View full case

SUZETTE NICOLAS Y SOMBILON v. ALBERTO ROMULO

FACTS:

Lance Corporal (L/CPL) Daniel Smith, a member of the United States Armed Forces, was charged with the crime of rape against a Filipina named Suzette S. Nicolas. The incident allegedly occurred on November 1, 2005 inside a Starex Van in the Subic Bay Freeport Zone, Olongapo City. Smith, along with other members of the United States Marine Corps, was accused of sexually abusing and having sexual intercourse with Nicolas without her consent. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Makati found Smith guilty of rape and sentenced him to suffer reclusion perpetua. Smith was ordered to be temporarily committed to the Makati City Jail until a detention facility agreed upon by both the Philippine and United States authorities was determined. However, on December 29, 2006, Smith was taken out of the Makati jail and brought to a facility under the control of the United States government, in accordance with new agreements between the Philippines and the United States.

The case also involves the validity of the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) between the Philippines and the United States. The petitioners argue that the VFA is void and unconstitutional and that the custody of defendant L/CPL Smith should be with the Philippines. The constitutionality of the VFA had been previously upheld by the Supreme Court in the case of Bayan v. Zamora. The issue of the constitutionality of the VFA is of prime importance as it pertains to the sovereignty of the Republic and a specific mandate of the Constitution. The provision in question is Art. XVIII, Sec. 25 of the Constitution, which prohibits the presence of foreign military bases, troops, or facilities in the Philippines unless under a treaty duly concurred in by the Senate and recognized as a treaty by the other contracting State. The Court finds that the VFA is allowed under this provision as it was duly concurred in by the Philippine Senate and recognized as a treaty by the United States, and it is related to the RP-US Mutual Defense Treaty, which had the concurrence of both Senates.

The Mutual Defense Treaty between the Republic of the Philippines and the United States of America aims to strengthen the collective defense efforts of both countries in the Pacific area and to preserve peace and security until a more comprehensive system of regional security is developed. It also ensures that the present instrument does not alter or diminish any existing agreements or understandings between the Philippines and the United States.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) between the Republic of the Philippines and the United States is constitutional.

  2. Whether the Romulo-Kenney Agreements of December 19 and 22, 2006, are in accordance with the VFA and the Philippine Constitution.

RULING:

  1. Constitutionality of the VFA: The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the VFA.

  2. Validity of the Romulo-Kenney Agreements: The Supreme Court declared that the Romulo-Kenney Agreements are not in accordance with the VFA and ordered the respondent Secretary of Foreign Affairs to negotiate with the United States representatives for the appropriate agreement on detention facilities under Philippine authorities.

PRINCIPLES:

  1. Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA): Agreements like the VFA are considered valid and binding international agreements or treaties.

  2. Constitutional Requirements for Foreign Military Presence: The presence of foreign military bases, troops, or facilities in the Philippines is allowed "under a treaty duly concurred in by the Senate ... and recognized as a treaty by the other contracting State." (Art. XVIII, Sec. 25, 1987 Philippine Constitution).

  3. International Law: The Philippines adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land (Art. II, Sec. 2, 1987 Philippine Constitution).

  4. Exclusive Power for Procedural Rules: The power of the Supreme Court to adopt rules of procedure for all courts is not curtailed or violated by international agreements recognizing custody and detention provisions (Art. VIII, Sec. 5[5], 1987 Philippine Constitution).

  5. Separation between Custody during Trial and Detention after Conviction: The VFA separates custody during the trial from detention after conviction, and detention must be carried out by Philippine authorities as agreed upon by both states (VFA, Art. V, Sec. 10).