Facts : Shigenori Kuroda, a former Lieutenant-General of the Japanese Imperial Army and Commanding General of the Imperial Forces of the Philippines was charged before a Military Commission convened by the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines. He had unlawfully disregarded and failed to discharge his duties as a commander to control the operations of members of his command.
Petitioner was duly prosecuted for acts committed in violation of the Hague Convention and the Geneva Convention through the issuance and enforcement of Executive Order No. 68.
Executive Order No. 68 provided the organization of such military commissions, established National War Crimes Office and prescribing rules and regulations governing the trial of accused war criminals.
Attorneys Melville Hussey and Robert Port of the United States of America participated in the prosecution of the case in behalf of the United States of America.
Issue : Whether or not Executive Order No. 68 is legal and constitutional.
Held : This court holds that the Executive Order No. 68 is legal and constitutional as provided in Sec. 3, Art. II of the Constitution, that-
“ The Philippines renounces war as an instrument of national policy, and adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the nation.”
The participation of the two American attorneys although under our law, they are not qualified to practice law is valid and constitutional. Military Commission is a special military tribunal governed by special law not by Rules of the Court, which govern ordinary civil courts. There is nothing in Executive Order No.68 which requires counsels need to be qualified to practice law in the Philippines. In fact, it is common in military tribunals that counsels for the parties are usually military personnel.
Under the doctrine of incorporation, although the Philippines was not a signatory of the Hague and Geneva Conventions, international jurisprudence is automatically incorporated in Philippine law, thus making war crimes punishable in the Philippines.
The Military Commission having been convened by virtue of a valid law, with jurisdiction over the crimes charged which fall under the provisions of Executive Order No 68, and having jurisdiction over the person of the petitioner by having said petitioner in its custody, the court will not interfere with the due process of such Military Commission.
Petition is denied with costs de oficio.
Petitioner was duly prosecuted for acts committed in violation of the Hague Convention and the Geneva Convention through the issuance and enforcement of Executive Order No. 68.
Executive Order No. 68 provided the organization of such military commissions, established National War Crimes Office and prescribing rules and regulations governing the trial of accused war criminals.
Attorneys Melville Hussey and Robert Port of the United States of America participated in the prosecution of the case in behalf of the United States of America.
Issue : Whether or not Executive Order No. 68 is legal and constitutional.
Held : This court holds that the Executive Order No. 68 is legal and constitutional as provided in Sec. 3, Art. II of the Constitution, that-
“ The Philippines renounces war as an instrument of national policy, and adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the nation.”
The participation of the two American attorneys although under our law, they are not qualified to practice law is valid and constitutional. Military Commission is a special military tribunal governed by special law not by Rules of the Court, which govern ordinary civil courts. There is nothing in Executive Order No.68 which requires counsels need to be qualified to practice law in the Philippines. In fact, it is common in military tribunals that counsels for the parties are usually military personnel.
Under the doctrine of incorporation, although the Philippines was not a signatory of the Hague and Geneva Conventions, international jurisprudence is automatically incorporated in Philippine law, thus making war crimes punishable in the Philippines.
The Military Commission having been convened by virtue of a valid law, with jurisdiction over the crimes charged which fall under the provisions of Executive Order No 68, and having jurisdiction over the person of the petitioner by having said petitioner in its custody, the court will not interfere with the due process of such Military Commission.
Petition is denied with costs de oficio.
No comments:
Post a Comment