local jurisdiction and entitled to all the rights, privileges and
Even without this affirmation, such principles of International Law are deemed incorporated immunities of a diplomatic mission or embassy in this country
as part of the law of the land as a condition... and consequence of our admission in the The determination of the executive arm of government that a state or instrumentality is
society of nations... classical or absolute theory, a sovereign cannot, without its consent, be entitled to sovereign or diplomatic immunity is a political question that is conclusive upon the
made a respondent in the courts of another sovereign. courts
classical or absolute theory... restrictive theory... restrictive theory, the immunity of the Principles:
sovereign is recognized only with regard to public acts or acts jure imperii of a state, but not
with regard to private acts or acts jure gestionis
Issues:
whether the petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Revised Rules of Court can be availed
of to question the order denying petitioner's motion to dismiss... personality or legal interest of
the Department of Foreign Affairs to intervene in the case in behalf of the Holy See
Ruling:
REPUBLIC v. SANDIGANBAYAN, GR No. 104768, 2003-07-21 P104,134. 60.
Facts: Board finds that a prima facie case exists against respondent for ill-gotten and unexplained
dismissed petitioner's Amended Complaint and ordered the return of the confiscated items to wealth in the amount of P2,974,134.00 and $50,000 US Dollars.
respondent Elizabeth Dimaano, while the second Resolution denied petitioner's Motion for Maj. Gen. Josephus Q. Ramas (ret.) be prosecuted and tried for violation of RA 3019, as
Reconsideration. amended, otherwise known as "Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act" and RA 1379, as
President Corazon C. Aquino issued Executive Order No. 1 ("EO No. 1") creating the amended, otherwise known as "The Act for the Forfeiture of Unlawfully
Presidential Commission on Good Government ("PCGG"). EO No. 1 primarily tasked the Acquired Property."[3]
PCGG to recover all... ill-gotten wealth of former President Ferdinand E. Marcos, his Amended Complaint naming the Republic of the Philippines ("petitioner"), represented by the
immediate family, relatives, subordinates and close associates. EO No. 1 vested the PCGG PCGG, as plaintiff and Ramas as defendant. The Amended Complaint also impleaded
with the power "(a) to conduct investigation as may be necessary in order to accomplish and Elizabeth
carry out the purposes of this... order" and the power "(h) to promulgate such rules and Dimaano ("Dimaano") as co-defendant.
regulations as may be necessary to carry out the purpose of this order." Accordingly, the Ramas was the Commanding General of the Philippine Army until 1986. On the other hand,
PCGG, through its then Chairman Jovito R. Salonga, created an AFP Anti-Graft Board ("AFP Dimaano was a confidential agent of the Military Security Unit, Philippine Army, assigned as
Board") tasked to investigate reports of... unexplained wealth and corrupt practices by AFP a clerk-typist at the office of Ramas from 1 January 1978 to
personnel, whether in the active service or retired.[2 February 1979. The Amended Complaint further alleged that Ramas "acquired funds, assets
AFP Board investigated various reports of alleged unexplained wealth of respondent Major and properties manifestly out of proportion to his salary as an army officer and his other
General Josephus Q. Ramas ("Ramas"). income from legitimately acquired property by taking undue advantage of his public office
owner of a house and lot located at 15-Yakan St., La Vista, Quezon City. He is also the and/or... using his power, authority and influence as such officer of the Armed Forces of the
owner of a house and lot located in Cebu City. The lot has an area of 3,327 square meters. Philippines and as a subordinate and close associate of the deposed President Ferdinand
Aside from the military equipment/items and communications equipment, the raiding team Marcos.
was also able to confiscate money in the amount of P2,870,000.00 and $50,000 US Dollars The Amended Complaint prayed for, among others, the forfeiture of respondents'
in the house of Elizabeth Dimaano on 3 March 1986. properties,... funds and equipment in favor of the State.
Elizabeth Dimaano is the mistress of respondent. He denied ownership of any mansion in Cebu City and the cash, communications equipment
February 25, 1986, a person who rode in a car went to the residence of Elizabeth Dimaano and other items confiscated from the house of Dimaano.
with four (4) attache cases filled with money and... owned by MGen Ramas 9 November 1988, petitioner asked for a deferment of the hearing due to its lack of
Elizabeth Dimaano had no visible means of income and is supported by respondent for she preparation for trial and the absence of witnesses and vital documents to support its case.
was formerly a mere secretary The court reset the hearing to 17 and 18 April 1989.
Elizabeth Dimaano could not have used the military equipment/items seized in her house on 13 April 1989, petitioner filed a motion for leave to amend the complaint in order "to charge
March 3, 1986 without the consent of respondent, he being the Commanding General of the the delinquent properties with being subject to forfeiture as having been unlawfully acquired
Philippine Army. It is also impossible for Elizabeth Dimaano to... claim that she owns the by defendant Dimaano alone
P2,870,000.00 and $50,000 US Dollars for she had no visible source of income. Sandiganbayan noted that petitioner had already delayed the case for over a year mainly
money was never declared in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities of respondent. because of its many postponements. Moreover, petitioner would want the case to revert to its
respondent has an unexplained wealth of
preliminary stage when in fact the case had long been ready for trial. The Sandiganbayan... Dimaano ("Dimaano") as co-defendant.
ordered petitioner to prepare for presentation of its additional evidence, if any. resolution
Private respondents then filed their motions to dismiss based on Republic v. Migrino.[9] The ESPONDENT COURT SERIOUSLY ERRED IN CONCLUDING THAT PETITIONER'S
Court held in Migrino that the PCGG does not have jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute EVIDENCE CANNOT MAKE A CASE FOR FORFEITURE AND THAT THERE WAS NO
military officers by reason of mere position... held without a showing that they are SHOWING OF CONSPIRACY, COLLUSION OR RELATIONSHIP BY CONSANGUINITY OR
"subordinates" of former President Marcos. AFFINITY BY AND BETWEEN RESPONDENT RAMAS AND RESPONDENT DIMAANO
resolution... judgment is hereby rendered dismissing the Amended Complaint, without NOTWITHSTANDING THE FACT THAT SUCH CONCLUSIONS WERE CLEARLY
pronouncement as to costs. The counterclaims are likewise dismissed for lack of merit, but UNFOUNDED AND PREMATURE, HAVING BEEN RENDERED PRIOR TO THE
the confiscated sum of money, communications equipment, jewelry and land titles are COMPLETION OF THE PRESENTATION OF THE EVIDENCE OF THE PETITIONER.
ordered... returned to Elizabeth Dimaano. RESPONDENT COURT SERIOUSLY ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE ACTIONS TAKEN
4 December 1991, petitioner filed its Motion for Reconsideration. BY THE PETITIONER, INCLUDING THE FILING OF THE ORIGINAL COMPLAINT AND
Sandiganbayan rendered a Resolution denying the Motion for Reconsideration. THE AMENDED COMPLAINT, SHOULD BE STRUCK OUT IN LINE WITH THE RULINGS
The Sandiganbayan dismissed the Amended Complaint on the following grounds: OF THE SUPREME COURT IN CRUZ, JR. v. SANDIGANBAYAN, 194 SCRA 474 AND
(1.) REPUBLIC v. MIGRINO, 189 SCRA 289, NOTWITHSTANDING THE FACT THAT:
The actions taken by the PCGG are not in accordance with the rulings of the Supreme Court The cases of Cruz, Jr. v. Sandiganbayan, supra, and Republic v. Migrino, supra, are clearly
in Cruz, Jr. v. Sandiganbayan[10] and Republic v. Migrino[11] which involve the same issues. not applicable to this case;
(2.) Any procedural defect in the institution of the complaint in Civil Case No. 0037 was cured
No previous inquiry similar to preliminary investigations in criminal cases was conducted and/or waived by respondents with the filing of their respective answers with counterclaim;
against Ramas and Dimaano. and
(3.) The separate motions to dismiss were evidently improper considering that they were filed
The evidence adduced against Ramas does not constitute a prima facie case against him. after commencement of the presentation of the evidence of the petitioner and even before
(4.) the latter was allowed to formally offer its evidence and rest its case;
There was an illegal search and seizure of the items confiscated. RESPONDENT COURT SERIOUSLY ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE ARTICLES AND
Sandiganbayan erred in declaring the properties confiscated from Dimaano's house as THINGS SUCH AS SUMS OF MONEY, COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT, JEWELRY AND
illegally seized and therefore inadmissible in evidence. LAND TITLES CONFISCATED FROM THE HOUSE OF RESPONDENT DIMAANO WERE
Petitioner contends that all rights under the Bill of Rights had already reverted to its ILLEGALLY SEIZED AND THEREFORE EXCLUDED AS EVIDENCE.[12]
embryonic... stage at the time of the search. Therefore, the government may confiscate the RESPONDENT COURT SERIOUSLY ERRED IN CONCLUDING THAT PETITIONER'S
monies and items taken from Dimaano and use the same in evidence against her since at the EVIDENCE CANNOT MAKE A CASE FOR FORFEITURE AND THAT THERE WAS NO
time of their seizure, private respondents did not enjoy any constitutional right. SHOWING OF CONSPIRACY, COLLUSION OR RELATIONSHIP BY CONSANGUINITY OR
Issues: AFFINITY BY AND BETWEEN RESPONDENT RAMAS AND RESPONDENT DIMAANO
Amended Complaint naming the Republic of the Philippines ("petitioner"), represented by the NOTWITHSTANDING THE FACT THAT SUCH CONCLUSIONS WERE CLEARLY
PCGG, as plaintiff and Ramas as defendant. The Amended Complaint also impleaded UNFOUNDED AND PREMATURE, HAVING BEEN RENDERED PRIOR TO THE
Elizabeth COMPLETION OF THE PRESENTATION OF THE EVIDENCE OF THE PETITIONER.
RESPONDENT COURT SERIOUSLY ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE ACTIONS TAKEN whether the protection accorded to individuals under the International Covenant on Civil and
BY THE PETITIONER, INCLUDING THE FILING OF THE ORIGINAL COMPLAINT AND Political Rights ("Covenant") and the
THE AMENDED COMPLAINT, SHOULD BE STRUCK OUT IN LINE WITH THE RULINGS Universal Declaration of Human Rights ("Declaration") remained in effect during the
OF THE SUPREME COURT IN CRUZ, JR. v. SANDIGANBAYAN, 194 SCRA 474 AND interregnum.
REPUBLIC v. MIGRINO, 189 SCRA 289, NOTWITHSTANDING THE FACT THAT: Ruling:
The cases of Cruz, Jr. v. Sandiganbayan, supra, and Republic v. Migrino, supra, are clearly We hold that PCGG has no such jurisdiction.
not applicable to this case; etitioner, however, does not claim that the President assigned Ramas' case to the PCGG.
Any procedural defect in the institution of the complaint in Civil Case No. 0037 was cured Therefore, Ramas' case should fall under the first category of AFP personnel before the
and/or waived by respondents with the filing of their respective answers with counterclaim; PCGG could exercise its jurisdiction over him. Petitioner argues that Ramas was undoubtedly
and a... subordinate of former President Marcos because of his position as the Commanding
The separate motions to dismiss were evidently improper considering that they were filed General of the Philippine Army. Petitioner claims that Ramas' position enabled him to receive
after commencement of the presentation of the evidence of the petitioner and even before orders directly from his commander-in-chief, undeniably making him a subordinate of former
the latter was allowed to formally offer its evidence and rest its case; President
RESPONDENT COURT SERIOUSLY ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE ARTICLES AND Marcos.
THINGS SUCH AS SUMS OF MONEY, COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT, JEWELRY AND We hold that Ramas was not a "subordinate" of former President Marcos in the sense
LAND TITLES CONFISCATED FROM THE HOUSE OF RESPONDENT DIMAANO WERE contemplated under EO No. 1 and its amendments.
ILLEGALLY SEIZED AND THEREFORE EXCLUDED AS EVIDENCE.[1... primary issue for Mere position held by a military officer does not automatically make him a "subordinate" as
resolution is whether the PCGG has the jurisdiction to investigate and cause the filing of a this term is used in EO Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A absent a showing that he enjoyed close
forfeiture petition against Ramas and Dimaano for unexplained wealth under RA No. 1379. association with former President Marcos.
The primary issue for resolution is whether the PCGG has the jurisdiction to investigate and "subordinate" as used in EO Nos. 1 & 2 refers to one who enjoys a close association with
cause the filing of a forfeiture petition against Ramas and Dimaano for unexplained wealth former President Marcos and/or his wife, similar to the immediate family member, relative,
under RA No. 1379. and close associate in EO No. 1 and the close relative, business associate,... dummy, agent,
andiganbayan erred in dismissing the case before completion of the presentation of or nominee in EO No. 2.
petitioner's evidence. Ramas' position alone as Commanding General of the Philippine Army with the rank of Major
Sandiganbayan erred in dismissing the case before completion of the presentation of General[19] does not suffice to make him a "subordinate" of former President Marco
petitioner's evidence. PCGG has to provide a prima... facie showing that Ramas was a close associate of former
Sandiganbayan erred in declaring the properties confiscated from Dimaano's house as President Marcos... failed to do.
illegally seized and therefore inadmissible in evidence. the resolution of the AFP Board and even the Amended Complaint do not show that the
(1) whether the revolutionary government was bound by the Bill of Rights of the 1973 properties Ramas allegedly owned were accumulated by him in his capacity as a
Constitution during the interregnum, that is, after the actual and effective take-over of power "subordinate" of his commander-in-chief. Petitioner merely enumerated the properties Ramas
by the revolutionary government following the... cessation of resistance by loyalist forces up allegedly owned... and suggested that these properties were disproportionate to his salary
to 24 March 1986 (immediately before the adoption of the Provisional Constitution); and (2) and other legitimate income without showing that Ramas amassed them because of his close
association with former President Marcos. Petitioner, in fact, admits that the AFP Board
resolution does... not contain a finding that Ramas accumulated his wealth because of his their relatives and cronies.[29] Without these elements, the PCGG cannot claim jurisdiction
close association with former President Marcos, thus: over a case.
While it is true that the resolution of the Anti-Graft Board of the New Armed Forces of the etitioner has only itself to blame for non-completion of the presentation of its evidence. First,
Philippines did not categorically find a prima facie evidence showing that respondent Ramas this case has been pending for four years before the Sandiganbayan dismissed it.
unlawfully accumulated wealth by virtue of his close association or relation with... former Petitioner... filed its Amended Complaint on 11 August 1987, and only began to present its
President Marcos and/or his wife, it is submitted that such omission was not fatal. The evidence on 17 April 1989. Petitioner had almost two years to prepare its evidence. However,
resolution of the Anti-Graft Board should be read in the context of the law creating the same despite this sufficient time, petitioner still delayed the presentation of the rest of its evidence
and the objective of the investigation which was, as stated in the above, pursuant to by filing... numerous motions for postponements and extensions.
Republic Act Nos. 3019 and 1379 in relation to Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-a;[21] Thus, we hold that the Sandiganbayan did not err in dismissing the case before completion of
(Emphasis supplied) the presentation of petitioner's evidence.
Such omission is fatal. Petitioner forgets that it is precisely a prima facie showing that the ill- Petitioner claims that the Sandiganbayan erred in declaring the properties confiscated from
gotten wealth was accumulated by a "subordinate" of former President Marcos that vests Dimaano's house as illegally seized and therefore inadmissible in evidence. This issue bears
jurisdiction on PCGG. EO No. 1[22] clearly premises the creation... of the PCGG on the a significant effect on petitioner's case since these properties comprise most of petitioner's...
urgent need to recover all ill-gotten wealth amassed by former President Marcos, his evidence against private respondents. Petitioner will not have much evidence to support its
immediate family, relatives, subordinates and close associates. Therefore, to say that such case against private respondents if these properties are inadmissible in evidence.
omission was not fatal is clearly contrary to the intent behind the creation of the "Illegal Possession of Firearms and Ammunition." Dimaano was not present during the raid
PCGG. but Dimaano's cousins witnessed the raid. The raiding team seized the items detailed... in the
preliminary investigation of unexplained wealth amassed on or before 25 February 1986 falls seizure receipt together with other items not included in the search warrant. The raiding team
under the jurisdiction of the seized these items: one baby armalite rifle with two magazines; 40 rounds of 5.56
Ombudsman, while the authority to file the corresponding forfeiture petition rests with the ammunition; one pistol, caliber .45; communications equipment, cash consisting of
Solicitor General.[27] The Ombudsman Act or Republic Act No. 6770 ("RA No. 6770") vests P2,870,000 and US$50,000, jewelry, and land titles.
in the Ombudsman the power to conduct preliminary investigation and to file... forfeiture "on March 3, 1986 or five days after the successful EDSA revolution.
proceedings involving unexplained wealth amassed after 25 February 1986.[28] Petitioner is partly right in its arguments.
After the pronouncements of the Court in Cruz, the PCGG still pursued this case despite the "done in defiance of the provisions of the 1973 Constitution."[41] The resulting government
absence of a prima facie finding that Ramas was a "subordinate" of former President Marcos. was indisputably a revolutionary government bound by no constitution or legal limitations
The petition for forfeiture filed with the Sandiganbayan should be... dismissed for lack of except treaty obligations that the revolutionary government, as the de jure government in the
authority by the PCGG to investigate respondents since there is no prima facie showing that Philippines, assumed under international... law.
EO No. 1 and its amendments apply to respondents. We hold that the Bill of Rights under the 1973 Constitution was not operative during the
Petitioner has no jurisdiction over private respondents. Thus, there is no jurisdiction to waive interregnum. However, we rule that the protection accorded to individuals under the
in the first place. The PCGG cannot exercise investigative or prosecutorial powers never Covenant and the Declaration remained in effect during the interregnum.
granted to it. PCGG's powers are specific and limited. Unless given additional assignment directives and orders of the revolutionary government were the supreme law because no
by... the President, PCGG's sole task is only to recover the ill-gotten wealth of the Marcoses, constitution limited the extent and scope of such directives and orders.
during the interregnum, a person could not invoke any exclusionary right under a Bill of The seizure of these items was therefore void, and unless these items are contraband per se,
Rights because there was neither a constitution nor a Bill of Rights during the interregnum. [53] and they are not, they must be returned to the person from whom the raiding seized
The Declaration, to which the Philippines is also a signatory, provides in its Article 17(2) that them.
"[n]o one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property." Although the signatories to the do not declare that such person is the lawful owner... of these items... petition for certiorari is
Declaration did not intend it as a legally binding document, being only a declaration, the DISMISSED. The questioned Resolutions of the Sandiganbayan dated 18 November 1991
Court has interpreted the Declaration as part of the generally accepted principles of and 25 March 1992 in Civil Case No. 0037, remanding the records of this case to the
international law and binding on the State.[46] Thus, the revolutionary government was also Ombudsman for such appropriate action as the evidence may... warrant, and referring this
obligated under international law to observe the rights[47] of individuals under the case to the Commissioner of the Bureau of Internal Revenue for a determination of any tax
Declaration. liability of respondent Elizabeth Dimaano, are AFFIRMED.
The fact is the revolutionary government did not repudiate the Covenant or the Principles:
Declaration in the same way it repudiated the 1973 Constitution. As the de jure government,
the revolutionary government could not escape responsibility for the State's good faith
compliance with its treaty obligations under international law.
directives and orders issued by government officers were valid so long as these officers did
not exceed the authority granted them by the revolutionary government. The directives and
orders should not have... also violated the Covenant or the Declaration. In this case, the
revolutionary government presumptively sanctioned the warrant since the revolutionary
government did not repudiate it. The warrant, issued by a judge upon proper application,
specified the items to be searched and... seized. The warrant is thus valid with respect to the
items specifically described in the warrant.
Constabulary raiding team seized items not included in the warrant.
I was informed that the reason why they also brought the other items not included in the
search warrant was because the money and other jewelries were contained in attaché cases
and cartons with... markings "Sony Trinitron", and I think three (3) vaults or steel safes.
Believing that the attaché cases and the steel safes were containing firearms, they forced
open these containers only to find out that they contained money.
It is obvious from the testimony of Captain Sebastian that the warrant did not include the
monies, communications equipment, jewelry and land titles that the raiding team confiscated.
The search warrant did not particularly describe these items and the raiding team
confiscated... them on its own authority. The raiding team had no legal basis to seize these
items without showing that these items could be the subject of warrantless search and
seizure.[52] Clearly, the raiding team exceeded its authority when it seized these... items.
PROVINCE OF NORTH COTABATO v. GOVERNMENT OF REPUBLIC PEACE PANEL ON ANCESTRAL W... hether respondent Government of the Republic of the Philippines Peace Panel committed grave
DOMAIN, GR No. 183591, 2008-10-14 abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when it negotiated and initiated the MOA
Facts: vis-à-vis ISSUES Nos. 4 and 5
On August 5, 2008, the Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and the MILF, through the Whether there is a violation of the people's right to information on matters of public concern (1987
Chairpersons of their respective peace negotiating panels, were scheduled to sign a Memorandum of Constitution, Article III, Sec. 7) under a state policy of full disclosure of all its transactions involving public
Agreement on the Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) Aspect of the GRP-MILF Tripoli interest (1987 Constitution, Article II, Sec. 28)... including public consultation under Republic Act No. 7160
Agreement on Peace of 2001 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. (LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE OF 1991)
The signing of the MOA-AD between the GRP and the MILF was not to materialize, however, for upon If it is in the affirmative, whether prohibition under Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure is an
motion of petitioners, specifically those who filed their cases before the scheduled signing of the MOA-AD, appropriate remedy
this Court issued a Temporary Restraining Order enjoining the GRP from... signing the same. Whether by signing the MOA, the Government of the Republic of the Philippines would be BINDING itself...
Towards the end of 1999 up to early 2000, the MILF attacked a number of municipalities in Central a) to create and recognize the Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE) as a separate state, or a juridical,
Mindanao and, in March 2000, it took control of the town hall of territorial or political subdivision not recognized by law;... b) to revise or amend the Constitution and
Kauswagan, Lanao del Norte.[3] In response, then President Joseph Estrada declared and carried out an existing laws to conform to the MOA;... c) to concede to or recognize the claim of the Moro Islamic
"all-out-war" against the MILF. Liberation Front for ancestral domain in violation of Republic Act No. 8371 (THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES
Formal peace talks between the parties were held in Tripoli, Libya from June 20-22, 2001, the outcome of RIGHTS ACT OF 1997), particularly Section 3(g) & Chapter VII (DELINEATION, RECOGNITION OF
which was the GRP-MILF Tripoli Agreement on Peace (Tripoli Agreement 2001) containing the basic ANCESTRAL
principles and agenda on the following aspects of the negotiation: DOMAINS)
Security Aspect, Rehabilitation Aspect, and Ancestral Domain Aspect. With regard to the Ancestral If in the affirmative, whether the Executive Branch has the authority to so bind the Government of the
Domain Aspect, the parties in Tripoli Agreement 2001 simply agreed "that the same be discussed further Republic of the Philippines
by the Parties in their next meeting." Whether the inclusion/exclusion of the Province of North Cotabato, Cities of Zamboanga, Iligan and
In 2005, several exploratory talks were held between the parties in Kuala Lumpur, eventually leading to the Isabela, and the Municipality of Linamon, Lanao del Norte in/from the areas covered by the projected
crafting of the draft MOA-AD in its final form, which, as mentioned, was set to be signed last August 5, Bangsamoro Homeland is a justiciable question... hether desistance from signing the MOA derogates any
2008. prior valid commitments of the Government of the Republic of the Philippines.
On August 19, 2008, Ernesto Maceda, Jejomar Binay, and Aquilino Pimentel III filed a petition for Wh
Prohibition,... praying for a judgment prohibiting and permanently enjoining respondents from formally Ruling:
signing and... executing the MOA-AD and or any other agreement derived therefrom or similar thereto, and In general, the objections against the MOA-AD center on the extent of the powers conceded therein to the
nullifying the MOA-AD for being unconstitutional and illegal. Petitioners herein additionally implead as BJE.
respondent the MILF Peace Negotiating Panel represented by its Chairman Mohagher right to self-determination of a people is normally fulfilled through internal self-determination - a people's
Iqbal. pursuit of its political, economic, social and cultural development within the framework... of an existing
Issues: state. A right to external self-determination... arises in only the most extreme of cases and, even then,
Whether the petitions have become moot and academic under carefully defined circumstances.
(i) insofar as the mandamus aspect is concerned, in view of the disclosure of official copies of the final External self-determination can be defined as in the following statement from the Declaration on Friendly
draft of the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA); and Relations, supra
(ii) insofar as the prohibition aspect involving the Local Government Units is concerned, if it is considered One, E.O. No. 3 itself is replete with mechanics for continuing consultations on both national and local
that consultation has become fait accompli with the finalization of the draft levels and for a principal forum for consensus-building. In fact, it is the duty of the Presidential Adviser on
Whether the constitutionality and the legality of the MOA is ripe for adjudication the Peace Process to conduct regular dialogues to seek... relevant information, comments, advice, and
recommendations from peace partners and concerned sectors of society.
Two, Republic Act No. 7160 or the Local Government Code of 1991 requires all national offices to conduct `Bangsamoros.'" It defines "
consultations before any project or program critical to the environment and human ecology including those "Bangsamoro people" as the natives or original inhabitants of Mindanao and its... adjacent islands
that may call for the eviction of a particular group of... people residing in such locality, is implemented including Palawan and the Sulu archipelago at the time of conquest or colonization, and their descendants
therein. The MOA-AD is one peculiar program that unequivocally and unilaterally vests ownership of a vast whether mixed or of full blood, including their spouses.
territory to the Bangsamoro people, which could pervasively and drastically result to the diaspora or Thus, the concept of "Bangsamoro," as defined in this strand of the MOA-AD, includes not only "Moros" as
displacement of a... great number of inhabitants from their total environment. traditionally understood even by Muslims,[31] but all indigenous peoples of Mindanao and its adjacent
Three, Republic Act No. 8371 or the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997 provides for clear-cut islands.
procedure for the recognition and delineation of ancestral domain, which entails, among other things, the The Bangsamoro people are acknowledged as having the right to self-governance, which right is said to be
observance of the free and prior informed consent of the Indigenous rooted on ancestral territoriality exercised originally under the suzerain authority of their sultanates and the
Cultural Communities/Indigenous Peoples. Notably, the statute does not grant the Executive Department Pat a Pangampong ku Ranaw.
or any government agency the power to delineate and recognize an ancestral domain claim by mere
agreement or compromise.
The MOA-AD cannot be reconciled with the present Constitution and laws. Not only its specific provisions
but the very concept underlying them, namely, the associative relationship envisioned between the GRP
Brief Fact Summary.
and the BJE, are unconstitutional , for the concept... presupposes that the associated entity is a state and
Quebec attempted to secede from Canada.
implies that the same is on its way to independence.
Synopsis of Rule of Law.
While there is a clause in the MOA-AD stating that the provisions thereof inconsistent with the present
The right of a people to self-determination cannot be said to ground a right to unilateral secession.
legal framework will not be effective until that framework is amended, the same does not cure its defect.
Issue.
The inclusion of provisions in the MOA-AD establishing an associative... relationship between the BJE and
Under international law, is there a right to self-determination that would give the National Assembly,
the Central Government is, itself, a violation of the Memorandum of Instructions From The President dated
legislature or government of Quebec, the right to effect Quebec’s unilateral secession from Canada?
March 1, 2001, addressed to the government peace panel. Moreover, as the clause is worded, it virtually
Held.
guarantees that the necessary... amendments to the Constitution and the laws will eventually be put in
The principle of self-determination captured under international law has evolved within a framework of
place. Neither the GRP Peace Panel nor the President herself is authorized to make such a guarantee.
respect for the territorial integrity of existing states. It is only people under colonial or foreign occupation
Upholding such an act would amount to authorizing a usurpation of the constituent powers vested only in
that are granted the right to external self-determination, based on the assumption that both are entities
Congress, a Constitutional Convention, or the people themselves through the process of initiative, for the
inherently distinct from the colonialist power and the occupant power. Quebec is neither a colony nor a
only way that the Executive can ensure the outcome of the amendment process is through an undue
foreign occupied land in this case nor have her people been victims of attacks on their physical existence
influence or interference with that process.
or integrity or of massive human violations. But Quebecers are represented equitably in legislative,
While the MOA-AD would not amount to an international agreement or unilateral declaration binding on the
executive and judicial institutions, they occupy prominent positions within the government of Canada and
Philippines under international law, respondents' act of guaranteeing amendments is, by itself, already a
they equally enjoy the freedom to pursue their political, economic, social and cultural development.
constitutional violation that renders the MOA-AD fatally... defective.
Discussion.
WHEREFORE, respondents' motion to dismiss is DENIED. The main and intervening petitions are GIVEN
The possibility that the international law right of self-determination could entail secession as a “last resort”
DUE COURSE and hereby GRANTED.
in cases of especially severe oppression, in which other channels for exercising internal self-determination
Principles:
had been “totally frustrated” is left open by the Reference Re Secession of Quebec.
Under the heading "Terms of Reference" (TOR), the MOA-AD includes not only four earlier agreements
between the GRP and MILF, but also two agreements between the GRP and the MNLF: the 1976 Tripoli
Agreement, and the Final Peace Agreement on the Implementation of the 1976 Tripoli
Agreement, signed on September 2, 1996 during the administration of President Fidel Ramos.