Ateneo de Zamboanga University | College of Law | CASE DIGEST

Title of the Case: ROQUE GUMUA

petitioner
vs.
MAJOR GENERAL ROMEO ESPINO, in his capacity as Chief of Staff of AFP and Military
Commission 2, respondents
G.R. No. and Date: G.R. No. L-36188-37586. 29 February 1980
Ponente: MAKASIAR, J:
Legal Doctrine: As Commandering Chief and as enforcer or administrator of Martial Law ,…can
Promulgate proclamations, orders, decrees during the period of martial law essential to
To the security and preservation of the Republic, to the defense of the political and
Social liberties of the people, and to the institution of reforms to prevent the resurgence of
rebellion or Insurrection or secession or the threat thereof as well as to meet the impact of a
worldwide recession, inflation or economic crisis which presently threatens all nations including
highly develop countries.
Facts:
 1972, a Chinaman was kidnapped by allegedly group of Sgt Cordova, they keep the victim in
San Clemens, Tarlac particularly in the house of the petitioner Roque Gumaua, who used to
be a co soldier Sgt. Aguinaldo Ciordoca in Camp Olivas. After surveillance, Gumaua’s house
was raided and he was arrested along with Halasan, who guarded the kidnapped victim.
Since martial law was being imposed at that time, Gumaua was held under the custody and
trial of the military court,
 Gumaua petitioned for prohibition and a mandamus with restraining order and preliminary
injunction against Major General Romeo Espino as Chief of Staff of the AFP and Military
Commission no.2.
 He filed for habeas corpus and averred that:
A) military tribunals cannot try civilians if civil courts are open.
B) the president cannot deprive the civil courts of their jurisdiction to try to criminal cases
involving civilians
C) as a civilian he is entitled even during Martial Law to his constitutional right to counsel
during the preliminary investigation, to be subject to the jurisdiction of the court only upon
his arrest or voluntary submission
D) General Order No.12 defining the jurisdiction of the military commissions has not been
validated by the constitution which has been ratified by a plebiscite, as the referendum hold
pursuant to PD No. 86 was not sufficient complied with the amending process prescribed by
the 1935 Constitution, which process binding on the people
ISSUE: WON Guamua can be validly tried before the military court?

RULING: YES. there is ample proof that Sgt Aguinaldo Cordova and Sgt Barbelinio Casipi ,co- accused of
petitioners in kidnapping charge, they belong to the AFP during the commission of the crime
while Gumaua is a retired PC-non commission officer, the trial of petitioners Gumaua and
Halasan before the respondent Military Commission no.2 along with the two other accused
who are member of the AFP is valid under General orders No. 8

  DIGESTED BY : Estella Marie N. Calib