Scribd
Upload
115 views1 page

Peralta Vs Director of Prisons, GR No. L-49, November 12, 1949

William Peralta was sentenced to life imprisonment for robbery by a court established by the Japanese during their occupation of the Philippines. He filed a petition for habeas corpus, arguing that the court did not provide fair trials and violated his constitutional rights. The Supreme Court ruled that while the Japanese court's jurisdiction came from martial law, its judgments were no longer valid after the Japanese occupation ended. The court therefore granted the writ of habeas corpus and ordered Peralta's release.

Uploaded by

Pamela Tambalo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
115 views1 page

Peralta Vs Director of Prisons, GR No. L-49, November 12, 1949

William Peralta was sentenced to life imprisonment for robbery by a court established by the Japanese during their occupation of the Philippines. He filed a petition for habeas corpus, arguing that the court did not provide fair trials and violated his constitutional rights. The Supreme Court ruled that while the Japanese court's jurisdiction came from martial law, its judgments were no longer valid after the Japanese occupation ended. The court therefore granted the writ of habeas corpus and ordered Peralta's release.

Uploaded by

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

Facts

William Peralta was prosecuted for the crime of robbery and was sentenced to life
imprisonment as defined and penalized by Act No. 65 of the National Assembly of
the Republic of the Philippines.

The petition for Habeas Corpus is based on the contention that the Court of Special
and Exclusive Criminal Jurisdiction created by Ordinance No. 7 was a political
instrumentality of the military forces of Japan and which is repugnant to the aims of
the Commonwealth of the Philippines for it does not afford a fair trial and impairs the
constitutional rights of the accused.

Issue

Is the creation of court by Ordinance No 7. valid?

Ruling

Yes.

Since the criminal jurisdiction established by the invader is drawn entirely from the
law martial as defined in the usages of nations.

All judgment of a political complexion of the courts during the Japanese regime
ceased to be valid upon reoccupation of the islands

The Writ of Habeas Corpus prayed for is hereby granted and it is ordered that the
petitioner be released forthwith.

You might also like