G.R. No. L-47917 February 21, 1989
RUFINO MENDIVEL, ET AL., petitioners, vs. THE SECRETARY OF NATIONAL DEFENSE, ET AL., respondents.

FACTS

Petitioners, ten indigent farmers from Albay, were arrested in mid-1975 for allegedly being members of a New People’s Army liquidation squad responsible for ambushing and killing two Civilian Home Defense Force volunteers. Following their arrest, a complaint for multiple murder was filed with the Municipal Court of Oas. After preliminary investigations, two separate Informations for murder were filed against them with the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Albay, Branch V, docketed as Criminal Cases Nos. 670 and 696. The petitioners were arraigned and pleaded not guilty.
During a joint hearing on January 13, 1976, the prosecution moved to transfer the cases to the Military Tribunals, asserting military jurisdiction. The CFI granted the motion in an Order dated January 15, 1976, directing the transmittal of the records. The cases underwent review by military authorities, culminating in a recommendation from the Judge Advocate General to prosecute the petitioners for illegal possession of firearms with double murder before a Military Commission. This recommendation was approved by the Secretary of National Defense in February 1978, leading to the filing of a Charge Sheet with Military Commission No. 26.

ISSUE

The sole legal issue is whether the Military Commission has jurisdiction over the subject crimes to the exclusion of the civil courts.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition as moot and academic. The legal logic is grounded in the supervening events that removed the actual controversy. At the time of the Court’s resolution, Military Commission No. 26, whose jurisdiction was being directly challenged, had already been dissolved. Furthermore, the records of Criminal Cases Nos. 670 and 696, which had been transferred to military authorities, were subsequently returned to the civil court’s prosecutorial arm, the Provincial Fiscal of Albay, as confirmed by an official receipt. This return of the cases to the civilian judicial system effectively nullified the core dispute over forum jurisdiction.
The Court, citing the precedent in Ygay v. Escareal, ruled that the return of the case records to the respondent court rendered the issues raised moot. With the military tribunal dissolved and jurisdiction effectively reverting to the civil courts, there was no longer a live case or controversy requiring adjudication on the jurisdictional question. However, the Court expressly noted its regret over the petitioners’ prolonged detention without trial. It directed the Regional Trial Court of Albay (the successor to the CFI) to proceed with the trial of the cases with dispatch, thereby reinstating the petitioners’ full constitutional rights to due process and a speedy trial within the regular judicial system. The dismissal on mootness grounds was thus without prejudice to the petitioners’ rights in the revived civilian proceedings.