Case Summary (G.R. No. 45892)
Petitioner
The People of the Philippines.
Respondent
Tranquilino Lagman and Primitivo de Sosa.
Key Dates
• Registration period: April 1–7, 1936
• Filing of informations: following appellants’ failure to register
• Decision date: July 13, 1938
Applicable Law
• Section 60, Commonwealth Act No. 1 (National Defense Law)
• Sections 65 and 69, Commonwealth Act No. 1 (allowing deferment and allowances)
• Section 2, Article II, 1935 Constitution of the Philippines
Facts
Both appellants were duly notified to appear before the Acceptance Board for military registration but did not comply by the registration deadline. They admitted nonregistration but claimed family dependencies—De Sosa supported a mother and young brother; Lagman supported his father—and a personal objection to military service.
Issue
Whether the compulsory military-registration provisions of the National Defense Law violate Section 2, Article II of the 1935 Constitution, which mandates that all citizens may be required by law to render personal military or civil service.
Holding
The Supreme Court affirmed that the National Defense Law’s compulsory service requirement is constitutional and valid under the 1935 Constitution.
Legal Reasoning
• Constitutional Duty: Section 2, Article II imposes on government the prime duty to defend the State, empowering it to require personal military service.
• Derivative Power: The duty to defend implies the authority to conscript; reliance on voluntary enlistment alone would frustrate governmental responsibility.
• Precedents: U.S. decisions (Jacobson v. Massachusetts; United States v. Olson) uphold compulsory service as within governmental war-and-defense powers and not a deprivation of property or due process.
• Wartime Analogy: Whether in actual war or pr
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 45892)
Facts
- Appellants Tranquilino Lagman (G.R. No. 45892) and Primitivo de Sosa (G.R. No. 45893) are Filipino citizens who reached the age of twenty years in 1936.
- Both were required by Commonwealth Act No. 1 (National Defense Law), § 60, to register for military service between April 1 and April 7, 1936.
- Each received official notices to appear before the Acceptance Board for registration but failed to do so by the time the informations were filed.
- Neither appellant disputed the failure to register; they justified their non-compliance on grounds of family dependency and personal objection:
- De Sosa has no father and must support his mother and an eight-year-old brother.
- Lagman must support his father, professes no “military leanings,” and objects to killing or being killed.
- The Court of First Instance convicted both appellants of violating § 60 of the National Defense Law and sentenced each to one month and one day of imprisonment with costs.
Issues
- Whether the National Defense Law’s compulsory registration provision (Commonwealth Act No. 1, § 60) violates the Constitution of the Philippines.
- Whether appellants’ family responsibilities or personal objections constitute valid defenses to non-registration.
- Whether compulsory military registration deprives appellants of property or due process rights.
Applicable Law
- Commonw