49. WHO vs. Aquino  Yes.

 Yes. The executive branch of the Phils has expressly recognized that Verstuyft is entitled to
GR. No. L-35131 diplomatic immunity, pursuant to the provisions of the Host Agreement. The DFA formally
November 29, 1972 advised respondent judge of the Philippine Government's official position. The Solicitor
Topic: International Organizations General, as principal law officer of the gorvernment, likewise expressly affirmed said
Petitioners:THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION and DR. LEONCE VERSTUYFT petitioner's right to diplomatic immunity and asked for the quashal of the search warrant.
Respondents: HON. BENJAMIN H. AQUINO, as Presiding Judge of Branch VIII, Court of First
Instance of Rizal, MAJOR WILFREDO CRUZ, MAJOR ANTONIO G. RELLEVE, and CAPTAIN PEDRO S. It is a recognized principle of international law and under our system of separation of
NAVARRO of the Constabulary Offshore Action Center (COSAC) powers that diplomatic immunity is essentially a political question and courts should refuse
Ponente: J. Teehankee to look beyond a determination by the executive branch of the government, and where the
plea of diplomatic immunity is recognized and affirmed by the executive branch of the
government as in the case at bar, it is then the duty of the courts to accept the claim of
DOCTRINE:
immunity upon appropriate suggestion by the principal law officer of the government, the
Solicitor General in this case, or other officer acting under his discretion. Courts may not so
Diplomatic immunity is essentially a political question and courts should refuse to look beyond
exercise their jurisdiction by seizure and detention of property, as to embarrass the
a determination by the executive branch of the government.
executive arm of the government in conducting foreign relations.
FACTS:
The Court, therefore, holds the respondent judge acted without jurisdiction and with grave
abuse of discretion in not ordering the quashal of the search warrant issued by him in
 Dr. Leonce Verstuyft was assigned by WHO to its regional office in Manila as Acting
disregard of the diplomatic immunity of petitioner Verstuyft.
Assistant Director of Health Services. His personal effects, contained in twelve
(12) crates, were allowed free entry from duties and taxes. Constabulary Offshore Action
Center (COSAC) suspected that the crates “contain large quantities of highly dutiable
goods” beyond the official needs of Verstuyft.
 Upon application of the COSAC officers, Judge Aquino issued a search warrant for the
search and seizure of the personal effects of Verstuyft.
 Secretary of Foreign Affairs Carlos P. Romulo advised Judge Aquino that Dr. Verstuyft is
entitled to immunity from search in respect for his personal baggage as accorded to
members of diplomatic missions pursuant to the Host Agreement and requested that the
search warrant be suspended.
 The Solicitor General accordingly joined Verstuyft for the quashal of the search warrant but
respondent judge nevertheless summarily denied the quashal. Verstuyft, thus, filed a
petition for certiorari and prohibition with the SC. WHO joined Verstuyft in asserting
diplomatic immunity.

ISSUE:

Whether or not personal effect of Verstuyft can be exempted from search and seizure under the
diplomatic immunity.

HELD: