KURODA v. JALANDONI 42 O.G. 4282 case digest

The Philippines although not a signatory to the Hague Convention, is bound because it embodied generally accepted principles of international law binding upon all States.

KURODA v. JALANDONI

42 O.G. 4282

FACTS:
Shigenori Kuroda, a former Lieutenant-General of the Japanese Imperial Army, is charged before a military commission of the Armed Forces of the Philippines. He seeks to establish the illegality of EO 68 on the grounds that it violates our Constitution and that the petitioners are not charged with crimes based on the law since the Philippines is not a signatory to the Hague Convention on Rules and Regulations covering Land Warfare.

ISSUE:

1) Whether or not EO 68 is unconstitutional; and
2) Whether or not Kuroda may be charged with violation of Hague Convention’s rules and regulations

HELD:
Executive Order 68, establishing a National War Crimes Office is valid and constitutional. The president has acted in conformity with the generally accepted policies of international law which are also part of the Constitution pursuant to the incorporation clause stipulated in Section 2, Article II of the Constitution. The rules and regulation of Hague Convention form part of and are wholly based on generally accepted principles of international law and were even accepted by the United States and Japan for they are signatories to the said convention. Such rules and regulations, therefore, form part of the law of the Philippines regardless of whether or not it was a signatory to the same. Thus, Kuroda may be charged for violation of its rules and regulations.