Scribd
Upload
23 views2 pages

G.R No319

- The petitioner, a Chinese citizen, was detained in 1945 by the US Army and then turned over to Philippine authorities in 1945 and held as a political prisoner. - While the petitioner claims he cannot be detained under Commonwealth Act No. 682 since he owes allegiance to neither the US or Philippines, the court maintained that as a foreigner he could still be prosecuted for espionage, which is a crime against national security regardless of citizenship. - Therefore, the petitioner fell under the scope of Act No. 682 allowing detention of political prisoners delivered by the US Army to Philippine authorities, and the petition of habeas corpus was denied.

Uploaded by

Ronnie Colandog
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
23 views2 pages

G.R No319

- The petitioner, a Chinese citizen, was detained in 1945 by the US Army and then turned over to Philippine authorities in 1945 and held as a political prisoner. - While the petitioner claims he cannot be detained under Commonwealth Act No. 682 since he owes allegiance to neither the US or Philippines, the court maintained that as a foreigner he could still be prosecuted for espionage, which is a crime against national security regardless of citizenship. - Therefore, the petitioner fell under the scope of Act No. 682 allowing detention of political prisoners delivered by the US Army to Philippine authorities, and the petition of habeas corpus was denied.

Uploaded by

Ronnie Colandog
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

[G.R. No. L-319. March 28, 1946.

GO TIAN SEK SANTOS, Petitioner, v. ERIBERTO MISA, Director

of Prisons, Respondent.
Mariano Trinidad for Petitioner.

First Assistant Solicitor General Reyes and Solicitor De los

Angeles for Respondent.

SYLLABUS

1. HABEAS CORPUS; DETENTION UNDER COMMONWEALTH ACT NO.


682; ESPIONAGE; CITIZENSHIP, IMMATERIAL. — The foreign status of
a political detainee does not exclude him ipso facto from the scope of
the provisions of section 19 of Commonwealth Act No. 682, because
he may be prosecuted for espionage, a crime not conditioned by the
citizenship of the offender, and considered as an offense against

national security.

DECISION

BENGZON, J.:

The petitioner avers he is a Chinese citizen apprehended in February,


1945, by the Counter Intelligence Corps of the United States Army,
turned over last September, to the Commonwealth Government, and
since then detained by the respondent as a political prisoner. Such
detention, he claims, is illegal, because he has not been charged
before, not convicted by, the judge of a competent court, and because
he may not be confined under Act. No. 682, as he owes allegiance
neither to the United States nor to the Commonwealth of the
Philippines.
The Solicitor General, for the respondent, admits the detention, for
active collaboration with the Japanese, doubts the allegation of
citizenship, and maintains that, conceding arguendo petitioner’s

alienage, he may be charged for espionage, a crime against national


security wherein allegiance is immaterial, and may, therefore, be held
in custody under Commonwealth Act No. 682.
As the record stands, the petitioner must be deemed a Chinese
subject. The commitment order No. 291 issued by the United States
Army authorities describes him as such. But it does not follow that he
is entitled to liberty now. But it does not follow that he is entitled to
liberty now. He is included among those contemplated by Section 19 of
Commonwealth Act No. 682, which reads partly:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"Upon delivery by the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of
the
United States in the Philippines of the persons detained by him as
political prisoners, to Commonwealth Government, the Office of
Special Prosecutors shall receive all records, documents, exhibits and
such other things as the Government of the United States may have
turned over in connection with and/or affecting said political prisoners,
examine the aforesaid records, documents, exhibits, etc., and take, as
speedily as possible, such action as may be proper: Provided,
however, . . . And, provided, further, That, in the interest of public
security, the provisions of article one hundred twenty-five of the
Revised Penal Code, as amended, shall be deemed, as they are
hereby, suspended, insofar as the aforesaid political prisoners are
concerned , until the filing of the corresponding information with the
People’s Court, but the period of suspension shall not be more than six
(6) months from the formal delivery of said political prisoners by the
Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States in the
Philippines to the Commonwealth Government.
His foreign status does not exclude him ipso facto from the scope of
the provisions. As stated by the Solicitor General, he might be
prosecuted for espionage, (Commonwealth Act. No. 616) a crime not
conditioned by citizenship of the offender, and considered as an
offense against national security.
The contentions advanced during the oral argument, challenging the
validity of said section 19, Commonwealth Act. No. 682, upon
constitutional grounds must be overruled, in view of our decision in
Laurel v. Director of Prisons (p. 372, ante), copy of which will be
furnished to petitioner by the clerk of this court. The petition is denied,
with costs.

You might also like