ISABELITA C. VINUYA, ET AL.

IN THEIR CAPACITY AND AS MEMBERS OF THE

“MALAYA LOLAS ORGANIZATIONS” V. EXECUTIVE SECRETARY ALBERTO G.
ROMULO (G.R. NO. 162230, 28 APRIL 2010; G.R. NO. 162230, 12 AUGUST 2014

VINUYA ET AL. vs. ROMULO

G.R. NO. 162230, APRIL 28, 2010; AUGUST 12, 2014
DEL CASTILLO, J.; BERSAMIN, J.

Facts: Members of the NGO Malaya Lolas, acting on behalf of 70 comfort women filed a
petition sought to compel the Executive Department to demand an official apology and
seek reparations from the Japanese government before the International Court of
Justice and other international tribunals. The petitioners claimed that the brutal rape and
enslavement of the comfort women constituted a crime against humanity, sexual slavery,
and torture. They alleged that the Philippine government (Executive Department), by
refusing to espouse the petitioners’ claims against Japan, breached its obligation not to
afford impunity for crimes against humanity.

Issues: Whether or not the Executive Department committed grave abuse of discretion in
not espousing petitioners’ claims

Ruling: The SC ruled in the negative. The question whether the Philippine government
should espouse claims of its nationals against a foreign government is a foreign relations
matter, the authority for which is demonstrably committed by our Constitution not to the
courts but to the political branches. In this case, the Executive Department has already
decided that it is to the best interest of the country to waive all claims of its nationals for
reparations against Japan in the Treaty of Peace of 1951. The wisdom of such decision
is not for the courts to question. Petitioners filed a motion for reconsideration and a
supplemental motion for reconsideration, but the Court also denied both in 2014 for
being devoid of merit. The SC reiterated that the Constitution has entrusted to the
Executive Department the conduct of foreign relations for the Philippines. Whether or not
to espouse petitioners' claim against the Government of Japan is left to the exclusive
determination and judgment of the Executive Department. The Court cannot interfere
with or question the wisdom of the conduct of foreign relations by the Executive
Department. Accordingly, the SC cannot direct the Executive Department, either by writ
of certiorari or injunction, to conduct our foreign relations with Japan in a certain manner.