G.R. No. L-47540. March 21, 1978.
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR THE HABEAS CORPUS OF RENATO DAÑGANAN Y CAPATI. RENATO C. DAÑGANAN, ET AL., petitioners, vs. HON. SECRETARY JUAN PONCE ENRILE, ET AL., respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Renato C. Dañganan was implicated in the murder-kidnapping of Felix G. Sytangco. On December 3, 1977, he was interrogated by NBI and PC Metrocom agents and executed an affidavit waiving his rights under Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code, placing himself under NBI protective custody due to fear of reprisal. Following an inquest that found illegally possessed firearms were used in the crime, a commitment order was issued under Letter of Instruction No. 621, and his custody was transferred to the Metrocom. On January 7, 1978, the Secretary of National Defense issued Arrest, Search and Seizure Order (ASSO) No. 4421 against Dañganan for murder and kidnapping under General Order No. 62.
Before the ASSO’s issuance, Dañganan, his wife, and father filed a petition for habeas corpus on December 27, 1977, alleging illegal detention. The petition was amended to implicate the Secretary of National Defense and to assert that Dañganan’s waiver affidavit was executed under duress, which he later retracted, denying any involvement. The respondents denied the coercion allegation. A charge sheet was subsequently filed with a military tribunal on February 17, 1978, accusing Dañganan of illegal possession of firearms, kidnapping, and murder under General Orders and the Revised Penal Code.

ISSUE

Whether the writ of habeas corpus is available to secure the release of Renato Dañganan, who is detained by virtue of a validly issued Arrest, Search and Seizure Order (ASSO) for offenses falling under military tribunal jurisdiction.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition. The legal logic is anchored on the specific provisions of General Orders issued during the period of martial law. General Order No. 62, which amended General Order No. 60, explicitly authorized the Secretary of National Defense to issue an ASSO for specific offenses, including murder and kidnapping as defined under the Revised Penal Code—the very charges against Dañganan. Section 4 of General Order No. 60 further provided that a person detained under an ASSO could be kept in detention until released by the President or the Secretary of National Defense.
The Court, citing precedents like Go v. Olivas and Romero v. Ponce Enrile, held that where detention is pursuant to a lawful order issued under a valid general order, the writ of habeas corpus cannot be invoked to effect release. The military tribunal had acquired jurisdiction over the charges. Since Dañganan’s detention was by virtue of ASSO No. 4421, issued with probable cause for offenses within military tribunal jurisdiction, his confinement was legal. The writ of habeas corpus is a remedy against illegal restraint; it does not lie when custody is authorized by law. The Court found no grounds to rule the ASSO invalid or the detention unlawful under the prevailing legal framework.