Title
Comendador vs. De Villa
Case
G.R. No. 93177
Decision Date
Aug 2, 1991
AFP officers challenged court-martial legality, bail rights, and pre-trial procedures post-1989 coup; SC upheld military jurisdiction but revived peremptory challenges, denying bail for court-martial cases.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 158830)

Facts:

  • Consolidation and Parties
    • Four consolidated cases (G.R. Nos. 93177, 95020, 96948, 97454) involving AFP and PNP officers.
    • Charges: Violation of Articles of War 67 (Mutiny), 96 (Unbecoming Conduct), 94 (Various Crimes) in relation to Art. 248 RPC (Murder), arising from the December 1–9, 1989 failed coup.
  • Proceedings in Each Case
    • G.R. No. 93177 – Petitioners challenged:
      • Legality of Pre-Trial Investigation (PTI) Panel procedures;
      • Creation and composition of General Court-Martial No. 14 (GCM 14).
    • G.R. No. 96948 – Petitioners contested:
      • Validity of GCM 14’s composition;
      • Denial of their peremptory challenge rights under Com. Act No. 408, Art. 18.
    • G.R. No. 95020 – Ltc. Ligot’s bail application before GCM 14 was denied; he sought certiorari, mandamus, provisional liberty, and injunction from RTC Q.C. Branch 104.
    • G.R. No. 97454 – Private respondents filed habeas corpus in RTC Q.C. Branch 86, secured orders for release on grounds of no formal charges after over a year.
  • Pre-Trial Investigation and Court-Martial Actions
    • PTI Panel subpoenas, scheduling of counter-affidavit submissions, motions for summary dismissal and reconsideration (all ultimately denied).
    • GCM 14 convened by General Order No. M-6 “By Command of” Gen. De Villa; peremptory challenges disallowed under P.D. 39.
    • Bail proceedings: GCM 14 denied bail; RTC granted provisional liberty to Ligot and intervenors, then ordered formal bail proceedings.
    • Habeas corpus: RTC Solano ordered release for lack of charges; appeal ad cautelam filed by government, motion for reconsideration denied.

Issues:

  • Whether the PTI Panel complied with due process and Art. 71, AW, and whether failure to submit counter-affidavits voided its actions.
  • Whether GCM 14 was validly convened under Art. 8, AW, despite General Order No. M-6 not being personally signed by the Chief of Staff.
  • Whether accused military officers retain the right to peremptory challenge under Art. 18, Com. Act 408, notwithstanding P.D. 39.
  • Whether military officers facing court-martial have the constitutional right to bail under Art. III, Sec. 13, Constitution.
  • Whether RTCs have jurisdiction to entertain certiorari, mandamus, and habeas corpus petitions affecting court-martial proceedings and to order release of military detainees.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.