CO KIM CHAM (alias CO KIM CHAM) v. EUSEBIO VALDEZ TAN KEH and ARSENIO P. DIZON, !

d"# $% &i's(
Ins(an)# $% Manila,
&a)(s* This is a petition for mandamus praying for the respondent judge to continue the proceedings in a civil case
which was initiated under the regime of the so called Republic of the Philippines established during the Japanese
military occupation in the country. The respondent judge refused to take cognizance of the proceedings on the
ground that the proclamation issued by Gen. ouglas !ac"rthur when the "merican forces took over the occupation
of the island from the Japanese government# had the effect of invalidating and nullifying all the judicial proceedings
and judgments of the court under the Philippine e$ecutive %ommittee and the Republic of the Philippines established
during the Japanese military occupation. Respondent further claim that lower courts have no more jurisdiction to take
cognizance and continue the case in courts under a defunct government in the absence of enabling law granting
authority of such courts. Respondent contends that the government established during the Japanese occupation
were no de facto government.
The +'in)i+al iss!#s to be resolved now for the court are the following&
,. 'hether judicial acts and proceedings of the courts e$isting in the Philippines under the first government
were good and valid and remained so even after the liberation or occupation by the (nited )tates #
-. 'hether the proclamation by Gen. !ac"rthur declaring that all laws# regulations and processes of any of
the government in the Philippines are null and void and without legal effect in areas of the Philippines free
of enemy occupation and control# has invalidated all judgments and judicial acts and proceedings of the
said court
.. *f the said judicial acts and proceedings were not been invalidated# will the present courts under Japanese
occupation continue those proceedings pending in court
The court in resolving the issue one by one shed light to the given +uestions. *n the first issue# the court said that
under international and political law# it is a legal truism that all acts and proceedings of the legislative# e$ecutive and
judicial departments of a de facto government are good and valid. "nother +uestion now then needs an answer that
is whether or not the government under the Japanese occupation was a de facto government. "nd if they were# then
all those judicial proceedings remain good and valid even if there is a change of government. )everal kinds of de
facto government were elucidated by the court to find out what is applicable to the present case at bar.

" Government de facto in a proper legal sense government that gets possession and control of# or usurps# by force
or by the voice of the majority# the rightful legal governments and maintains itself against the will of the latter

Government de facto established and maintained by military forces this is by way of invasion and occupation of a
territory of the enemy in the course of war and which is denominated a government of paramount force.

" Government de facto established as an independent government by inhabitants of a country who rise in
insurrection against the parent state The powers and duties of de facto government of the second kind are regulated
in )ection *** of the ,ague conventions of -./0# which provides the authority of the legislative power having actually
passed into the hands of the occupant# the latter shall take steps in his power to re1establish and insure as far as
possible# public order and safety# while respecting# unless absolutely prevented# the laws in force in the country.
"ccording to the precepts of the ,ague %onventions# as the belligerent occupant has the right and is burdened with
the duty to insure public order and safety during his military occupation# he possess all the powers of a de facto
government and he can suspend the old laws and promulgate new ones and make such changes in the old as he
may see fit# but is enjoined to respect municipal laws in force in the country# those laws which enforce public order#
and regulate social and commercial life in the country. 2aws of political in nature and affecting political relations such
as the right of assembly# right to bear arms# right to travel freely are considered as suspended and in abeyance
during military occupation. "lthough the local and civil administration of justice is suspended it is not unusual for the
invader to take the whole administration into his hands. 2ocal courts are authorized to continue administering justice#
and judges and other judicial officers are kept in their posts. The municipal laws of a con+uered territory or the laws
which regulate private rights continue in force during military occupation e$cept so far as they are suspended or
changed by the acts of con+ueror# he nevertheless has all the powers of a de facto government and can at his
pleasure either the e$isting laws or make new ones. The Philippines during the Japanese occupation falls under the
second kind of de facto government a civil government established by military forces of occupation. "ccording to
,alleck who wrote a book on international law# the government established over an enemy3s territory during the
military occupation may e$ercise all the powers given by the laws of war to the con+ueror over the con+uered and is
subject to all restrictions which the code imposes. The governments by the Philippine 4$ecutive commission and the
Republic of the Philippines under the Japanese military occupation being a de facto government# it necessarily
follows that the judicial acts and proceedings of the courts of justice of those government which are not political
comple$ion were good and valid and by virtue of the well1known principle of postliminy 5postliminium6in international
law# remained good and valid after the liberation or reoccupation of the Philippines by "merican and 7ilipino forces.
"ccording to that principle in international law# the fact that a territory which has been occupied by an enemy comes
again into the power of its legitimate government of sovereignty# does not wipe out the effects done by an invader#
which for one reason or another it is within his competence to do.
*n the book of *sagani %ruz# the right of postliminy says 8atel is that in which persons or things taken by the enemy
are restored to the former state on coming actually into the power of the nation to which they belong. *n the present
concept jus postliminium now also imports the reinstatement of the authority of the displaced government once
control of the enemy is lost over the territory affected. *n short non1political acts performed during the occupation
5civil rights6 remain valid even after the occupation but acts of political automatically lose their validity upon the end
of the occupation. *n 9achura3s book# postliminium is e$plained as the revival or reversion to the old laws and
sovereignty of territory in the belligerent occupation once control of the belligerent occupant is lost over the territory
affected. )ide discussion&1

:n the phrase processes of any other government which is the second issue of the case# still the well1known
principles of international law is upheld that is all judgments and judicial proceedings# which are not of political
comple$ion# of the de facto government during the Japanese military occupation were good and valid before and
remained so after the occupied territory had come again into the power of the titular sovereign1

2egal ma$im# e$cepting that of a political nature# 2aw once established continues until changed by the some
competent legislative power. *t is not change merely by change of sovereignty. There can no break or interregnum in
law. 7rom the time the law comes into e$istence with the first1felt corporateness of a primitive people it must last until
the final disappearance of human society. :nce created# it persists until a change take place and when changed it
continues in such condition until the ne$t change and so forever. %on+uest or colonization is impotent to bring law to
an end; in spite of change of constitution# the law continues unchanged until the new sovereign by legislative acts
creates a change. 5Joseph ,. <eale# author cases on conflict of laws and treatise on conflict of laws.1

Respondent judge is ordered therefore to take cognizance of and continue to the final judgment of the proceedings.
C$ Ki/ C0an v Vald#1 Tan K#0
&a)(s $% (0# )as#* %o =im %han had a pending civil case# initiated during the Japanese occupation# with the %ourt
of 7irst *nstance of !anila. "fter the 2iberation of the !anila and the "merican occupation# Judge "rsenio izon
refused to continue hearings on the case# saying that a proclamation issued by General ouglas !ac"rthur had
invalidated and nullified all judicial proceedings and judgments of the courts of the Philippines and# without an
enabling law# lower courts have no jurisdiction to take cognizance of and continue judicial proceedings pending in the
courts of the defunct Republic of the Philippines 5the Philippine government under the Japanese6.
The court resolved (0'## iss!#s*
,. 'hether or not judicial proceedings and decisions made during the Japanese occupation were valid and remained
valid even after the "merican occupation;
-. 'hether or not the :ctober >?# -.@@ proclamation !ac"rthur issued in which he declared that Aall laws#
regulations and processes of any other government in the Philippines than that of the said %ommonwealth are null
and void and without legal effect in areas of the Philippines free of enemy occupation and controlB invalidated all
judgments and judicial acts and proceedings of the courts;
.. "nd whether or not if they were not invalidated by !ac"rthur3s proclamation# those courts could continue hearing
the cases pending before them.
Ra(i$* Political and international law recognizes that all acts and proceedings of a de facto government are good and
valid. The Philippine 4$ecutive %ommission and the Republic of the Philippines under the Japanese occupation may
be considered de facto governments# supported by the military force and deriving their authority from the laws of war.
!unicipal laws and private laws# however# usually remain in force unless suspended or changed by the con+ueror.
%ivil obedience is e$pected even during war# for Athe e$istence of a state of insurrection and war did not loosen the
bonds of society# or do away with civil government or the regular administration of the laws. "nd if they were not
valid# then it would not have been necessary for !ac"rthur to come out with a proclamation abrogating them.
The second +uestion# the court said# hinges on the interpretation of the phrase Aprocesses of any other governmentB
and whether or not he intended it to annul all other judgments and judicial proceedings of courts during the Japanese
military occupation.
*7# according to international law# non1political judgments and judicial proceedings of de facto governments are valid
and remain valid even after the occupied territory has been liberated# then it could not have been !ac"rthur3s
intention to refer to judicial processes# which would be in violation of international law.
" well1known rule of statutory construction is& A" statute ought never to be construed to violate the law of nations if
any other possible construction remains.B
"nother is that Awhere great inconvenience will result from a particular construction# or great mischief done# such
construction is to be avoided# or the court ought to presume that such construction was not intended by the makers
of the law# unless re+uired by clear and une+uivocal words.B
"nnulling judgments of courts made during the Japanese occupation would clog the dockets and violate international
law# therefore what !ac"rthur said should not be construed to mean that judicial proceedings are included in the
phrase Aprocesses of any other governments.B
*n the case of () vs Reiter# the court said that if such laws and institutions are continued in use by the occupant#
they become his and derive their force from him. The laws and courts of the Philippines did not become# by being
continued as re+uired by the law of nations# laws and courts of Japan.
*t is a legal ma$im that# e$cepting of a political nature# Alaw once established continues until changed by some
competent legislative power. *T *) 9:T %,"9G4 !4R42C <C %,"9G4 :7 ):84R4*G9TC.B (ntil# of course# the
new sovereign by legislative act creates a change.
Therefore# even assuming that Japan legally ac+uired sovereignty over the Philippines# and the laws and courts of
the Philippines had become courts of Japan# as the said courts and laws creating and conferring jurisdiction upon
them have continued in force until now# it follows that the same courts may continue e$ercising the same jurisdiction
over cases pending therein before the restoration of the %ommonwealth Government# until abolished or the laws
creating and conferring jurisdiction upon them are repealed by the said government.
DECISION* 'rit of mandamus issued to the judge of the %ourt of 7irst *nstance of !anila# ordering him to take
cognizance of and continue to final judgment the proceedings in civil case no. ?/->.
S!//a'2 $% 'a(i$*
-. *nternational law says the acts of a de facto government are valid and civil laws continue even during occupation
unless repealed.
>. !ac"rthur annulled proceedings of other governments# but this cannot be applied on judicial proceedings because
such a construction would violate the law of nations.
?. )ince the laws remain valid# the court must continue hearing the case pending before it.
DDD? kinds of de facto government& one established through rebellion 5govt gets possession and control through force
or the voice of the majority and maintains itself against the will of the rightful government6
through occupation 5established and maintained by military forces who invade and occupy a territory of the enemy in
the course of war; denoted as a government of paramount force6
through insurrection 5established as an independent government by the inhabitants of a country who rise in
insurrection against the parent state6
3.R. N$. L4,5678
Cal(#9 P0ili++in#s, In)., +#(i(i$n#'4a++#ll##
Vs.
En'i)$ Pal$/a', in 0is )a+a)i(2 as T0# P$s(/as(#' 3#n#'al, '#s+$nd#n(4a++#llan(
7"%T)&
*n the year -.E/# %alte$ Philippines conceived and laid the ground work for a promotional scheme calculated
to drum up patronage for its oil products. The contest was entitled A%alte$ ,ooded Pump %ontestB# which calls for
participants to estimate the actual number of liters as hooded gas pump at each %alte$ station will dispense during a
specific period.
7oreseeing the e$tensive use of the mails not only as amongst the media for publicizing the contest but also
for the transmission of communications# representations were made by %alte$ with the postal authorities for the
contest to be cleared in advance for mailing. This was formalized in a letter sent by %alte$ to the Post master
General# dated :ctober ?-# -.E/# in which %alte$# thru its counsel# enclosed a copy of the contest rules and
endeavored to justify its position that the contest does not violate the AThe "nti12ottery Provisions of the Postal 2awB.
(nfortunately# the Palomar# the acting Postmaster General denied %alte$3s re+uest stating that the contest
scheme falls within the purview of the "nti1lottery Provision and ultimately# declined %late$3s re+uest for clearance.
%alte$ sought reconsideration# stressing that there being no consideration involved in part of the contestant#
the contest was not commendable as a lottery. ,owever# the Postmaster General maintained his view that the
contest involves consideration# or even it does not involve any consideration it still falls as AGift 4nterpriseB# which
was e+ually banned by the Postal 2aw.
*))(4&
'hether the petition states a sufficient cause of action for declaratory reliefF
'hether or not the scheme proposed by %alte$ the appellee is within the coverage of the prohibitive provisions of
the Postal 2awF
,42&
*.
<y e$press mandate of )ection - of Rule EE of the old Rules of %ourt which deals with the applicability to invoke
declaratory relief which states& Aeclaratory relief is available to person whose rights are affected by a statute# to
determine any +uestion of construction or validity arising under the statute and for a declaration of rights thereunder.
*n amplification# conformably established jurisprudence on the matter# laid down certain conditions&
There must be a justiciable controversy.
The controversy must be between persons whose interests are adverse.
The party seeking declaratory relief must have a legal interest in the controversy.
The issue involved must be ripe for judicial determination.
'ith the appellee3s bent to hold the contest and the appellant3s threat to issue a fraud order if carried out# the
contenders are confronted by an ominous shadow of imminent and inevitable litigation unless their differences are
settled and stabilized by a declaration. "nd# contrary to the insinuation of the appellant# the time is long past when it
can rightly be said that merely the appellee3s Adesires are thwarted by its own doubts# or by the fears of othersB G
which admittedly does not confer a cause of action. oubt# if any there was# has ripened into a justiciable
controversy when# as in the case at bar# it was translated into a positive claim of right which is actually contested.
%onstruction
1 *s the art or process of discovering and e$pounding the meaning and intention of the authors of the law with
respect to its application to a given case# where that intention is rendered doubtful# amongst others# by reason of the
fact that the given case is not e$plicitly provided for in the law.
*t is not amiss to point out at this juncture that the conclusion we have herein just reached is not without precedent.
*n 2iberty %alendar %o. vs. %ohen# -. 9.J.# ?..# --0 ". >d.# @H0# where a corporation engaged in promotional
advertising was advised by the county prosecutor that its proposed sales promotion plan had the characteristics of a
lottery# and that if such sales promotion were conducted# the corporation would be subject to criminal prosecution# it
was held that the corporation was entitled to maintain a declaratory relief action against the county prosecutor to
determine the legality of its sales promotion plan.
**.
*s the %ontest )cheme a 2otteryF
2ottery
1 4$tends to all schemes for the distribution of prizes by chance
e.g. policy playing# gift e$hibitions# prize concerts# raffles and fairs as well as various forms of gambling.
Three 4ssential 4lements&
%onsideration
Prize
?. %hance
9o# according to the )upreme %ourt# the contest scheme is not a lottery but it appears to be more of a
gratuitous distribution since nowhere in the rules is any re+uirements that any fee be paid# any merchandise be
bought# any services be rendered# or any value whatsoever be given for the privilege to participate. )ince# a
prospective contestant has to do is go to a %alte$ )tation# re+uest for the entry form which is available on demand
and accomplish and submit the same for the drawing of the winner. <ecause of this# the contest fails to e$hibit any
discernible consideration which would brand it as a lottery.
!oreover# the law does not condemn the gratuitous distribution of property by chance# if no consideration is derived
directly or indirectly from the party receiving the chance# but it does condemn as criminal scheme in which a valuable
consideration of some kind is paid directly or indirectly for the chance to draw a prize.
*s the scheme# as sales promotion which would benefit the sponsor in the way of increased patronage be considered
as a consideration and thus violates the Postal 2awF
9o# the re+uired element of consideration does not consist of the benefit derived by the sponsors of the
contest. The true test lies on whether or not the participant pays a valuable consideration for the chance of winning
and not whether or not those conducting the enterprise receiver something of value for the distribution of the prize.
*s the %ontest )cheme a Gift 4nterpriseF
4ven if the term Gift 4nterprise is not yet defined e$plicitly# there appears to be a consensus among
le$icographers and standard authorities that the term is common applied to a sporting artifice of under which goods
are sold for their market value but by way of inducement to purchase the product# the purchaser is given a chance to
win a prize.
"nd thus# the term of gift enterprise cannot be established in the case at bar since there is not sale of
anything to which the chance offered is attached as an inducement to the purchaser. The contest is open to all
+ualified contestant irrespective of whether or not they buy the appellee3s products.
The lesson that we derive from this state of the pertinent jurisprudence is that every case must be resolved upon the
particular phraseology of the applicable statutory provision. *t is only logical that the term under a construction should
be accorded no other meaning than that which is consistent with the nature of the word associated therewith.
*n the end# the )upreme %ourt ruled out that under the prohibitive provision of the Postal 2aw# gift enterprise and
similar schemes therein contemplated are condemnable only if# like lotteries# they involve the element of
consideration. 7inding non in the contest# it was ruled out that the appellee may not be denied the use of the mails
for the purpose thereof.
4barle v. )ucaldito#
G.R. 9o. 21??E>H. ecember >.# -.H0
7"%T)&
The petitioner# then provincial Governor of Iamboanga del )ur and a candidate for reelection in the local elections of
-.0-# seeks injunctive relief in two separate petitions# to enjoin further proceedings of his criminal cases# as well as
*.). 9os. -10/# >10-# @10-# J10-# E10-# and 010- of the respondent 7iscalKs office of the said city# all in the nature of
prosecutions for violation of certain provisions of the "nti1Graft and %orrupt Practices "ct and various provisions of
the Revised Penal %ode. Principally# the petitioner relies on the failure of the respondents %ity 7iscal and the "nti1
Graft 2eague to comply with the provisions of 4$ecutive :rder 9o. >E@# L:(T2*9*9G T,4 PR:%4(4 <C ',*%,
%:!P2"*9"9T) %,"RG*9G G:84R9!49T :77*%*"2) "9 4!P2:C44) '*T, %:!!*))*:9 :7
*RR4G(2"R*T*4) ),:(2 <4 G(*4#L preliminary to their criminal recourses.
*))(4&
'hether or not 4: >E@ is applicable in the case at bar.
,42&
9o. *t is plain from the very wording of the :rder that it has e$clusive application to administrative# not criminal
complaints. The very title speaks of L%:!!*))*:9 :7 *RR4G(2"R*T*4).L There is no mention# not even by
implication# of criminal Loffenses#L that is to say# Lcrimes.L 'hile LcrimesL amount to Lirregularities#L the 4$ecutive
:rder could have very well referred to the more specific term had it intended to make itself applicable thereto.
%learly# the 4$ecutive :rder simply consolidates these e$isting rules and streamlines the administrative apparatus in
the matter of complaints against public officials. *t is moreover significant that the 4$ecutive :rder in +uestion makes
specific reference to Lerring officials or employees ... removed or otherwise vindicated. *f it were intended to apply to
criminal prosecutions# it would have employed such technical terms as LaccusedL# Lconvicted#L or Lac+uitted.L 'hile
this is not necessarily a controlling parameter for all cases# it is here material in construing the intent of the measure.
%ebu *nstitute of Technology v. :ple
)ec. ?5a6 P @J- and )ec. @> of <P >?> illustrates repeal by implication.
)ec ?5a6 provides& Ano increase in tuition or other school fees or charges shall be approved unless E/M of the
proceed is allocated to increase in salaries or wages of the member of the faculty.B
<P >?>& Aeach private school shall determine its rate of tuition and other school fees or charges. The rates or
charges adopted by schools pursuant to this provision shall be collectible# and their application or use authorized#
subject to rules and regulations promulgated by the !inistry of 4ducation# %ulture and )ports.B
*))(4& 'o9 )ec. @> of <P >?> impliedly repealed )ec. ?5a6 of P @J-
,42& There was implied repeal because there are irreconcilable differences between the two laws.