Laurel vsmisa Facts: the Supreme Court, in a resolution, acted on the petition f

or the writ of habeas corpus filed by petitioner anastacio laurel based on the t
heory that a F ilipino citizen who adhered to the enemy giving the latter aid an
d comfort durin g the Japanese occupation cannot be prosecuted for the crime of
treason defined and penalized by article 114 of the revised penal code for the r
eason that 1) th at the sovereignty of the legitimate government in the Philippi
nes and consequen tly, the correlative allegiance of Filipino citizens therto wa
s then suspended; and 2) that there was a change of sovereignty over these islan
ds upon the procla mation of the Philippine republic. Issues: Whether or not the
allegiance of the accused as a Filipino citizen was suspended and that there wa
s a change of sovereignty over the Phil Islands. Held: No, a citizen or subject
owes, not a qualified and temporary, but an absolute an d permanent allegiance,
which consists in the obligation of fidelity and obedien ce to his government of
sovereign. The absolute and permanent allegiance of the inhabitants of a territ
ory occupied by the enemy to their legitimate government or sovereign is not abr
ogated or severed by the enemy occupation, because the so vereignty of the gover
nment or sovereign de jure is not transferred thereby the occupier. Just as trea
son may be committed against the Federal as well as against the Stat e Govt, in
the same way treason may have been committed during the Japanese occu pation aga
inst the sovereignty of the US as well as against the sovereignty of t he Phil C
ommonwealth; and that the change of our form of govt from commonwealth to republ
ic does not affect the prosecution of those charged with the crime of t reason c
ommitted during the commonwealth, bec it is an offense against the same govt and
the same sovereign people.