The Law IsCool

SECRETARY OF JUSTICE v. LANTION

October 26, 2012 § 1 Comment

FACTS:
Secretary Of Justice Franklin Drilon, representing the Government of the Republic of the Philippines, signed in Manila the “extradition Treaty Between
the Government of the Philippines and the Government of the U.S.A. The Philippine Senate ratified the said Treaty.
On June 18, 1999, the Department of Justice received from the Department of Foreign Affairs U.S Note Verbale No. 0522 containing a request for the
extradition of private respondent Mark Jiminez to the United States.
On the same day petitioner designate and authorizing a panel of a orneys to take charge of and to handle the case. Pending evaluation of the
aforestated extradition documents, Mark Jiminez through counsel, wrote a le er to Justice Secretary requesting copies of the official extradition request
from the U.S Government and that he be given ample time to comment on the request after he shall have received copies of the requested papers but
the petitioner denied the request for the consistency of Article 7 of the RP-US Extradition Treaty stated in Article 7 that the Philippine Government
must present the interests of the United States in any proceedings arising out of a request for extradition.

ISSUE: Whether or not to uphold a citizen’s basic due process rights or the governments ironclad duties under a treaty.

RULING: Petition dismissed.

The human rights of person, whether citizen or alien , and the rights of the accused guaranteed in our Constitution should take precedence over treaty
rights claimed by a contracting state. The duties of the government to the individual deserve preferential consideration when they collide with its treaty
obligations to the government of another state. This is so although we recognize treaties as a source of binding obligations under generally accepted
principles of international law incorporated in our Constitution as part of the law of the land.
The doctrine of incorporation is applied whenever municipal tribunals are confronted with situation in which there appears to be a conflict between a
rule of international law and the provision of the constitution or statute of the local state.

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

Check out my Youtube channel. (h ps://www.youtube.com/channel/UCUUvROHZi5UP96rukdPBNjA)

 Advertisements

REPORT THIS AD
Tagged: consti digest, poli digest, SECRETARY OF JUSTICE v. LANTION

§ One Response to SECRETARY OF JUSTICE v. LANTION

kris says:
September 15, 2014 at 12:54 pm (h ps://thelawiscool.wordpress.com/2012/10/26/secretary-of-justice-v-lantion/#comment-99)
this digest is nice got what i came for

Reply (/2012/10/26/secretary-of-justice-v-lantion/?replytocom=99#respond)

Blog at WordPress.com.