You are on page 1of 1

I.

Treachery

Anastacio Laurel v Eriberto Misa


GR No. L-409, 20 January 1947

Nature: Petition for Habeas Corpus


Ponente:
Facts:
The Supreme Court acted on the petition for habeas corpus filed by Laurel
based on a theory that a Filipino citizen who adhered to the enemy by giving the
latter aid and comfort during the Japanese occupation cannot be prosecuted for
the crime of treason under Article 114 of the Revised Penal Code. The reason is
that the sovereignty of the legitimate government in the Philippines and, the
correlative allegiance of the Filipino citizens were suspended, and that there was
a change of sovereignty over the islands upon the proclamation of the Philippine
Republic.

Issues:
(1) Whether or Not the allegiance of the accused to the Philippine
government was suspended.
(2) Whether or Not the sovereignty over the Philippine islands was changed.

Held:
(1) No.
(2) No

Ruling:
(1) In the case of CO Kim Cham v Valdez Tan Keh and Dizon, the Court held
that the absolute and permanent allegiance of the inhabitants of a
territory occupied by the enemy of their legitimate government or
sovereign is not abrogated or severed by the enemy occupation, because
the sovereignty of the government or sovereign de jure is not transferred
to the occupier, and if it is not transferred to the occupant, it must
necessarily remain vested in the legitimate government.
Sovereignty itself is not suspended and subsists during the enemy
occupation, the allegiance of the inhabitants to their legitimate
government or sovereign subsists, and therefore there is no such thing as
suspended allegiance.
(2) According to Section 1, Article II of the Philippine Constitution, a crime
against the Government of the Philippines established by authority of the
people of the Philippines, in whom the sovereignty resides, “All laws of
the Philippine Islands…shall remain operative unless inconsistent with
this Constitution…and all references in such laws to the Government and
corresponding officials under this constitution.” The Independence law
and Philippine Constitution contains the declaration that “sovereignty
resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them.”
The Court held that treason is an offense the same government and the
same people, even though under occupation, because Article XVIII of the
Constitution provides that “The government established by this
constitutions shall be known as the Commonwealth of the Philippines.
Upon the final and complete withdrawal of the sovereignty.”

You might also like