G.R. No. L-25133 September 28, 1968
S/SGT. JOSE SANTIAGO, petitioner-appellant, vs. LT. COL. CELSO ALIKPALA, ET AL., respondents-appellees.

FACTS

Petitioner S/Sgt. Jose Santiago, an accused in a court-martial proceeding, filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition with the lower court on April 17, 1963. He sought to restrain the respondent officers constituting the general court-martial from continuing the proceedings, alleging lack of jurisdiction due to denial of due process. The lower court dismissed the petition as moot and academic because, during its pendency and without a restraining order, the petitioner had been convicted by the court-martial. The petitioner appealed. The facts, as stipulated, reveal that the petitioner was arraigned on December 17, 1962, by a general court-martial that had been created by a special order to try the case of a certain Capt. Egmidio Jose. The arraignment was conducted to avoid prescription of one of the offenses charged against the petitioner, allegedly committed on or about December 18, 1960. Prior to this arraignment, no written summons or subpoena was issued to the petitioner or his counsel; instead, a telephone instruction was given to have the petitioner brought under escort. There was no special order published creating or directing the general court-martial composed of the respondents to arraign and try the petitioner’s case; they relied on an indorsement directing the referral of the petitioner’s case to the existing court. The special order creating the court was amended to include the phrase “and such other cases which may be referred to it” only on January 8, 1963, after the arraignment. The petitioner’s counsel objected to the arraignment on grounds of lack of jurisdiction, but the court-martial overruled the objections.

ISSUE

Whether the general court-martial was lawfully convened and possessed jurisdiction over the petitioner, considering the alleged denial of due process arising from the failure to comply with legal requirements for its convening and the petitioner’s arraignment.

RULING

The Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s dismissal. It held that the court-martial was not lawfully convened and was devoid of jurisdiction. The failure to comply with the applicable laws and regulations for convening a valid court-martial amounted to a denial of due process. The general court-martial that arraigned the petitioner was specifically convened to try the case of Capt. Egmidio Jose, not the petitioner. The subsequent indorsement referring the petitioner’s case to this existing body and the later amendment of the special order did not cure the jurisdictional defect at the time of arraignment. A court-martial, being a tribunal of special and limited jurisdiction, must be convened pursuant to a valid order, and its jurisdiction is restricted to the cases specified in that order. Since the order creating the respondents’ court did not include the petitioner’s case, it had no power to arraign or try him. This defect constituted a violation of procedural due process, which requires that a person be subject to the lawful jurisdiction of a duly constituted tribunal. The denial of this fundamental right rendered the proceedings void for lack of jurisdiction. The case was not moot and academic because a judgment rendered by a body without jurisdiction is a nullity.