KURODA vs JALANDONI
83 PHIL 171
FACTS: Shigenori Kuroda, formerly a Lieutenant-General of the Japanese Imperial Army and Commanding General of the Japanese Imperial Forces in The Philippines during a period covering 19433 and 19444 who is now charged before a military Commission convened by the Chief of Staff of the Armed forces of the Philippines with having unlawfully disregarded and failed "to discharge his duties as such command, permitting them to commit brutal atrocities and other high crimes against noncombatant civilians and prisoners of the Imperial Japanese Forces in violation of the laws and customs of war" comes before this Court seeking to establish the illegality of Executive Order No. 68 of the President of the Philippines: to enjoin and prohibit respondents Melville S. Hussey and Robert Port from participating in the prosecution of petitioner's case before the Military Commission and to permanently prohibit respondents from proceeding with the case of petitioners.
ISSUE: Whether Military Commission has jurisdiction to try petitioner for acts committed in violation of the Hague Convention and the Geneva Convention even the Philippine was not a signatory to such treaty?
HELD: Military Commission has jurisdiction to try for the acts committed.It cannot be denied that the rules and regulations of the two convention form part of and are wholly based on the generally accepted principles of international law.These rules and principles were accepted by the two belligerent nations, United States and Japan, who were signatories of two conventions.Such rules and principles therefore,form part of the law of our nation even the Philippine was not a signatory to the conventions embodying them,for our Constitution has been deliberatley general and extensive in its scope and is not confined to the recognition of rules and principles of international law as contained in treaties to which our government may have been or shall be a signatory.
83 PHIL 171
FACTS: Shigenori Kuroda, formerly a Lieutenant-General of the Japanese Imperial Army and Commanding General of the Japanese Imperial Forces in The Philippines during a period covering 19433 and 19444 who is now charged before a military Commission convened by the Chief of Staff of the Armed forces of the Philippines with having unlawfully disregarded and failed "to discharge his duties as such command, permitting them to commit brutal atrocities and other high crimes against noncombatant civilians and prisoners of the Imperial Japanese Forces in violation of the laws and customs of war" comes before this Court seeking to establish the illegality of Executive Order No. 68 of the President of the Philippines: to enjoin and prohibit respondents Melville S. Hussey and Robert Port from participating in the prosecution of petitioner's case before the Military Commission and to permanently prohibit respondents from proceeding with the case of petitioners.
ISSUE: Whether Military Commission has jurisdiction to try petitioner for acts committed in violation of the Hague Convention and the Geneva Convention even the Philippine was not a signatory to such treaty?
HELD: Military Commission has jurisdiction to try for the acts committed.It cannot be denied that the rules and regulations of the two convention form part of and are wholly based on the generally accepted principles of international law.These rules and principles were accepted by the two belligerent nations, United States and Japan, who were signatories of two conventions.Such rules and principles therefore,form part of the law of our nation even the Philippine was not a signatory to the conventions embodying them,for our Constitution has been deliberatley general and extensive in its scope and is not confined to the recognition of rules and principles of international law as contained in treaties to which our government may have been or shall be a signatory.
No comments:
Post a Comment