7/27/2019 Kuroda vs Jalandoni 83 Phil 171 case

1/1

Kuroda vs Jalandoni 83 Phil 171

Facts

Shinegori Kuroda, a former Lieutenant-General of the Japanese Imperial Army andCommanding General of the Japanese Imperial Forces in the Philippines was charged before the

Philippine Military Commission for war crimes. As he was the commanding general during suchperiod of war, he was tried for failure to discharge his duties and permitting the brutal atrocitiesand other high crimes committed by his men against noncombatant civilians and prisoners of the

Japanese forces, in violation of of the laws and customs of war.

Kuroda, in his petition, argues that the Military Commission is not a valid court because the lawthat created it, Executive Order No. 68, is unconstitutional. He further contends that using as

basis the Hague Conventions Rules and Regulations covering Land Warfare for the war crime

committed cannot stand ground as the Philippines was not a signatory of such rules in such

convention. Furthermore, he alleges that the United States is not a party of interest in the caseand that the two US prosecutors cannot practice law in the Philippines.

Issue1.Whether or not Executive Order No. 68 is constitutional2.Whether or not the US is a party of interest to this case

Ruling

The Supreme Court ruled that Executive Order No. 68, creating the National War Crimes Office

and prescribing rules on the trial of accused war criminals, is constitutional as it is aligned withSec 3,Article 2 of the Constitution which states that The Philippines renounces war as an

instrument of national policy and adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as

part of the law of the nation. The generally accepted principles of international law includes

those formed during the Hague Convention, the Geneva Convention and other internationaljurisprudence established by United Nations. These include the principle that all persons,

military or civilian, who have been guilty of planning, preparing or waging a war of aggression

and of the commission of crimes and offenses in violation of laws and customs of war, are to beheld accountable. In the doctrine of incorporation, the Philippines abides by these principles and

therefore has a right to try persons that commit such crimes and most especially when it is

committed againsts its citizens. It abides with it even if it was not a signatory to these

conventions by the mere incorporation of such principles in the constitution.The United States is a party of interest because the country and its people have been equally, if

not more greatly, aggrieved by the crimes with which the petitioner is charged for. By virtue of

Executive Order No. 68, the Military Commission is a special military tribunal and that the rules

as to parties and representation are not governed by the rules of court but by the very provisionsof this special law.