The Historical Impeachment of A Chief Justice in the Philippines

The impeachment trial of the Philippine’s current Supreme Court Chief Justice, Renato Corona, begins today, January 16, 2012. He will be tried before the 23-person Senate members who will sit as judges to determine whether he is guilty of the complaints imputed against him. All members of the judiciary and the legal industry are all out in monitoring how the impeachment trial will go as it marks a historical event most especially in the judiciary department of the Philippines, being the first impeachment trial against a Supreme Court’s highest ranking magistrate official.

Even law students have sparking interests over the Constitutional relevance of the issue as there are varying opinions that the Executive department stepped over the boundaries on the separation of powers in the Executive, Legislative and Judiciary departments of the Philippines. I believe this issue probably emanates from the accusations made against the allegedly influencing tactics made by President Aquino to influence his allies who are members of the House of Representatives to file an impeachment complaint against the Chief Justice. This is quite different from the impeachment made against Merceditas Guttierez, former Ombudsman which was initiated by private citizens. This move of President Aquino is probably in line with his objective of keeping the ball rolling on his anti-graft campaign. But again, the question remains whether this move had weakened the independence of the judiciary system of the Philippines?

PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES

By: Evelyn De Matias

COURSE OUTLINE

I. PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS

A. Brief history of Public International Law

B. Definition of International Law

            - body of rules & principles which are recognized as legally binding and governs the relations of states and other entities with one another (as between international organizations, between international organizations and states, between international organizations and states and the people).

C. Functions of International Law

1.      defines the existence of states

2.      provides framework of diplomatic relations

3.      governs international agreements

4.      sets forth rules for international commerce

5.      governs individual human rights

6.      regulates protection of the global environment (air, land, sea and global resources)

7.      VITAL FUNCTION: eliminates elements of unlawful force in the solution of human conflicts and provides basis for the orderly management of international relations; social progress


D. Foundations of International Law

            1. Principle of comity

            2. Principle of reciprocity/mutuality

            3. Principle of independence

            4. Principle of equality of states

CONFLICT OF LAWS NOTES

CONFLICT OF LAWS NOTES

By: Evelyn De Matias

PRINCIPLES AND DOCTRINES

Extraterritoriality

-         General rule: Philippine laws have no extraterritorial effects in another country.

Reason: One sovereign country is independent of another.

-         Exceptions:

• When our law provides respect to other countries with respect to its citizens and nationals

• When our country enters into a treaty with another country.

• Congressional legislations adopting foreign law to municipal law of the land.

-         Extraterritorial application of a foreign law allowed when the country gives consent (implied or expressed).

Exception: When the foreign law is against public policy and order.

Foreign Elements

-         consist of the following as subject matter:

a.       nationality or citizenship

b.      personal status

c.       property

-         points of contacts include:

a.       place of contracting

b.      place of negotiation of contract

c.       place of performance

d.      location of subject matter of the contract

e.       domicile, residence, place of incorporation, nationality and place of business of parties.

f.        If the place of negotiating the contract and the place of performance are in the same state, the local law of this state shall apply.

BANK OF AMERICA vs AMERICAN REALTY CO. 321 SCRA 659

“In a conflict between a Philippine law and a foreign law, Philippine law prevails”

Facts:

The Bank of America granted a loan to a corporation secured by a real estate mortgage by the respondent. Upon the loan maturity, the corporation debtor failed to pay and the petitioner bank filed 4 collection cases in the foreign courts (England and Hong Kong) against the corporation debtors. At the same time it also filed an extrajudicial foreclosure in the office of the Provincial Sheriff of Bulacan, Philippines on the real estate mortgage and said was sold in a public auction. The respondent files action for damages against petitioner due to the act of foreclosing the real estate mortgage extrajudicially despite the pending civil suits before the foreign courts to collect the principal loan. Petitioner contends that the respondent is not made a party on the collection case before the foreign courts for being a third party mortgagor and such actions were filed in foreign courts and thus decisions rendered on such courts are not enforceable in the Philippines unless a separate action is filed in the Phils to enforce such judgment and that under the English law which is the law governing in the principal agreement, the mortgagee does not lose its security interest by filing a civil action for sum of money. The court rendered judgment in favor of defendants declaring that the filing of civil suit on collection of a sum of money in foreign courts constitutes a waiver on the security of the mortgages.