105 RUBI vs. PROV. BOARD OF MINDORO1
Before Acquisition by US
G.R. No. 14078 | March 7, 1919 | Malcolm, J.
SUMMARY:
Rubi and other Manguianes applied for habeas corpus, alleging that the Manguianes
are being illegally deprived of their liberty by being detained by the provincial officials
of the province of Mindoro pursuant to Resolution 25 ordering that the Manguianes
be gathered Tigbao for them to be educated and civilized. This is because Rubi, et al.
had not fixed their dwelling in Tigbao. SC ultimately ruled against them, holding that
there was a lawful delegation of power to the provincial authorities by the PH
Legislature and that the provincial board’s resolution was a valid action.
PROVISIONS APPLICABLE: See footnotes.
DOCTRINE:
Following the policy of the government to civilize the indios would justify the
delegation of power to the provincial boards since they are the ones who are in the
best position to determine what would most benefit the interest of “law and order”.
● As officials charged with the administration of the province and the
protection of its inhabitants, who but they are better fitted to select sites
which have the conditions most favorable for improving the people who have
the misfortune of being in a backward state?
FACTS:
1. The provincial board of Mindoro adopted Resolution 25 to gather the
Mangyans in the sitio of Tigbao in Naujan Lake in the interest of law and
order. Said resolution was adopted pursuant to Section 21452 of the Admin
Code and are necessary measures for the protection of the Mangyanes of
Mindoro as well as the protection of public forests in which they roam, and
to introduce civilized customs among them.
2. Rubi and his companions have not fixed their dwelling in Tigbao and are
detained to be punished pursuant to Section 2759.3 Doroteo Dabalos is
being detained by the sheriff of Mindoro by virtue of the Sections 2145 and
2759.
3. Rubi and other Manguianes applied for habeas corpus, alleging that the
Manguianes are being illegally deprived of their liberty by the provincial
officials of that province of Mindoro.
History
1
Original digest by Patricia Ignacio.
2
Section 2145. Establishment of non-Christians upon sites selected by the provincial governor. -
With the prior approval of the Department Head, the provincial governor of any province in which
non-Christian inhabitants are found is authorized, when such course is deemed necessary in
the interest of law and order, to direct such inhabitants up to their habitation on sites on
unoccupied public lands to be selected by him and approved by the provincial board.
3
Section 2759. Refusal of non-Christian to take up appointed habitation. - Any non-Christian
who shall refuse to comply with the directions lawfully given by a provincial governor, pursuant
to section two thousand one hundred and forty-five of this Code to take up habitation upon a site
designated by said governor shall upon conviction be imprisoned for a period not exceeding
sixty days.
A.
● Laws of the Indies having reference to the subject at hand are compiled in
Book VI, Title III, stating that, among others, indios are made to live in
poblaciones and reducciones (to instruct them of the Sacred Catholic Faith
and evangelical law so they can be civilized), the ones concentrated therein
allowed to retain lands previously held by them, and that no Spaniards,
negroes, mestizos or mulattoes are allowed to live in the towns of indios
● The Decree of the Governor-General of the Philippine Islands of 1881 states,
among others, that all indios of the Islands of Luzon are to be governed by
common law, that the limits of the territory of rebellious indios shall be fixed
so that anyone going beyond this shall be detained, and that races that are
not subdued (aetas and mountain igorots) shall be given advantages in
return of their “voluntary submission”.
B. After Acquisition of the Philippines by US
1. Organic Law
● President McKinley’s Instructions to the Commission of April 7, 1900 was to
deal with the uncivilized tribes of the Islands the same way they dealt with
Native Americans by permitting them to maintain their tribal organization
and government and under which many of these tribes are now living in
peace and contentment, surrounded by civilization to which they are unable
or unwilling to conform, subject to wise and firm regulation.
2. Statute Law
● Notable is Act No. 547 which provided establishment of local civil
governments for the Manguianes in Mindoro
C. Terminology
● “Non-Christian” has been the favorite nomenclature in lieu of the unpopular
“tribe”
● "Non-Christian" shall include Mohammedans and pagans
D. Meaning of “Non-Christian”
● The motive of the law does not relate to a particular people because of their
religion or particular province because of location. Whole intent is predicated
in civilization or lack of civilization.
● “Non-Christian" is intended to relate to degree of civilization.
○ member of an uncivilized tribe, of a low order of intelligence,
uncultured and uneducated
● "The determining factor in deciding whether they are to be allowed to remain
under the jurisdiction of regularly organized municipalities or what form of
government shall be afforded to them should be the degree of civilization to
which they have attained x x x”
● It is indicative of the degree of civilization rather than of religious
denomination, for to hold that it is indicative of religious denomination will
make the law invalid as against that Constitutional guaranty of religious
freedom."
E. The Manguianes
 ● In Tagalog, Bicol, and Visaya, Manguian signifies 'savage,' 'mountainer,'
'pagan,' 'negro.'
● Very low in culture, have considerable Negrito blood, and have not advanced
beyond the Negritos in civilization so impractical to bring them under
municipal government
● Peaceful, timid, primitive, sem-nomadic people, approximately 15,000 in
number
● No desire for community life
E. Comparative - The American Indians
● Indians have been treated as “in a state of pupilage” - relationship of
US-Indians in Guardian-Ward, always subject to US plenary authority
● Courts have always held that laws affecting the Indians are not within their
power to overrule since subject has always been political in nature
● US v Crook
○ Held that Indian is a ‘person’ with the right to sue writ of habeas
corpus (so Rubi is also a person and entitled to sue)
○ Indians possess the inherent right of expatriation, as well as the
more fortunate white race, and have the inalienable right to 'life,
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,' so long as they obey the laws
and do not trespass on forbidden ground
○ Determination of policy to relocate is for legislative and executive
branches and once decided court cannot interfere
ISSUES/HOLDING/RATIO:
1. W/N there was an unlawful delegation of legislative power to provincial
authorities - NO, Section 2145 of the Administrative Code of 1917 is not an unlawful
delegation of legislative power by the Philippine Legislature to provincial official and a
department head.
● There is a distinction between the delegation of power to make law and
conferring an authority or discretion as to its execution, to be exercised
under and in pursuance of the law.
○ What the legislature did in the case is in accordance with the latter
where the legislature conferred upon the provincial governor, with
the approval of the provincial Board and the Department Head,
discretionary authority as to the execution of the law.
● SEE DOCTRINE
2. W/N there was a valid action by the provincial board, pursuant to a valid exercise of
police power - YES
● Police power is a power coextensive with self-protection. It may be said to
be that inherent and plenary power in the State which enables it to prohibit
all things hurtful to the comfort, safety and welfare of society. There can be
no doubt that the exercise of police power in the Philippine Government
belongs to the Legislature and that this power is limited only by the Acts of
Congress and those fundamental principles which lie at the foundation of all
republican forms of government.
● In the present case, the reasons assigned to the resolution of the provincial
board of Mindoro include:
1) the failure of former attempts for the advancement of the
non-Christian people of the province,
2) the only successful method for educating the Manguianes was to
oblige them to live in a permanent settlement,
3) protection of the Manguianes,
4) protection of the public forests in which they roam and
5) necessity of introducing civilized customs among the Manguianes.
● [1st reason] Advancement of non-Christian elements is carried on by the
following measures:
1) pursuance of a closer settlement policy whereby seminomadic
races are induced to leave their wild habitat and settle in organized
communities
2) extension of public school and public health systems throughout
the regions
3) extension of public works and extension of government control
4) construction of roads and trails between one place and another to
promote social and economic intercourse and maintain amicable
relations
5) pursuance of the development of natural economic resources
especially agriculture and
6) encouragement of immigration into and the investment of private
capital in the fertile regions of Mindanao and Sulu.
■ Visit of the Secretary of Interior to the site showed positive
results of less than one year of implementation which
justifies its continuance and development. (construction
of buildings, encouraging reaction of boys to education,
etc)
● [2nd & 5th reasons] Manguianes are not free, as civilized men are free and
they are not the equals of their more fortunate brothers. The Manguianes
are citizens of a low degree of intelligence and Filipinos who are a drag
upon the progress of the State.
○ Where to permit them to live in a way-faring life will ultimately result
in a burden to the state and on account of their ignorance, they will
commit crimes and make depredations, or if not they will be subject
to involuntary servitude by those who may want to abuse them.
○ Not knowing what true liberty is and not practising the same
rightfully, how can they allege that they are being deprived thereof
without due process of law?
■ To allow them to successfully invoke that Constitutional
guaranty at this time will leave the Government without
recourse to pursue the works of civilizing them and
making them useful citizens. They will thus be left in a
permanent state of savagery and become a vulnerable
point of attack by those who doubt, nay challenge, the
ability of the nation to deal with our backward brothers
● [4th reason] Waste lands do not produce wealth. Waste people do not
advance the Interest of the State. Illiteracy and thriftlessness are not
conducive to homogeneity. The State to protect itself from destruction must
prod on the laggard and the sluggard.
 ● THUS, when the validity of law is generally challenged and no particular case
of oppression is called to the attention of the courts, it would seem that the
Judiciary should not unnecessarily hamper the Government in the
accomplishment of its laudable purpose.
○ CJ of SC of Tennessee writes: “In balancing conflicting solutions,
that one is perceived to tip the scales which the court believes will
best promote the public welfare in its probable operation as a
general rule or principle. But public policy is not a thing inflexible.
No court is wise enough to forecast its influence in all possible
contingencies. Distinctions must be made from time to time as
sound reason and a true sense of justice may dictate.”
○ The idea is to unify the people of the Philippines so that they may
approach the highest concept of nationality. The Manguianes, in
order to fulfill government policies, must be confined for a time for
their own good and the good of the country. If all are to be equal
before the law, all must be approximately equal in intelligence.
[OTHER ISSUES]
3. W/N these Acts are religiously discriminatory - NO
● The statute is clear and unambiguous. It provides for the segregation of
non-Christians and none other. The term “non-Christian” refers to natives of
the Philippine Islands of a low grade of civilization. It does not discriminate
on account of religious differences.
4. W/N these Acts unnecessarily infringe on liberty; due process of law and; equal
protection of laws - NO
● The Philippine Bill and the Jones law provides that “No law shall be enacted
in said Islands which shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property
without due process of law, or deny any person therein to the equal
protection of law. This constitutional limitation is derived from the 14th
amendment.
● Liberty does not import “an absolute right in each person to be, at all times
and in all circumstances, wholly freed from restraint. There are manifold
restraints that a person is subject to for the common good. Otherwise there
would be anarchy. In every well-ordered society charged with the duty of
conserving the safety of its members, the rights of the individual in respect
of his liberty may at times, under the pressures of great dangers, be subject
to such restrain to be enforced by reasonable regulations as the safety of
the general public may demand (Harlan, J. in Jacobson v Massachusetts).
○ Liberty as understood in democracies, is not a license; it is “liberty
regulated by law”. The liberty of the citizen may be restrained in the
interest of the public health, or of the public order and safety, or
otherwise within the proper scope of police power. (Hall v.
Geiger-Jones ; Hardie-Tynes Manufacturing Co. v Cruz)
● Neither is due process a stationary and blind sentinel of liberty. Due process
simply means that 1) law prescribed in harmony with the general powers of
the legislative dept., 2) law is reasonable in operation, 3) enforced according
to regular methods of procedure prescribed and, 4) applicable to all citizens
of the state or to all of a class. What is due process of law depends on the
circumstances. It varies with the subject-matter and necessities of the
situation (Moyer v Peabody)
● Equal protection is not infringed by a statute which is applicable to all
members of a class.The classification must have a reasonable basis and
cannot be purely arbitrary in nature.
5. W/N these Acts violate the constitutional prohibition on Slavery and Involuntary
Servitude - NO
● Slavery and involuntary servitude, together with their corollary, peonage, all
denote “a condition of enforced, compulsory service to one another”.
Thirteenth amendment of the US is extended to the Philippines.
○ Confinement in reservations in accordance with section 2145 of
the Administrative Code does not constitute slavery and
involuntary servitude.
RULING:
Petitioners are not unlawfully imprisoned or restrained of their liberty. Habeas corpus
can, therefore, not issue. This is the true ruling of the court. Costs shall be taxes
against petitioners. So ordered.
Johnson, J., dissent
● All persons are entitled to hearing before being deprived of liberty.
Moir, J., dissent
● Mangyan are likewise protected by Section 3 of the Act of Congress of
August 29, 19164
● In the US, the Indian nations were considered as separate nations, but
Manguianes not separate state and are legally Filipinos. Reservations
provided to Indians measured to be larger than Luzon and not merely
thousands of hectares.
● Majority opinion implies “Non-Christian” is any wild or backward tribe and
includes a million other Filipinos that according to court’s opinion under the
present law, may be taken from their homes and herded on a reservation at
the instance of the provincial governor. No mention of crime besides caingin.
● The arbitrary and unrestricted power to do harm should be the measure by
which law’s legality is tested
● No matter how beneficent the motives of the lawmakers if the law tends to
deprive any man of life, liberty or property without due process, it is void
● US vs Crook
○ Indians declared to be illegally held by US authority in violation of
their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and were
released from custody
● Section 2145 and 2759 should be unconstitutional.
4
"That no law shall be enacted in said Islands which shall deprive any person of life, liberty or
property without due process of law, or deny to any person therein the equal protection of the
laws."