Ognir Vs Director Of Prison

67. Ognir vs. Director of Prisons 80, Phil 401 Facts: In 1943, a General Court Martial was convened or appointed in Lanao by Colonel Wendel W. Fertig, Commanding Officer of the 10th Military District of Mindanao. Said Court convicted herein petitioner, Antonio Ognir, guilty of violating 93rd Article of War of the Philippine Army, thereby sentencing him to life imprisonment. In this petition for habeas corpus, Ognir contended that said Court was not legally constituted, hence the judgment against him was null and void for want of jurisdiction. The question whether the General Court Martial was legally constituted, Supreme Court had responded in the negative. As provided for under Article 8 of the Commonwealth Act No. 408, General Court Martial may only be appointed by Commanding Officer of a Division, among others, only when empowered by the President of the Philippines. The lack of showing or evidence that Colonel Wendel W. Fertig was indeed authorized by the President clearly established that the General Court Martial which convicted petitioner was illegally constituted, hence the judgment was void ab initio. Judge Advocate General of the Philippine Army and Solicitor Antonio A. Torres, in their motion for reconsideration on Supreme Court’s decision, raised the contention that the proceedings of the General Court Martial should be given the same effects as the actuation of de facto officers in the same manner as the pronouncements of Civil Tribunals set up during the second Republic (Japanese Era).

Issue: WON the decision of the General Court Martial may be treated similar to the actuation of the civil courts during the Japanese era. Held: No. Such a contention was untenable as there was no analogy between the decision of the courts established by the Military Government or the so-called second Republic, and that of the General Court-Martial which convicted petitioner. The Courts of the Commonwealth legally constituted which were continued during the so-called Philippine Republic, and the other courts during the Japanese occupation were legally created by laws which, under the International Law, the military occupant had the right to promulgate. While said General Court-Martial was created or convened by an officer having no power or authority to do so.