Month
20XX
NAVALES V ABAYA
Presentation
Tagline
Facts: Last July 27, 2003 more than 300 junior
officers and enlisted men – mostly from the elite
units of the AFP quietly entered the premises of
the Ayala Center in Makati City. They disarmed
the security guards and took over the Oakwood
Premier Apartments (Oakwood). The soldiers
then made a statement through ABS-CBN News
network that they went to Oakwood to air their
grievances against the administration of
President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo
such as graft and corruption in the military, sale
of arms
and ammunition to the ‘enemies’ of the State,
etc. They declared the withdrawal of support
from the chain of command and demanded the
resignation of key civilian and military leaders
of the Arroyo administration.
ADD A FOOTER 2
After a series of negotiations between the soldiers and the
Government team led by Ambassador Cimatu an agreement was
forged between the two groups. Subsequently DOJ charged the 3221
soldiers who took part in the “Oakwood incident” with violation of
Article 134- A coup d’ etat of the RPC.
Thereafter several of the accused filed in the RTC (branch 61) an
Omnibus Motion praying that the RTC assume jurisdiction over all
charges filed before the military tribunal.
ADD A FOOTER 3
While such motion was pending, DOJ issued a
Resolution finding probable cause for coup d’ etat
against only 31 of the original 321 accused and the
charges against them were dismissed.
RTC (branch 61) admitted the Amended
Information charging only 31 of the original
accused with the crime of coup d’ etat defined
under Article 134-A of the RPC.
ADD A FOOTER 4
At this point the RTC acted on the Omnibus Motion filed by the 243 of
the original accused declaring the petition for the court assume
jurisdiction over all charges filed before the military court and requiring
the prosecution to produce evidence to establish probable cause as
MOOT AND ACADEMIC. Furthermore, it declared that all the charges
before the court-martial against the accused are hereby declared NOT
SERVICE CONNECTED BUT IS ABSORBED AND IN FURTHERANCE TO THE
ALLEGED CRIME OF COUP D’ ETAT.
ADD A FOOTER 5
However, 1Lt. Navales, et. al who were earlier dropped as accused in
the crime of coup d’ etat were charged before the General Court
Martial with violations of the Articles of War.
ADD A FOOTER 6
March 1, 2004, the General Court-martial has set the arraignment/trial
of those charged with violations of the Articles of War.
Petitions for the issuance of temporary restraining order were filed and
the court directed that parties to observe the status quo prevail before
the filing of the petition.
ADD A FOOTER 7
Issue: Whether or not the petitioners are entitled
to the writs of prohibition and habeas corpus.
ADD A FOOTER 8
Ruling: No. The Order of the RTC declaring that all the charges before
the court-martial against accused were not service-connected but
absorbed and in furtherance of the crime of coup d’ etat, cannot be
given effect.
When RTC resolved the Omnibus Motion to assume jurisdiction over all
the charges filed before the military tribunal had already been
rendered moot and
academic when the RTC accepted the Amended Information under
which only 31 of the accused were charged and dismissing the case as
against the other 290. It has become moot against those charges that
were dismissed.
ADD A FOOTER 9
However in said order it further declared that “all the charges before
the court-martial against the accused and former accused are not
service-connected”, believing that the crimes defined in and penalized
by the Articles of War were committed in furtherance of coup d’etat
and thus absorbed by the said crime.
ADD A FOOTER 10
Thus, insofar as those whose case against them was dismissed, there
was nothing left to be resolved after the Omnibus Motion was
considered moot and academic. This dismissal made the petitioners no
longer parties to the case and no further relief could be granted to
them. 1Lt Navales, et al. since they are strangers to the proceedings
in the criminal case are not bound by any judgment rendered by the
court, thus they cannot find solace in the declaration of the RTC that
the charges filed against them before the General Court-Martial were
not service connected.
ADD A FOOTER 11
In view of the clear mandate of RA 7055 that military courts have
jurisdiction to try cases involving violations of Articles 54 to 70, Articles
72 to 92 and Articles 95 to 97 of the Articles of War as these are
considered “service connected” crimes. It even mandates that it
should be tried by the court martial. The RTC thus has no legal basis to
rule that the violation of the following Articles of War were committed
in furtherance of coup d’ etat and as such absorbed by the latter
crime. In making such a declaration the RTC acted without or in excess
of jurisdiction and is NULL AND VOID.
ADD A FOOTER 12
The writs of prohibition and habeas corpus prayed for by the
petitioners must fail.
As a general rule, the writ of habeas corpus will not issue where the
person alleged to be restrained of his liberty is in custody of an officer
under a process issued by a court with jurisdiction and that the writ
should not be allowed after the party sought to be released had been
charged before any court or quasi-judicial body.
ADD A FOOTER 13
Thus, the rules apply to petitioners who were detained under
Commitment Order issued by the Chief of Staff of the AFP.
On the other hand, the office of the writ of prohibition is to prevent
inferior courts, corporations, boards or persons from usurping or
exercising a jurisdiction or power with which they have not been
vested by law.
ADD A FOOTER 14
In this case, the General Court Martial has jurisdiction over the charges
filed against 1Lt. Navales, et. al under RA 7055. A writ of prohibition
cannot be issued to prevent it from exercising its jurisdiction.
ADD A FOOTER 15
VIDEO SLIDE
ADD A FOOTER 16
