You are on page 1of 2

In re: The Issuance of the Writ of Habeas Corpus for Dr. respect to which under Proclamation No.

on No. 2045, the

Aurora Parong, et al. vs. Ponce Enrile, [G.R. No. L-61388, privilege of the writ of habeas corpus continues to be
April 20, 1983] * suspended, thus:
“ x x x and in all other places the suspension of
FACTS: the privilege of the writ shall also continue
The records show that nine (9) of the fourteen with respect to persons at present detained as
(14) detainees herein were arrested on July 6, 1982 at well as others who may hereafter be similarly
about 1:45 p.m. when three (3) teams of the PC/INP of detained for the crimes of insurrection or
Bayombong, Nueva Viscaya led by Lt. Col. Coronel, 1st Lt. rebellion, subversion conspiracy or proposals
de Guzman and 1st Lt. Baria, after securing a Search to commit such crimes, and for all other crimes
Warrant No. S-82 issued by Judge Sofronio Sayo of the and offenses committed by them in
Court of First Instance of Nueva Viscaya conducted a raid furtherance or on the occasion thereof, or
at the residence of Dra. Aurora Parong. Apprehended incident thereto, or in connection therewith.”
during the said raid were Dra. Aurora Parong, Benjamin
Pineda, Sabino Padilla, Francisco Divinagracia, Zenaida
Mallari, Letty Ballogan, Norberto Portuguese, and ISSUE:
Mariano Soriano who were then having a conference in W/n the petitioners may post bail
the dining room of Dra. Parong's residence which had
been doing on since 10:00 a.m. of that same day. The five RULING:
other detainees were arrested on a different date. Prior NO. From the clear language of the Lansang
to their arrest, all the detainees were under surveillance case, “the function of Court is merely to check — not to
as they were then identified as members of the supplant — the Executive, or to ascertain merely
Communist Party of the Philippines engaging in whether he has gone beyond the constitutional limits of
subversive activities. his jurisdiction, not to exercise the power vested in him
The herein fourteen (14) detainees (hereafter or to determine the wisdom of his act.” If, however, the
referred to sometimes as petitioners) were all detained constitutional right to bail is granted to the herein
at the PC/INP Command Headquarters, Bayombong, petitioners by the court, through the procedure laid
Nueva Vizcaya from July 6, 1982 until their transfer on down under Rule 114 of the Rules of court, what
the morning of August 10, 1982 to an undisclosed place inevitably results is the supplanting of the decision of the
reportedly to Camp Crame, Quezon City, to Echague, President to detain pursuant to Proclamation No. 2045,
Isabela, and to Tuguegarao, Cagayan. of persons who come under its coverage.
Hence, this petition for the writ of habeas corpus The specific mention in the Constitution of
and mandamus filed by Josefina Garcia-Padilla, mother rebellion and insurrection along with invasion and
of detained petitioner Sabino G. Padilla, Jr. on August 13, imminent danger thereof, shows that the terms
1982. The mandamus aspect of the instant petition has, "rebellion and insurrection" are used therein in the sense
however, become moot and academic, and whereabouts of a state or condition of the Nation, not in the concept
of petitioners having already become known to of a statutory offense. What, therefore, should
petitioner Josefina Garcia-Padilla. determine the legality of imposing what is commonly
The Court en banc issued a writ of habeas corpus referred to as "preventive detention" resulting from the
and required the respondents to make a return of the suspension of the privilege of habeas corpus, is the
writ. In return to the writ filed, the respondents, through necessity of its adoption as a measure to suppress or
the Solicitor General, alleged that (1) the detainees quell the rebellion, or beat off an invasion. The necessity
mentioned in the petition, with the exception of Tom for such measure as a means of defense for national
Vasquez who was temporarily released, are all being survival quite clearly transcends in importance and
detained by virtue of a Presidential Commitment Order urgency the claim of those detained to the right to bail to
(PCO), pursuant to LOI No. 1211 in relation to obtain their freedom. To hold otherwise would defeat
Presidential Proclamation No. 2045, and that said PCO the purpose of the constitutional grant of the power to
was issued by President Ferdinand E. Marcos for suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus on the
violation of P.D. No. 885; (2) the corresponding charges occasions expressly mentioned in the charter. For what
against the said detainees have been filed in court and indeed could the purpose be of suspending the privilege
before the Acting Provincial Fiscal of Nueva Viscaya of the writ of habeas corpus other than to restrict, at
where they are pleading; (3) persons named in the PCO least for the duration of the emergency of invasion or
were arrested and are being detained for offenses with rebellion, the right to personal liberty, dictated as it is, in
the greater interest of public safety and national their comrades in the field thereby jeopardizing the
security. success of government efforts to bring to an end the
So it is that Proclamation No. 2045 mentions not invasion, rebellion or insurrection.
only rebellion or insurrection as coming within the Realistically, a person engaged in the rebellion
suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, does not, upon being arrested or captured, cease to be
but also other offenses, including subversion which is not as committed to the cause of the movement. Through a
mentioned in the Constitution, committed by reason or grand conspiracy, as is of the essence of how rebellion is
on the occasion of the rebellion, or in connection committed, involving a great mass of confederates
therewith, or in the furtherance thereof. There need be bound together by a common goal, he remains in a state
no alarm over what libertarian jurists fear as violation of of continued participation in the criminal act or design.
the constitutional right to personal liberty when the His heart still beats with the same emotion for the
President decrees the suspension of the privilege of success of the movement of which he continues to be an
habeas corpus. Only those who give cause for it will be ardent adherent and ally. It is simple logic then to hold
subject to restriction of their liberty, as the necessity that there should be no legal compulsion for a captured
therefor arises in the interest of national defense and rebel to be charged in court, only to be released on bail,
survival. The constitutional guarantee of individual while he is, realistically and legally, still as much as part
freedom is intact in all its plenitude and sanctity, save and parcel of the movement, continuing as it is, as those
only as the Constitution has envisioned the need for its still engaged in carrying on actively to attain their goal of
limitation, and only to a few, in relation to the entire overthrowing the established regime.
population, as the Constitution itself permits in case of It is, likewise, all too well-known that when the
overwhelming and imperious necessity. rebel forces capture government troopers or kidnap
As previously noted, "invasion" which is not a private individuals, they do not accord to them any of the
statutorily-defined offense and "imminent danger rights now being demanded by the herein petitioners,
thereof" as mentioned in the Constitution indicate that particularly to be set at liberty upon the filing of bail. As
"rebellion and insurrection" are also mentioned therein a matter of common knowledge, captives of the rebels
not in their concept as statutorily-defined public crimes, or insurgents are not only not given the right to be
but as a state or condition of extreme emergency released, but also denied trial of any kind. In some
resulting from the existence of the aforesaid events. instances, they may even be liquidated
Now, if captured enemies from the invading unceremoniously. What is then sought by the suspension
force may not be charged with any statutory offense that of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is, among
would provide the occasion to demand the right to bail, others, to put the government forces on equal fighting
it is obvious that persons engaged in rebellion or terms with the rebels, by authorizing the detention of
insurrection may not claim the right to be released on their own rebel or dissident captives as the rebellion
bail when similarly captured or arrested during the goes on. In this way, the advantage the rebellion forces
continuance of the aforesaid contingency. They may not have over those of the government, as when they resort
even claim the right to be charged immediately in court, to guerrilla tactics with sophisticated weapons, is, at
as they may rightfully do so, were they being charged least, minimized, thereby enhancing the latter's chances
with an ordinary or common offense. This is so because of beating their enemy. It would, therefore, seem to be
according to legal writers or publicists, the suspension of ignoring realities in the name of misplaced magnanimity
the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus “has the sole and compassion, and for the sake of humanity, to grant
effect of allowing the executive to defer the trials of the demand for respect of rights supposedly guaranteed
persons charged with certain offenses during the period by the Constitution by those who themselves seek to
of emergency.” This clearly means denial of the right to destroy that very same instrument, trampling over it
be released on bail on being charged in court with already as they are still waging war against the
bailable offenses. government. This stark actuality gives added force and
The suspension of the privilege of the writ of substance to the rationale of the suspension of the
habeas corpus must, indeed, carry with it the suspension privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in case of invasion,
of the right to bail, if the government's campaign to insurrection, rebellion, or imminent danger thereof,
suppress the rebellion is to be enhanced and rendered when public safety requires it.
effective. If the right to bail may be demanded during the
continuance of the rebellion, and those arrested,
captured and detained in the course thereof will be
released, they would, without the least doubt, rejoin