Title
Concepcion vs. Jalandoni
Case
G.R. No. L-148
Decision Date
Dec 20, 1945
Reservist Flaviano T. Concepcion challenged court-martial jurisdiction for failing to report for active duty; Supreme Court ruled he remained subject to military law despite non-compliance.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-148)

Facts:

Flaviano T. Concepcion v. Brigadier General Rafael Jalandoni, G.R. No. L-148. December 20, 1945, the Supreme Court En Banc, Jaranilla, J., writing for the Court.

Petitioner Flaviano T. Concepcion was a reservist in the Philippine Army who, according to the petition, had never been enlisted or mustered into the Regular Force and claimed he remained a civilian. Respondent Brigadier General Rafael Jalandoni, Acting Chief of Staff of the Philippine Army, caused a general court-martial to be convened charging Concepcion with violating section 48 of Commonwealth Act No. 1 (the National Defense Act) by failing to report for active duty when called; the specification invoked Article 97 (general article) of the Articles of War (Commonwealth Act No. 408).

The military prosecution was prompted by a May 20, 1945 letter from Juana Videra alleging that Concepcion induced her son, Crisanto V. Sabio, to enlist in Concepcion’s stead, and that Sabio later died in captive circumstances; this complaint was investigated and led to the charge against Concepcion for failing to answer the call for active duty in late October 1941. At the hearing before the Court, petitioner was represented by Major Antonio M. Sanchez and respondent by Colonel Luis P. Torres, Judge Advocate General.

Petitioner sought judicial relief by filing a petition in the Supreme Court praying that the Acting Chief of Staff be ordered to desist from trying him by court-martial, essentially challenging the jurisdiction of the court-martial on the ground that Article 2(a) of the Articles of War makes a reservist subject to military law only “from the dates of their call to active duty and w...(Subscriber-Only)

Issues:

  • Does the general court-martial have jurisdiction to try petitioner, a reservist who failed to report after being called to active duty?
  • If jurisdiction exists, does the Articles of War (Commonwealth Act No. 408) repeal or conflict with section 48 of the National Defense Act (Commonwealth Act No. 1) so as to...(Subscriber-Only)

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. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.