You are on page 1of 2

Case digest: Kuroda vs Jalandoni 83 Phil 171 Facts: Shinegori Kuroda, a former lieutenant-general of the Japanese Imperial

Army and commanding general of the Japanese Imperial Forces in the Philippines was charged before the Philippine Military ommission for war crimes! "eing the commanding general of the enemy forces during the war period, he was tried for failing to discharge his duties well and permitting the brutal atrocities and other high crimes committed by his men against noncombatant ci#ilians and prisoners of the Japanese forces, in clear #iolation of the laws and customs of war! Kuroda, in his petition, argues that the Military ommission is not a #alid court because the law that created it, $%ecuti#e &rder 'o! (), is unconstitutional! *e further contends that using as basis the *ague on#ention+s ,ules and ,egulations co#ering -and .arfare for the war crimes committed cannot stand ground as the Philippines was not a signatory of such rules in such con#ention! Furthermore, he alleges that the /nited States is not a party of interest in the case and that the two /S prosecutors cannot practice law in the Philippines! Issues: 0! .hether or not $%ecuti#e &rder 'o! () is constitutional! 1! .hether or not the /S is a party of interest to this case! Ruling: 2he Supreme ourt ruled that $%ecuti#e &rder 'o! (), creating the 'ational .ar rimes &ffice and prescribing rules on the trial of accused war criminals is constitutional as it is aligned with Sec! 3, Article 1 of the onstitution which states that, 42he 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!5 2he generally accepted principles of international law includes those formed during the *ague on#ention, the 6ene#a on#ention and other international 7urisprudence established by the /nited 'ations! 2hese include the principle that all persons, military or ci#ilian, who ha#e been guilty of planning, preparing or waging a war of aggression and of the commission of crimes and offenses in #iolation of laws and customs of war, are to be held 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

aggrie#ed by the crimes with which the petitioner is charged for! "y #irtue of $%ecuti#e &rder 'o! (). the Military ommission is a special military tribunal and that the rules as to parties and representation are not go#erned by the rules of court but by the #ery pro#isions of this special law! . if not more greatly.committed againsts its citi8ens! It abides with it e#en if it was not a signatory to these con#entions by the mere incorporation of such principles in the constitution! 2he /nited States is a party of interest because the country and its people ha#e been e9ually.