G.R. No. L-30650 - Adolfo vs. Court of 1st Instance of Zambales

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-30650)

Procedural Posture

Petitioner filed a petition for review on certiorari on September 1, 1969 seeking reversal of a decision of the Court of First Instance dated November 20, 1968. The CFI decision had annulled the Municipal Judge’s order of June 29, 1967 that declared non-existent a custody receipt issued by the Commander of the U.S. Naval Base at Subic Bay for the provisional liberty of accused Albert L. Merchant and had the effect of preventing reissuance of an arrest warrant under the Military Bases Agreement provision invoked. The petition framed the controlling question as the validity and effect of the custody receipt and, in particular, whether an August 10, 1965 exchange of notes (the Mendez-Blair exchange) validly modified the Bases Agreement so as to authorize custody of civilian components by the base commander.

Facts Relevant to the Bases Agreement Provision

Petitioner relied on paragraph 5 of Article XIII (referred to as Article 13 in the petition) of the (1947) Military Bases Agreement, which the petition quoted: “In all cases over which the Philippines exercises jurisdiction the custody of the accused, pending trial and final judgment, shall be entrusted without delay to the commanding officer of the nearest base, who shall acknowledge in writing that such accused has been delivered to him for custody pending trial in a competent court of the Philippines and that he will be held ready to appear and will be produced before said court when required by it. The commanding officer shall be furnished by the fiscal (prosecuting attorney) with a copy of the information against the accused upon the filing of the original in the competent court.” Petitioner also cited paragraph 2 of the same article: “The Philippines shall have the right to exercise jurisdiction over all other offenses committed outside the bases by a member of the armed forces of the United States.” Petitioner asserted that Merchant’s alleged offense occurred outside a base (Barrio Manggahan, Subic, Zambales) and that Merchant, though a U.S. citizen, was a civilian employee or civilian component of the U.S. Naval Base and thus not a “member of the armed forces” within the original Base Agreement’s scope.

Petitioner’s Legal Argument on the Mendez‑Blair Exchange

Petitioner challenged the validity of the August 10, 1965 exchange of notes (Mendez-Blair) to the extent it purported to extend custodial authority to cover “civilian component” persons. The petition recited the language of the 1965 exchange’s paragraph 5, which expressly extended custodial provisions to “an accused member of the United States armed forces, civilian component, or dependent,” and required the commanding officer’s written acknowledgment and production when required, plus furnishing the fiscal with a copy of the information. Petitioner argued that the 1947 Bases Agreement is a treaty of a permanent character (99 years; Article XXIX cited by petitioner) that affects territorial authority and jurisdiction and therefore must be amended only by the entities empowered by the Constitution to make or amend treaties—the President with the concurrence of two-thirds of the Senate. Petitioner emphasized the legal distinction between treaties and executive agreements, citing authority (Tanada & Fernando; Commissioner of Customs vs. Eastern Sea Trading; and other authorities) and arguing that changes of the kind effected by Mendez‑Blair are not mere executive adjustments of detail but substantive amendments to a treaty that required Senate action. Consequently, petitioner contended the August 10, 1965 notes, not having been ratified by the Senate, remained mere proposals and could not effect the claimed change in custodial authority.

Respondents’ Position and Admissions

Respondents, in their answer filed October 25, 1969, admitted substantially the factual allegations and agreed that the central legal issue was the validity of the August 10, 1965 exchange of notes. They asserted that the exchange was valid and in accord with law and established precedents, thereby supporting the proposition that the commanding officer could exercise custody over civilian components pursuant to the 1965 exchange.

Subsequent Developments: Withdrawal of Custody Receipt and Bonding

In April 1970 developments removed the immediate practical controversy: by letter dated April 16, 1970 (received April 20, 1970) Rear Admiral V. G. Lambert advised the Municipal Court that, at the request of Albert L. Merchant, the custody receipt issued on June 26, 1967 pursuant to Article XIII (as revised on August 10, 1965) was withdrawn and that the Base Commander could no longer be held responsible for Merchant’s presence. The letter explained Merchant sought the withdrawal because he desired that his case be adjudicated in the Municipal Court at the earliest possible time. On April 20, 1970 Merchant, through counsel, filed a Constancia and deposited a cash bond of P600.00 with the Municipal Treasurer and prayed that the arrest warrant be recalled or the accused be released under Section 14, Rule 114 of the Rules of Court. Respondents later moved to dismiss the petition on May 6, 1970, relying on those developments and asserting that the custodial receipt had been withdrawn.

Petitioner’s Manifestation and the Mootness Determination

Petitioner filed a manif

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. L-30650)

Procedural Posture and Relief Sought

Petition for review on certiorari filed September 1, 1969 by Hon. Nicolas C. Adolfo, Municipal Judge of Subic, Zambales, as petitioner against the Court of First Instance of Zambales, Branch I, Hon. Lucas Lacson, Presiding, and private respondent Albert L. Merchant.
Petitioner sought reversal and vacation of respondent Court’s decision of November 20, 1968 which annulled petitioner’s order of June 29, 1967 that declared non-existent the custody receipt issued by the Commander of the U.S. Naval Base at Subic Bay for the provisional liberty of Albert L. Merchant.
Petitioner asked that the order annulling the custody receipt be set aside so that an arrest warrant could be reissued pursuant to Article 13 (paragraph 5) of the United States–Philippines Military Bases Agreement (as quoted in the petition).
The petition specifically raised the validity of the August 10, 1965 exchange of notes (Mendez-Blair Agreement) insofar as it would modify or amend the Military Bases Agreement without submission to the Senate for ratification.

Factual Background

Albert L. Merchant, a citizen of the United States and described in the petition as a civilian employee or component of the U.S. Naval Base at Subic Bay, was accused in a criminal case (Criminal Case No. 1625) of "Less Serious Physical Injuries thru Reckless Imprudence."
Petitioner Judge Adolfo had issued an order on June 29, 1967 declaring as non-existent a custody receipt issued by the Commander of the U.S. Naval Base at Subic Bay which had purportedly acknowledged custody of Merchant pending trial.
The Court of First Instance of Zambales, Branch I, under Hon. Lucas Lacson, annulled the Municipal Judge’s order by decision dated November 20, 1968.
Subsequent correspondence and events: a letter from Rear Admiral V. G. Lambert (Commander, U.S. Naval Base at Subic Bay) dated April 16, 1970 and received April 20, 1970 advising that the custody receipt issued on June 26, 1967 in accordance with Article XIII of the Military Bases Agreement as revised on August 10, 1965 was withdrawn at Merchant’s request and that the Commander could no longer be held responsible for his presence.
On April 20, 1970, Merchant, through counsel, submitted a Constancia to the Municipal Court of Subic attaching a certificate from the Municipal Treasurer showing deposit of Six Hundred Pesos (P600.00) as Cash Bond Deposit for the accused, with Official Receipt No. M-8888315 dated April 20, 1970; he prayed that the warrant for his arrest be recalled or that he be released from custody under Section 14, Rule 114, of the Rules of Court.

Relevant Treaty / Agreement Provisions Quoted in the Petition

Paragraph 5 of Article 13 of the 1947 Military Bases Agreement (as quoted in the petition):
- "In all cases over which the Philippines exercises jurisdiction the custody of the accused, pending trial and final judgment, shall be entrusted without delay to the commanding officer of the nearest base, who shall acknowledge in writing that such accused has been delivered to him for custody pending trial in a competent court of the Philippines and that he will be held ready to appear and will be produced before said court when required by it. The commanding officer shall be furnished by the fiscal (prosecuting attorney) with a copy of the information against the accused upon the filing of the original in the competent court."
Paragraph 2 of Article 13 of the 1947 Military Bases Agreement (as quoted in the petition):
- "2. The Philippines shall have the right to exercise jurisdiction over all other offenses committed outside the bases by an member of the armed forces of the United States."
Paragraph 5 of the Agreed Official Minutes (Mendez-Blair Agreement of August 10, 1965) as cited by respondents:
- "5. In all cases over which the Republic of the Philippines exercises jurisdiction, the custody of an accused member of the United States armed forces, civilian component , or dependent, pending investigation, trial and final judgment, shall be entrusted without delay to the commanding officer of the nearest base , who shall acknowledge in writing (a) that such accused has been delivered to him for custody pending investigation, trial and final judgment in a competent court of the Philippines (b) that he will be made available to the Philippine authorities for investigation upon their request and (c) that he will be produced before said court when required by it. The commanding officer shall be furnished by the fiscal (prosecuting attorney) with a copy of the information against the accused upon the filing of the original in the competent court."

Central Legal Issue Presented

Whether the August 10, 1965 exchange of notes (Mendez-Blair Agreement) validly amended or modified the Military Bases Agreement so as to confer custodial authority upon the commanding officer of the U.S. Naval Base over civilian component personnel like Albert L. Merchant, without submission of such modification to the Philippine Senate for ratification as required by the Constitution in the case of treaties.

Petitioner’s Arguments and Legal Theory