GR L 22744; (March, 1966) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-22744 March 31, 1966
Lam Yin alias Lim Yin, petitioner-appellee, vs. Commissioner of Immigration, respondent-appellant.
FACTS
Petitioner Lam Yin, a Chinese national, was admitted into the Philippines on May 3, 1953, as a transient from Sandakan, Borneo, bound for Hongkong. She overstayed her permitted period. After deportation proceedings, the Commissioner of Immigration ordered her deported on August 6, 1955. She was temporarily released upon posting bonds. She was arrested and detained from August 16, 1963, to December 27, 1963, then released again under bond with the condition she leave by January 2, 1964. For failing to leave, she was rearrested on January 29, 1964, and detained. She filed a petition for habeas corpus on March 11, 1964. The parties stipulated that her stay was illegal, she was not charged with any other offense, nine years had passed since the deportation order, the government had not yet deported her, and negotiations were ongoing between the Philippine Government and the Nationalist Government of China for the return of overstaying Chinese like her.
ISSUE
Whether the detention of petitioner pending deportation is unreasonably long, justifying her release via a writ of habeas corpus.
RULING
No. The Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s order for release. The detention starting from January 29, 1964, was not unreasonably long, as less than two months had elapsed when the petition was filed. Even considering the detention had continued for about two years by the time of the decision, it was not illegal because the delay was due to diplomatic negotiations between the Philippine and Chinese governments for the return of overstaying Chinese, not due to any fault or negligence of the Philippine Government. Citing Tan Seng Pao v. Commissioner of Immigration, the Court held that as long as detention is not attributable to government fault and deportation is not impossible due to statelessness, the deportation order remains valid. Petitioner had already been accorded humanitarian consideration through two previous releases on bond. Granting release would sanction illegal stay and expose the country to undesirable aliens. The petition for habeas corpus was denied.