CASE TITLE DOCTRINE

1) Philip Morris vs. CA The fact that international law has been made part of the law of the land does not by
224 SCRA 576 (1993) any means imply the primacy of international law over national law in the municipal
sphere. Under the doctrine of incorporation as applied in most countries, rules of
international law are given a standing equal, not superior, to national legislative
enactments.

2) Abbas vs CA The Tripoli Agreement as part of international law would not be superior to R.A. 6734
(Organic Act for the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao), an enactment of the
Congress of the Philippines, rather it would be in the same class as the latter.

3) La Chemise Lacoste SA v. Fernandez A treaty or convention is not a mere moral obligation to be enforced or not at the whims
of an incumbent head of ministry. It creates a legally binding obligation on the parties
founded on the generally accepted principle of pacta sunt servanda which has been
adopted as part of the law of our land.

Pacta sunt servanda - agreements must be kept

4) Moss v. Director of Lands TREATY OF GENERAL RELATIONS entered into by the Philippines and US, July 4,
1946.

Article 6 of such treaty states that: all existing property rights of citizens and
corporations of the US in the Philippines shall be acknowledged, respected and
safeguarded to the same extent as property rights of citizens and corporations of the
Philippines.

5) Guerreros Transport Services v. Blaylock Transportation Services Employees
Association-Kilusan
INTERNATIONAL & NATIONAL LAW
Treaty has 2 aspects:
1. Serves as an international agreement between states; and
2. As a municipal law for people of each state to observe.
There was a public bidding (by the US Subic Naval Base) to employ transport services
in which petitioners won against respondent, however, union (respondent) was granted
by the court to be hired by petitioner for the 5-year contract TO PROVIDE SECURITY
FOR EMPLOYMENT (application of the municipal law) in accordance to the PH-US
Labor Agreement. (Intl agreement between the States)

6) Collector of Internal Revenue vs Campos Rueda INTERNATIONAL & NATIONAL LAW

Tangier law, a city in Morocco, provides exemption from transfer tax on intangible
property upon the death of the owner to the administrator. There is a question whether
or not the PH would need to recognize Tangier as having a international personality
(like that of a State).

It does not admit of doubt that if a foreign country is to be identified with a state, it is
required in line with Pound's formulation that it be a politically organized sovereign
community independent of outside control bound by penalties of nationhood, legally

PREPARED BY || APARENTE || AQUINO || CALUB || ENRIQUEZ || GONZALES || CHRISTIAN GREY || MALABANAN || MARQUEZ || MENDOZA || TIO
 supreme within its territory, acting through a government functioning under a regime of
law. A foreign country is thus a sovereign person with the people composing it viewed
as an organized corporate society under a government with the legal competence to
exact obedience to its commands. Even on the assumption then that Tangier is bereft
of international personality, the CIR has not successfully made out a case. The Court
did commit itself to the doctrine that even a tiny principality, like Liechtenstein, hardly an
international personality in the sense, did fall under this exempt category.

Thus, by the express provision of the NIRC Sec. 122 and the principle of reciprocity
(recognizing Tangier, Morocco as having international personality), the exemption to
the transfer tax of the intangible estate was granted.

7) Gonzales vs Hechanova INTERNATIONAL & NATIONAL LAW

Contracts with Burma and Vietnam were executed by Exec. Secretary for the
importation of rice.

An international agreement may be invalidated by our courts on the basis of our

Constitution, in Article 8, Sec. 2, that the SC may not be deprived of its jurisdiction to
review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal, certiorari, or writ of error as the law
or rules of court may provide, final judgments and decrees of inferior courts in - All
cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, law, ordinance, OUR
CONSTITUTION AUTHORIZES THE NULLIFICATION OF A TREATY, NOT ONLY
WHEN IT CONFLICTS WITH THE FUNDAMENTAL LAW, BUT, ALSO, WHEN IT
RUNS COUNTER TO AN ACT OF CONGRESS.

8) In Re: Garcia Petitioner is a PH citizen and graduate of law in the University of Madrid in Spain.

Petitioner contends that he is entitled to the Treaty on Academic Degrees and the
Exercise of Professions between PH and Spain, specifically, that he does not need to
take the bar exams to exercise his legal profession in the PH.

The treaty is intended to govern Filipino citizens desiring to practice their profession in
Spain, and the citizens of Spain desiring to practice their legal profession in the PH.
Thus, petitioner is not qualified among the provisions of the treaty between PH and
Spain.

The treaty could not have been intended to modify the laws and regulations governing
admission to the practice of law in the PH. Furthermore, so that the Executive
Department can not encroach upon the constitutional prerogative of the SC on rules for
admission to the practice of law in the PH.

9) Ichong vs Hernandez The law does not violate any international treaties or obligations. The UN Charter
imposes no strict or legal obligations regarding the rights and freedom of their subjects,
and the Declaration of Human Rights contains nothing more than a mere
recommendation, or a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations.
The Treaty of Amity between the Republic of the Philippines and the Republic of China
guarantees equality of treatment to the Chinese nationals upon the same terms as the
nationals of any other country. But the nationals of China are not discriminated against
because nationals of all other countries, except those of the United States, who are

PREPARED BY || APARENTE || AQUINO || CALUB || ENRIQUEZ || GONZALES || CHRISTIAN GREY || MALABANAN || MARQUEZ || MENDOZA || TIO
 granted special rights by the Constitution, are all prohibited from engaging in the retail
trade

10) Singh vs Collector of Customs By the Constitution of the United States, a treaty is placed upon the same footing and
made of like obligation with an Act of Congress. Both are declared by that instrument to
be the supreme law of the land, and no superior efficacy is given to either over the
other. If, however, the treaty and the Act of Congress are inconsistent, the one last in
date will control. (Take note: This was when the Philippines was under the US
occupation, 1918)

11) Marcos vs Manglapus Right to return is distinct and separate from the right to travel. It is distinct and separate
from the right to travel and enjoys a different protection under the International
Covenant of Civil and Political Rights, i.e., against being "arbitrarily deprived" thereof.

12) Reyes vs Bagatsing The vienna convention on diplomatic relations does NOT apply as there is no threat to
the US embassy.

The issue of the applicability of Ordinance No. 7295 of the City of Manila prohibiting the
holding or staging of rallies or demonstrations within a radius of five hundred (500) feet
from any foreign mission or chancery; and for other purposes which finds support in
Article 22 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations need not be passed upon.
There was no showing that the distance between the chancery and the embassy gate
is less than 500 feet. Even if it could be shown that such a condition is satisfied, it does
not follow that respondent Mayor could legally act the way he did. The validity of his
denial of the permit sought could still be challenged. It could be argued that a case of
unconstitutional application of such ordinance to the exercise of the right of peaceable
assembly presents itself. As in this case there was no proof that the distance is less
than 500 feet, the need to pass on that issue was obviated.

13) Agustin vs Edu The conclusion reached by this Court that this petition must be dismissed is reinforced
by this consideration.

The petition itself quoted these two whereas clauses of the assailed Letter of
Instruction:

1) "[Whereas], the hazards posed by such obstructions to traffic have been

recognized by international bodies concerned with traffic safety, the 1968
Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals and the United Nations
Organization (U.N.);

2) [Whereas], the said Vionna Convention, which was ratified by the Philippine
Government under P.D. No. 207, recommended the enactment of local
legislation for the installation of road safety signs and devices; * * * "

It cannot be disputed then that this Declaration of Principle found in the Constitution
possesses relevance: "The Philippines * * * adopts the generally accepted principles of
international law as part of the law of the land * * *."

PREPARED BY || APARENTE || AQUINO || CALUB || ENRIQUEZ || GONZALES || CHRISTIAN GREY || MALABANAN || MARQUEZ || MENDOZA || TIO
 The 1968 Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals is impressed with such a
character. It is not for this country to repudiate a commitment to which it had pledged its
word. The concept of Pacta sunt servanda stands in the way of such an attitude, which
is, moreover, at war with the principle of international morality.

14) Sison v. Board of Accountancy and Ferguzon
While the profession of certified public accountant is not controlled or regulated by the
Government of Great Britain, the country of origin of respondent Robert Orr Ferguson,
according to the record, said respondent had been admitted in this country to the
practice of his profession as certified public accountant on the strength of his
membership of the Institute of Accountants and Actuaries in Glasgow (England),
incorporated by the Royal Charter of 1855. The question of his entitlement to admission
to the practice of his profession in this jurisdiction, does not , therefore, come under
reciprocity, as this principle is known in International Law, but it is included in the
meaning of comity, as expressed in the alternative condition of the proviso of the
above-quoted section 12 which says: such country or state does not restrict the right of
Filipino certified public accountants to practice therein.

International Law is founded largely upon mutuality, reciprocity, and the principle of
comity of nations. Comity, in this connection, is neither a matter of absolute obligation
on the one hand, nor of mere courtesy and good will on the other; it is the recognition
which one nation allows within its territory to the acts of foreign governments and
tribunals, having due regard both to the international duty and convenience and the
rights of its own citizens or of other persons who are under the protection of its laws.
The fact of reciprocity does not necessarily influence the application of the doctrine of
comity, although it may do so and has been given consideration in some instances.

The fact that the Philippine and the United Kingdom, are bound by a treaty of friendship
and commerce, and each nation is represented in the other by corresponding
diplomatic envoy. There is no reason whatsoever to doubt the statement and
assurance made by the diplomatic representative of the British Government in the
Philippines, regarding the practice of the accountancy profession in the United Kingdom
and the fact that Filipino certified public accountant will be admitted to practice their
profession in the United Kingdom should they choose to do so.

Under such circumstances, and without necessarily construing that such attitude of the
British Government in the premises, as represented by the British Minister, amounts to
reciprocity, we may at least state that it comes within the realm of comity, as
contemplated in our law.

It appearing that the record fails to show that the suspension of this respondent is . . .
based on any of the cause provided by the Accountancy Law, we find no reason why
Robert Orr Ferguson, who had previously been registered as certified public
accountants and issued the corresponding certificate public accountant in the Philippine
Islands, should be suspended from the practice of his profession in these Islands.

15) Kuroda vs Jalandoni In accordance with the generally accepted principle of international law of the present
day including the Hague Convention the Geneva Convention and significant precedents
of international jurisprudence established by the United Nation all those person military
or civilian who have been guilty of planning preparing or waging a war of aggression
and of the commission of crimes and offenses consequential and incidental thereto in

PREPARED BY || APARENTE || AQUINO || CALUB || ENRIQUEZ || GONZALES || CHRISTIAN GREY || MALABANAN || MARQUEZ || MENDOZA || TIO
 violation of the laws and customs of war, of humanity and civilization are held
accountable therefor. Consequently in the promulgation and enforcement of Execution
Order No. 68 the President of the Philippines has acted in conformity with the generally
accepted and policies of international law which are part of the our Constitution.

It cannot be denied that the rules and regulation of the Hague and Geneva
conventions form, part of and are wholly based on the generally accepted principals of
international law. In facts these rules and principles were accepted by the two
belligerent nation the United State and Japan who were signatories to the two
Convention, Such rule and principles therefore form part of the law of our nation even if
the Philippines was not a signatory to the conventions embodying them for our
Constitution has been deliberately general and extensive in its scope and is not
confined to the recognition of rule and principle of international law as continued inn
treaties to which our government may have been or shall be a signatory.

Furthermore when the crimes charged against petitioner were allegedly committed the
Philippines was under the sovereignty of United States and thus we were equally
bound together with the United States and with Japan to the right and obligation
contained in the treaties between the belligerent countries. These rights and obligation
were not erased by our assumption of full sovereignty. If at all our emergency as a free
state entitles us to enforce the right on our own of trying and punishing those who
committed crimes against crimes against our people.

16) Ingenohl vs Olsen & Co. 1. International law, including questions concerning the rights of persons within the
dominion of one nation by reason of acts done within the dominion of another, is part of
our law, and should be ascertained and administered by the courts as often as such
questions are duly submitted to their determination.

2. Where there is no written law upon the subject, such as treaty or statute, questions
of international law must be determined by judicial decisions, the works of jurists, and
the acts and usages of civilized nations.

3. Comity of nations is the recognition which one nation allows within its territory to the
legislative, executive, or judicial acts of another nation, having due regard to
international duty and convenience, and to the rights of its own citizens or others who
are under the protection of its laws.
xxx xxx xxx
6. A foreign judgment for money in favor of a citizen of the foreign country against a
citizen of this country, rendered by a competent court having jurisdiction of the cause
and of the parties, upon due allegations and proofs and opportunity to defend
according to the course of a civilized jurisprudence, whose record is clear and formal, is
prima facie evidence, at least, in a suit upon it in this country, and is conclusive on the
merits, unless impeached on special ground, or shown by international law or the
comity of this country not entitled to full faith and credit.

But here we have a statute which clearly defines the specific conditions upon which a
foreign judgment can be enforced in the Philippine Islands, and we have a decision of
the United States Supreme Court which holds that "where there is no written law upon
the subject, such as treaty or statute, questions of international law must be determined
by judicial decisions, the works of jurists, and the acts and usages of civilized nations."

PREPARED BY || APARENTE || AQUINO || CALUB || ENRIQUEZ || GONZALES || CHRISTIAN GREY || MALABANAN || MARQUEZ || MENDOZA || TIO

17) Bosque vs United States
18) China National Machinery and Equipment Corp. vs Santamaria
19) Liban vs Gordon
20) Pharmaceutical and Health Care Association of the Philippines vs Duque
PREPARED BY || APARENTE || AQUINO || CALUB || ENRIQUEZ || GONZALES || CHRISTIAN GREY || MALABANAN || MARQUEZ || MENDOZA || TIO
The converse of that proposition is also true that where you do have a treaty or statute,
to enforce a foreign judgment, it must come under and within the specific provisions of
the treaty or statute.
The words in Article 8 of the treaty, "such laws as are applicable to other foreigners,"
referred not to Spanish Law, but to the laws enacted by the new sovereignty. The
enjoyment of the privilege of practicing the profession, ceased by virtue of the
stipulations of the treaty of Paris and the subsequent laws and regulations of the new
sovereignty inconsistent therewith. What is protected by the treaty are property rights or
propriedad which includes the right to sell, dispose or possession, the right to practice
law was not referred to as property there.
The contract Agreement was not concluded between the Philippines and Chima, but
between Northrail and CNMEG. Both Northrail and CNMEG entered into the Contract
Agreement as entities with personalities distinct and separate from the Philippine and
Chinese governments, respectively.
Executive agreement is similar to a treaty except that the former:
1. Does not require legislative concurrence
2. Usually less formal
3. Narrower range of subject matters
Requisites of EA pursuant to Vienna Convention
1. The agreement must be between states
2. Written
3. Governed by international law
The PNRC is sui generis in nature; it is neither strictly a GOCC nor a private
corporation.
As recognition of the country's adherence to the Geneva Convention and respect the
unique status of the PNRC in consonance with its treaty obligations. The Geneva
Convention has the force and effect of law. Under the Constitution, the Philippines
adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the
land.
The PNRC, as a National Society of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent
Movement, can neither be "classified as an instrumentality of the State, so as not to
lose its neutrality" as well as independence, nor strictly as a private corporation since it
is regulated by international humanitarian law and treated as an auxiliary of the State.
Under the Constitution, international law can become part of the sphere of domestic law
either by transformation or incorporation. Treaties become part of the law of the land
through transformation which shall be valid and effective unless concurred in by at least
two-thirds of all the members of the senate.
The ICMBS and WHA Resolutions are not treaties as they have not been concurred in
by at least two-thirds of all members of the Senate as required under the Constitution.
WHA Resolutions have not been embodied in any local legislation. It is propounded
that WHA Resolutions may constitute "Soft law" or non-binding norms, principles and
practices that influence state behavior.

21) Department of Budget and Management Procurement Service vs Kolonwel
22) Pimentel v. Office of the Executive Secretary
23) Ocejo vs Consul General of Spain
24) Bayan Muna vs Romulo (long)
PREPARED BY || APARENTE || AQUINO || CALUB || ENRIQUEZ || GONZALES || CHRISTIAN GREY || MALABANAN || MARQUEZ || MENDOZA || TIO
Soft law does not fall into any categories of international law provided under the 1946
Statute of International Court of Justice, Chapter 3, Article 38. It is, however, an
expression of non binding norms, principles and practices that influence state behavior.
Consequently, legislation is necessary to transform the provisions of the WHA
Resolutions into Domestic Law. The provisions of the WHA Resolutions cannot be
considered as part of the law of the land that can be implemented by executive
agencies without the need of a law enacted by the legislature.
The foreign loan agreements (Loan No. 7118-PH) with international financial
institutions, partake of an executive or international agreement and shall govern the
procurement of goods necessary to implement the project. This has been affirmatively
answered in the case on Abaya vs Ebdane where the court declared that the RP-JBIC
loan agreement was to be of governing application over the CP I project and that the
JBIC Procurement Guidelines, as stipulated in the loan agreement.
Under the fundamental international law principle of pacta sunt servanda, the RP, as
borrower, bound itself to perform in good faith its duties and obligation under Loan No.
7118-PH. Applying this postulate, the IABAC was legally obliged to comply with, or
accord primacy to, the WB Guidelines on the conduct and implementation of the
bidding/procurement process in question.
Under our Constitution, the power to ratify is vested in the President, subject to the
concurrence of the Senate. The role of the Senate is limited only to giving or
withholding its consent, or concurrence, to the ratification. Hence, it is within the
authority of the President to refuse to submit a treaty to the Senate or, having secured
its consent for its ratification, refuse to ratify it.
The deceased was a Spanish subject at the time of his death, appellant himself, having
reported his death to the Spanish Consul General, impliedly recognized his Spanish
nationality. These circumstances, taken in conjunction with the fact that the deceased
was registered as a Spanish subject in the Spanish Consulate General in the
Philippines, more than sufficiently warrant the conclusion that said deceased was a
Spaniard when he died.
The word "dominios" appearing in article 26 of the Treaty of Friendship and General
Relations of 1902 between Spain and the United States, includes the Philippines.
Pending withdrawal of the sovereignty of the United States, the Philippines, even in its
present self-governing status, continues to be subject to the sovereignty of the United
States and is in this sense a part of the United States. The rule invoked by the
appellant to the effect that the constitution and acts of Congress of the United States do
not, ex propio vigore, have force in the Philippines, does not apply to a treaty which by
the very nature of its provisions, is intended to apply thereto.
Facts: Non-surrender bilateral agreement b/w US & PH against Rome Statute.
1. Exchange of notes = executive agreements
a. Binding through executive action
2. No senate concurrence needed for exchange of notes
3. No difference between treaties and executive agreements in terms of their

25) Nicolas v. Romulo
26) Bayan (Bagong Alyansang Makabayan) vs Zamora
27) Commissioner of Customs vs Eastern Sea Trading
PREPARED BY || APARENTE || AQUINO || CALUB || ENRIQUEZ || GONZALES || CHRISTIAN GREY || MALABANAN || MARQUEZ || MENDOZA || TIO
binding effects on the contracting states concerned
4. Not against Rome Statute
a. Art 90 & 98 reads a waiver where the Rome Statute wont apply if
there is another international obligation (The non-surrender
agreement)
i. US neither a state-party nor a signatory to the Rome statute
ii. US-PH have non-surrender agreement
b. PH & US have primary jurisdiction to prosecute criminal offenses
committed by their respective citizens and military personnel
c. Rome Statute not declaratory of customary international law
i. No overwhelming consensus that prosecution of
internationally recognized crimes should be handled by a
particular international criminal court
Facts: Rape of Filipina by US Lance Corporal Daniel Smith, VFA
1. Constitutionality of VFA - Upheld
a. VFA duly concurred by PH Senate and US Government
b. VFA is a product of the RP-US Mutual Defense Treaty as
implementing agreement
2. Difference in treatment when it comes to detention after conviction as against
custody during trial
a. Detention: carried out in facilities agreed on by authorities of both
parties & detention shall be by PH Authorities.
i. Romulo-Kenney Agreement on detention of accused in US
Embassy is against the VFA as not by PH Authorities
3. VFA self-executing Agreement
1. Art. 2 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties does not distinguish
between treaties and executive agreements. So long as parties manifest
through a written document and through their actions that they are bound by
the agreement, the agreement is to be understood as treaty under
international law.
2. Whether the other state views the agreement as treaty or not in its domestic
legal jargon is inconsequential under the scope of international law.
3. Consent of a state to be bound by a treaty is expressed by ratification when;
(1) treaty provides for such ratification; (2) it was established that negotiating
states agreed that ratification should be required; (3) state representatives
signed the treaty subject to ratification, and; (4) intent to sign the treaty subject
to ratification was apparent in the full powers of the representative or
expressed during negotiation.
4. Upon ratification, parties are bound to comply with the provisions of the treaty
(Pacta Sunt Servanda)
5. Under Philippine law; it is the President who may ratify treaties; the Senate
who may concur or question the wisdom of the treaties, and the Courts who
may question the legality of the proceedings in ratifying treaties.
1. The executive prerogative to enter into international agreements have been
confirmed by long usage. As compared to treaties which take on political

28) USAFFE Veterans Association Inc vs Treasurer of the Philippines
29) Abaya vs Ebdane
PREPARED BY || APARENTE || AQUINO || CALUB || ENRIQUEZ || GONZALES || CHRISTIAN GREY || MALABANAN || MARQUEZ || MENDOZA || TIO
issues, changes of national policy and of permanent character, agreements
are detail adjustments of temporary character.
2. An executive agreement is not subject to Senate concurrence. The validity of
these agreements have never been seriously questioned by the Courts.
It must be noted that treaty is not the only form that an international agreement may
assume. For the grant of the treaty-making power to the Executive and the Senate
does not exhaust the power of the government over international relations.
Consequently, executive agreements may be entered with other states and are
effective even without the concurrence of the Senate. It is observed in this connection
that from the point of view of the international law, there is no difference between
treaties and executive agreements in their binding effect upon states concerned as long
as the negotiating functionaries have remained within their powers, "The distinction
between so-called executive agreements" and "treaties" is purely a constitutional one
and has no international legal significance". There are now various forms of such pacts
or agreements entered into by and between sovereign states which do not necessarily
come under the strict sense of a treaty and which do not require ratification or consent
of the legislative body of the State, but nevertheless, are considered valid international
agreements. It was held in Altman vs USA that "an international compact negotiated
between the representatives of two sovereign nations and made in the name and or
behalf of the contracting parties and dealing with important commercial relations
between the two countries, is a treaty both internationally although as an executive
agreement it is not technically a treaty requiring the advice and consent of the Senate.
Nature of Executive Agreements.
Executive Agreements fall into two classes: (1) agreements made purely as executive
acts affecting external relations and independent of or without legislative authorization,
which may be termed as presidential agreements and (2) agreements entered into in
pursuants of acts of Congress, which have been designated as
Congressional-Executive Agreements. The Romulo-Snyder Agreement may fall under
any of these two classes, for precisely on September 18, 1946, Congress of the
Philippines specifically authorized the President of the Philippines to obtain such loans
or incur such indebtedness with the Government of the United States, its agencies or
instrumentalities. Even granting, arguendo, that there was no legislative authorization, it
is hereby maintained that the Romulo-Snyder Agreement was legally and validly
entered into to conform to the second category, namely, "agreements entered into
purely as executive acts without legislative authorization." This second category usually
includes money agreements relating to the settlement of pecuniary claims of citizens. It
may be said that this method of settling such claims has come to be the usual way of
dealing with matters of this kind.
An "exchange of notes" is a record of a routine agreement that has many similarities
with the private law contract. The agreement consists of the exchange of two
documents, each of the parties being in the possession of the one signed by the
representative of the other. Under the usual procedure, the accepting State repeats the
text of the offering State to record its assent. The signatories of the letters may be
government Ministers, diplomats or departmental heads. The technique of exchange of
notes is frequently resorted to, either because of its speedy procedure, or, sometimes,
to avoid the process of legislative approval. It is stated that "treaties, agreements,
 conventions, charters, protocols, declarations, memoranda of understanding, modus
vivendi and exchange of notes" all refer to "international instruments binding at
international law." It is further explained that-
Although these instruments differ from each other by title, they all have common
features and international law has applied basically the same rules to all these
instruments. These rules are the result of long practice among the States, which have
accepted them as binding norms in their mutual relations. Therefore, they are regarded
as international customary law. Since there was a general desire to codify these
customary rules, two international conventions were negotiated. The 1969 Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties, which entered into force on 27 January 1980,
contains rules for treaties concluded between States. The 1986 Vienna Convention on
the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations, which has still not
entered into force, added rules for treaties with international organizations as parties.
Both the 1969 Vienna Convention and the 1986 Vienna Convention do not distinguish
between the different designations of these instruments. Instead, their rules apply to all
of those instruments as long as they meet the common requirements. Significantly, an
exchange of notes is considered a form of an executive agreement, which becomes
binding through executive action without the need of a vote by the Senate or Congress.

30) Gibbs vs Rodriguez According to Article 38 of the Statues of the International Court of Justice, the Court
shall, subject to certain limitations, apply judicial decisions as a subsidiary means for
the determination of rule of International Law. Although courts are not organs of the
State for expressing in a binding manner its views on foreign affairs, they are
nevertheless organs of the State giving, as a rule, impartial expression to what is
believed to be International Law. For this reason, judgments of municipal tribunals are
of considerable practical importance for determining what is the right rule of
International Law. This is now being increasingly recognizes, and periodical unofficial
collections of decisions of both international and municipal courts are being published.
In pleadings before international tribunals litigants still fortify their arguments by
reference to writings of international jurists, but with the growth of international judicial
activity and of the practice of States evidenced by widely accessible records and
reports, it is natural that reliance on the authority of writers as evidence of International
Law should tend to diminish. For it is as evidence of the law and not as a law-creating
factor that the usefulness of teaching of writers has been occasionally admitted in
judicial pronouncements. But inasmuch as a source of law is conceived as a factor
influencing the judge in rendering its decision, the work of writers may continue to play
a part in proportion to its intrinsic scientific value, its impartiality and its determination to
scrutinize critically the practice of State by reference to legal principle.

31) Vinuya vs Romulo Within the limits prescribed by international law, a State may exercise diplomatic
protection by whatever means and to whatever extent it thinks fit, for it is its own right
that the State is asserting. Should the natural or legal person on whose behalf it is
acting consider that their rights are not adequately protected, they have no remedy in
international law. All they can do is resort to national law, if means are available, with a
view to furthering their cause or obtaining redress. All these questions remain within the
province of municipal law and do not affect the position internationally. Even the
invocation of jus cogens norms and erga omnes obligations will not alter this analysis.

The term erga omnes (Latin: in relation to everyone) in international law has been used

PREPARED BY || APARENTE || AQUINO || CALUB || ENRIQUEZ || GONZALES || CHRISTIAN GREY || MALABANAN || MARQUEZ || MENDOZA || TIO
 as a legal term describing obligations owed by States towards the community of states
as a whole. Essential distinction should be drawn between the obligations of a State
towards the international community as a whole, and those arising vis--vis another
State in the field of diplomatic protection. By their very nature, the former are the
concern of all States. In view of the importance of the rights involved, all States can be
held to have a legal interest in their protection; they are obligations erga omnes. The
term jus cogens (literally, compelling law) refers to norms that command peremptory
authority, superseding conflicting treaties and custom. Jus cogens norms are
considered peremptory in the sense that they are mandatory, do not admit derogation,
and can be modified only by general international norms of equivalent authority.

PREPARED BY || APARENTE || AQUINO || CALUB || ENRIQUEZ || GONZALES || CHRISTIAN GREY || MALABANAN || MARQUEZ || MENDOZA || TIO