ANASTACIO LAUREL v.

ERIBERTO MISA
77 Phil 856 | January 30, 1947

FACTS:
The accused was charged with treason. During the Japanese occupation, the accused adhered to the
enemy by giving the latter aid and comfort. He claims that he cannot be tried for treason since his
allegiance to the Philippines was suspended at that time. Also, he claims that he cannot be tried under
a change of sovereignty over the country since his acts were against the Commonwealth which was
replaced already by the Republic.

Anastacio Laurel filed a petition for habeas corpus contending that he cannot be prosecuted for the
crime of treason as defined and penalized by the Article 114 of the Revised Penal Code on the grounds
that the sovereignty of the legitimate government and the allegiance of Filipino citizens was then
suspended, and that there was a change of sovereignty over the Philippines upon the

proclamation of the Philippine Republic.

ISSUE:
Whether the absolute allegiance of a Filipino citizen to the government becomes suspended during
enemy occupation.

HELD:
No. The absolute and permanent
their legitimate government or
because the sovereignty of the
occupier. It remains vested in the
allegiance of the inhabitants of a territory occupied by the enemy of
sovereign is not abrogated or severed by the enemy occupation
government or sovereign de jure is not transferred thereby to the
legitimate government.

What may be suspended is the exercise of the rights of a sovereignty with the control and government
of the territory occupied by the enemy passes temporarily to the occupant. The political laws which
prescribe the reciprocal rights, duties and obligation of government and citizens, are suspended in
abeyance during military occupation.