G.R. No. 159835 ; January 21, 2010
THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION AND DEPORTATION, Petitioner, vs. JUNG KEUN PARK @ JUNG GEUN PARK @ CHUNG KEUN PARK, Respondent.

FACTS

Respondent Jung Keun Park, a Korean national, came to the Philippines in the early 1990s to invest. In 2000, the BID received a July 6, 2000 letter from a Korean Consul/Police Attaché requesting Park’s deportation due to alleged fraud charges in Korea and stating his passport had been cancelled. Acting on this, the BID arrested and deported Park on July 24, 2000. Park returned to the Philippines on October 28, 2000, via Zamboanga from Malaysia. The BID, believing he re-entered without a valid passport, arrested him on December 11, 2000. On December 22, 2000, the BID issued a Charge Sheet indicting him for violating Section 37(a)(7) of the Philippine Immigration Act and, on the same day, issued a Summary Deportation Order (SDO). Park filed a Petition for Bail, claiming he had paid fines and should not be considered undocumented as he held a Travel Certificate and a Special Investor’s Resident Visa (SIRV). He later filed a motion to set aside the SDO, arguing the July 6, 2000 letter was disavowed by the Korean Embassy in subsequent letters dated February 16, 2001, and May 28, 2001, and that he had a new passport. The BID denied his motion as belated, ruling the SDO was final. Park assailed the SDO and the denial before the Court of Appeals, which set them aside, leading the BID to file this petition.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in nullifying the BID’s Summary Deportation Order and its Resolution denying Park’s motion to set it aside, on grounds of grave abuse of discretion.

RULING

The Supreme Court GRANTED the petition, reversing the Court of Appeals. The Court held that the BID had sufficient factual and legal basis for the SDO and its subsequent Resolution. Park, as a non-immigrant, was required by Section 10 of the Immigration Act to present a valid passport and visa upon entry. The Charge Sheet alleged he remained in the Philippines in violation of the conditions of his admission as a non-immigrant, specifically for failure to present a valid passport, which is a ground for deportation under Section 37(a)(7). The BID’s reliance on the uncontroverted July 6, 2000 letter at the time of the SDO’s issuance was not an abuse of discretion. The subsequent letters from the Korean Embassy were submitted only after the SDO had become final and executory due to Park’s failure to appeal within the 30-day reglementary period under the Deportation Rules. The Court also found that Park was accorded due process as the Charge Sheet informed him of the specific grounds, and summary deportation was proper as the charge related to his lack of a valid passport, which falls under the rules for summary proceedings. The SDO was thus valid and the BID’s denial of the motion to set it aside was correct.