GONZALES V.

HECHANOVA
9 SCRA 230
October 22, 1963
CONCEPCION, J.
FACTS:
Executive Secretary Rufino Echanova, respondent, authorized the
importation of 67,000 tons of foreign rice to be purchased from
Vietnam and Burma. The Petitioner, Ramon Gonzales, a rice planter,
and president of the Ilo-ilo Palay and Corn Planters Association, filed a
petition averring that, in making or attempting to make said imporation
of foreign rice, the respondents are acting without jurisction or in
excess of jurisdiction because R.A. No. 2207, explicitly prohibits the
importation of rice and corn by Rice and Corn Administration or any
government agency.
ISSUE:
Whether or not an international agreement may be invalidated
by our courts.
HELD:
Suffice it to say that the Constitution of the Philippines has
clearly settled it in the affirmative, by providing, in Section 2 of Article
VIII thereof, that the Supreme Court may not be deprived "of its
jurisdiction to review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal,
certiorari, or writ of error as the law or the rules of court may provide,
final judgments and decrees of inferior courts in (1) All cases in
which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, law, ordinance, or
executive order or regulation is in question". In other words, our
Constitution authorizes the nullification of a treaty, not only when it
conflicts with the fundamental law, but, also, when it runs counter to
an act of Congress.
The alleged consummation of the aforementioned contracts with
Vietnam and Burma does not render this case academic, Republic Act
No. 2207 enjoins our Government not from entering into contracts for
the purchase of rice, but from importing rice, except under the
conditions Prescribed in said Act. Upon the other hand, Republic Act
No. 3452 has two (2) main features, namely: (a) it requires the
Government to purchase rice and corn directly from our local planters,
growers or landowners; and (b) it prohibits importations of rice by the
Government, and leaves such importations to private parties. The

pivotal issue in this case is whether the proposed importation which

has not been consummated as yet is legally feasible.