G.R. No. 92013 - Laurel vs. Garcia

May 9, 1956: Reparations Agreement with Japan
June 27, 1958: Reparations Contract No. 300 (Roppongi property procured)
July 22, 1976: Philippine Embassy relocated from Roppongi to Nampeidai
Aug. 11, 1986: President Aquino issues Administrative Order No. 3 to study disposition/utilization of Japan properties
July 25, 1987: Executive Order No. 296 allows sale/lease of reparations properties to non-Filipinos
Feb. 20, 1990: Temporary Restraining Order issued
Feb. 21, 1990: Scheduled bidding enjoined
July 25, 1990: En banc decision

1987 Constitution (effective basis for decision):
• Art. II, Sec. 28 (state policy of full public disclosure)
• Art. III, Sec. 7 (right to information)
• Art. XII, Secs. 2–3, 10 (national economy and patrimony; preference to Filipino citizens)
Republic Act No. 1789 (Reparations Law; nationality restriction on sale of reparations goods)
Executive Order No. 296 (amending RA 1789’s nationality restriction)
Civil Code:
• Art. 419 (property classification)
• Art. 420(2) (public dominion: property belonging to State for public service)
• Art. 422 (conversion of public dominion into patrimonial property)
Administrative Code of 1987, Sec. 48 (conveyance of government real property must be authorized by law and executed by the President)

Under the Reparations Agreement, Japan transferred four Tokyo/Kobe properties for Philippine diplomatic and public-service use.
Roppongi lot served as chancery until 1976, then lay idle due to lack of repair funds.
A lease-construction proposal with a Japanese firm remained unacted upon.
Executive branch, through AOs and EO 296, pursued public sale of Roppongi, setting a $225 million floor price. Two biddings stalled; third was set for Feb. 21, 1990 when Court issued TRO.
Ojeda additionally alleged the bidding process was kept in Tokyo until days before the sale and biased against Filipino participation.

Whether Roppongi property, originally public-dominion land, may be alienated without formal conversion into patrimonial property.
Whether the President or her agents possess authority to sell the property absent legislative authorization.
Whether EO 296 is constitutional in lifting the nationality restriction for sale to non-Filipinos.
Whether bidding procedures violated constitutional right to information and discriminated against Filipino bidders.

Classification and Conversion:
• Roppongi remains property of public dominion under Art. 420(2) of the Civil Code, intended for public service (diplomatic use).
• Conversion to patrimonial property under Art. 422 requires a distinct and formal act—legislative or executive—declaring withdrawal from public-service use.
• Non-use alone (even over 13 years) does not effect conversion, especially when idleness is due to lack of repair funds.
Executive Order No. 296:
• Does not itself convert Roppongi into patrimonial property; it merely removes the nationality restriction for sale.
• Based on erroneous premise that the lots were already alienable.
Applicability of Philippine Law:
• Questions on authority to dispose and bidding procedures governed by Philippine law; lex situs (Japanese law) inapplicable t

Two consolidated petitions (G.R. No. 92013 by Laurel; G.R. No. 92047 by Ojeda) sought prohibition against bidding for the sale of a 3,179 sqm parcel at 306 Roppongi, Minato-ku, Tokyo, scheduled February 21, 1990.
The lot formed part of four properties in Japan acquired by the Philippine government under the May 9, 1956 Reparations Agreement for embassy and consular use.
The other three lots were Nampeidai (Philippine Embassy site), Kobe Commercial (warehouse/parking lot), and Kobe Residential (vacant).
The Roppongi site housed the Embassy Chancery until its 1976 transfer due to deferred repairs; it has remained undeveloped.
A proposed lease‐construction deal with Kajima Corporation was pending but unacted upon by the government.
President Aquino’s Administrative Orders No. 3 (and A-D) of 1986 created a committee to study disposition/utilization; Executive Order No. 296 (July 25, 1987) opened reparations properties to non-Filipino buyers.
Two bidding attempts at a $225 million minimum floor price failed or were postponed; the Supreme Court issued a TRO on February 20, 1990.

Oral arguments on G.R. No. 92013 heard March 13, 1990; G.R. No. 92047 comment deadlines extended four times through June 1990.
The petitions were consolidated by Court resolution on March 27, 1990.
After filing of comments and a reply, the Court resolved to decide without further delay.

Whether the Roppongi property remains “public dominion” under Articles 419–420, Civil Code, or has become “patrimonial property” under Article 422.
Whether the Executive (President and agents) has the authority to alienate the property absent legislative action.
Whether Executive Order No. 296 validly amended the nationality restrictions in Rep. Act No. 1789 to permit sale to non-Filipino entities.
Whether the bidding procedures discriminated against Filipino citizens and entities and violated constitutional rights to information and equality.