Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 302 views

    Nicolas V Romulo

    Uploaded by

    Pam Ramos
    The Supreme Court case regarded where Daniel Smith, a US soldier convicted of rape, would be detained after trial. The Romulo-Kenney Agreement stated he would be detained at the US Embassy, but the Court found this unconstitutional as it contradicted the Visiting Forces Agreement, which stated detention would be carried out by Philippine authorities. The Court ruled detention must follow the VFA and be in Philippine facilities agreed upon by both governments, with custody held by Philippine authorities.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Nicolas V Romulo

    Uploaded by

    Pam Ramos
    302 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court case regarded where Daniel Smith, a US soldier convicted of rape, would be detained after trial. The Romulo-Kenney Agreement stated he would be detained at the US Embassy, but the Court found this unconstitutional as it contradicted the Visiting Forces Agreement, which stated detention would be carried out by Philippine authorities. The Court ruled detention must follow the VFA and be in Philippine facilities agreed upon by both governments, with custody held by Philippine authorities.

    Original Description:

    Consti 2 - Bill of Rights

    Original Title

    Nicolas v Romulo

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court case regarded where Daniel Smith, a US soldier convicted of rape, would be detained after trial. The Romulo-Kenney Agreement stated he would be detained at the US Embassy, but the Court found this unconstitutional as it contradicted the Visiting Forces Agreement, which stated detention would be carried out by Philippine authorities. The Court ruled detention must follow the VFA and be in Philippine facilities agreed upon by both governments, with custody held by Philippine authorities.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    302 views2 pages

    Nicolas V Romulo

    Uploaded by

    Pam Ramos
    The Supreme Court case regarded where Daniel Smith, a US soldier convicted of rape, would be detained after trial. The Romulo-Kenney Agreement stated he would be detained at the US Embassy, but the Court found this unconstitutional as it contradicted the Visiting Forces Agreement, which stated detention would be carried out by Philippine authorities. The Court ruled detention must follow the VFA and be in Philippine facilities agreed upon by both governments, with custody held by Philippine authorities.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Nicolas v.

    Romulo

    GR No 175888 Feb 11, 2009

    The dispute about where Daniel Smith (yung US military na nang rape) will be
    detained after the trial.

    Facts
    - Lance Corporal Daniel Smith was convicted of rape committed against
    Suzette Nicolas, a Filipina. During the trial, he was in the custody of the US
    Gov’t pursuant to the VFA. After the RTC of Makati rendered its decision
    finding Daniel Smith guilty of rape, he was supposed to be detained at the
    Makati city jail until further orders. But he was taken out by PH law
    enforcement agents under orders of the DILG and brought to a facility for
    detention controlled by the US gov’t. This was pursuant to the Romulo-
    Kenney Agreement.
    - This was then brought to the CA, but was dismissed for being moot.

    Issue
    - Is the agreement constitutional/valid?

    Held
    - No. The Romulo-Kenney Agreement is unconstitutional for being
    contradictory to the VFA.
    - Under the VFA, it can be clearly ascertained that custody during trial is
    different from detention after conviction.
    - It is stated in the VFA that the detention of the accused shall be carried out in
    facilities agreed upon by the PH gov’t authorities and the US gov’t authorities,
    and that the detention shall be by the PH authorities. Therefore, the
    detention pursuant to the Romulo-Kenney Agreement, that the accused will
    be detained in the US Embassy, is not in accord with the VFA itself.

    Equal Protection discussion


    - The equal protection clause is not violated because there is a substantial
    basis for a different treatment of a member of a foreign military armed force
    allowed to enter the PH and all other accused.
    - The rule in International Law is that a foreign armed forces member allowed
    to enter one’s territory is immune from local jurisdiction to the extent agreed
    upon.

    Notes
    - The validity of VFA was also discussed.
    - It is known that under the PH Bill of 1902, which laid the basis for the PH
    Commonwealth, the US agreed to cede to the PH all the territory it acquired
    from Spain under the treaty of Paris, except certain naval ports and/or
    military bases, which were covered by the RP-US Military bases agreement.
    After the Expiration of such agreement, the US ceded the remaining islands to
    the PH.
    - The VFA is a treaty concurred by the Senate, and attested by the authorities
    of the US gov’t. The fact that the VFA was not submitted to the US Senate does
    not invalidate its binding force. The VFA was just an implementing
    agreement of the RP-US mutual defense treaty, which does not need to be
    submitted to the US Senate, but only for ratification of the US Congress.

    You might also like