G.R. No. 75983 - Cruz vs. Enrile

The case involves a consolidated petition for writ of habeas corpus filed before the Supreme Court in October 1986 concerning 217 alleged political detainees arrested during the martial law years (1972–1981) and detained in New Bilibid Prisons.
Of the 217 detainees, 157 were civilians and 26 were confirmed military personnel.
All detainees were tried for common crimes before various military commissions (courts martial) created by General Order No. 8. The crimes included robbery, murder, arson, kidnapping, and illegal possession of firearms; only one military accused was charged with disobedience and assault on a superior officer.
No political offenses were pleaded or proved against the civilian detainees despite the political climate.
The sentences varied: 115 sentenced to death, 46 to life imprisonment, 9 sentenced to 20–30 years, 41 to 10–20 years, and 3 to less than 10 years.
Status of cases varied: 68 had final judgments approved by the President, 75 pending review, and the rest suspended or undetermined.

Some detainees, including Virgilio Alejandrino (granted presidential amnesty but still imprisoned), and several acquitted or fully served sentences, remained detained.
Petitioners challenged the constitutionality of the military tribunals and General Order No. 8 creating them, arguing that military commissions lacked jurisdiction over civilians during martial rule.
They claimed their trials before courts martial were illegal, and sought retrial in civil courts to ensure due process.

The Supreme Court issued the writ of habeas corpus on July 31, 1987, after petitioners filed an amended petition reiterating their claims and relying on the Court’s earlier ruling in Olaguer, et al. vs. Military Commission No. 34, declaring military commissions lacked jurisdiction over civilians.
The Solicitor General initially did not oppose the release of civilian detainees but urged review for military personnel.
Subsequently, the Solicitor General requested reconsideration of the Olaguer ruling’s broad application to civilians for common crimes, suggested limited retroactive effect to prevent prejudice on evidence and procedural matters, and raised concerns about consequences of voiding final judgments.

Whether military commissions (courts martial) had jurisdiction over civilians charged and convicted of common crimes during martial law.
Whether all military tribunal proceedings against civilian detainees were null and void for lack of jurisdiction.
Whether the Olaguer decision applies retroactively to invalidate prior convictions and proceedings involving civilians before military courts.
Whether civilian detainees are entitled to immediate release or retrial in the civil courts.
Whether military personnel detainees are covered by the prohibition on military trials of civilians and whether their detention is lawful.
Whether retrial in civil courts violates the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy or the prescriptive periods for offenses.