Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 328 views

    G.R. No. L-54558

    Uploaded by

    Teresa Cardinoza
    EDUARDO B. OLAGUER, OTHONIEL V. JIMENEZ, ESTER MISA-JIMENEZ, CARLOS LAZARO, REYNALDO MACLANG, MAGDALENA DE LOS SANTOS-MACLANG, TEODORICO N. DIESMOS, RENE J. MARCIANO, DANILO R. DE OCAMPO, VICTORIANO C. AMADO and MAC ACERON, petitioners, vs. MILITARY COMMISSION NO. 34, THE TRIAL COUNSEL OF MILITARY COMMISSION NO. 34, and THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL DEFENSE, respondents. No. L-69882 May 22, 1987 EDUARDO OLAGUER, OTHONIEL JIMENEZ, REYNALDO MACLANG and ESTER MISA-JIMENEZ, petitioners, vs. THE CHIEF OF STAFF, AFP, MILITARY COMMISSION NO. 34, JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL, AFP, MINISTER OF NATIONAL DEFENSE and THE DIRECTOR OF PRISONS, respondents.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    G.R. No. L-54558

    Uploaded by

    Teresa Cardinoza
    328 views2 pages
    EDUARDO B. OLAGUER, OTHONIEL V. JIMENEZ, ESTER MISA-JIMENEZ, CARLOS LAZARO, REYNALDO MACLANG, MAGDALENA DE LOS SANTOS-MACLANG, TEODORICO N. DIESMOS, RENE J. MARCIANO, DANILO R. DE OCAMPO, VICTORIANO C. AMADO and MAC ACERON, petitioners, vs. MILITARY COMMISSION NO. 34, THE TRIAL COUNSEL OF MILITARY COMMISSION NO. 34, and THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL DEFENSE, respondents. No. L-69882 May 22, 1987 EDUARDO OLAGUER, OTHONIEL JIMENEZ, REYNALDO MACLANG and ESTER MISA-JIMENEZ, petitioners, vs. THE CHIEF OF STAFF, AFP, MILITARY COMMISSION NO. 34, JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL, AFP, MINISTER OF NATIONAL DEFENSE and THE DIRECTOR OF PRISONS, respondents.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    EDUARDO B. OLAGUER, OTHONIEL V. JIMENEZ, ESTER MISA-JIMENEZ, CARLOS LAZARO, REYNALDO MACLANG, MAGDALENA DE LOS SANTOS-MACLANG, TEODORICO N. DIESMOS, RENE J. MARCIANO, DANILO R. DE OCAMPO, VICTORIANO C. AMADO and MAC ACERON, petitioners, vs. MILITARY COMMISSION NO. 34, THE TRIAL COUNSEL OF MILITARY COMMISSION NO. 34, and THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL DEFENSE, respondents. No. L-69882 May 22, 1987 EDUARDO OLAGUER, OTHONIEL JIMENEZ, REYNALDO MACLANG and ESTER MISA-JIMENEZ, petitioners, vs. THE CHIEF OF STAFF, AFP, MILITARY COMMISSION NO. 34, JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL, AFP, MINISTER OF NATIONAL DEFENSE and THE DIRECTOR OF PRISONS, respondents.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    328 views2 pages

    G.R. No. L-54558

    Uploaded by

    Teresa Cardinoza
    EDUARDO B. OLAGUER, OTHONIEL V. JIMENEZ, ESTER MISA-JIMENEZ, CARLOS LAZARO, REYNALDO MACLANG, MAGDALENA DE LOS SANTOS-MACLANG, TEODORICO N. DIESMOS, RENE J. MARCIANO, DANILO R. DE OCAMPO, VICTORIANO C. AMADO and MAC ACERON, petitioners, vs. MILITARY COMMISSION NO. 34, THE TRIAL COUNSEL OF MILITARY COMMISSION NO. 34, and THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL DEFENSE, respondents. No. L-69882 May 22, 1987 EDUARDO OLAGUER, OTHONIEL JIMENEZ, REYNALDO MACLANG and ESTER MISA-JIMENEZ, petitioners, vs. THE CHIEF OF STAFF, AFP, MILITARY COMMISSION NO. 34, JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL, AFP, MINISTER OF NATIONAL DEFENSE and THE DIRECTOR OF PRISONS, respondents.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    G.R. No.

    L-54558 May 22, 1987


    EDUARDO B. OLAGUER, OTHONIEL V. JIMENEZ, ESTER MISA-JIMENEZ,
    CARLOS LAZARO, REYNALDO MACLANG, MAGDALENA DE LOS SANTOSMACLANG, TEODORICO N. DIESMOS, RENE J. MARCIANO, DANILO R. DE
    OCAMPO, VICTORIANO C. AMADO and MAC ACERON, petitioners,
    vs.
    MILITARY COMMISSION NO. 34, THE TRIAL COUNSEL OF MILITARY
    COMMISSION NO. 34, and THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL
    DEFENSE, respondents.
    No. L-69882 May 22, 1987
    EDUARDO OLAGUER, OTHONIEL JIMENEZ, REYNALDO MACLANG and ESTER
    MISA-JIMENEZ, petitioners,
    vs.
    THE CHIEF OF STAFF, AFP, MILITARY COMMISSION NO. 34, JUDGE ADVOCATE
    GENERAL, AFP, MINISTER OF NATIONAL DEFENSE and THE DIRECTOR OF
    PRISONS, respondents.

    In 1979, Olaguer and some others were detained by military personnel and they
    were placed in Camp Bagong Diwa. Logauer and his group are all civilians. They
    were charged with (1) unlawful possession of explosives and incendiary devices; (2)
    conspiracy to assassinate President and Mrs. Marcos; (3) conspiracy to assassinate
    cabinet members Juan Ponce Enrile, Francisco Tatad and Vicente Paterno; (4)
    conspiracy to assassinate Messrs. Arturo Tangco, Jose Roo and Onofre Corpus; (5)
    arson of nine buildings; (6) attempted murder of Messrs. Leonardo Perez, Teodoro
    Valencia and Generals Romeo Espino and Fabian Ver; and (7) conspiracy and
    proposal to commit rebellion, and inciting to rebellion. On August 19, 1980, the
    petitioners went to the SC and filed the instant Petition for prohibition and habeas
    corpus.

    ISSUE: Whether or not the petition for habeas corpus be granted.

    HELD: The petition for habeas corpus has become moot and academic because by
    the time the case reached the SC Olaguer and his companions were already
    released from military confinement. When the release of the persons in whose
    behalf the application for a writ of habeas corpus was filed is effected, the Petition
    for the issuance of the writ becomes moot and academic. 18 Inasmuch as the
    herein petitioners have been released from their confinement in military detention
    centers, the instant Petitions for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus should be
    dismissed for having become moot and academic. But the military court created to
    try the case of Olaguer (and the decision it rendered) still continues to subsist.

    ISSUE2: The issue is then shifted to: Whether or not a military tribunal has the
    jurisdiction to try civilians while the civil courts are open and functioning.

    HELD: The SC nullified for lack of jurisdiction all decisions rendered by the military
    courts or tribunals during the period of martial law in all cases involving civilian
    defendants. A military commission or tribunal cannot try and exercise jurisdiction,
    even during the period of martial law, over civilians for offenses allegedly
    committed by them as long as the civil courts are open and functioning, and that
    any judgment rendered by such body relating to a civilian is null and void for lack of
    jurisdiction on the part of the military tribunal concerned.

    You might also like