HEIZEL MAE DONQUE

CHAPTER 11: JURISDICTION

JURISDICTION
• is the authority exercised by a state over persons and things within or sometimes outside its territory
• subject to certain exceptions
• may be classified as either PERSONAL or TERRITORIAL
• may exercised by a state over:
a. NATIONALS
b. TERRISTRIAL DOMAIN
c. MARITIME AND FLUVIAL DOMAIN
d. CONTINENTAL SHELF
e. OPEN SEAS l
f. AERIAL DOMAIN
g. OUTER SPACE
h. OTHER TERRITORIES

MONTIVIDEO CONVENTION
• applies to all inhabitants
• all persons within a state shall be under the jurisdiction of whichever state a person is in
• e.g.foreigners will be under the jurisdiction of the Philippines regardless of the nationality
• LOGIC BEHIND THIS:
- Whoever is within the territory of any other state they are visiting, foreigners shall receive the same amount of
protection in theory with the citizens by the government itself. Since, foreigners are protected in the same amount with
the citizens by the government of the state they are visiting, foreigners are therfeore bound by all the laws in the state.

PERSONAL JURISDICTION
• unlike territorial jurisdiction, it can extend outside of the state’s territory
• DOCTRINE OF INDELIBLE ALLEGIANCE
- one of the more controversial types personal jurisdiction
- made famous by Japan during WWII
- regardless of citizenship, Japanese people will always have allegiance to Japan
- Japanese people are expected to defend, protect, and serve Japan in the events of WWII
- as a result, the USA put Japanese people in concentration camps
- In the Philippines, we have come to compromise with the naturalization processes from being a Filipino Citizen to
being naturalized american citizen whenever Filipino people chose to live in the USA; or opt to become a dual citizen
• WHY IS DUAL CITIZENSHIP ALLOWED? IN TERMS OF WAR, WHERE DOES THIS PERSON SIDE WITH?
- Citizenship is not the same as allegiance.
- People are expected to only have a single allegiance even if they have multiple citizenship
- e.g., Even if Filipino born citizen loses his citizenship, he is still Filipino under dual citizenship
• ASSERTION OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION
- Personal laws follows a person wherever he is
- Article 15, CC: personal and family laws of a the state over a person is binding even living abroad. Personal and
Family laws follows a Filipino wherever he is.
- e.g. divorce is not allowed in the Philippines even if it is allowed in another countries.
- exemptions: 1. If a Filipino marries a foreign inside or outside the Philippines, if either procures a divorce.
 2. If both Filipino couples got married abroad where divorce is allowed, however, it will not be
recognized in the Philippines because both of them are Filipinos. They can remarry but only
outside the Philippines where their diviorce is recognized
• PERSONAL WILL OF A PERSON AFTER HE DIES
- included in personal jurisdiction
- however, the form of the will can follow the forms in foreign states but the contents of the will shall abide by the laws of
the Philippines
• SUCCESION OF A PERSON
- include in personal jurisdiction
- Article 16, FC: succession shall be regulated by national law in terms of the form
- however, formalties is not regulated by national law
• JURISDICTION TO TAX
- even if a person earns money abroad, he is still to abide by the national laws on taxations even if not residing in the
Philippines
- as provide in the Revised Revenue Code for income received by a Filipino from all sources

SIMUNDAC KEPPEL V. KEPPEL

Facts: Two German citizens filed an annulment of marriage on the basis of Philippine Law.
Issue: Can two foreigners get an annulment in the Philippines under Philipine Laws?
Held: Philipine law cannot be applied to the German couple as far as the family rights and obligations of the parties who
are foreign nationals are concerned even if they are both residing in the Philippines. They are still German citizens, thus, it
is the pertinent German Law that governed.

• CAN A FOREIGNER GET AN ANNULMENT AGAINST A FILIPINO NATIONAL?

- YES. If either of the parties are Filipino National

JOYCE V. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTION

Facts: A person who carried himself out to be a British subject with G reat Britain. Lord Haw Haw is a double agent. He
was a British National and held British passport and yet espouse a anti-british propaganda.
Issue: Can he be prosecuted?
Defense: He cannot be prosecuted for high treason because the persons wo can only be prosecuted for high treason
are the nationals of the country. A person can only be convicted of high treason against a state if he is a national of the
state.
Held: Since he held himself as British National and held a British passport, he will be tried for high treason.

TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION
• General Rule: A state has jurisdiction over all persons and property within its territory.

THE SCHOONER EXCHANGE V. MCFADDON

The jurisdiction of the nation within its own territory will is necessary, exclusive, and absolute. It is susceptible of no
limitation not imposed by itself.

• EXEMPTION FROM THE STATEMENT ABOVE:

1. Foreign states, heads of state, diolomatic representatives, and consuls to a certain degree
— to a certain degree meaning that if they commit such acts in connection with their functions, they cannot be
prosecuted in the host state.
 prosecuted
— if consuls commits crimes not related to their functions, they may be prosecuted.
— the former three can never be porosecuted with Philippine territory regardless of the kind of crime they commit

2. Foreign state property, including embassies, consulates, public vessels engaged in non-commercial activities.
— these are extensions of the territory of whichever country that that embassy is coming from

3. Acts of State

UNDEHILL V. HERNANDEZ
Facts: Underhill is subject of the USA, an american citizen. He was in Venenzuela under the previous government. He was
in the mission to deal and operate the waterworks of the Venezuelan government prior to the revolution. Hernandez was a
revolutionary and a military commander who stage a revolution in Venenzuela and won. After the revolution, Underhill was
put into house arrest in order to compel him to continue finishing the waterworks and operate the waterworks in
Venenzuela. Underhill applied for a passport so he can exit Venenzuela. At first, he was refused, he was compelled to be in
house arrest and to have the waterworks running. Eventually, Underhill was granted a passport and was able to exit
Venenzuela. In the meantime, the USA recognized the revolutionary government created by Hernandez. After Underhill
returned to the USA, he sued Hernandez for the following:

1. Sued for damages for placing him under house arrest

2. sued for the cost and for him to be paid in his services for building the waterworks for Venenzuela.

The suit was brought up in the USA

Held: The Supreme court ruled that because the USA already recognized the revolutionary government, therefore the
acts of Hernandez is considered to be acts of state. Hence, nobody can question an act of state, even if it s true that
Underhill suffered under Hernandez. Thus, Underhill cannot sue Hernandez.

4. Foreign merchant vessels exercising the rights of innocent passage or arrival under stress.
— INNOCENT PASSAGE:
- navigation through the territorial sea of a state as long as it is not for purposes other than to get into a certain
location (dock in one of the PH Ports of entree), or an entree under juries without entering internal waters
- In the Philippines, everything in the straightline method falls in the internal waters of the Philippines. No foreign
vessel can pass through internal waters and territorial waters. Only Philippine vessels can have the right to ply the
routes within these internal waters. Only Philippine aircraft are allowed to fly over Philippine airspace.

— CAN FOREIGN VESSELS TAKE A SHORCUT THROUGH NATIONAL TERRITORY TO GO TO SPECIFIED

LOCATION? The general answer is no because these vessels are not accorded freedom of navigation. However,
they can if they are accorder the right of innocent passage by the national government.

— ARRIVAL UNDER STRESS/INVOLUNTARY ENTRANCE:

- may be due to lack of provisions, unseaworthiness of the vessel, inclement weather, or otehr cases of force
majeure, like pursuit by pirates.
- e.g. If a Foeign vessel is nearby PH waters and a storm comes up, they can hide in one of the PH island or
mountains so that the winds cannot hit them.

5. Foreign armies passing through or stationed in its territories with its persmission.
6. Such other persons or property, including organizations like the UN, over which it may be, by agreement waive jurisdiction.
— PH don’t have jurisdiction over the UN
— e.g. The UN Headquarters in New York is not under US jurisdiction but rather exclusively under the UN Jurisdiction.

LAND JURISDICTION
• everything found within the territorial domain of the state is under its jurisdiction.

SAGUISAG V. EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

I

Facts: There has always been protest againsts Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreements (EDCA) because it has
something to do with the visiting forces agreement of the Philippines.After the US left the US
↑
bases in the Philippines, the
US still came back after EDCA or the visiting forces agreement.

Issue: After the US was evicted from the PH, there was a conscious political stance that no other US bases will be made
in the PH ever again. But under EDCA, there is Agreed Locations ― these are specific points and locations in the PH
where the US can build structures and post their military men.

Held: The SC ruled that these agreed locations are not akin to US bases because under the US-PH agreement before,
every aspect of control within the US bases including the buiding of the US bases and its operation are left exclusively by
the USA which means that the PH have given full jurisdictio over these areas. On the other hand, the rule of agreed
locations is the US have control over the structure of these areas but management and jurisdiction will remain with the
Philippines. Hence, these are two different things, because in Agreed Locations, PH are not giving up jurisdiction. The only
thing that the EDCA provides to US is the ownership of building and construction of activities towards the US not the
jurisdiction of these areas.

• Philippines own properties outside of its territory

— e.g. Roppongi, Japan: The Roppongi property was acquired by the Philippine government pursuant to the
reparations agreement between the Philippine and Japanese governments in 1956. Under such agreement, this
Roppongi property was acquired by the Philippine government for a specific purpose, namely, to serve as the site of the
Philippine Embassy in Tokyo, Japan.

MARITIME AND FLUVIAL JURISDICTION

• GENERAL PRINCIPLE: The internal waters of a state are assimilate to the land mass and subjected to the same degree of
jurisdiction exercised over the terrestrial domain.
• civil, criminal, administrative jurisdiction is exercised by the flag state over its public vessels wherever they may be
• JURISDICTION OVER FOREIGN MERCHANT VESSELS
— Civil matters: the jurisdiction of foreign merchant vessels docked in a local port is exercied by coastal state
— Criminal Matters: the jurisdiction is determine by either English Rule or French Rule (Philippines follows the English
Rule)
• ENGLISH RULE: The coastal state shall have jurisdiction over all offenses committed on board such as the vessel, except
only where they do not compromise the peace of the port
• FRENCH RULE: The flag state shall have jurisdiction over all offenses committed on board such as the vessel, except only
where they do not compromise the peace of the port
• e.g. If the drugs is on board of the vessesl and has not docked in the Philippines, the Philippines will not have jurisdiction.
But once that vessel is docked, even if the drugs are not brought outside the vessel, the Philippines will acquire jurisdiction
under the English Rule.

• ARCHIPELAGO DOCTRINE: the waters around, between and connecting the islands of the archipelago,regardless
of their breath and dimensionsform part of the internal waters of the Philippines.
• FREEDOM WITHIN THE PHILIPPINE WATERS AND PHILIPPINE AIRSPACE
— only the vessesl flying the flags of the Philippines will have freedom of overflight and freedom of navigation.
— Freedom of Overflight: only airlines of the Philippines can have freedom of overflight in between islands
— Freedom of Navigation: only vessels flying the Philippine flag can have the freedom of navigation between PH
islands and internal waters
— Innocent Passage and Landing traffic: other airlines can have freedom of overflight

MAGALLONA V. ERMITA
Facts: UNCLOS 3 recommended even smaller baselines and congress created a new law covering the UNCLOS 3 on
narrowing baselines. Certain factions in society filed a case questioning the new law.
Issue: By following the UNCLOS 3 on narrowing baselines, does Philippines giving territorial waters?
Held: If we stick to the treaty limits under the Treaty of Paris where there is no EEZ and etc, eventually the interntional
community will reject as they reject the archipelagic doctrine made by Treaty of Paris. Hence, Philippines shall follow the
UNCLOS 3. Furthermore, the SC held that PH can still benefit from the UNCLOS 3 because of the EEZ where the
Philippines can still mine, fish, and pump oil to the exclusion of all other states which was not included in Treaty Limits.

• REGIME OF ISLANDS
— Article 121, UNCLOS III: an island is a naturally formed area of land, surrounded by water, which is above water at
high tide.
— Group of islands and rocks too far away from the archipelago
— also refers to patches of islands in the Pacific such as the Hawaiian islands and Oceania islands like Fiji
— Problems:
1. While they may generate territorial sea, they cannot generate baselines. Therefore if they cannot generate baselines, you
can only measure territorial sea from low marks at the lowest low tide and extend 12 nutical miles but beyond 24 nautical
miles, they have nothing.
2. Cannot generate Exclusive Economic Zone

THE CONTIGUOUS ZONE

• It is a zone contiguous to its territorial sea
• The coastal State may exercise the control necessary to:
a) prevent infringement of its customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws and regulations within its territory or territorial
sea
b) punish infringement of the above laws and regulations committed within its territory or territorial sea
• ARTICLE 33, UNCLOS III: The contiguous zone may not extend beyond 24 nautical miles from the baselines from which
the breadth of the territorial sea is measured.

THE CONTINENTAL SHELF

• comprises of seabed and subsoil of the submarine areas that extend beyond its territorial sea throughout the natural
prolongation of its land territory to outer edge of the continental margine
• a distance of 200 nautical miles from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured where the
outer edge of the continental margin does not extend up to that distance

THE PATRIMONIAL SEA OR EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE

• extends 200 nautical miles from the coast or the baselines
• The Philipines will have the exclusive rights to gather the natural resources of area, build structures
• EXEMPTIONS IN EEZ — The Philippines cannot get all the resources in the area, hence under the UNCLOS III, if there is
a surplus of natural resources, foreign countries may get the surplus
• HOW DO WE DETERMINE WHAT IS SURPLUS?
— Since UNCLOS III allows the entree of foreign states to an EEZ of a state to get surplus of natural resources, to
have peaceful transactions between the states on surplus, multilateral agreements and treaties are made and exist.
And also evaluate and know to a certain degree what resources are surplus.

THE OPEN SEAS

• these are res communes meaning no one owns the open seas
• available to the use of all states for purposes of navigation, flying over them, laying submarine cables or fishing.
• hostilities may be waged in times of war
• shall be reserved for peaceful purposes
• EXERCISE JURISDICTION ON THE OPEN SEAS
1. Over its vessels — the flag state has jurisdiction over its public vessels at all times wherever they may be even on open
seas
2. Over pirates — two kinds of pirates: a) pirate of a vessel; b) pirate of an aircraft
— deemed to be enemies of all mankind
— may be captured in open seas by the vessel of any state
— IF CAPTURED, WHERE WILL BE PROSECUTED? In the Flag State of the capturing vessel
— CAPTURED BUT ENTERED IN TERRITORIAL SEAS? The flag state can still capture the pirate but the
capturing vessel must surrender the pirate to the authorities of the territorial state for prosecution
3. In the exercise of the right of visit and search — Under the laws of neutrality, the public vessel or aircraft of a belligerent
state may visut and search any neutral merchant vessel on the open seas and capture any found or suspected to be engaged
or to have engaged in activities favorable to the other belligerent.
4. Under Doctrine of Hot Pursuit — CAPTURED BUT ENTERED IN TERRITORIAL SEAS? The flag state can still capture the
pirate but the capturing vessel must surrender the pirate to the authorities of the territorial state for prosecution

AERIAL JURISDICTION
• there are no traditional rules in international law regarding the rights of the subjacent state to its aerial domain
• local state has jurisdiction over the airspace above it to an unlimited heights, or at the most up to where outer space begins
• no foreign aircraft, civil or military, may pass through the aerial domain of a state without its consent
• FIVE AIR FREEDOMS FOREIGN AIRCRAFT:
1. The freedom to fly across foreign territory without landing
2. The freedom to land for non-traffic purposes
3. The freedom to put down traffic originating in the state of the aircraft
4. The freedom to embark traffic destined for the state of the aircraft
5. The freedom to embark traffic destined for or to put down traffic originating in a third state