GR 171855; (October, 2012) (Digest)
G.R. No. 171855; October 15, 2012
FE V. RAPSING, TITA C. VILLANUEVA and ANNIE F. APAREJADO, represented by EDGAR APAREJADO, Petitioners, vs. HON. JUDGE MAXIMINO R. ABLES, of RTC-Branch 47, Masbate City; SSGT. EDISON RURAL, et al., Respondents.
FACTS
Petitioners are the widows of Teogenes Rapsing, Teofilo Villanueva, and Edwin Aparejado, who were among seven individuals killed in Baleno, Masbate. Respondents, members of the Philippine Army, alleged the deaths occurred during a legitimate military operation and firefight with alleged New People’s Army partisans. Petitioners, however, claimed the victims were unarmed civilians summarily executed. Following a National Bureau of Investigation probe, an Information for Multiple Murder was filed against respondents in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Masbate.
The Judge Advocate General’s Office (JAGO) filed an Omnibus Motion seeking to transfer the case to a military tribunal, arguing the acts were service-connected. Initially denied, the motion was granted upon reconsideration by the RTC, which ordered the records turned over to military authorities. Petitioners sought reconsideration, arguing the civil court retained jurisdiction under Republic Act No. 7055, but this was denied, prompting the petition for certiorari.
ISSUE
Whether the Regional Trial Court committed grave abuse of discretion in transferring the criminal case for multiple murder to the jurisdiction of a military tribunal.
RULING
Yes, the RTC committed grave abuse of discretion. Jurisdiction is conferred by law and determined by the allegations in the Information. The Information specifically accuses respondents of multiple murder committed with treachery and evident premeditation. These are crimes defined and penalized under the Revised Penal Code, over which regular civil courts have exclusive original jurisdiction.
Republic Act No. 7055 provides that members of the Armed Forces who commit crimes “not service-connected” are under the jurisdiction of civil courts. The legislative intent, as revealed in Senate deliberations, defines “service-connected” offenses as those committed pursuant to a lawful order or within the context of a valid military mission. The allegations in the Information describe a crime—multiple murder—that is inherently civilian in character. The mere fact that the accused are military personnel does not automatically render the offense service-connected. The nature of the crime as alleged, a heinous offense against civilians, places it squarely within the jurisdiction of the civil courts. The RTC’s order to transfer the case, despite the clear jurisdictional mandate, constituted a capricious and whimsical exercise of judgment amounting to grave abuse of discretion. The Orders dated December 6, 2005 and January 11, 2006 were annulled and set aside, and the RTC was directed to proceed with the criminal case.