Laurel vs. Misa 77 Phil.

856 Facts: During the Japanese occupation in the Philippines, Anastacio Laurel adhered to the enemy by giving the latter aid and comfort. He was then charged with treason. He claimed that he could not be prosecuted for the crime of treason for the reasons that the sovereignty of the legitimate government in the Philippines and the allegiance of Filipino citizen to the government were suspended at that time of occupation. He likewise contended that there was a change of sovereignty upon the proclamation of the Republic and his acts were against the Commonwealth. Issue: Whether or not the absolute allegiance of a Filipino citizen to the government was suspended during the Japanese occupation. Ruling: No, the absolute and permanent allegiance of a Filipino citizen to the Philippine government, which although was occupied by the Japanese, was not abrogated or severed by the latters occupation. The sovereignty of the government is not transferred to the enemy by mere occupation. Since there was no transfer of sovereignty, it is presumed that the Philippine government still had the power. Moreover, sovereignty cannot be suspended; it is either subsisting or eliminated. What may be suspended is the exercise of the rights of sovereignty; but not sovereignty itself.