Co Kim Cham V Valdez Tan Keh (Digest)

CO KIM CHAM v.
VALDEZ TAN KEH and ARSENIO DIZON

GR No. L-5
September 17, 2945
Ponente: Feria, J.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND:
On January 2, 1942, the Imperial Japanese Forces occupied the City
of Manila, and on the next day their Commander in Chief proclaimed
"the Military Administration under law over the districts occupied by
the Army." In said proclamation, it was also provided that "so far as
the Military Administration permits, all the laws now in force in the
Commonwealth, as well as executive and judicial institutions, shall
continue to be effective for the time being as in the past," and "all
public officials shall remain in their present posts and carry on
faithfully their duties as before."
A civil government or central administration organization under the
name of "Philippine Executive Commission was organized by Order
No. 1 issued on January 23, 1942, by the Commander in Chief of the
Japanese Forces in the Philippines, and Jorge B. Vargas, who was
appointed Chairman thereof, was instructed to proceed to the
immediate coordination of the existing central administrative organs
and judicial courts, based upon what had existed therefore, with
approval of the said Commander in Chief, who was to exercise
jurisdiction over judicial courts.
The Chairman of the Executive Commission, as head of the central
administrative organization, issued Executive Orders Nos. 1 and 4,
dated January 30 and February 5, 1942, respectively, in which the
Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, Courts of First Instance, and the
justices of the peace and municipal courts under the Commonwealth
were continued with the same jurisdiction, in conformity with the
instructions given to the said Chairman of the Executive Commission
by the Commander in Chief of Japanese Forces in the Philippines in
the latter's Order No. 3 of February 20, 1942, concerning basic
principles to be observed by the Philippine Executive Commission in
exercising legislative, executive and judicial powers. Section 1 of
said Order provided that "activities of the administration organs and
judicial courts in the Philippines shall be based upon the existing
statutes, orders, ordinances and customs. . . ."
On October 14, 1943, the so-called Republic of the Philippines was
inaugurated, but no substantial change was effected thereby in the
organization and jurisdiction of the different courts that functioned
during the Philippine Executive Commission, and in the laws they
administered and enforced.
On October 23, 1944, a few days after the historic landing in Leyte,
General Douglas MacArthur issued a proclamation to the People of
the Philippines which declared:
1. That the Government of the Commonwealth of the
Philippines is, subject to the supreme authority of the
Government of the United States, the sole and only
government having legal and valid jurisdiction over the people
in areas of the Philippines free of enemy occupation and
control;
2. That the laws now existing on the statute books of the
Commonwealth of the Philippines and the regulations
promulgated pursuant thereto are in full force and effect and
legally binding upon the people in areas of the Philippines free
of enemy occupation and control; and
3. That all laws, regulations and processes of any other
government in the Philippines than that of the said
Commonwealth are null and void and without legal effect in
areas of the Philippines free of enemy occupation and control.
On February 3, 1945, the City of Manila was partially liberated and
on February 27, 1945, General MacArthur, on behalf of the
Government of the United States, solemnly declared "the full powers
and responsibilities under the Constitution restored to the
Commonwealth whose seat is here established as provided by law.
FACTS:
Petitioner, Co Kim Cham, had a pending civil case with the Court of
First Instance of Manila, which was initiated during the Japanese
military occupation of the Philippines.
Respondent Judge Arsenio Dizon refused to take cognizance of and
continue the proceedings on the ground that the proclamation
issued on October 23, 1944 by General Douglas MacArthur had the
effect of invalidating and nullifying all judicial proceedings and
judgments of the courts of the Philippines, and that the lower courts
have no jurisdiction to take cognizance of and continue judicial
proceedings pending in the courts of the defunct Republic of the
Philippines in the absence of an enabling law granting such
authority.
A petition for mandamus was thus filed, in which the petitioner
prays that the respondent judge of the lower court be ordered to
continue the proceedings in civil case No. 3012.
ISSUE:
1. Whether the judicial acts and proceedings of the courts

existing in the Philippines under the Philippine Executive
Commission and the Republic of the Philippines were good and
valid, and remained so even after the liberation or
reoccupation of the Philippines by the United States and
Filipino forces;
2. Whether the proclamation issued on October 23, 1944 by
General Douglas MacArthur, in which he declared that all
laws, regulations and processes of any other government in
the Philippines than that of the said Commonwealth are null
and void and without legal effect in areas of the Philippines
free of enemy occupation and control, invalidated all
judgments and judicial acts and proceedings of said courts;
3. If said judicial acts and proceedings have not been invalidated
by said proclamation, whether or not the present courts of the
Commonwealth may continue those proceedings.
HELD:
1. YES. Political and international law recognize that all acts and
proceedings of the legislative, executive, and judicial
departments of a de facto government are good and valid.
The Philippine Executive Commission and the Republic of the
Philippines during the Japanese military occupation were
recognized as being de facto governments (of the second
kind*). By virtue of the Principle of Postliminy (Postliminium) in
International law, judicial acts and proceedings of de facto
governments are and remain valid after the liberation or
reoccupation of the Philippines by the American and Filipino
forces.
2. NO. The October 23, 1944 proclamation of General MacArthur
did not invalidate the judicial acts and proceedings of the
courts of justice in the Philippines.
This issue hinges upon the interpretation of the phrase
processes of any other government and whether or not it
was his intention to annul all other judgments and judicial
proceedings of courts during the Japanese military occupation.
According to the well-known principles of international law, all
judgments and judicial proceedings of de facto governments,
which are not of a political complexion, during the Japanese
military occupation were valid before and remain so even after
the occupied territory had been liberated. In addition, a wellknown rule of statutory constriction states A statute ought
never to be construed to violate the law of nations if any other
possible construction remains. Another well-established rule
of statutory construction states that Where great

inconvenience will result from a particular construction, such
construction was not intended by the makers of the law unless
required by clear and unequivocal words. Hence, it should be
presumed that it was not, and could not have been the
intention of General MacArthur to refer to judicial processes, in
violation of said principles of international law. The only
reasonable construction of said phrase is that it refers to
governmental processes other than judicial processes or court
proceedings.
3. Judicial acts and proceedings are valid, hence, YES, the courts
may continue with the proceedings.
DECISION:
Writ of mandamus issued to the judge of the Court of First Instance
of Manila, ordering him to take cognizance of and continue to final
judgment the proceedings in civil case No. 3012.
Notes:
3 Kinds of De Facto Governments
1. Government that gets possession and control of, or
usurps by force or by the voice of the majority, the
rightful legal government and maintains itself against
the will of the latter
2. Government established and maintained by
military forces who invade and occupy a territory
of the enemy in the course of war, and which is
denominated a government of paramount force
3. Government established as an independent government
by the inhabitants of a country who rise in insurrection
against the parent state
Principle of Postliminy (or Postliminium) The right by

which persons and property seized in war are restored to their
former status on recovery
o The fact that a territory which has been occupied by an
enemy comes again into the power of its legitimate
government or sovereignty, does not, except in very
few cases, wipe out the effects of acts done by an
invader, which for one reason or another, it is within his
competence to do

Co Kim Cham V Valdez Tan Keh (Digest)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Co Kim Cham V Valdez Tan Keh (Digest)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Co Kim Cham V Valdez Tan Keh (Digest)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CO KIM CHAM v.

VALDEZ TAN KEH and ARSENIO DIZON

1. Whether the judicial acts and proceedings of the courts

of statutory construction states that Where great

Principle of Postliminy (or Postliminium) The right by

You might also like