Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Peralta v. Dir. of Prison Digest

    Uploaded by

    LORELEI LOUISE A„ORA DELOSO
    49 views2 pages
    William Peralta was convicted of robbery by the Court of Special and Exclusive Criminal Jurisdiction created by Ordinance No. 7 during the Japanese occupation. He filed a habeas corpus petition arguing the court lacked constitutional authority. The Supreme Court ruled that (1) Ordinance No. 7 was constitutional as the criminal jurisdiction of an occupying force comes from international law, not the laws of the occupied or occupying states; (2) Peralta's life imprisonment sentence was valid as an occupying force can establish new crimes; and (3) the sentence was no longer valid after the Philippine government was restored, in line with prior rulings.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    peralta-v.-dir.-of-prison-digest.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    William Peralta was convicted of robbery by the Court of Special and Exclusive Criminal Jurisdiction created by Ordinance No. 7 during the Japanese occupation. He filed a habeas corpus petition arguing the court lacked constitutional authority. The Supreme Court ruled that (1) Ordinance No. 7 was constitutional as the criminal jurisdiction of an occupying force comes from international law, not the laws of the occupied or occupying states; (2) Peralta's life imprisonment sentence was valid as an occupying force can establish new crimes; and (3) the sentence was no longer valid after the Philippine government was restored, in line with prior rulings.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    49 views2 pages

    Peralta v. Dir. of Prison Digest

    Uploaded by

    LORELEI LOUISE A„ORA DELOSO
    William Peralta was convicted of robbery by the Court of Special and Exclusive Criminal Jurisdiction created by Ordinance No. 7 during the Japanese occupation. He filed a habeas corpus petition arguing the court lacked constitutional authority. The Supreme Court ruled that (1) Ordinance No. 7 was constitutional as the criminal jurisdiction of an occupying force comes from international law, not the laws of the occupied or occupying states; (2) Peralta's life imprisonment sentence was valid as an occupying force can establish new crimes; and (3) the sentence was no longer valid after the Philippine government was restored, in line with prior rulings.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    PERALTA V. DIR.

    OF PRISONS
    G.R. No. L-49; November 12, 1945
    FERIA, J.

    Facts:

    William Peralta, was convicted of Robbery as defined and penalized for Life imprisonment by section 2
    (a) of Act No. 65 of the National Assembly. He was tried and convicted by The Court of Special and
    Exclusive Criminal Jurisdiction to which was created by Ordinance No. 7 who was proclaimed by then
    Pres. Jose P. Laurel during the Japanese occupation, pursuant to the authority conferred upon him by the
    constitution.

    The petition for Habeas corpus is based on the ground that the Court of Special and Executive Criminal
    Jurisdiction created by Ord. no. 7 “was a political instrumentality of the military forces of the Japanese
    imperial army, the aims and purposes of which are repugnant to those aims and political purposes of the
    commonwealth of the Phils. And deprives the petitioner of his constitutional rights. As it adopts
    summary procedure of, to wit:

    ● The court may interrogate the accused and witnesses before trial in order to clarify the points in
    dispute;
    ● The refusal of the accused to answer the questions be considered unfavorable to him;
    ● That if from the facts admitted at the preliminary interrogation it appears that the defendant is
    guilty, he may be immediately convicted without the due process of law;
    ● The sentence of the court is not appealable, unless the penalty is of death penalty

    Issues:

    ● Whether or not Ordinance no. 7 to which created The courts of special and exclusive criminal
    jurisdiction constitutional?
    ● Whether or not life imprisonment as which was imposed was valid?
    ● Whether or not the penalty of life imprisonment cease to be valid during the reoccupation of the
    Philippine Commonwealth Government?

    Ruling:

    ● Yes, Ordinance no. 7 is constitutional as it is well established in International Law that “The
    criminal jurisdiction established by the invader in the occupied territory finds its source neither
    in the laws of the conquering or conquered state – it is drawn entirely from the law martial as
    defined in the usages of nations. The authority thus derived can be asserted either through
    special tribunals, whose authority and procedures is defined in the military code of conquering
    state, or through ordinary courts and authorities of the conquered district. It being a
    governmental instrumentality. (Taylor, Int. Public Law, p. 598)
    ● Yes, as the US rules of land warfare provide that the belligerent occupant may promulgate such
    new laws and regulations as military necessity demands, and in this class be included those laws
    which come into being as a result of military rule; that is those which establish new crimes and
    offenses incident to a state of war and are necessary for the control of the country and
    protection of the army. (Pub. 1940, pp. 76,77)
    ● Yes, as in the decision in the case of Co Kim Cham v. Valdez Tan Keh, supra, that all judgments of
    political complexion of the courts during the Japanese regime, ceased to be valid upon the
    reoccupation of the islands by virtue of the principle or right of postliminium. (Co Kim Cham v.
    Valdez Tan Keh, supra)

    You might also like