[G.R. No. 144920. October 17, 2000]

IN RE: PETITION TO DECLARE R.A. NO. 8043 AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL

EN BANC

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated OCT 17 2000.

G.R. No. 144920 (In Re: Petition to Declare Republic Act No.8043 As Unconstitutional, Aurora Ferrer Valdez vs. Inter-Country Adoption Board.)

Before this Court is a petition to declare as unconstitutional R. A. No. 8043, or the Inter Country Adoption Law.

We state the facts.

Sometime during October 1987, upon the urging of a Catholic nun, who was a volunteer worker for Hospicio de San Jose (hereinafter referred to as "the hospicio"), petitioner was compelled by extreme poverty to entrust her two minor children, Benson and Evelyn, to the hospicio.

Petitioner and her husband visited their children regularly.

However, sometime in November 1987, the hospicio did not allow them to see their children anymore.

The hospicio subsequently advised petitioner to go to the Inter-Country Adoption Board, as the children were already given in adoption on June 18, 1988 pursuant to a Deed of Voluntary Commitment executed by petitioner on October 5, 1987.

Petitioner consulted with the executive director of the Board, a certain Lourna T. Laraya. Ms. Laraya refused to give petitioner information about her children citing R. A. 8043 as basis.

On January 26, 2000, petitioner filed a petition for habeas corpus with the Court of Appeals, naming the hospicio and the Inter-Country Adoption Board as respondents.

On February 9, 2000, the Court of Appeals issued the writ prayed for. The Court of Appeals directed respondents to produce the bodies of Benson and Evelyn, their records of commitment and/or adoption before the court on February 11, 2000 and to show cause why the custody of the children should not be given to petitioner.

On February 11, 2000, respondents, through the Solicitor General returned the writ. The Solicitor General stated that, (1) respondents "neither have the custody nor power of restraint" over Benson and Evelyn, (2) Benson and Evelyn were not imprisoned nor under any restraint of liberty, (3) Benson and Evelyn were placed for foreign adoption as early as June 18, 1988 pursuant to a Deed of Voluntary Commitment; and (4) both Benson and Evelyn are now fully emancipated being twenty (20) and eighteen (18) years old respectively.

On October 6, 2000, petitioner filed this petition arguing that R. A. No. 8043 is unconstitutional.

We resolve to dismiss the petition.

This Court has no jurisdiction over the petition. This is a petition for declaratory relief as it is one assailing the constitutionality of a law.

Rule 63, Section 1 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure provides:

"Any person interested under a deed, will contract or other written instrument, whose rights are affected by a statute, executive order or regulations, ordinance, or any other governmental regulation may, before breach or violation thereof, bring an action in the appropriate Regional Trial Court to determine any question of construction or validity arising, and for a declaration of his rights or duties thereunder (underscoring ours)."

Article VIII, Sec 5 of the 1987 Constitution provides that "the Supreme Court shall review revise reverse or affirm on appeal on certiorari, as the law or the Rules of Court may provide, final judgments and orders of lower courts in: xxx (a) All cases in which J the constitutionality or validity of any...law...is in question xxx (underscoring ours)." A similar rule is found in Sec. 17 (3) (1) of R.A. No. 296 (The Judiciary Act of 1948), which states that this jurisdiction is exclusively vested m this Court.

This Court has no original jurisdiction over petitions for declaratory relief even if only questions of law are involved. It is settled that this Court merely exercises appellate jurisdiction over such petitions [Salvacion v. Central Bank of the Philippines, 278 SCRA 27 (1997); Tano v. Governor Socrates, 278 SCRA 154 (1997)].

Petition dismissed.

Very truly yours,

LUZVIMINDA D. PUNO

Clerk of Court

(Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA

Asst. Clerk of Court


Back to Home | Back to Main

 

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

QUICK SEARCH

cralaw

 







chanrobles.com





ChanRobles Legal Resources:

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com