Buscayno vs. Military Commissions Nos. 1, 2, 6 and 25, G.R. No. L-58284, November 19, 1981
Buscayno vs. Military Commissions Nos. 1, 2, 6 and 25, G.R. No. L-58284, November 19, 1981
Buscayno vs. Military Commissions Nos. 1, 2, 6 and 25, G.R. No. L-58284, November 19, 1981
*
No. L-58284. November 19, 1981.
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 1/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
________________
* EN BANC.
274
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 2/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
275
minated, then jeopardy does not set in. After the accused has been
put in jeopardy, the filing against him of another charge for the
same offense or for an attempt or frustrated stage thereof or for
any offense which necessarily includes or is included in the
offense originally charged places him in double jeopardy.
Same; Same; Rebellion is not an element of the crime of
subversion,—Petitioners contend that rebellion is an element of
the crime of subversion. That contention is not correct because
subversion does not necessarily include rebellion. Subversion, like
treason, is a crime against national security. Rebellion is a crime
against public order.
Same; Same; Same.—The petitioners were accused of
rebellion for having allegedly undertaken a public uprising to
overthrow the government. In contrast, they were accused of
subversion for being allegedly officers and ranking members of the
Communist Party and similar subversive groups. The alleged
overt acts of resisting the armed forces were only incidental to the
main charge of being leaders of subversive or revolutionary
organizations collaborating with an alien power to make the
country a satellite thereof, like Cuba, North Korea and North
Vietnam in relation to Soviet Russia.
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 3/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
276
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 4/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
Makasiar, J.:
Melencio-Herrera, J.:
277
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 5/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
278
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 6/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
AQUINO, J.:
279
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 7/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
280
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 8/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
281
282
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 10/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
_________________
283
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 11/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 12/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
285
286
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 17/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
290
291
292
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 20/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
293
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 21/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 22/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 24/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
________________
297
________________
5 Ibid, 234-236.
6 90 Phil. 172 (1971).
7 Fourth edition, 531-532 (1953).
8 341 US 494 (1951).
9 367 US 203 (1961)
300
_________________
10 395 US 444.
11 Ibid, 447. Cf. Strong, Fifty Years of "Clear and Present Danger."
Supreme Court Review 41 (1969).
301
separate
1
opinions in Aquino vs. Military Commission No. 2 2
and in the latest cases this year of Buscayno vs. Enrile ,
3
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 29/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
3
Sison vs. Enrile 4 and Luneta vs. Special Military
Commission No. 1 .
These cases were all decided before the President's
issuance of Proclamation No. 2045 on January 17, 1981
revoking his previous proclamations of martial law (Nos.
1081 and 1104) as well as General Order No. 8, and
directing that "the military tribunals created pursuant
thereto are hereby dissolved upon final determination of
cases pending therein which may not be transferred to the
civil courts without irreparable prejudice to the state in
view of the rules on double jeopardy, or other
circumstances which render further prosecution of the
cases difficult, if not impossible."
In Sison particularly, the Court in dismissing the
petition, unanimously noted that "(T)he President of the
Philippines has announced that the military tribunals are
being phased out. It is reported that the Ministry of Justice
is now taking steps to transfer cases pending before the
military tribunals to the civil courts. Hence, the issues
raised by the petitioners have become moot and academic."
With the official lifting of martial law under
Proclamation No. 2045 and the revocation thereunder of
General Order No. 8 creating military tribunals, and
pursuant to the Court's abovequoted pronouncement in
Sison on the phaseout of military tribunals, there is no
longer any justification for continuing to subject
petitioners-civilians to trial by military commissions in
derogation of the judicial power vested exclusively in the
civil courts.
As stressed in my separate opinion in Aquino, civilians
like petitioners placed on trial for offenses under general
law are entitled to trial by judicial process, not by executive
or military process. Judicial power is vested by the
Constitution exclusively in the Supreme Court and in such
inferior courts as
________________
302
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 30/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
________________
303
_________________
7 Jointly decided with Angeles vs. Abaya and reported in 90 PhiL 172.
304
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 32/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
'* * * The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus and the right to bail
guaranteed under the Bill of Rights are separate and co-equal. If the
intention of the framers of the Constitution was that the suspension of
the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus carries or implies the
suspension of the right to bail, they would have very easily provided that
all persons shall before conviction be bailable by sufficient sureties,
except those charged with capital offenses when evidence of guilt is
strong and except when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is
suspended. As stated in the case of Ex Parte Milligan, 4
305
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 33/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
Wall. 2, 18 L. ed. 297, the Constitution limited the suspension to only one
great right, leaving the rest to remain forever inviolable.'
'To the plea that the security of the State would be jeopardized by the
release of the defendants on bail, the answer is that the existence of
danger is never a justification for courts to tamper with the fundamental
rights expressly granted by the Constitution. These rights are
immutable, inflexible, yielding to no pressure of convenience, expediency
or the so-called 'judicial statesmanship.' The Legislature itself cannot
infringe them, and no court conscious of its responsibilities and
limitations would do so. If the Bill of Rights are incompatible with stable
government and a menace to the Nation, let the Constitution be
amended, or abolished. It is trite to say that, while the Constitution
stands, the courts of justice as the repository of civil liberty are bound to
protect and maintain undiluted individual rights.'
306
9
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 34/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
9
III. A final word on the statements in the main opinion
that would deny to this Supreme Court the right to "review
the rulings and proceedings of the military commission" or
at best limit such 10
review "to decisions of the Court of
Military Appeals in cases appealed to it from the military
commission." It must first be noted that these statements
do not carry the affirmance of a majority of the Court that
would unsettle or overthrow this Court's consistent
exercise of its judicial power and jurisdiction through the
prerogative writs of certiorari and prohibition or habeas
corpus over cases, including military commissions (in
whatever stage of the proceedings), where a violation or
denial of constitutional rights is asserted by the aggrieved
party, although not always with successful results. In this
very case, the Court did again exercise, with the required
concurrence of at least eight (8) members, its jurisdiction
over proceedings in the military commissions per its
Resolution of October 22, 1981 through the issuance of a
temporary restraining order enjoining respondent military
commissions "from proceeding with the trial of petitioners
.... until otherwise ordered by the Court."
Petition dismissed. Order lifted.
_________________
307
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 35/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
——oOo——
308
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 36/37
5/7/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 109
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000179474abf6178ea6400003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 37/37