Cruz v Enrile (1988, G.R. No. 75983)

 Facts: 

            Even until 1986, there were still around 157 civilians who were imprisoned by courts martial during the nine-year Martial Law. Habeas corpus proceedings were filed to question their detention.

 

Issue: 

1.     W/N courts martial have jurisdiction over the persons of civilians, and not merely over the crimes imputed to them, regardless of which they are entitled to trial by judicial, not executive or military process.

2.     If the civilians are released, can those who committed crimes still be prosecuted under civilian courts?

 

 

Held: 

1.     A military jurisdiction 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.

2.     The fact cannot be ignored, however, that crimes appear to have been committed, and there are accusations against herein petitioners for those offenses.No breach of the constitutional prohibition against twice putting an accused in jeopardy of punishment for the same offensewould result from the retrial of the petitioners’ cases, for the simple reason that the absence of jurisdiction of the courts martial to try and convict the petitioners prevented the first jeopardyfrom attaching. Valid previous proceedings are required in order that the defense of double jeopardy can be raised by the accused in the second prosecution.