Tan Chin Hin v. Insular Collector of Customs
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Tan Seng, a Chinese boy approximately 17 years of age, arrived in Manila from China claiming to be the son of Tan Chin Hin, a resident merchant. The customs authorities denied Tan Seng entry into the Philippine Islands. Procedural History: An investigation was conducted by a board of special inquiry. Two members found Tan Seng was not the legitimate son of Tan Chin Hin, denying him entry. The third member noted discrepancies but found them insufficient to deny entry. The decision was appealed to the Collector of Customs, who examined the record and found Tan Seng not entitled to enter, ordering his return to the port of embarkation. The Petition: Tan Chin Hin, on behalf of Tan Seng, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the Court of First Instance of Manila. The judge issued an order for the Collector of Customs to show cause. The Collector submitted the proceedings and evidence. The Court of First Instance proceeded to take testimony on Tan Seng's right to enter, without first determining if there was an abuse of authority by the customs department.
Issue(s)
Whether the Court of First Instance has the authority to intervene and take testimony on the right of an alien to enter the Philippine Islands when the customs authorities have already made a determination, absent a clear showing of abuse of authority. Whether the customs authorities abused their authority in refusing Tan Seng the right to land in the Philippine Islands.
Ruling
The judgment of the Court of First Instance is reversed, and the judgment of the Collector of Customs is affirmed. Tan Seng is refused landing and ordered returned to his port of embarkation.
Ratio Decidendi
On the authority of the Court of First Instance to intervene: The judicial department of the Government has no authority or right to intervene in determining the right of aliens to enter the Philippine Islands, except and until it has been proved and shown clearly that the branch of the executive department of the Government upon which the power to determine that question has been conferred by law, has abused its authority. The right to determine, in the first instance, whether or not a Chinese alien has a right to enter has been conferred by law upon a branch of the executive department. The judicial department's intervention is limited to determining if such authority has been abused. An abuse of authority exists when no proof supports the customs authorities' conclusions or when they misapply a clear provision of law. The decision of the customs authorities is final unless an abuse of authority is shown. The Court of First Instance was without authority to admit proof upon the right of Tan Seng to land, its jurisdiction being limited to determining whether an abuse of authority had occurred. On whether the customs authorities abused their authority: The burden is upon the alien seeking to land to show that he has a right to enter. The customs authorities act as judges in the first instance, with the opportunity to see and hear witnesses, and are not obligated to believe declarations if the witnesses' manner or conduct causes disbelief, even if their declarations are undisputed. In this case, there was proof to support the conclusions of the customs authorities, including discrepancies in the testimony regarding the ages of other children and the appearance of Tan Seng being considerably younger than seventeen. Therefore, there was no abuse of authority by the customs authorities in refusing Tan Seng the right to land.
Main Doctrine
The judicial department of the Government has no authority or right to intervene in determining the right of aliens to enter the Philippine Islands, except and until it has been proved and shown clearly that the branch of the executive department of the Government upon which the power to determine that question has been conferred by law, has abused its authority. A mere refusal by the proper authorities to allow an alien to enter is not an abuse of authority.