G.R. No. 160922 - Kiani vs. Bureau of Immigration

Javed Kiani, a British national by citizenship and Pakistani by birth, was married to Jeany-Vi Kiani, a Filipina, and held a permanent resident visa issued on March 17, 1993.
On June 19, 2002, Javed Kiani’s friend reported at the Rodriguez, Rizal Police Station that Iqbal Singh and Balbir Singh had been forcibly taken by armed men from their residence, implicating circumstances that later involved Javed Kiani.
A few days later, Commissioner Andrea D. Domingo of the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation (BID) issued Mission Order No. ADD-02-203, based on Executive Order No. 287 of former President Estrada. The order directed BID officers to verify Javed Kiani’s immigration status and investigate alleged violations of the Philippine Immigration Act of 1940, as amended.

On June 27, 2002, Javed Kiani was arrested at Felicidad Village, Montalban, Rizal by BID intelligence officers Eduardo Cabrera, Eliseo Exconde, and Jose Vale, Jr.
The arrest was predicated on allegations provided by Iqbal Singh and Balbir Singh that Javed Kiani had furnished them with spurious Alien Certificate Registration (ACR) and Immigrant Certificate Registration (ICR) forms, which were identified as fake and not official BID forms.
On July 1, 2002, a Charge Sheet was filed against “Javed Kiani alias Ahmad Singh” before the Board of Special Inquiry (BSI) for violating specific provisions of the Philippine Immigration Act.

On July 1, 2002, the Board of Commissioners (BOC) conducted a summary proceeding leading to a Summary Deportation Order which revoked Javed Kiani’s visa and ordered his deportation, subject to various clearances and payment of an administrative fine.
On July 2, 2002, Jeany-Vi Kiani filed a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus on behalf of her detained husband before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila, contending that his arrest and detention were unfounded since no deportation order had yet been properly issued.
The petition also alleged that Javed Kiani had intervened during the arrest of other persons, which allegedly triggered resentment by the arresting officers.
Despite a bail order granted on July 18, 2002, specifying a bond of P50,000.00, the BID intelligence officers, through the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), filed an omnibus motion for reconsideration, ultimately leading the RTC to set aside its initial bail order and dismiss the petition on grounds of jurisdiction and proper remedy.

Jeany-Vi Kiani appealed the RTC’s Order dismissing her petition before the Court of Appeals (CA), raising issues on the legality of Javed Kiani’s arrest and detention, and the effect of the Summary Deportation Order consolidating his continued detention.
On May 8, 2003, the CA affirmed the RTC’s dismissal by holding that once a charge sheet was filed, any claim of unlawful detention was rendered moot.
Petitioner (through Jeany-Vi Kiani) later moved for reconsideration of the CA decision, but the motion was denied on November 21, 2003, further cementing the lower courts’ positions.

On January 15, 2004, petitioners filed a petition for review on certiorari before the Supreme Court under Rule 45 of the Revised Rules of Court.
They contended that:

The CA erred in failing to nullify the arrest and detention of Javed Kiani.
The CA erred in affirming the legality and finality of the Summary Deportation Order issued by the BOC.
Habeas corpus remained the proper remedy despite the filing of the charge sheet.

The petitioner further argued that the Mission Order from the Immigration Commissioner was null and void because it was issued prior to any determination by the BOC regarding deportation grounds.
The Office of the Solicitor General responded by asserting that the petitioner had engaged in forum shopping by simultaneously pursuing similar reliefs in different fora, and reiterated that the appropriate remedy was a petition for review via Rule 43, not a writ of habeas corpus.

Was the arrest of Javed Kiani on June 27, 2002, and his subsequent detention by the respondents valid under the law?
Did the filing of a charge sheet cure any purported irregularities in his arrest, thereby rendering his detention lawful?

Does the issuance of a Summary Deportation Order by the BOC automatically validate and legalize Javed Kiani’s continued detention?
Had such order become final and executory at the time the petition was filed, barring relief through a writ of habeas corpus?

Was the filing of a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus the proper remedy for challenging the detention and alleged irregularities in the administrative process?
Did the petitioner’s act of pursuing simultaneous remedies (including the filing of an omnibus motion by Javed Kiani himself) constitute forum shopping, thereby affecting the validity of the petition?

Did the petitioner comply with the required procedural steps under the Revised Rules of Court, particularly with regards to the certification against forum shopping?
Was it proper to question the legality of the arrest after the charge sheet had been submitted to the BSI?