Aquino v.

Enrile
59 SCRA 183
FACTS:
The cases are all petitions for habeas corpus, the petitioners having been
arrested and detained by the military by virtue of Proclamation 1081. The
petitioners were arrested and held pursuant to General Order No.2 of the
President “for being participants or  for having given aid and comfort in the
conspiracy to seize political and state power in the country and to take over the
Government by force…” General Order No. 2 was issued by the President in the
exercise of the power he assumed by virtue of Proclamation 1081 placing the
entire country under martial law.

ISSUES:
1) Is the existence of conditions claimed to justify the exercise of the power to
declare martial law subject to judicial inquiry?; and
2) Is the detention of the petitioners legal in accordance with the declaration of
martial law?

HELD:
5 Justices held that the issue is a political question, hence, not subject to judicial
inquiry, while 4 Justices held that the issue is a justiciable one. However, any
inquiry by this Court in the present cases into the constitutional sufficiency of the
factual bases for the proclamation of martial law has become moot and
academic. Implicit in the state of martial law is the suspension of the privilege of
the writ of habeas corpus with respect to persons arrested or detained for acts
related to the basic objective of the proclamation, which is to suppress invasion,
insurrection or rebellion, or to safeguard public safety against imminent danger
thereof. The preservation of society and national survival takes precedence. The
proclamation of martial law automatically suspends the privilege of the writ as to
the persons referred to in this case.