Dela Cruz v. Moya
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Rodolfo Dela Cruz, a member of the Armed Forces of the Philippines assigned to the Intelligence and Operations Section of the 432nd PC Company, was on a mission to verify and apprehend persons engaged in illegal cockfighting in Barangay Pangi, Maco, Sto. Tomas, Davao. Upon encountering resistance, Dela Cruz and his company apprehended the operators, including the deceased Eusebio Cabilto, and brought them to the PC Headquarters. The operators pursued the soldiers, and during the ensuing scuffle, Dela Cruz shot Cabilto. Procedural History: On August 2, 1979, Dela Cruz was charged with homicide in the Court of First Instance of Davao (Criminal Case No. 40080). While the case was pending, Presidential Decree Nos. 1822 and 1822-A were promulgated in 1981, vesting courts-martial with jurisdiction over crimes committed by members of the Armed Forces in the performance of their duties. Dela Cruz moved to transfer the case to military authorities, claiming the offense was duty-related. The motion was denied. The Petition: Dela Cruz filed a petition for certiorari and mandamus, questioning the jurisdiction of the civil court.
Issue(s)
Whether the Court of First Instance of Davao had jurisdiction over Criminal Case No. 40080. Whether Presidential Decree Nos. 1822 and 1822-A were applicable to the case.
Ruling
The petition is GRANTED. The proceedings in Criminal Case No. 40080 are declared null and void, without prejudice to the filing of another action in the proper forum. A copy of the decision is to be furnished the Judge Advocate of the Philippine Constabulary for appropriate action.
Ratio Decidendi
On the jurisdiction of the civil court: The Court held that jurisdiction over the subject matter is determined by the statute in force at the time of the commencement of the action. In this case, the information was filed on August 2, 1979. At that time, General Order No. 59, dated June 24, 1977, was in effect, which vested military tribunals with exclusive jurisdiction over offenses committed by military personnel while in the performance of their official duty. The Court found that it was not disputed that petitioner Dela Cruz was a member of the Philippine Constabulary and that the shooting of Cabilto occurred while Dela Cruz was executing a mission order. The existence of the mission order, directing Dela Cruz to verify and apprehend persons engaged in illegal cockfighting, and the prosecution's evidence showing Cabilto was shot while Dela Cruz was executing this order, compelled the Court to declare that the respondent court was without jurisdiction to try the case. The Court emphasized that while a certificate from the Secretary of National Defense was considered conclusive for determining duty-connection, it did not preclude courts from making their own findings on the matter, nor did it make the certificate a condition precedent for the exercise of jurisdiction by either civilian courts or military tribunals. On the applicability of Presidential Decrees Nos. 1822 and 1822-A: The Court acknowledged the Solicitor General's point that Presidential Decrees Nos. 1822 and 1822-A, which vested courts-martial with jurisdiction, were promulgated in 1981, after the information was filed in 1979. Therefore, these decrees were indeed inapplicable to the case at bar. However, the Court clarified that General Order No. 59, which was in effect at the time the information was filed, was the controlling law regarding jurisdiction in this instance. The Court's ruling was based on General Order No. 59, not on the later Presidential Decrees.
Main Doctrine
A civil court retains jurisdiction over a criminal case filed before it, even if the accused is a member of the Armed Forces and the offense was committed in relation to his duty, if the applicable law vesting exclusive jurisdiction in courts-martial was not yet in effect at the time the information was filed.