Monday, December 19, 2016

International Catholic Migration Commission vs. Calleja GR No. 85750 & G.R. No. 89331


Topic: Workers-Members of an International Organization

FACTS:

GR # 85750- the Catholic Migration Commission (ICMC) case

1.     ICMC was one of those accredited by the Philippine government to operate the refugee processing center in Morong, Bataan. That comes from an argument between the Philippine government and the United Nations High Commissioner for refugees for eventual resettlement to other countries was to be established in Bataan.

2.     ICMC was duly registered with the United Nations Economic and Social Council and enjoys consultative status. As an international organization rendering voluntary and humanitarian services in the Philippines, its activities are parallel to those of the international committee for migration and the international of the red cross.

3.     On July 14,1986, Trade Unions of the Philippines and Allied for certification with the then Ministry of Labor and Employment a petition for certification election among the rank and file members employed by ICMC. The latter opposed the petition on the ground that it is an international organization registered with the United Nations and hence, enjoys diplomatic immunity.

4.     The Med-Arbiter sustained ICMC and dismissed the petition for each of jurisdiction. On appeal by TUPAS, Director Calleja, reversed the Med-arbiter’s decision and ordered the immediate conduct of a certification election. ICMC then sought the immediate dismissal of the TUPAS petition for certification election involving the immunity expressly granted but the same was denied. With intervention of department of foreign affairs who was legal interest in the outcome of this case, the second division gave due to the ICMC petition and required the submittal of memoranda by the parties.

GR # 89331- the IRRI case

1.     The International Rice Research Institute was a fruit of memorandum of understanding between the Philippine government and the Ford and Rochefeller Foundations. It was intended to be an autonomous, philanthropic tax-free, non-profit, non stock organization designed to carry out the principal objective of conducting “ basic research on the rice plant.”

2.     It was organized and registered with the SEC as a private corporation subject to all laws and regulations. However, by virtue of P.D no. 1620, IRRI was granted the status, prerogatives, privileges and immunities of an international organization.

3.     The Kapisanan filed a petition for direct certification election with regional office of the Department of Labor and Employment. IRRI opposed the petition invoking Pres. Decree no.1620 conferring upon it the status of an international organization and granting it immunity from all civil, criminal, and administrative proceedings under Philippine laws. The Med-Arbiter upheld the opposition on the basis of PD 1620 and dismissed the petition for direct certification.

4.     On appeal by BLR Director, set aside the med-arbiter’s decision and contends that immunities and privileges granted to IRRI do not include exemption from coverage of our labor laws.


ISSUE:

1.     GR # 85750- the ICMC case: Whether or not the grant of diplomatic privileges and immunities to ICMC extends to immunity from the application of Philippine labor laws?

2.     GR no. 89331- the IRRI case: Whether or not the Secretary of Labor committed grave abuse of discretion in dismissing the petition for certification election filed by Kapisanan?

RULING: Both ICMC and IRRI are outside the coverage of Labor Relations law.

The grant of diplomatic privileges and immunities to ICMC extends to immunity from the application of Philippine labor laws, because it is clearly necessitated by their international character and respective purposes which is to avoid the danger of partiality and interference by the host country in their internal workings.

Employees are not without recourse whenever there are disputes to be settled because each specialized agency shall make provision for appropriate modes of settlement of disputes out of contracts or other disputes of private character to which the specialized agency is a party. Moreover, pursuant to article IV of memorandum of abuse of privilege by ICMC, the government is free to withdraw the privileges and immunities accorded.

No grave abuse of discretion may be imputed to respondent secretary of labor in his assumption of appellate jurisdiction, contrary to Kapisanan’s allegation, hence, any party to an election may appeal the order or results of the elections as determined by the med-arbiter directly to the secretary of labor and employment on the ground that the rules and regulations or parts thereof established by the secretary of labor and employment for the conduct of the election have been violated.

DISPOSITIVE: Wherefore, petition granted in ICMC case and in IRRI case, the petition was dismissed.


DOCTRINE:
The immunity granted being "from every form of legal process except in so far as in any particular case they have expressly waived their immunity," it is inaccurate to state that a certification election is beyond the scope of that immunity for the reason that it is not a suit against ICMC.

A certification election cannot be viewed as an independent or isolated process. It could tugger off a series of events in the collective bargaining process together with related incidents and/or concerted activities, which could inevitably involve ICMC in the "legal process," which includes "any penal, civil and administrative proceedings." 

No comments:

Post a Comment