On the basis of General Order No. 59 "Further Limiting the Jurisdiction of Military Tribunals", petitioners sought to annul the resolution of respondent commission denying petitioner’s motion to transfer five criminal cases involving them to civil courts. Respondent, manifested that petitioners had already been released and the cases involving them already ordered transferred to the civil courts, the only impediment to implement the transfer being the existence of the Supreme Court’s temporary restraining orders and asked that the petition to be dismissed and that the restraining order be dissolved.

The Supreme Court lifted and dissolved the restraining order to enable respondent commission to transfer the cases to the civil courts, and ruled that the cases at bar shall be deemed dismissed for having become moot and academic.

1. ACTIONS; DISMISSAL; MOOT AND ACADEMIC. — A petition seeking to annul a resolution of the Military Commission denying petitioners motion to transfer certain criminal cases involving them to the civil courts despite the issuance of General Order No. 59 which further limited the jurisdiction of military tribunals, may be dismissed for having become moot and academic upon showing that the petitioners were already released and the cases against them ordered transferred to the civil courts.

R E S O L U T I O N

The petition at bar was filed on November 3, 1977 and on the basis of General Order No. 59 "Further Limiting the Jurisdiction of Military Tribunals" issued on June 24, 1977 by the President of the Philippines, prays for judgment "annulling the resolution of respondent Military Commission No. 5 which denied petitioners’ motion to transfer Criminal Cases Nos. MC-5-42, 43, 44, 45, 46 and 47 to the civil courts, and commanding respondent Military Commission to desist from further proceedings in and to order the transfer of said criminal cases to the civil courts." chanrobles lawlibrary : rednad

On November 8, 1977, the Court issued a temporary restraining order restraining respondent military commission "from proceeding with the hearing of Criminal Cases Nos. MC-5-42, 43, 44, 45, 46 and 47 on November 9, 1977, and from conducting further proceedings therein."cralaw virtua1aw library

After considering respondent’s comment required on the petition and petitioners’ reply thereto, the Court issued its Resolution of February 9, 1978 giving due course to the petition and requiring the parties to submit their respective memoranda in lieu of oral argument.

On March 2, 1978, respondent military commission through the Solicitor General’s Office filed a motion to dispense with the filing of memorandum stating the following:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"1. That on February 17, 1978, respondent in the above-entitled case as well as in L-43247 and L-44090, filed its COMPLIANCE AND MOTION TO DISMISS dated February 16, 1978 alleging among others:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

‘2. That the reported temporary release is therefore confirmed; moreover, the cases involving petitioners, which are pending before respondent Military Commission, have already been ordered transferred to the civil courts for further proceedings;

‘3. That consequently all pertinent issues in all the above-entitled cases have been rendered moot and academic;

‘4. That an impediment to the transfer of said cases to the civil courts is the existence of a temporary restraining order issued on November 8, 1977 in 47222-27, enjoining the respondent ’from proceeding with the hearing of Criminal Cases Nos. MC-5-42, 43, 44, 46, 46 and 47 on November 9, 1977, and from conducting further proceedings therein’, and which restraining order prevents the respondent from acting on the directive of the Secretary of National Defense to transfer subject cases to the civil courts.’

and praying that ’the temporary restraining order issued on November 8, 1977 by this Honorable Court be lifted and dissolved, and the petitions in all the above entitled cases dismissed, the same having been rendered moot and academic.’"

The Court in its two Resolutions of March 16, 1978 in two related cases, namely, L-44090 (In re: petition for Habeas Corpus of Vicente T. Tan, Et. Al.) and L-43247 (Susan Y. Mabasa v. Military Commission No. 5, Et. Al.) ordered the dismissal and termination of said cases for having become moot and academic on the ground that the petitioners have already been released from detention and the criminal cases against them have already been ordered transferred to the civil courts for further proceedings.cralawnad

The cases at bar may therefore be dismissed for having been rendered moot and academic and the Court’s temporary restraining order of November 8, 1977 may be lifted for the purpose of enabling respondent military commission to act for the sole purpose of transferring the cases before it to the civil courts.

ACCORDINGLY, the Court’s temporary restraining order of November 8, 1977 is lifted for the purpose of enabling respondent military commission to transfer the cases before it to the civil courts and upon receipt of the corresponding manifestation to this effect, the case at bar shall be deemed dismissed for having become moot and academic.chanrobles virtual lawlibrary

Castro, C.J., Barredo, Makasiar, Antonio, Muñoz Palma, Aquino, Concepcion Jr., Fernandez and Guerrero, JJ., concur.

Fernando, J., and Santos, JJ., took no part.