VINUYA VS.

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
G.R. No. 162230, 28 April 2010

Doctrine: The Constitution has entrusted to the Executive Department the conduct of foreign relations for the Philippines

FACTS
The petitioners, members of the Malaya Lolas Organization, a non-stock, non-profit organization whose purpose
is to provide aid to the victims of rape by Japanese military forces in the Philippines during World War II,
appealed that since 1998, their request for assistance in filing a claim against Japanese officials and military
officers who ordered the “comfort women” stations in the Philippines, has been declined by the Executive
Secretary of DOJ, DFA and OSG. However, the officials of the Executive Department declined the assistance
requested by the petitioner as they took the position that individual claims for compensation had already been
fully satisfied by Japan’s compliance with the Peace Treaty between the Philippines and Japan. The petitioners
argued that the Court has confused diplomatic protection with the broader responsibility of states to protect
the human rights of their citizens, especially where the rights asserted are subject of erga omnes obligations
and pertain to jus cogen norms. That, the petitioners’ claims are subject of diplomatic protection, that crimes
committed are dreadful to the humanity, and atrocities against petitioners are not subject to the statute of
limitations under international law.
ISSUE
Whether or not the Executive Department committed grave abuse of discretion in declining to espouse the
claims of the petitioners.
RULING
No. The petition lacks merit. Individuals can only bring a claim within international legal system when they are
able to persuade a government to bring a claim on the individuals behalf. The Constitution has entrusted to the
Executive Department the conduct of foreign relations for the Philippines. Whether or not to espouse
petitioners' claim against the Government of Japan is left to the exclusive determination and judgment of the
Executive Department. The Court cannot question the wisdom of the conduct of foreign relations by the
Executive Department. Thus, we cannot direct the Executive Department, either by writ of certiorari or
injunction, to conduct our foreign relations with Japan in a certain manner. The Executive Department has
determined that espousal of petitioners’ cause would be inimical to our country’s foreign policy interests, and
could disrupt our relations with Japan, thus creating serious implications for stability in this region.