School Work

CO KIM CHAM v GOku

Description
Consti
Categories
Published
of 2
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Related Documents
Share
Transcript
  DE FACTO GOVERNMENT V. DE JURE GOVERNMENT CO KIM CHAM v. EUSEBIO VALEZ etal. G.R. No. L-5, September 17, 1945   FACTS: 1. On January 2, 1942, the Imperial Japanese Forces occupied the City of Manila and their military commander thereby proclaimed that “all the laws now in force in the Commonwealth, including executive and judicial institutions, shall continue to be effective for the time being as in the past…and a;; public officials  shall remain in their  present posts and carry on faithfully their duties as before”.  2. On January 23, 1942, a central administration named Philippine Executive Commission was organized per Order No. 1 by the Japanese Commander and consequently, the PEC issued E.Os 1 & 4 which provides that the SC, CA, CFI and justices of lower courts continue their jurisdiction as based on the existing statutes, orders, ordinances and customs. 3. Then, on October 14, 1943, the “Republic of the Philippines” was inaugurated but caused no substantial change on the courts and laws functioned and enforced during the PEC administration. 4. On October 23, 1944, Gen. Douglas McArthur landed in Leyte, consequently, proclaimed the “Government of the Commonwealth of the Philippines”, subject to the authority of the US Government, will be the sole authority to govern the Philippines free from occupation of enemy state. 5. On February 03, 1945, Gen. McArthur announced that all the laws, rules, proceedings will be in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth government. 6. Petitioner filed this complaint because the respondent judge refused to continue the  judicial proceedings of a civil case involving the petitioner (Cham), on the ground that the proclamation by Gen. Douglas in 23 October1944 had the effect of invalidating and nullifying all judicial proceedings and judgments of the Philippines under the Philippine Executive Commission (PEC) and the Republic of the Philippines (RP) established during the Japanese occupation. 7. The Respondent, however, contends that the government established in the Philippines during the Japanese occupation were no de facto governments, hence, all their laws, rules and processes are considered null and void. ISSUE:   Whether the governments (PEC and RP) established during the Japanese military occupation were de facto   government?   (and all the judicial acts and proceedings of the said governments are still good and valid even after the liberation)?   RULING: 1.    The Court stated the three kinds of a de facto government. First, a government that gets possession and control of, or usurps, by force or by the voice of majority; Second, that which 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; and  Third, that established as an independent government by the inhabitants of a country who rise in insurrection against the parent state. 2.    The court said that, the RP apparently established and organized as a sovereign state independent from any other government by the Filipino people, was, In truth and reality, a government established by the belligerent occupation or the  Japanese forces. It is the same as PEC and the ultimate source of its authority is the Japanese forces. 3.   In connection with the preceding number, it means that Japan had no legal power to grant independence to PH or transfer the sovereignty to US because its  DE FACTO GOVERNMENT V. DE JURE GOVERNMENT military occupation had matured into an absolute and permanent dominion or sovereignty by a treaty or law. 4.   Moreover, even if RP had been established by the free will of the Filipino but with support and backing of Japan, such government would still be considered as one established by the Filipinos in insurrection or rebellion against the parent state. Hence, IT IS A DE FACTO GOVERNMENT. 5.   Being a de facto government, all the laws, acts and judicial proceedings established during the Japanese occupation are still good and valid, although after the liberation of Manila. Therefore, the civil case of the petitioner must be acted upon by the respondent judge.
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks