THIRD DIVISION
G.R. No. 176394, October 21, 2015
COL. ORLANDO E. DE LEON, PN (M), Petitioner, v. LT. GEN. HERMOGENES C. ESPERON, JR., (AFP), AND SPECIAL GENERAL COURT MARTIAL NO. 2, Respondents.
COL. ARMANDO V. BAÑEZ, PN (M), Petitioner-Intervenor.
LTC ACHILLES S. SEGUMALIAN, PN (M), Petitioner-Intervenor.
G.R. No. 177033
MAJOR LEOMAR JOSE M. DOCTOLERO O-10124 (INFANTRY) PHILIPPINE ARMY AND CAPTAIN WILLIAM VICTORINO F. UPANO O-11876 (INFANTRY) PHILIPPINE ARMY, Petitioners, v. LT. GEN. HERMOGENES C. ESPERON, JR., CHIEF OF STAFF, ARMED FORCES OF THE PHILIPPINES AND THE SPECIAL GENERAL COURT MARTIAL NO. 2, Respondents.
G.R. No. 177304
MAJOR JASON L. AQUINO (INF) PA, Petitioner, v. GEN. HERMOGENES C. ESPERON, JR., AS CHIEF OF STAFF OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE PHILIPPINES AND APPOINTING AND REVIEWING AUTHORITY OF THE SPECIAL GENERAL COURT MARTIAL NO. 2 (SIC), AND THE SPECIAL GENERAL COURT MARTIAL NO. 2, Respondents.
G.R. No. 177470
1ST LIEUTENANT ERVIN C. DIVINAGRACIA O-12742 (INF), PHILIPPINE ARMY, Petitioner, v. LT. GEN. HERMOGENES C. ESPERON, JR., CHIEF OF STAFF, ARMED FORCES OF THE PHILIPPINES AND THE SPECIAL GENERAL COURT MARTIAL NO. 2, Respondents.
G.R. No. 177471
CAPTAIN JOEY T FONTIVEROS O-11713 (INFANTRY) PHILIPPINE ARMY, Petitioner, v. LT. GEN. HERMOGENES C. ESPERON, JR., CHIEF OF STAFF, ARMED FORCES OF THE PHILIPPINES AND THE SPECIAL GENERAL COURT MARTIAL NO. 2, Respondent.
D E C I S I O N
JARDELEZA, J.:
These are consolidated petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and for the issuance of the writ of habeas corpus seeking:
Petitioners also seek the issuance of a temporary restraining order and/or writ of preliminary injunction against the respondents and all persons acting for or under their authority to cease and desist from conducting court martial proceedings and to cease and desist from otherwise prosecuting, investigating or proceeding in any manner againsj/the petitioners relative to their alleged violations of the Articles of War.
- To annul, reverse and set aside the Memorandum1 dated November 17, 2006 of the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, Lt. Gen. Hermogenes Esperon, Jr. and Letter Order No. 7582 dated November 24, 2006 signed by the Adjutant General of the AFP, Commodore Paterno Labiano;
- To prohibit Lt. Gen. Esperon, Jr. and the Special General Court Martial No. 2 to desist from further proceeding with the court martial and from otherwise investigating or prosecuting the petitioners under the Articles of War (Commonwealth Act No. 408); and
- To order Lt. Gen. Esperon, Jr. and/or Special General Court Martial No. 2 and/or all persons acting for and in behalf or under their authority to produce petitioners3 Major Doctolero and Captain Upano, to release them from detention and to forthwith desist from restraining them in any manner of their liberty.
On July 20, 2006, Col. Nemesio I. Dabal, Judge Advocate General of the Judge Advocate General's Office (JAGO), AFP, issued Office Order No. 14-068 constituting a Pre-Trial Investigation Panel (Panel) which would conduct investigation on the cases of all the petitioners.
NAME Articles of WarCOL ORLANDO E DE LEON 67, 96 & 97COL ARMANDO V BAÑEZ 68, 96 & 97LTCOL ACHILLES S SEGUMALIAN 67, 96 & 97MAJ JASON LAUREANO Y AQUINO 67, 96 & 97MAJ JOSE LEOMAR M DOCTOLERO 68, 96 & 97CPT JOEY T FONTIVEROS 68, 96 & 97CPT WILLIAM UPANO 68, 96 & 971LT ERVIN C DIVINAGRACIA 68, 96 & 977
On October 25, 2006, the Panel submitted its Pre-Trial Investigation Report (PTI Report)16 to Lt. Gen. Esperon, Jr. The Panel recommended that petitioners, except for Bañez, Segumalian and Divinagracia, be tried before the court-martial for violation of the applicable Articles of War:17
NAME Articles of WarCOL ORLANDO E DE LEON 67 & 96COL ARMANDO V BAÑEZ 67 & 96LTCOL ACHILLES S SEGUMALIAN 67, 96 & 97MAJ JASON LAUREANO Y AQUINO 67 & 96MAJ JOSE LEOMAR M DOCTOLERO 67 & 96CPT JOEY T FONTIVEROS 67 & 96CPT WILLIAM F UPANO 67 & 961LT ERVIN C DIVINAGRACIA 67 & 96
The PTI Report was referred to Col. Pedro G. Herrera-Davila, Staff Judge Advocate for the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (CSAFP). In his Pre-Trial Advice18 dated November 7, 2006, Col. Davila disapproved the PTI Report and recommended the referral to trial by a General Court Martial of the 37 AFP Officers, including the petitioners, for violations of Articles 96 (for all of the petitioners) and 97 (only for Segumalian). He also recommended that they be tried for violations of other offenses considering that the available evidence established a prima facie case against them. The offenses allegedly committed by the petitioners, as found by Col. Davila, are as follows:
NAME Articles of WarCOL ORLANDO E DE LEON 96ARMANDO V BAÑEZ NoneACHILLES S SEGUMALIAN 96 & 97MAJ JASON LAUREANO Y AQUINO 96MAJ JOSE LEOMAR M DOCTOLERO NoneCPT JOEY T FONTIVEROS 96CPT WILLIAM F UPANO 961LT ERVIN C DIVINAGRACIA None
Thereafter, in a Memorandum20 dated November 17, 2006, Lt. Gen. Esperon, Jr. created and convened a Special General Court Martial to try petitioners' cases and other high-ranking military officers. In Letter Order No. 75821 dated November 24, 2006, Commodore Paterno E. Labiano, the Adjutant General, designated the officers, to be detailed as the President and members of the Special General Court-Martial No. 2, who will try petitioners' cases.
NAME Articles of WarCOL ORLANDO E DE LEON 67 & 96COL ARMANDO V BAÑEZ 67 & 96LTC ACHILLES S SEGUMALIAN 67, 96 & 97MAJ JASON LAUREANO Y AQUINO 67 & 96MAJ JOSE LEOMAR M DOCTOLERO 67 & 96CPT JOEY T FONTIVEROS 67 & 96CPT WILLIAM F UPANO 67 & 961LT ERVIN C DIVINAGRACIA 67 & 9619
Thus, this case has been rendered moot and academic by these various resolutions.
In David v. Macapagal-Arroyo,38 we described a moot and academic case as "one that ceases to present a justiciable controversy by virtue of supervening events, so that a declaration thereon would be of no practical use or value"39 and discussed that "[g]enerally, courts decline jurisdiction over such case, or dismiss it on ground of mootness."40
Any resolution of the petitions to annul the Memorandum dated November 17, 2006 and Letter Order No. 758, to restrain the Special General Court Martial and to order the release of the petitioners from confinement would be of no practical value since as early as 2009, Special General Court Martial No. 2 already absolved the petitioners of the charges under the Articles of War, Special General Court Martial No. 2 has long been dissolved and the petitioners were already released from confinement.
WHEREFORE, the petitions are DISMISSED for having become moot and academic.
SO ORDERED.chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Velasco, Jr., (Chairperson), Peralta, Villarama, Jr., and Reyes, JJ., concur.
Endnotes:
1Rollo (G.R. No. 176394), pp. 78-79.
2Id. at 80-81.
3 All of the petitioners except for petitioner Major Jason L. Aquino prayed for the issuance of the writ of habeas corpus.
4Rollo (G.R. No. 176394), pp. 1604-1605.
5 Petitioners Major Jose M. Doctolero, Captain Joey T. Fontiveros, Captain William F. Upano, Major Jason L. Aquino, and P' Lieutenant Ervin C. Divinagracia are officers in the Philippine Army, Armed Forces of the Philippines. Petitioners Colonel Orlando E. De Leon, Colonel Armando V. Bañez, and Lieutenant Colonel Achilles S. Segumalian are officers of the Philippine Navy (Marines), AFP, rollo (G.R. No. 177033), pp. 69-70.
6Rollo (G.R. No. 176394), pp. 1604-1645.
7Id. at 639-1640.
8Id. at 1646.
9Id. at 123-127, 142-143, 593-597, 910-913; rollo (G.R. No. 177033), pp. 83-86, 100-103; rollo (G.R. No. 177470), pp. 62-65; rollo (G.R. No. 177471), pp. 76-79.
10 Article 63. Disrespect Toward the President, Vice President, Congress of the Philippines, or Secretary of National Defense. - Any officer who uses contemptuous or disrespectful words against the President, Vice President, Congress of the Philippines, or Secretary of National Defense, shall be dismissed from the service or suffer such other punishment as a court-martial may direct. Any other person subject to military law who so offends shall be punished as a court-martial may direct. [As amended by RA 242]
11 Article 65. Assaulting or Willfully Disobeying Superior Officer. - Any person subject to military law who, on any pretext whatsoever, strikes his superior officer or draws or lifts up any weapon, or offers any violence against him, being in the exercise of his office, or willfully disobeys any lawful command of his superior officer, shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.
12 Article 67. Mutiny or Sedition. - Any person subject to military law who attempts to create or who begins, excites, causes, or joins in any mutiny or sedition in any company, party, post, camp, detachment, guard, or other command shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.
13 Article 96. Conduct Unbecoming an Officer and Gentleman. - Any officer, cadet, flying cadet, or probationary second lieutenant, who is convicted of conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman shall be dismissed from the service. [As amended by RAs 242 and 516]
14 Article 97. General Article. - Though not mentioned in these articles, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and military discipline, and all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the military service, shall be taken cognizance of by a general or special court-martial according to the nature and degree of the offense, and punished at the discretion of the court.
15Rollo (G.R. No. 176394), pp. 123-127, 142-143, 593-597, 910-913; rollo (G.R. No. 177033), pp. 83-86, 100-103; rollo (G.R. No. 177470), pp. 62-65; rollo (G.R. No. 177471), pp. 76-79.
16Rollo (G.R. No. 176394), pp. 142-327.
17Id. at 324-327.
18Id. at 1249-1423.
19Id. at 1421-1422.
20Id. at 78-79.
21Id. at 80-81.
22Rollo (G.R. No. 177033), p. 54.
23Rollo (G.R. No. 177304), pp. 21-24.
24 Article 8. General Court Martial. - The President of the Philippines, the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, the Chief of Constabulary and, when empowered by the President, the commanding officer of a major command or task force, the commanding officer of a division, the commanding officer of a military area, the Superintendent of the Military Academy, the commanding officer of a separate brigade or body of troops may appoint General Court-Martial; but when any such commander is the accuser or the prosecutor of the person or persons to be tried, the court shall be appointed by a superior competent authority. x x x
25 Article 9. Special Courts-Martial. - The commanding officer of a major command, task force, military area, or division, and, when empowered by the President, the commanding officer of a garrison, fort, camp, brigade, regiment, detached battalion or squadron, or other detached command or place, zone or commissioned vessel where troops are on duty may appoint special courts-martial, but when any such commanding officer is the accuser or the prosecutor of the person or persons to be tried, the court shall be appointed by superior authority and may in any case be appointed by superior authority when by the latter deemed desirable. [As amended by RAs 242 and 516]
26 Article 45. Action by Convening Authority. - Under such regulations as may be prescribed by the President, every record of trial by general court-martial or military commission, or record of trial by special courts-martial in which a bad-conduct discharge has been adjudged and approved by the authority appointing the court, received by a reviewing or confirming authority, shall be referred by him, before he acts thereon, to his staff judge advocate or to the Judge Advocate General. No sentence of a court-martial shall be carried into execution until the same shall have been approved by the officer appointing the court or by the officer commanding for the time being; Provided, That no sentence of a special court-martial which includes a bad-conduct discharge shall be carried into execution until, in addition to the approval by the convening authority, the same shall have been approved by an officer authorized to appoint a general court-martial. [As amended by RA 516]
27 Article 46. Powers Incident to Power to Approve. — The power to approve the sentence of a court-martial shall be held to include:28Rollo (G.R. No. 177033), p. 53.
- The power to approve or disapprove a finding and to approve only so much of a finding of guilty of a particular offense as involves a finding of guilty of a lesser included offense, when, in the opinion of the authority having power to approve, the evidence of record requires a finding of only the lesser degree of guilt; and
- The power to approve or disapprove the whole or any part of the sentence; and
- The power to remand a case for hearing, under the provisions of article fifty.
29 Article 70. Arrest or Confinement. - Any person subject to military law charged with a crime or with a serious offense under these articles shall be placed in confinement or in arrest, as circumstances may require; but when charged with a minor offense only, such person shall not ordinarily be placed in confinement. Any person placed in arrest under the provisions of this article shall thereby be restricted to barracks, quarters, or tent, unless such limits shall be enlarged by proper authority. x x x
30Rollo (G.R. No. 176394), pp. 1856-1864.
31 Article 47. Confirmation. - In addition to the approval required by article forty-five, conformation by the President is required in the following cases before the sentence of a court-martial is carried into execution, namely:When the authority competent to confirm the sentence has already acted as the approving authority, no additional confirmation by him is necessary. [As amended by RA 242]
- Any sentence respecting a general officer;
- Any sentence extending to the dismissal of an officer, except that in time of war a sentence extending to the dismissal of an officer below the grade of brigadier general may be carried into execution upon confirmation by the commanding general of the Army in the field;
- Any sentence extending to the suspension or dismissal of a cadet, flying cadet, probationary second lieutenant; and
- Any sentence of death, except in the cases of persons convicted in time of war, of murder, mutiny, desertion, or as spies; and in such excepted cases, a sentence of death may be carried into execution subject to the provisions of article fifty, upon confirmation by the commanding general of the Army in the field.
Article 48. Power Incident to Power to Confirm. - The power to confirm the sentence of a court-martial shall be held to include:32 5. COURTS MARTIAL - Appointing authorities - a. General courts-martial - x x x
- The power to confirm or disapprove a finding, and to confirm so much only of a finding of guilty of a particular offense as involves a finding of guilty of a lesser included offense when, in the opinion of the authority having the power to confirm, the evidence of record requires a finding of only the lesser degree of guilt;
- The power to confirm or disapprove the whole or any part of the sentence; and
- The power to remand a case for rehearing under the provisions of article fifty.
x x x
An officer who has power to appoint a general court-martial may determine the cases to be referred to it for trial and may dissolve it; but he cannot control the exercise by the court of powers vested in it by law. He may withdraw any specification or charge at anytime unless the court has reached a finding thereon.
33Rollo (G.R. No. 176394), p. 1871.
34Id. at 2540-2542.
35Id. at 2462-2478.
36Id. at 2479-2522.
37Id. at 2523-2539.
38 G.R. No. 171396, May 3, 2006, 489 SCRA 160.
39Id. at 213-214.
40Id. at 214.