Secretary of Justice Vs Lantion

Secretary of Justice vs. Hon. Ralph C.
Lantion
Facts: On January 13, 1977 P.D. 1069 was issued prescribing the Procedure of the Extradition of Persons who have committed Crimes in a Foreign Country. The Decree is founded on The Doctrine of Incorporation under the Constitution Art II, Sec 2 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution. On November 13, 1994 Justice Secretary Franklin Drilon signed in Manila the Extradition Treaty Between the Government of the Philippines and the Government of U.S.A. It was ratified by the Senate. On June 18, 1999, the Department of Justice received from the Department of Foreign Affairs of U. S. a request for the extradition of Mark Jimenez to the United States who are charged in the U.S. with the violation of the following: conspiracy, attempt to evade tax, false statement or entry, election contributions in the name of another. Pending evaluation of the extradition documents, Mark Jimenez, through a counsel, on July 1, 1999, requested copies of the official extradition request from the U.S. Government as well as all documents and papers submitted therewith, and that he be given ample time to comment on the request after he shall received copies of the requested papers. Mark Jimenez insisted the constitutional rights particularly the following: 1. the right to be furnished the request and supporting papers; 2. the right to be heard which consists in having a reasonable period of time to oppose the request, and to present evidence is support of the opposition; The Depart of Justice Denied the request. On Aug 6, 1999 Mark Jimenez filed with the R.T.C against the Secretary of Justice, Secretary of Foreign Affairs and the Director of the NBI for Mandamus (to compel them to furnish to Mark Jimenez the extradition documents.), Certiorari (to set aside the Sec. of Justice letter dated July 13, 1999), Prohibition (to restrain the Sec of Justice from considering the extradition request). On August 10, 1999 the Judge ordered: The Secretary of Justice et al ordered to maintain the status quo by refraining from committing the acts complained of. Thus this petition, arguing that Honorable Lantion (Presiding Judge of RTC Manila)acted without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or abuse discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in issuing the TRO: 1. by ordering the Secretary of Justice to refrain from committing the acts complained of (i.e to desist from refusing Mark Jimenez access to the official extradition request and documents.)
2. Secretary of Justice was unqualifiedly prevented from performing legal duties under the extradition treaty and the Philippine Extradition Law. Issue: Would Mark Jimenez entitlement to notice and hearing during the evaluation stage of the proceedings constitute a breach of the legal duties of the Philippine Government under the RPUS Extradition Treaty? Held: Petition Dismissed. Petitioner (Secretary of Justice) is ordered to furnish Mark Jimenez copies of the extradition request and its supporting papers, and to grant him (Mark Jimenez) a reasonable period within which to file his comment with supporting evidence. Under the Doctrine of Incorporation, rules of international law form part of the law of the land and no further legislative action is needed to make such rules applicable in the domestic sphere. The doctrine of incorporation is applied whenever municipal tribunals are confronted with situations in which there appears to be a conflict between a rule of international law and the provisions of the constitution or statute of the local state. Efforts should first be exerted to harmonize them, so as to give effect to both since it is to be presumed that municipal law was enacted with proper regard for the generally accepted principles of international law in observance of the incorporation clause in the above cited constitutional provision. In a situation, however, where the conflict is irreconcilable and a choice has to be made between a rule of international law and a municipal law, jurisprudence dictates that municipal law should be upheld by the municipal courts, for the reason that such courts are organs of municipal law and are accordingly bound by it in all circumstances. The fact that international law has been made part of the law of the land does not pertain to or imply the primacy of international law over national or municipal law in the municipal sphere. The doctrine of incorporation, as applied in most countries, decrees that rules of international law are given equal standing with, but are not superior to, national legislative enactments. Accordingly, the principle lex posterior derogate priori takes effect a treaty may repeal a statute and a statute may repeal a treaty. In states where the Constitution is the highest law of the land, such as the Republic of the Philippines, both statutes and treaties may be invalidated if they are in conflict with the constitution

Secretary of Justice Vs Lantion

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Secretary of Justice Vs Lantion

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Secretary of Justice Vs Lantion

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Secretary of Justice vs. Hon. Ralph C.

You might also like