3.

Kuroda vs Jalandoni
83 SCRA 171

Facts: Shinegori Kuroda, a former Lieutenant-General of the Japanese Imperial Army and
Commanding General of the Japanese Imperial Forces in the Philippines was charged before the
Philippine Military Commission for war crimes. As he was the commanding general during such
period of war, he was tried for failure to discharge his duties and permitting the brutal atrocities
and other high crimes committed by his men against noncombatant civilians and prisoners of the
Japanese forces, in violation of the laws and customs of war.
Kuroda, in his petition, argues that the Military Commission is not a valid court because the law
that created it, Executive Order No. 68, is unconstitutional. Executive Order No. 68 is illegal on
the ground that it violates not only the provision of our constitutional law but also our local laws
to say nothing of the fact (that) the Philippines is not a signatory nor an adherent to the Hague
Convention on Rules and Regulations covering Land Warfare and therefore petitioners is charged
of 'crimes' not based on law, national and international." Hence petitioner argues — "That in view
off the fact that this commission has been empanelled by virtue of an unconstitutional law an illegal
order this commission is without jurisdiction to try herein petitioner. Furthermore, he alleges that
the United States is not a party of interest in the case and that the two US prosecutors cannot
practice law in the Philippines.

Issue: Whether or not Executive Order No. 68 is constitutional.

Ruling: Yes. The Supreme Court ruled that Executive Order No. 68, creating the National War
Crimes Office and prescribing rules on the trial of accused war criminals, is constitutional as it is
aligned with Sec 3, Article 2 of the Constitution which states that “The Philippines renounces war
as an instrument of national policy and adopts the generally accepted principles of international
law as part of the law of the nation.” The generally accepted principles of international law includes
those formed during the Hague Convention, the Geneva Convention and other international
jurisprudence established by United Nations. These include the principle that all persons, military
or civilian, who have been guilty of planning, preparing or waging a war of aggression and of the
commission of crimes and offenses in violation of laws and customs of war, are to be held
accountable. In the doctrine of incorporation, the Philippines abides by these principles and
therefore has a right to try persons that commit such crimes and most especially when it is
committed against its citizens. It abides with it even if it was not a signatory to these conventions
by the mere incorporation of such principles in the constitution.

Note: The United States is a party of interest because the country and its people have been equally,
if not more greatly, aggrieved by the crimes with which the petitioner is charged for. By virtue of
Executive Order No. 68, the Military Commission is a special military tribunal and that the rules
as to parties and representation are not governed by the rules of court but by the very provisions
of this special law.