Rodolfo Dela Cruz, petitioner vs. Hon. CFI Davao Judge Felix Moya, respondent

(G.R. No. 65192, 27 April 1988, 160 SCRA 838)

/archibald.manansala

Archibald Jose T. Manansala

CEU School of Law and Jurisprudence

Doctrine – One of essential requisites for a valid court proceeding is that court has jurisdiction

over the subject matter of case being heard, and jurisdiction over subject matter is determined by

the statute in force at time the action was commenced. The Court also ruled that General Order

No. 59 dated 24 June 1977 applies to Dela Cruz’s case and PD 1822 and 1822-A are

inapplicable.

Thus, the criminal case proceedings in the CFI Davao are null and void due to the court’s lack of

jurisdiction over subject matter and petitioner Dela Cruz should be tried under the military

tribunals created under General Order No. 59, as he was a member of the Philippine

Constabulary at the time the alleged offense was committed and he was executing the Mission

Order when he shot to death Eusebio Cabilto.

Type of Appeal/Action – Petition for Certiorari and Mandamus was certified to the Supreme

Court by then Intermediate Appellate Court in its Resolution dated 30 August 1983, as the

petitioner’s appeal involved a pure question of law.

Facts – On 2 August 1979, petitioner Rodolfo Dela Cruz, member of Armed Forces of the

Philippines and assigned to the Intelligence and Operations Section of 432nd

Company of

Philippine Constabulary, was charged for crime of homicide in Court of First Instance Davao in

an information filed by the Provincial Fiscal on 2 August 1979, for allegedly killing Eusebio

Cabilto during an operation to verify and apprehend operators of illegal cockfights in Barangay

Pangi, Maco, Sto. Tomas, Davao. The case was filed as Criminal Case No. 40080.

During pendency of the case, Presidential Decree Nos. 1822 and 1822-A were promulgated by

Pres. Marcos on 16 January 1981, which vested jurisdiction of courts-martial over crimes

committed by members of (then) Philippine Constabulary and Armed Forces during performance

of their duties.

Dela Cruz claimed that his act was related to performance of his duties. Then, he filed a motion

to transfer the case to the military authorities so that he could be tried by a court martial, but his

motion was denied.

Hence, the present petition for Certiorari and Mandamus.

Issues – Whether the civil courts have jurisdiction over case of homicide filed against Dela

Cruz?

Held – The Supreme Court GRANTED Dela Cruz’s petition and the proceedings in the CFI

Davao were declared null and void, without prejudice of filing the proper action against him in

proper forum.

Ruling – The Supreme Court ruled that there was no dispute that Dela Cruz was a member of the

Philippine Constabulary at the time the alleged offense was committed, and he was executing the

Mission Order when he shot to death Eusebio Cabilto.

Rodolfo Dela Cruz, petitioner vs. Hon. CFI Davao Judge Felix Moya, respondent

(G.R. No. 65192, 27 April 1988, 160 SCRA 838)

/archibald.manansala

Archibald Jose T. Manansala

CEU School of Law and Jurisprudence

The Court ruled that General Order No. 59 dated 24 June 1977 applies to Dela Cruz’s case and

PD 1822 and 1822-A are inapplicable.

The Court stated that one of essential requisites for a valid court proceeding is that court has

jurisdiction over the subject matter of case being heard, and jurisdiction over subject matter is

determined by the statute in force at time the action was commenced.

The military tribunals created under General Order No. 8 exercised exclusive jurisdiction over

“(a)ll offenses committed by military personnel of the Armed Forces of the Philippines while in

the performance of their official duty or which arose out of any act or omission done in the

performance of their official duty; Provided, that for the purpose of determining whether an

offense was committed while in the performance of official duty or whether it arose out of an act

or omission done in the performance of official duty, a certificate issued by the Secretary of

National Defense to that effect shall be conclusive unless modified or revoked by the President.”