8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

1/51

Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURT

Manila

EN BANC

G.R. No. 146710-15 March 2, 2001

JOSEPH E. ESTRADA,petitioner,vs.ANANO DESERTO, !" h!# ca$ac!%& a# O'()*#'a", RAMON GON+AES,OUNTEERS AGANST CRME AND CORRUPTON, GRAT REE PHPPNESOUNDATON, NC., EONARD DE ERA, DENNS UNA, ROMEO CAPUONGa"* ERNESTO /. RANCSCO, JR.,respondent.

----------------------------------------

G.R. No. 1467 March 2, 2001

JOSEPH E. ESTRADA,petitioner,vs.GORA MACAPAGA-ARROO,respondent.

PUNO,J.:

On the line in the cases at bar is the office of the President. Petitioner Joseph EercitoEstrada alle!es that he is the President on leave "hile respondent #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o clai%s she is the President. &he "arrin! personalities are i%portant enou!hbut %ore transcendental are the constitutional issues e%bedded on the parties'dispute. (hile the si!nificant issues are %an$, the u!ular issue involves therelationship bet"een the ruler and the ruled in a de%ocrac$, Philippine st$le.

)irst, "e ta*e a vie" of the panora%a of events that precipitated the crisis in theoffice of the President.

+n the Ma$ , elections, petitioner Joseph Eercito Estrada "as elected

President "hile respondent #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o "as elected /ice-President.0o%e ten 123 %illion )ilipinos voted for the petitioner believin! he "ould rescuethe% fro% life's adversit$. Both petitioner and the respondent "ere to serve a si4-$ear ter% co%%encin! on June 52, .

)ro% the be!innin! of his ter%, ho"ever, petitioner "as pla!ued b$ a plethora ofproble%s that slo"l$ but surel$ eroded his popularit$. 6is sharp descent fro% po"erstarted on October 7, 8222. +locos 0ur #overnor, 9uis :Chavit: 0in!son, a lon!ti%efriend of the petitioner, "ent on air and accused the petitioner, his fa%il$ and friendsof receivin! %illions of pesos fro%juetenglords.

&he e4pos; i%%ediatel$ i!nited reactions of ra!e. &he ne4t da$, October epart%ent of &rade and +ndustr$.On Nove%ber 5, 0enate President )ran*lin >rilon,and 6ouse 0pea*er Manuel /illar, to!ether "ith so%e 7= representatives defectedfro% the rulin! coalition, 9apian n! Masan! Pilipino.2

&he %onth of Nove%ber ended "ith a bi! ban!. +n a tu%ultuous session onNove%ber 5, 6ouse 0pea*er /illar trans%itted the Articles of +%peach%entsi!nedb$ < representatives, or %ore than 5 of all the %e%bers of the 6ouse of

Representatives to the 0enate. &his caused political convulsions in both houses ofCon!ress. 0enator >rilon "as replaced b$ 0enator Pi%entel as 0enate President.0pea*er /illar "as unseated b$ Representative )uentebella.8On Nove%ber 82, the0enate for%all$ opened the i%peach%ent trial of the petitioner. &"ent$-one 183senators too* their oath as ud!es "ith 0upre%e Court Chief Justice 6ilario #. >avide,

Jr., presidin!.5

&he political te%perature rose despite the cold >ece%ber. On >ece%ber =, thei%peach%ent trial started.7&he battle ro$ale "as fou!ht b$ so%e of the %ar?ueena%es in the le!al profession. 0tandin! as prosecutors "ere then 6ouse Minorit$

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

2/51

)loor 9eader )eliciano Bel%onte and Representatives Jo*er Arro$o, (i!berto &aDada,0er!io Apostol, Raul #on@ales, Oscar Moreno, 0alacnib Baterina, Roan 9ibarios, OscarRodri!ue@, Clavel Martine@ and Antonio Nachura. &he$ "ere assisted b$ a batter$ ofprivate prosecutors led b$ no" 0ecretar$ of Justice 6ernando Pere@ and no" 0olicitor#eneral 0i%eon Marcelo. 0ervin! as defense counsel "ere for%er Chief JusticeAndres Narvasa, for%er 0olicitor #eneral and 0ecretar$ of Justice Estelito P.Mendo@a, for%er Cit$ )iscal of Manila Jose )la%iniano, for%er >eput$ 0pea*er of the6ouse Raul >a@a, Att$. 0ie!fried )ortun and his brother, Att$. Ra$%und )ortun. &heda$ to da$ trial "as covered b$ live &/ and durin! its course eno$ed the hi!hest

vie"in! ratin!. +ts hi!h and lo" points "ere the constant conversational piece of thechatterin! classes. &he dra%atic point of the >ece%ber hearin!s "as the testi%on$of Clarissa Oca%po, senior vice president of E?uitable-PC+ Ban*. 0he testified thatshe "as one foot a"a$ fro% petitioner Estrada "hen he affi4ed the si!nature :Jose/elarde: on docu%ents involvin! a P0A 0hrine tos$%boli@e the people's solidarit$ in de%andin! petitioner's resi!nation. 0tudents andteachers "al*ed out of their classes in Metro Manila to sho" their concordance.0pea*ers in the continuin! rallies at the E>0A 0hrine, all %asters of the ph$sics ofpersuasion, attracted %ore and %ore people.8

On Januar$ , the fall fro% po"er of the petitioner appeared inevitable. At 82p.%., the petitioner infor%ed E4ecutive 0ecretar$ Ed!ardo An!ara that #eneralAn!elo Re$es, Chief of 0taff of the Ar%ed )orces of the Philippines, had defected. At

852 p.%., petitioner a!reed to the holdin! of a snap election for President "here he"ould not be a candidate. +t did not diffuse the !ro"in! crisis. At 522 p.%., 0ecretar$of National >efense Orlando Mercado and #eneral Re$es, to!ether "ith the chiefs ofall the ar%ed services "ent to the E>0A 0hrine.88+n the presence of for%erPresidents A?uino and Ra%os and hundreds of thousands of cheerin! de%onstrators,#eneral Re$es declared that :on behalf of Four Ar%ed )orces, the 52,222 stron!%e%bers of the Ar%ed )orces, "e "ish to announce that "e are "ithdra"in! oursupport to this !overn%ent.:85A little later, PNP Chief, >irector #eneral Panfilo9acson and the %aor service co%%anders !ave a si%ilar stunnin!

announce%ent.87

0o%e Cabinet secretaries, undersecretaries, assistant secretaries,and bureau chiefs ?uic*l$ resi!ned fro% their posts.8eput$ E4ecutive 0ecretar$ Ra%on Ba!atsin!, Political Adviser An!elito Bana$o,Asst. 0ecretar$ Bo$in! Re%ulla, and Att$. Macel )ernande@, head of the PresidentialMana!e%ent 0taff, ne!otiated for the petitioner. Respondent Arro$o "as representedb$ no" E4ecutive 0ecretar$ Renato de /illa, no" 0ecretar$ of )inance AlbertoRo%ulo and no" 0ecretar$ of Justice 6ernando Pere@.8=Outside the palace, there "asa brief encounter at Mendiola bet"een pro and anti-Estrada protesters "hich resultedin stone-thro"in! and caused %inor inuries. &he ne!otiations consu%ed all %ornin!until the ne"s bro*e out that Chief Justice >avide "ould ad%inister the oath torespondent Arro$o at hi!h noon at the E>0A 0hrine.

At about 822 noon, Chief Justice >avide ad%inistered the oath to respondentArro$o as President of the Philippines.8At 852 p.%., petitioner and his fa%il$hurriedl$ left MalacaDan! Palace.8 6e issued the follo"in! press state%ent52

:82 Januar$ 822

0&A&EMEN& )ROM

PRE0+>EN& JO0EP6 EJERC+&O E0&RA>A

At t"elve o'cloc* noon toda$, /ice President #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o too*her oath as President of the Republic of the Philippines. (hile alon! "ith%an$ other le!al %inds of our countr$, + have stron! and serious doubtsabout the le!alit$ and constitutionalit$ of her procla%ation as President, + donot "ish to be a factor that "ill prevent the restoration of unit$ and order inour civil societ$.

+t is for this reason that + no" leave MalacaDan! Palace, the seat of thepresidenc$ of this countr$, for the sa*e of peace and in order to be!in the

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

3/51

healin! process of our nation. + leave the Palace of our people "ith !ratitudefor the opportunities !iven to %e for service to our people. + "ill not shir*fro% an$ future challen!es that %a$ co%e ahead in the sa%e service of ourcountr$.

+ call on all %$ supporters and follo"ers to oin %e in to pro%otion of aconstructive national spirit of reconciliation and solidarit$.

Ma$ the Al%i!ht$ bless our countr$ and beloved people.

MABG6AFH

10!d.3 JO0EP6 EJERC+&O E0&RA>A:

+t also appears that on the sa%e da$, Januar$ 82, 822, he si!ned the follo"in!letter5

:0ir

B$ virtue of the provisions of 0ection , Article /++ of the Constitution, + a%hereb$ trans%ittin! this declaration that + a% unable to e4ercise the po"ersand duties of %$ office. B$ operation of la" and the Constitution, the /ice-President shall be the Actin! President.

10!d.3 JO0EP6 EJERC+&O E0&RA>A:

A cop$ of the letter "as sent to for%er 0pea*er )uentebella at 52 a.%. on Januar$82.85Another cop$ "as trans%itted to 0enate President Pi%entel on the sa%e da$althou!h it "as received onl$ at 22 p.%.55

On Januar$ 88, the Monda$ after ta*in! her oath, respondent Arro$o i%%ediatel$dischar!ed the po"ers the duties of the Presidenc$. On the sa%e da$, this Courtissued the follo"in! Resolution in Ad%inistrative Matter No. 2--2efensor-0antia!o, Juan Ponce Enrile, and John Os%ena voted :$es: "ith reservations, citin! asreason therefor the pendin! challen!e on the le!iti%ac$ of respondent Arro$o'spresidenc$ before the 0upre%e Court. 0enators &eresa A?uino-Oreta and RobertBarbers "ere absent.77&he 6ouse of Representatives also approved 0enator#uin!ona's no%ination in Resolution No. =.7

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

4/51

/isa$as, and

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

5/51

(hether conviction in the i%peach%ent proceedin!s is a conditionprecedent for the cri%inal prosecution of petitioner Estrada. +n the ne!ativeand on the assu%ption that petitioner is still President, "hether he isi%%une fro% cri%inal prosecution.

+/

(hether the prosecution of petitioner Estrada should be enoined on the

!round of preudicial publicit$.

(e shall discuss the issues in seriatim.

3h%hr or "o% %h ca##

A% (ar !"o a $o!%!ca )#%!o"

Private respondents

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

6/51

+n fine, the ;a *!#%!"c%!o" bet"een E>0A People Po"er + E>0A People Po"er ++ isclear. EDSA involves the e4ercise of the $o$ $o:r o9ro)%!o""hich or%hr: %h :ho ;or"'"%. EDSA is an e4erciseof $o$ $o:r o9 9r*o' o9 #$ch a"* 9r*o' o9 a##'(& %o $%!%!o"%h ;or"'"% 9or r*r## o9 ;r!a"c#"hich o"& a99c%* %h o99!c o9%h Pr#!*"%. EDSA !# enial ofthese ri!hts "as one of the reasons of our revolution a!ainst 0pain. Ournational hero, Jose P. Ri@al, raised the clarion call for the reco!nition of freedo% ofthe press of the )ilipinos and included it as a%on! :the refor%s sine quibusnon.:

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

7/51

&he issue then is "hether the petitioner resi!ned as President or should beconsidered resi!ned as of Januar$ 82, 822 "hen respondent too* her oath as the7thPresident of the Public. Resi!nation is not a hi!h level le!al abstraction. +t is afactual ?uestion and its '"%#are be$ond ?uibble %hr ')#% ( a" !"%"% %or#!;" a"* %h !"%"% ')#% ( co)$* (& ac%# o9 r!")!#h'"%.=&hevalidit$ of a resi!nation is not !overn%ent b$ an$ for%al re?uire%ent as to for%. +tcan be oral. +t can be "ritten. +t can be e4press. +t can be i%plied. As lon! as theresi!nation is clear, it %ust be !iven le!al effect.

+n the cases at bar, the facts sho" that petitioner did not "rite an$ for%al letter ofresi!nation before he evacuated MalacaDan! Palace in the afternoon of Januar$ 82,822 after the oath-ta*in! of respondent Arro$o. Conse?uentl$, "hether or notpetitioner resi!ned has to be deter%ined fro% his act and o%issions before, durin!and after Januar$ 82, 822 or b$ the %o%a!%& o9 $r!or, co"%'$ora"o)# a"*$o#%r!or 9ac%# a"* c!rc)'#%a"%!a !*"c (ar!"; a 'a%r!a ra"c o"%h !##).

Gsin! this totalit$ test, : ho* %ha% $%!%!o"r r#!;"* a# Pr#!*"%.

&o appreciate the public pressure that led to the resi!nation of the petitioner, it isi%portant to follo" the succession of events after the e4pos; of #overnor 0in!son.

&he 0enate Blue Ribbon Co%%ittee investi!ated. &he %ore detailed revelations ofpetitioner's alle!ed %is!overnance in the Blue Ribbon investi!ation spi*ed the hatea!ainst hi%. &he Articles of +%peach%ent filed in the 6ouse of Representatives "hichinitiall$ "as !iven a near cipher chance of succeedin! sno"balled. +n e4press speed,it !ained the si!natures of < representatives or %ore than 5 of the 6ouse ofRepresentatives. 0oon, petitioner's po"erful political allies be!an desertin! h i%.Respondent Arro$o ?uit as 0ecretar$ of 0ocial (elfare. 0enate President >rilon andfor%er 0pea*er /illar defected "ith 7= representatives in to". &hen, his respectedsenior econo%ic advisers resi!ned to!ether "ith his 0ecretar$ of &rade and +ndustr$.

As the political isolation of the petitioner "orsened, the people's call for hisresi!nation intensified. &he call reached a ne" crescendo "hen the eleven 13%e%bers of the i%peach%ent tribunal refused to open the second envelope. +t sentthe people to paro4$s%s of outra!e. Before the ni!ht of Januar$ "as over, theE>0A 0hrine "as s"ar%in! "ith people cr$in! for redress of their !rievance. &heirnu%ber !re" e4ponentiall$. Rallies and de%onstration ?uic*l$ spread to thecountr$side li*e a brush fire.

As events approached Januar$ 82, "e can have an authoritative "indo" on the #%a%o9 '!"*of the petitioner. &he "indo" is provided in the :)inal >a$s of JosephEercito Estrada,: the diar$ of E4ecutive 0ecretar$ An!ara seriali@ed inthe Ph!!$$!" Da!& ")!rr.=&he An!ara >iar$ reveals that in the %ornin! of

Januar$ , petitioner's lo$al advisers "ere "orried about the s"ellin! of the cro"dat E>0A, hence, the$ decided to create an ad hoc co%%ittee to handle it. &heir "orr$"ould "orsen. At 82 p.%., petitioner pulled 0ecretar$ An!ara into his s%all office atthe presidential residence and e4clai%ed :Ed, ser$oso na ito. u%alas na si An!elo1Re$es3 1Ed, this is serious. An!elo has defected.3:2An hour later or at 852 p.%., thepetitioner decided to call for a snap presidential election a"* #%r##* h :o)*

"o% ( a ca"*!*a%. Th $ro$o#a 9or a #"a$ c%!o" 9or $r#!*"% !" Ma&:hr h :o)* "o% ( a ca"*!*a% !# a" !"*!c!)' %ha% $%!%!o"r ha*!"%"** %o ;! )$ %h $r#!*"c& " a% %ha% %!'. At 522 p.%., #eneralRe$es oined the sea of E>0A de%onstrators de%andin! the resi!nation of thepetitioner and dra%aticall$ announced the A)P's "ithdra"al of support fro% thepetitioner and their pled!e of support to respondent Arro$o. &he seis%ic shift ofsupport left petitioner "ea* as a president. Accordin! to 0ecretar$ An!ara, he as*ed0enator Pi%entel to advise petitioner to consider the option of@*!;"!9!*

fallin! fast on the petitioner. At 52 p.%., 0enator Pi%entel repeated to thepetitioner the ur!enc$ of %a*in! a !raceful and di!nified e4it. 6e !ave the proposala s"eetener b$ sa$in! that petitioner "ould be allo"ed to !o abroad "ith enou!hfunds to support hi% and h is fa%il$.5S!;"!9!ca"%&, %h $%!%!o"r

&he 9!r#% ";o%!a%!o"for a peaceful and orderl$ transfer of po"er i%%ediatel$started at 882 a.%. of Januar$ 82, that fateful 0aturda$. &he ";o%!a%!o" :a#!'!%*to three 153 points 13 the transition period of five da$s after the petitioner'sresi!nationK 183 the !uarantee of the safet$ of the petitioner and his fa%il$, and 153the a!ree%ent to open the second envelope to vindicate the na%e of thepetitioner.=A;a!", : "o% %ha% %h r#!;"a%!o" o9 $%!%!o"r :a# "o% a*!#$)%* $o!"%. Th $%!%!o"r ca""o% 9!;" !;"ora"c o9 %h!# 9ac%. Accordin!to 0ecretar$ An!ara, at 852 a.%., he briefed the petitioner on the three points andthe follo"in! entr$ in the A";ara D!ar& #ho:# %h rac%!o" o9 %h$%!%!o"r, viz

:4 4 4

+ e4plain "hat happened durin! the first round of ne!otiations.&he Pr#!*"%i%%ediatel$ stresses that h =)#% :a"%#the five-da$period pro%ised b$ Re$es, as "ell as to open the second envelope to clearhis na%e.

9 %h "o$ !# o$"*, o" Mo"*a&, h #a, h :! a (&Mo"*a&.

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

8/51

&he President sa$s. @Pa;o* "a $a;o* "a a8o. A&o8o "a 'a#&a*o "a";'a#a8!%. Pa;o* "a a8o #a r* %a$, ()ra)crac&, !"%r!;a. a' r&%!r*. *o"% :a"% a"& 'or o9 %h!# !%# %oo $a!"9). ' %!r* o9 %hr* %a$, %h ()ra)crac&, %h !"%r!;).F

=)#% :a"% %o car '& "a', %h" :! ;o.@

A;a!", %h!# !# h!;h ;ra* !*"c %ha% %h $%!%!o"r ha# r#!;"*. &he

intent to resi!n is clear "hen he said :4 4 4 A&o8o "a%as$ado nan! %asa*it.::A&o8o "a: are :or*# o9 r#!;"a%!o".

&he #co"* ro)"* o9 ";o%!a%!o"resu%ed at =52 a.%. Accordin! to the An!ara>iar$, the follo"in! happened

:Opposition's deal

=52 a.%. Rene arrives "ith Bert Ro%ulo and 1Ms. Macapa!al'sspo*esperson3 Rene Corona. )or this round, + a% acco%panied b$ >ondonBa!atsin! and Macel.

Rene pulls out a docu%ent titled :Ne!otiatin! Points.: +t reads

'. &he President shall si!n a resi!nation docu%ent "ithin the da$, 82Januar$ 822, that "ill be effective on (ednesda$, 87 Januar$ 822, on"hich da$ the /ice President "ill assu%e the Presidenc$ of the Republic ofthe Philippines.

8. Be!innin! to da$, 82 Januar$ 822, the transition process for theassu%ption of the ne" ad%inistration shall co%%ence, and personsdesi!nated b$ the /ice President to various positions and offices of the!overn%ent shall start their orientation activities in coordination "ith theincu%bent officials concerned.

5. &he Ar%ed )orces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Policeshall function under the /ice President as national %ilitar$ and policeauthorit$ effective i%%ediatel$.

7. &he Ar%ed )orced of the Philippines, throu!h its Chief of 0taff, shall!uarantee the securit$ of the President and his fa%il$ as approved b$ thenational %ilitar$ and police authorit$ 1/ice President3.

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

9/51

ti%e "ere the %easures to be underta*en b$ the parties durin! and after thetransition period.

Accordin! to 0ecretar$ An!ara, the draft a!ree%ent, "hich "as pre%ised on theresi!nation of the petitioner "as further refined. +t "as then, si!ned b$ their side andhe "as read$ to fa4 it to #eneral Re$es and 0enator Pi%entel to a"ait the si!natureof the Gnited Opposition. 6o"ever, the si!nin! b$ the part$ of the respondent Arro$o"as aborted b$ her oath-ta*in!. &he An!ara diar$ narrates the fateful events, vizK2

:444

22 a.%. Bet"een #eneral Re$es and %$self, there is a fir% a!ree%enton the five points to effect a peaceful transition. + can hear the !eneralclearin! all these points "ith a !roup he is "ith. + hear voices in thebac*!round.

A!ree%ent.

&he a!ree%ent starts . &he President shall resi!n toda$, 82 Januar$ 822,"hich resi!nation shall be effective on 87 Januar$ 822, on "hich da$ the/ice President "ill assu%e the presidenc$ of the Republic of the Philippines.

4 4 4

&he rest of the a!ree%ent follo"s

8. &he transition process for the assu%ption of the ne" ad%inistration shallco%%ence on 82 Januar$ 822, "herein persons desi!nated b$ the /icePresident to various !overn%ent positions shall start orientation activities"ith incu%bent officials.

'5. &he Ar%ed )orces of the Philippines throu!h its Chief of 0taff, shall!uarantee the safet$ and securit$ of the President and his fa%iliesthrou!hout their natural lifeti%es as approved b$ the national %ilitar$ andpolice authorit$ /ice President.

'7. &he A)P and the Philippine National Police 1PNP3 shall function under the/ice President as national %ilitar$ and police authorities.

'

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

10/51

&he president is havin! his final %eal at the presidential Residence "ith thefe" friends and Cabinet %e%bers "ho have !athered.

B$ this ti%e, de%onstrators have alread$ bro*en do"n the first line ofdefense at Mendiola. Onl$ the P0# is there to protect the Palace, since thepolice and %ilitar$ have alread$ "ithdra"n their support for the President.

p.%. &he President's personal staff is rushin! to pac* as %an$ of the

Estrada fa%il$'s personal possessions as the$ can.

>urin! lunch, Ronnie Puno %entions that the president needs to release afinal state%ent before leavin! MalacaDan!.

&he state%ent reads At t"elve o'cloc* noon toda$, /ice President #loriaMacapa!al-Arro$o too* her oath as President of the Republic of thePhilippines. (hile alon! "ith %an$ other le!al %inds of our countr$, + havestron! and serious doubts about the le!alit$ and constitutionalit$ of herprocla%ation as President, + do not "ish to be a factor that "ill prevent therestoration of unit$ and order in our civil societ$.

+t is for this reason that + no" leave MalacaDan! Palace, the seat of thepresidenc$ of this countr$, for the sa*e of peace and in order to be!in thehealin! process of our nation. + leave the Palace of our people "ith !ratitudefor the opportunities !iven to %e for service to our people. + "ill not shir*fro% an$ future challen!es that %a$ co%e ahead in the sa%e service of ourcountr$.

+ call on all %$ supporters and follo"ers to oin %e in the pro%otion of aconstructive national spirit of reconciliation and solidarit$.

Ma$ the Al%i!ht$ bless our countr$ and our beloved people.

MABG6AFH:'

+t "as curtain ti%e for the petitioner.

+n su%, "e hold that the resi!nation of the petitioner cannot be doubted. +t "asconfir%ed b$ his leavin! MalacaDan!. +n the press release containin! his finalstate%ent, 13 he ac*no"led!ed the oath-ta*in! of the respondent as President ofthe Republic albeit "ith reservation about its le!alit$K 183 he e%phasi@ed he "asleavin! the Palace, the seat of the presidenc$, for the sa*e of peace and in order tobe!in the healin! process of our nation. 6e did not sa$ he "as leavin! the Palace dueto an$ *ind inabilit$ and that he "as !oin! to re-assu%e the presidenc$ as soon asthe disabilit$ disappears 153 he e4pressed his !ratitude to the people for theopportunit$ to serve the%. (ithout doubt, he "as referrin! to the past opportunit$!iven hi% to serve the people as President 173 he assured that he "ill not shir* fro%

an$ future challen!e that %a$ co%e ahead in the sa%e service of our countr$.Petitioner's reference is to a future challen!e after occup$in! the office of thepresident "hich he has !iven upK and 1

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

11/51

A readin! of the le!islative histor$ of RA No. 52 "ill hardl$ provide an$ co%fort tothe petitioner. RA No. 52 ori!inated for% 0enate Bill No. 85. &he ori!inal draft ofthe bill, "hen it "as sub%itted to the 0enate, did not contain a provision si%ilar tosection 8 of the la" as it no" stands. 6o"ever, in his sponsorship speech, 0enatorArturo &olentino, the author of the bill, :reserved to propose durin! the period ofa%end%ents the inclusion of a provision to the effect that no public official "ho isunder prosecution for an$ act of !raft or corruption, or is under ad%inistrativeinvesti!ation, shall be allo"ed to voluntaril$ resi!n or retire.:8>urin! the period ofa%end%ents, the follo"in! provision "as inserted as section

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

12/51

&hereafter, "hen the President trans%its to the President of the 0enate andto the 0pea*er of the 6ouse of Representatives his "ritten declaration thatno inabilit$ e4ists, he shall reassu%e the po"ers and duties of his office.Mean"hile, should a %aorit$ of all the Me%bers of the Cabinet trans%it"ithin five da$s to the President of the 0enate and to the 0pea*er of the6ouse of Representatives their "ritten declaration that the President isunable to dischar!e the po"ers and duties of his office, the Con!ress shalldecide the issue. )or that purpose, the Con!ress shall convene, if it is not insession, "ithin fort$-ei!ht hours, in accordance "ith its rules and "ithout

need of call.

+f the Con!ress, "ithin ten da$s after receipt of the last "ritten declaration,or, if not in session, "ithin t"elve da$s after it is re?uired to asse%ble,deter%ines b$ a t"o-thirds vote of both 6ouses, votin! separatel$, that thePresident is unable to dischar!e the po"ers and duties of his office, the/ice-President shall act as PresidentK other"ise, the President shall continuee4ercisin! the po"ers and duties of his office.:

&hat is the la". No", the operative facts

. Petitioner, on Januar$ 82, 822, sent the above letter clai%in!inabilit$ to the 0enate President and 0pea*er of the 6ouseK

8. Gna"are of the letter, respondent Arro$o too* her oath of office asPresident on Januar$ 82, 822 at about 852 p.%.K

5. >espite receipt of the letter, the 6ouse of Representatives passedon Januar$ 87, 822 6ouse Resolution No. =ENOR+A MACAPA#A9-ARROFO A0 PRE0+>EN& O) &6E REPGB9+C O) &6EP6+9+PP+NE0, EQ&EN>+N# +&0 CON#RA&G9A&+ON0 AN> EQPRE00+N# +&00GPPOR& )OR 6ER A>M+N+0&RA&+ON A0 A PAR&NER +N &6E A&&A+NMEN& O)

&6E NA&+ON'0 #OA90 GN>ER &6E CON0&+&G&+ON

(6EREA0, as a conse?uence of the people's loss of confidence on the abilit$

of for%er President Joseph Eercito Estrada to effectivel$ !overn, the Ar%ed)orces of the Philippines, the Philippine National Police and %aorit$ of hiscabinet had "ithdra"n support fro% hi%K

(6EREA0, upon authorit$ of an en bancresolution of the 0upre%e Court,/ice President #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o "as s"orn in as President of thePhilippines on 82 Januar$ 822 before Chief Justice 6ilario #. >avide, Jr.K

(6EREA0, i%%ediatel$ thereafter, %e%bers of the international co%%unit$had e4tended their reco!nition to 6er E4cellenc$, #loria Macapa!al-Arro$oas President of the Republic of the PhilippinesK

(6EREA0, 6er E4cellenc$, President #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o has espouseda polic$ of national healin! and reconciliation "ith ustice for the purpose ofnational unit$ and develop%entK

(6EREA0, it is a4io%atic that the obli!ations of the !overn%ent cannot beachieved if it is divided, thus b$ reason of the constitutional dut$ of the6ouse of Representatives as an institution and that of the individual%e%bers thereof of fealt$ to the supre%e "ill of the people, the 6ouse ofRepresentatives %ust ensure to the people a stable, continuin! !overn%entand therefore %ust re%ove all obstacles to the attain%ent thereofK

(6EREA0, it is a conco%itant dut$ of the 6ouse of Representatives to e4ertall efforts to unif$ the nation, to eli%inate fractious tension, to heal socialand political "ounds, and to be an instru%ent of national reconciliation andsolidarit$ as it is a direct representative of the various se!%ents of the"hole nationK

(6EREA0, "ithout surrendin! its independence, it is vital for the attain%entof all the fore!oin!, for the 6ouse of Representatives to e4tend its support

and collaboration to the ad%inistration of 6er E4cellenc$, President #loriaMacapa!al-Arro$o, and to be a constructive partner in nation-buildin!, thenational interest de%andin! no less No", therefore, be it

*eso#ved by the +ouse of *epresentatives, &o e4press its support to theassu%ption into office b$ /ice President #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o asPresident of the Republic of the Philippines, to e4tend its con!ratulationsand to e4press its support for her ad%inistration as a partner in theattain%ent of the Nation's !oals under the Constitution.

Adopted,

10!d.3 )E9+C+ANO BE9MON&E JR.0pea*er

&his Resolution "as adopted b$ the 6ouse of Representatives on Januar$ 87,822.

10!d.3 ROBER&O P. NAARENO0ecretar$ #eneral:

On )ebruar$ =, 822, the 6ouse of the Representatives passed Ho)# R#o)%!o"No. 17"hich states

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

13/51

:RE0O9G&+ON CON)+RM+N# PRE0+>EN& #9OR+A MACAPA#A9-ARROFO'0NOM+NA&+ON O) 0ENA&OR &EO)+0&O &. #G+N#ONA, JR. A0 /+CE PRE0+>EN&O) &6E REPGB9+C O) &6E P6+9+PP+NE0

(6EREA0, there is a vacanc$ in the Office of the /ice President due to theassu%ption to the Presidenc$ of /ice President #loria Macapa!al-Arro$oK

(6EREA0, pursuant to 0ection , Article /++ of the Constitution, the

President in the event of such vacanc$ shall no%inate a /ice President fro%a%on! the %e%bers of the 0enate and the 6ouse of Representatives "hoshall assu%e office upon confir%ation b$ a %aorit$ vote of all %e%bers ofboth 6ouses votin! separatel$K

(6EREA0, 6er E4cellenc$, President #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o hasno%inated 0enate Minorit$ 9eader &eofisto &. #uin!ona Jr., to the position of/ice President of the Republic of the PhilippinesK

(6EREA0, 0enator &eofisto &. #uin!ona Jr., is a public servant endo"ed"ith inte!rit$, co%petence and coura!eK "ho has served the )ilipino people"ith dedicated responsibilit$ and patriotis%K

(6EREA0, 0enator &eofisto &. #uin!ona, Jr. possesses sterlin! ?ualities oftrue states%anship, havin! served the !overn%ent in various capacities,

a%on! others, as >ele!ate to the Constitutional Convention, Chair%an ofthe Co%%ission on Audit, E4ecutive 0ecretar$, 0ecretar$ of Justice, 0enatorof the Philippines ?ualities "hich %erit his no%ination to the position of/ice President of the Republic No", therefore, be it

*eso#ved as it is hereby reso#ved by the +ouse of *epresentatives& &hat the6ouse of Representatives confir%s the no%ination of 0enator &eofisto &.#uin!ona, Jr. as the /ice President of the Republic of the Philippines.

Adopted,

10!d.3 )E9+C+ANO BE9MON&E JR.0pea*er

&his Resolution "as adopted b$ the 6ouse of Representatives on )ebruar$=, 822.

10!d.3 ROBER&O P. NAARENO0ecretar$ #eneral:

173 Also, despite receipt of petitioner's letter clai%in! inabilit$, so%e t"elve183 %e%bers of the 0enate si!ned the follo"in!

:RE0O9G&+ON

(6EREA0, the recent transition in !overn%ent offers the nation anopportunit$ for %eanin!ful chan!e and challen!eK

(6EREA0, to attain desired chan!es and overco%e a"eso%e challen!esthe nation needs unit$ of purpose and resolve cohesive resolute 1sic3 "illK

(6EREA0, the 0enate of the Philippines has been the foru% for vitalle!islative %easures in unit$ despite diversities in perspectivesK

(6ERE)ORE, "e reco!ni@e and e4press support to the ne" !overn%ent ofPresident #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o and resolve to dischar!e and overco%ethe nation's challen!es.:

On )ebruar$ =, the S"a%also passed S"a% R#o)%!o" No.222 "hich states

:RE0O9G&+ON CON)+RM+N# PRE0+>EN& #9OR+A MACAPA#A9 ARROFO'0NOM+NA&+ON O) 0EM. &EO)+0&O &. #G+N#ONA, JR. A0 /+CE PRE0+>EN& O)

&6E REPGB9+C O) &6E P6+9+PP+NE0

(6EREA0, there is vacanc$ in the Office of the /ice President due to theassu%ption to the Presidenc$ of /ice President #loria Macapa!al-Arro$oK

(6EREA0, pursuant to 0ection Article /++ of the Constitution, the Presidentin the event of such vacanc$ shall no%inate a /ice President fro% a%on!the %e%bers of the 0enate and the 6ouse of Representatives "ho shallassu%e office upon confir%ation b$ a %aorit$ vote of all %e%bers of both6ouses votin! separatel$K

(6EREA0, 6er E4cellenc$, President #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o hasno%inated 0enate Minorit$ 9eader &eofisto &. #uin!ona, Jr. to the position of/ice President of the Republic of the PhilippinesK

(6EREA0, 0en. &eofisto &. #uin!ona, Jr. is a public servant endo"ed "ith

inte!rit$, co%petence and coura!eK "ho has served the )ilipino people "ithdedicated responsibilit$ and patriotis%K

(6EREA0, 0en. &eofisto &. #uin!ona, Jr. possesses sterlin! ?ualities of truestate%anship, havin! served the !overn%ent in various capacities, a%on!others, as >ele!ate to the Constitutional Convention, Chair%an of theCo%%ission on Audit, E4ecutive 0ecretar$, 0ecretar$ of Justice, 0enator ofthe land - "hich ?ualities %erit his no%ination to the position of /icePresident of the Republic No", therefore, be it

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

14/51

*eso#ved& as it is hereby reso#ved&&hat the 0enate confir% the no%inationof 0en. &eofisto &. #uin!ona, Jr. as /ice President of the Republic of thePhilippines.

Adopted,

10!d.3 ALG+9+NO L. P+MEN&E9 JR.President of the 0enate

&his Resolution "as adopted b$ the 0enate on )ebruar$ =, 822.

10!d.3 9GAR>O B. BARBO0ecretar$ of the 0enate:

On the sa%e date, )ebruar$ =, the S"a%li*e"ise passed S"a%R#o)%!o" No. 2"hich states

:RE0O9G&+ON RECO#N++N# &6A& &6E +MPEAC6MEN& COGR& +0 ,-/0-(,,)/)(

*eso#ved& as it is hereby reso#ved.&hat the 0enate reco!ni@e that the+%peach%ent Court is functus officioand has been ter%inated.

*eso#ved& further&&hat the Journals of the +%peach%ent Court on Monda$,Januar$

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

15/51

A##)'!"; h "=o !'')"!%&, %h 0 1or absolute i%%unit$ defense s$ndro%e3.:

&he Opposition in the then Batasan Pa%bansa sou!ht the repeal of this Marcosianconcept of e4ecutive i%%unit$ in the =5 Constitution. &he %ove "as led b$ the%

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

16/51

Me%ber of Parlia%ent, no" 0ecretar$ of )inance, Alberto Ro%ulo, "ho ar!ued thatthe after incu%benc$ i%%unit$ !ranted to President Marcos violated the principlethat a public office is a public trust. 6e denounced the i%%unit$ as a return to theanachronis% :the *in! can do no "ron!.:2=&he effort failed.

&he =5 Constitution ceased to e4ist "hen President Marcos "as ousted fro% officeb$ the People Po"er revolution in . (hen the = Constitution "as crafted, itsfra%ers did not reenact the e4ecutive i%%unit$ provision of the =5 Constitution.

&he follo"in! e4planation "as !iven b$ dele!ate J. Bernas vis2

:Mr. 0uare@. &han* $ou.

&he last ?uestion is "ith reference to the Co%%ittee's o%ittin! in the draftproposal the i%%unit$ provision for the President. + a!ree "ithCo%%issioner Nolledo that the Co%%ittee did ver$ "ell in stri*in! outsecond sentence, at the ver$ least, of the ori!inal provision on i%%unit$fro% suit under the =5 Constitution. But "ould the Co%%ittee %e%bersnot a!ree to a restoration of at least the first sentence that the Presidentshall be i%%une fro% suit durin! his tenure, considerin! that if "e do notprovide hi% that *ind of an i%%unit$, he %i!ht be spendin! all his ti%efacin! liti!ation's, as the President-in-e4ile in 6a"aii is no" facin! liti!ation'sal%ost dail$

)r. Bernas. &he reason for the o%ission is that "e consider it understood inpresent urisprudence that durin! his tenure he is i%%une fro% suit.

Mr. 0uare@. 0o there is no need to e4press it here.

)r. Bernas. &here is no need. +t "as that "a$ before. &he onl$ innovation%ade b$ the =5 Constitution "as to %a*e that e4plicit and to add otherthin!s.

Mr. 0uare@. On that understandin!, + "ill not press for an$ %ore ?uer$,Mada% President.

+ thin* the Co%%issioner for the clarifications.:

(e shall no" rule on the contentions of petitioner in the li!ht of this histor$. (ereect his ar!u%ent that he cannot be prosecuted for the reason that he %ust first beconvicted in the i%peach%ent proceedin!s. &he i%peach%ent trial of petitionerEstrada "as aborted b$ the "al*out of the prosecutors and b$ the events that led tohis loss of the presidenc$. +ndeed, on )ebruar$ =, 822, the 0enate passed 0enateResolution No. 5 :Reco!ni@in! that the +%peach%ent Court is )unctusOfficio.:20ince, the +%peach%ent Court is no" functus officio, it is untenable forpetitioner to de%and that he should first be i%peached and then convicted before hecan be prosecuted. &he plea if !ranted, "ould put a perpetual bar a!ainst hisprosecution. 0uch a sub%ission has nothin! to co%%end itself for it "ill place hi% in

a better situation than a non-sittin! President "ho has not been subected toi%peach%ent proceedin!s and $et can be the obect of a cri%inal prosecution. &o besure, the debates in the Constitutional Co%%ission %a*e it clear that "heni%peach%ent proceedin!s have beco%e %oot due to the resi!nation of thePresident, the proper cri%inal and civil cases %a$ alread$ be filed a!ainst hi%, vi@2

:444

Mr. A?uino. On another point, if an i%peach%ent proceedin! has been fileda!ainst the President, for e4a%ple, and the President resi!ns beforeud!e%ent of conviction has been rendered b$ the i%peach%ent court or b$the bod$, ho" does it affect the i%peach%ent proceedin! (ill it benecessaril$ dropped

Mr. Ro%ulo. +f "e decide the purpose of i%peach%ent to re%ove one fro%office, then his resi!nation "ould render the case %oot and acade%ic.6o"ever, as the provision sa$s, the cri%inal and civil aspects of it %a$continue in the ordinar$ courts.:

&his is in accord "ith our rulin! +n Re 0aturnino Ber%ude@that 'incu%bentPresidents are i%%une fro% suit or fro% bein! brou!ht to court durin! the period oftheir incu%benc$ and tenure: but not be$ond. Considerin! the peculiar circu%stancethat the i%peach%ent process a!ainst the petitioner has been aborted and

thereafter he lost the presidenc$, petitioner Estrada cannot de%and as a conditionsine ?ua non to his cri%inal prosecution before the O%buds%an that he be convictedin the i%peach%ent proceedin!s. 6is reliance on the case of 9ecaro@ vs.0andi!anba$an 8and related cases5are inapropos for the$ have a different factual%ilieu.

(e no" co%e to the scope of i%%unit$ that can be clai%ed b$ petitioner as a non-sittin! President. &he cases filed a!ainst petitioner Estrada are cri%inal in character.

&he$ involve plunder, briber$ and !raft and corruption. B$ no stretch of thei%a!ination can these cri%es, especiall$ plunder "hich carries the death penalt$, becovered b$ the alle!ed %antle of i%%unit$ of a non-sittin! president. Petitionercannot cite an$ decision of this Court licensin! the President to co%%it cri%inal actsand "rappin! hi% "ith post-tenure i%%unit$ fro% liabilit$. +t "ill be ano%alous tohold that i%%unit$ is an inoculation fro% liabilit$ for unla"ful acts and conditions.

&he rule is that unla"ful acts of public officials are not acts of the 0tate and theofficer "ho acts ille!all$ is not actin! as such but stands in the sa%e footin! as an$trespasser.7

+ndeed, critical readin! of current literature on e4ecutive i%%unit$ "ill reveal audicial disinclination to e4pand the privile!e especiall$ "hen it i%pedes the searchfor truth or i%pairs the vindication of a ri!ht. +n the =7 case of G0 v. Ni4on,

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

17/51

>e%ocratic National 6ead?uarters in (ashin!ton's (ater!ate 6otel durin! the =8presidential ca%pai!n. President Ni4on hi%self "as na%ed an unindicted co-conspirator. President Ni4on %oved to ?uash the subpoena on the !round, a%on!others, that the President "as not subect to udicial process and that he should firstbe i%peached and re%oved fro% office before he could be %ade a%enable to

udicial proceedin!s. &he clai% "as reected b$ the G0 0upre%e Court. +t concludedthat :"hen the !round for assertin! privile!e as to subpoenaed %aterials sou!ht foruse in a cri%inal trial is based onl$ on the !enerali@ed interest in confidentialit$, itcannot prevail over the funda%ental de%ands of due process of la" in the fairad%inistration of cri%inal ustice.: +n the 8 case of Ni4on v. )it@!erald,the G00upre%e Court further held that the i%%unit$ of the president fro% civil da%a!escovers onl$ :official acts.: Recentl$, the G0 0upre%e Court had the occasion toreiterate this doctrine in the case of Clinton v. Jones="here it held that the G0President's i%%unit$ fro% suits for %one$ da%a!es arisin! out of their official acts isinapplicable to unofficial conduct.

&here are %ore reasons not to be s$%pathetic to appeals to stretch the scope ofe4ecutive i%%unit$ in our urisdiction. One of the !reat the%es of the =Constitution is that a public office is a public trust.+t declared as a state polic$ that:the 0tate shall %aintain honest$ and inte!rit$ in the public service and ta*e positiveand effective %easures a!ainst !raft and corruptio.:it ordained that :publicofficers and e%plo$ees %ust at all ti%es be accountable to the people, serve the%"ith ut%ost responsibilit$, inte!rit$, lo$alt$, and efficienc$ act "ith patriotis% and

ustice, and lead %odest lives.:82+t set the rule that 'the ri!ht of the 0tate to recoverproperties unla"full$ ac?uired b$ public officials or e%plo$ees, fro% the% or fro%

their no%inees or transferees, shall not be barred b$ prescription, latches orestoppel.:8+t %aintained the 0andi!anba$an as an anti-!raft court.88+t created theoffice of the O%buds%an and endo"ed it "ith enor%ous po"ers, a%on! "hich is to:investi!ate on its o"n, or on co%plaint b$ an$ person, an$ act or o%ission of an$public official, e%plo$ee, office or a!enc$, "hen such act or o%ission appears to beille!al, unust i%proper or inefficient.:85&he Office of the O%buds%an "as also!iven fiscal autono%$.87&hese constitutional policies "ill be devalued if "e sustainpetitioner's clai% that a non-sittin! president eno$s i%%unit$ fro% suit for cri%inalacts co%%itted durin! his incu%benc$.

3h%hr or "o% %h $ro#c)%!o" o9 $%!%!o"r

E#%ra*a #ho)* ( "=o!"* *) %o $r=)*!c!a $)(!c!%&

Petitioner also contends that the respondent O%buds%an should be stopped fro%conductin! the investi!ation of the cases filed a!ainst hi% due to the barra!e ofpreudicial publicit$ on his !uilt. 6e sub%its that the respondent O%buds%an hasdeveloped bias and is all set file the cri%inal cases violation of his ri!ht to dueprocess.

&here are t"o 183 principal le!al and philosophical schools of thou!ht on ho" to deal"ith the rain of unrestrained publicit$ durin! the investi!ation and trial of hi!h profilecases.8

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

18/51

there %ust be alle!ation and proof that the ud!es have been undul$influenced, not si%pl$ that the$ %i!ht be, b$ the barra!e of publicit$. +n thecase at a bar, the records do not sho" that the trial ud!e developed actualbias a!ainst appellants as a conse?uence of the e4tensive %edia covera!eof the pre-trial and trial of his case. &he totalit$ of circu%stances of the casedoes not prove that the trial ud!e ac?uired a fi4ed opinion as a result ofpreudicial publicit$, "hich is incapable of chan!e even b$ evidencepresented durin! the trial. Appellant has the burden to prove this actual biasand he has not dischar!ed the burden.'

(e e4pounded further on this doctrine in the subse?uent case of (ebb vs. 6on. Raulde 9eon, etc.52and its co%panion cases, vi@

:A!ain petitioners raise the effect of preudicial publicit$ on their ri!ht todue process "hile under!oin! preli%inar$ investi!ation. (e find noprocedural i%pedi%ent to its earl$ invocation considerin! the substantialris* to their libert$ "hile under!oin! a preli%inar$ investi!ation.

444

&he de%ocratic settin!s, %edia covera!e of trials of sensational casescannot be avoided and oftenti%es, its e4cessiveness has been a!!ravatedb$ *inetic develop%ents in the teleco%%unications industr$. )or sure, fe"

cases can %atch the hi!h volu%e and hi!h velocit$ of publicit$ thatattended the preli%inar$ investi!ation of the case at bar. Our dail$ diet offacts and fiction about the case continues unabated even toda$.Co%%entators still bo%bard the public "ith vie"s not too %an$ of "hichare sober and subli%e. +ndeed, even the principal actors in the case theNB+, the respondents, their la"$ers and their s$%pathi@ers haveparticipated in this %edia blit@. &he possibilit$ of %edia abuses and theirthreat to a fair trial not"ithstandin!, cri%inal trials cannot be co%pletel$closed to the press and public. +n the se%inal case of Rich%ondNe"spapers, +nc. v. /ir!inia, it "as

444

a. &he historical evidence of the evolution of the cri%inal trial inAn!lo-A%erican ustice de%onstrates conclusivel$ that at the ti%e

this Nation's or!anic la"s "ere adopted, cri%inal trials both hereand in En!land had lon! been presu%ptivel$ open, thus !ivin!assurance that the proceedin!s "ere conducted fairl$ to allconcerned and discoura!in! perur$, the %isconduct ofparticipants, or decisions based on secret bias or partialit$. +naddition, the si!nificant co%%unit$ therapeutic value of publictrials "as reco!ni@ed "hen a shoc*in! cri%e occurs a co%%unit$reaction of outra!e and public protest often follo"s, and thereafterthe open processes of ustice serve an i%portant proph$lacticpurpose, providin! an outlet for co%%unit$ concern, hostilit$ and

e%otion. &o "or* effectivel$, it is i%portant that societ$'s cri%inalprocess satisf$ the appearance of ustice,' Offutt v. Gnited 0tates,57 G0 , 7, 9 E> , =< 0 Ct , "hich can best be providedb$ allo"in! people to observe such process. )ro% this unbro*en,uncontradicted histor$, supported b$ reasons as valid toda$ as incenturies past, it %ust be concluded that a presu%ption ofopenness inheres in the ver$ nature of a cri%inal trial under thisNation's s$ste% of ustice, Cf., e,!., 9evine v. Gnited 0tates, 58 G02, 7 9 Ed 8d , 2 0 Ct 25.

b. &he freedo%s of speech. Press and asse%bl$, e4pressl$!uaranteed b$ the )irst A%end%ent, share a co%%on corepurpose of assurin! freedo% of co%%unication on %atters relatin!to the functionin! of !overn%ent. +n !uaranteein! freedo% such asthose of speech and press, the )irst A%end%ent can be read asprotectin! the ri!ht of ever$one to attend trials so as !ive %eanin!to those e4plicit !uaranteesK the )irst A%end%ent ri!ht to receiveinfor%ation and ideas %eans, in the conte4t of trials, that the!uarantees of speech and press, standin! alone, prohibit!overn%ent fro% su%%aril$ closin! courtroo% doors "hich hadlon! been open to the public at the ti%e the )irst A%end%ent "asadopted. Moreover, the ri!ht of asse%bl$ is also relevant, havin!been re!arded not onl$ as an independent ri!ht but also as acatal$st to au!%ent the free e4ercise of the other )irst A%end%entri!hts "ith "hich the drafts%en deliberatel$ lin*ed it. A trialcourtroo% is a public place "here the people !enerall$ and

representatives of the %edia have a ri!ht to be present, and "heretheir presence historicall$ has been thou!ht to enhance theinte!rit$ and ?ualit$ of "hat ta*es place.

c. Even thou!h the Constitution contains no provision "hich be itster%s !uarantees to the public the ri!ht to attend cri%inal trials,various funda%ental ri!hts, not e4pressl$ !uaranteed, have beenreco!ni@ed as indispensable to the eno$%ent of enu%eratedri!hts. &he ri!ht to attend cri%inal trial is i%plicit in the !uaranteesof the )irst A%end%ent "ithout the freedo% to attend such trials,"hich people have e4ercised for centuries, i%portant aspects offreedo% of speech and of the press be eviscerated.

Be that as it %a$, "e reco!ni@e that pervasive and preudicial publicit$under certain circu%stances can deprive an accused of his due process ri!htto fair trial. &hus, in 2arte#ino& et a#. vs. 3#ejandro& et a#., "e held that to"arrant a findin! of preudicial publicit$ there %ust be allegation and

proofthat the ud!es have been undul$ influenced, not si%pl$ that the$%i!ht be, b$ the barra!e of publicit$. +n the case at bar, "e find nothin! inthe records that "ill prove that the tone and content of the publicit$ thatattended the investi!ation of petitioners fatall$ infected the fairness andi%partialit$ of the >OJ Panel. Petitioners cannot ust rel$ on the subli%inaleffects of publicit$ on the sense of fairness of the >OJ Panel, for these arebasicall$ unbe*no"n and be$ond *no"in!. &o be sure, the >OJ Panel isco%posed of an Assistant Chief 0tate Prosecutor and 0enior 0tateProsecutors. &heir lon! e4perience in cri%inal investi!ation is a factor toconsider in deter%inin! "hether the$ can easil$ be blinded b$ the *lie!

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

19/51

li!hts of publicit$. +ndeed, their 8-pa!e Resolution carries no indubitableindicia of bias for it does not appear that the$ considered an$ e4tra-recordevidence e4cept evidence properl$ adduced b$ the parties. &he len!th ofti%e the investi!ation "as conducted despite its su%%ar$ nature and the!enerosit$ "ith "hich the$ acco%%odated the discover$ %otions ofpetitioners spea* "ell of their fairness. At no instance, "e note, didpetitioners see* the dis?ualification of an$ %e%ber of the >OJ Panel on the!round of bias resultin! fro% their bo%bard%ent of preudicial publicit$.:1e%phasis supplied3

Appl$in! the above rulin!, "e hold that %hr !# "o% "o);h !*"c %o :arra"%%h!# Co)r% %o "=o!" %h $r!'!"ar& !"#%!;a%!o" o9 %h $%!%!o"r (& %hr#$o"*"% O'()*#'a". Petitioner needs to offer %ore than hostile headlines todischar!e his burden of proof.56e needs to sho" %ore "ei!ht$ social scienceevidence to successfull$ prove the i%paired capacit$ of a ud!e to render a bias-freedecision. (ell to note, the cases a!ainst the petitioner are #%!)"*r;o!"; preli%inar$ investi!ation b$ a special panel of prosecutors in the officeof the respondent O%buds%an. No alle!ation "hatsoever has been %ade b$ thepetitioner that the %inds of the %e%bers of this special panel have alread$ beeninfected b$ bias because of the pervasive preudicial publicit$ a!ainst hi%. +ndeed,the special panel has $et to co%e out "ith its findin!s and the Court cannot second!uess "hether its reco%%endation "ill be unfavorable to the petitioner.1wphi1.nt

&he records sho" that petitioner has instead char!ed respondent O%buds%an

hi%self "ith bias. &o ?uote petitioner's sub%ission, the respondent O%buds%an :hasbeen influenced b$ the barra!e of slanted ne"s reports, and he has buc*led to thethreats and pressures directed at hi% b$ the %obs.:58 Ne"s reports have also been?uoted to establish that the respondent O%buds%an has alread$ preud!ed thecases of the petitioner55and it is postulated that the prosecutors investi!atin! thepetitioner "ill be influenced b$ this bias of their superior.

A!ain, "e hold that the !*"cproffered b$ the petitioner is !"#)(#%a"%!a.&heaccurac$ of the ne"s reports referred to b$ the petitioner cannot be the subect of

udicial notice b$ this Court especiall$ in li!ht of the denials of the respondentO%buds%an as to his alle!ed preudice and the presu%ption of !ood faith andre!ularit$ in the perfor%ance of official dut$ to "hich he is entitled. Nor ca" :a*o$% %h %hor& o9 *r!a%! $r=)*!c o9 $%!%!o"r, !.., %ha% %h$r=)*!c o9 r#$o"*"% O'()*#'a" 9o:# %o h!# #)(or*!"a%# . +n truth, ourRevised Rules of Cri%inal Procedure, !ive investi!ation prosecutors theindependence to %a*e their o"n findin!s and reco%%endations albeit the$ are

revie"able b$ their superiors.57&he$ can be reversed but the$ can not be co%pelledcases "hich the$ believe deserve dis%issal. +n other "ords, investi!atin! prosecutorsshould not be treated li*e unthin*in! slot %achines. Moreover, if the respondentO%buds%an resolves to file the cases a!ainst the petitioner and the latter believesthat the findin!s of probable cause a!ainst hi% is the result of bias, he still has there%ed$ of assailin! it before the proper court.

.

E$!o;)

A "ord of caution to the :hootin! thron!.: &he cases a!ainst the petitioner "ill no"ac?uire a different di%ension and then %ove to a ne" sta!e - - - the Office of theO%buds%an. Predictabl$, the call fro% the %aorit$ for instant ustice "ill hit a hi!herdecibel "hile the !nashin! of teeth of the %inorit$ "ill be %ore threatenin!. +t is thesacred dut$ of the respondent O%buds%an to balance the ri!ht of the 0tate toprosecute the !uilt$ and the ri!ht of an accused to a fair investi!ation and trial "hichhas been cate!ori@ed as the :%ost funda%ental of all freedo%s.:5

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

20/51

JOHN R. OSMEIA, petitioner,vs.THE COMMSSON ON EECTONS, THE MUNCPAT O MAAT, HON.JEJOMAR /NA, MUNCPA TREASURER, AND SANGGUNANG /AAN OMAAT, respondents.

PUNO,J.:

At bench are t"o 183 petitions assailin! certain provisions of Republic Act No. =

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

21/51

#iven the facts of the cases at bench, "e cannot perceive ho" this evil can bebrou!ht about b$ the description %ade in section 8 of R.A. No. =

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

22/51

shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuit$ of hisservice for the full ter% for "hich he "as elected.

444 444 444

0ec. =. &he Me%bers of the 6ouse of Representatives shall beelected for a ter% of three $ears "hich shall be!in, unlessother"ise provided b$ la", at noon on the thirtieth da$ of June ne4tfollo"in! their election.

No Me%ber of the 6ouse of Representatives shall serve for %orethan three consecutive ter%s. /oluntar$ renunciation of the officefor an$ len!th of ti%e shall not be considered as an interruption inthe continuit$ of his service for the full ter% for "hich he "aselected.

Petitioners stress that under these provisions, e#ective #oca# officia#s& inc#uding2embers of the +ouse of *epresentative& have a term of three 163years and are

prohibited from serving for more than three 163consecutive terms. &he$ ar!ue thatb$ providin! that the ne" cit$ shall ac?uire a new corporate e4istence, section

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

23/51

provides that a cit$ "hose population has increased to more than two hundred fiftythousand "89:&:::% shall be entitled to at #east one congressiona# representative. 14

)inall$, "e do not find %erit in petitioners' contention that the creation of anadditional le!islative district in Ma*ati should have been e4pressl$ stated in the titleof the bill. +n the sa%e case of 0obias v.3ba#os& op cit., "e reiterated the polic$ ofthe Court favorin! a liberal construction of the :one tit#e;one subject: rule so as notto i%pede le!islation. &o be sure, "ith Constitution does not co%%and that the titleof a la" should e4actl$ %irror, full$ inde4, or co%pletel$ catalo!ue all its details.

6ence, "e ruled that :it should be sufficient co%pliance if the title e4presses the!eneral subect and all the provisions are !er%ane to such !eneral subect.:

(6ERE)ORE, the petitions are hereb$ >+0M+00E> for lac* of %erit No costs.

0O OR>ERE>.

arvasa& /.itug& ?apunan& 2endoza and ,rancisco&

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

24/51

0trictl$ spea*in!, the increase in the nu%ber of le!islative seats for the Cit$ of Ma*atiprovided for in R.A. No. =) of the /onstitution. &he nu%ber ofMe%bers apportioned to the province out of "hich such ne"province "as created, or "here the cit$, "hose population has soincreased, is !eo!raphicall$ located shall be correspondin!l$adusted b$ the Co%%ission on Elections but such adust%ent shallnot be %ade "ithin one hundred and t"ent$ da$s before theelection. 1E%phases supplied3

S$ara% O$!"!o"#

DADE, JR.,J., concurrin!

+ concur in the "ell "ritten opinion of Mr. Justice Re$nato 0. Puno. + "ish, ho"ever, toadd a fe" observations.

+.

0ection 2, Article Q of the Constitution provides that :nSo province, cit$,%unicipalit$ or baran!a$ %a$ be created, divided, %er!ed, abolished, or itsboundar$ substantiall$ altered, e4cept in accordance "ith the criteria established inthe local !overn%ent code and subect to the approval b$ a %aorit$ of the votescast in a plebiscite in the political units directl$ affected.: &hese criteria are no" setforth in 0ection = of the 9ocal #overn%ent Code of 1R.A. No. =23. One ofthese is that the territorial urisdiction of the local !overn%ent unit to be created orconverted should be properl$ identified b$ %etes and bounds "ith technicaldescriptions.

&he o%ission of R.A. No. =

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

25/51

&he constitution classifies cities as either high#y urbanized or co%ponent. 0ection 8of Article Q thereof provides

0ec. 8. Cities that are hi!hl$ urbani@ed, as deter%ined b$ la", andco%ponent cities "hose charters prohibit their voters fro% votin!for provincial elective officials, shall be independent of theprovince. &he voters of co%ponent cities "ithin a province, "hosecharters contain no such prohibition, shall not be deprived of theirri!ht to vote for elective provincial officials.

And 0ection 7O9) 0. >A/+>, 9ORENO &ATA>A +++,RONA9> 99AMA0, 6. 6ARRF 9. ROLGE, JR., JOE9RG+ BG&GFAN, RO#ER R. RAFE9, #ARF 0.MA99AR+, ROME9 RE#A9A>O BA#ARE0,C6R+0&OP6ER ).C. BO9A0&+#,

Petitioners,

- versus -

#9OR+A MACAPA#A9-ARROFO, A0PRE0+>EN& AN> COMMAN>ER-+N-C6+E),EQECG&+/E 0ECRE&ARF E>GAR>O ERM+&A, 6ON.

A/E9+NO CRG ++, 0ECRE&ARF O) NA&+ONA9>E)EN0E, #ENERA9 #ENERO0O 0EN#A, C6+E)O) 0&A)), ARME> )ORCE0 O) &6E P6+9+PP+NE0,>+REC&OR #ENERA9 AR&GRO 9OM+BAO, C6+E),P6+9+PP+NE NA&+ONA9 PO9+CE,

Respondents.4-------------------------------------------------4N+TE CAC6O-O9+/ARE0 AN> &R+BGNEPGB9+06+N# CO., +NC.,

Petitioners,

#.R. No. =5Present

PAN#AN+BAN, /.O/A9-#G&+ERRE, CARP+O, AG0&R+A-MAR&+NE, CORONA, CARP+O MORA9E0,

CA99EJO, 0R., ACGNA, &+N#A, C6+CO-NAAR+O, #ARC+A, and /E9A0CO,

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

26/51

- versus -

6ONORAB9E 0ECRE&ARF E>GAR>O ERM+&A AN>6ONORAB9E >+REC&OR #ENERA9 AR&GRO C.9OM+BAO,

Respondents.4-------------------------------------------------4)RANC+0 JO0EP6 #. E0CG>ERO, JO0EP6 A.0AN&+A#O, &EO>ORO A. CA0+NO, A#AP+&O A.ALG+NO, MAR+O J. A#GJA, 0A&GR C. OCAMPO,MGJ+/ 0. 6A&AMAN, JGAN E>#AR>O AN#ARA,

&EO)+0&O >9. #G+N#ONA +++, EMMANGE9 JO0E9 J./+99ANGE/A, 9+A 9. MAA, +MEE R. MARCO0,RENA&O B. MA#&GBO, JG0&+N MARC 0B.C6+PECO, RO+9O #O9E, >AR9ENE AN&ON+NO-CG0&O>+O, 9ORE&&A ANN P. RO0A9E0, JO0E9 #./+RA>OR, RA)AE9 /. MAR+ANO, #+9BER& C.REMG99A, )9ORENC+O #. NOE9, ANA &6ERE0+A6ON&+/ERO0-BARALGE9, +ME9>A C. N+CO9A0,MAR/+C M./.). 9EONEN, NER+ JA/+ERCO9MENARE0, MO/EMEN& O) CONCERNE>C+&+EN0 )OR C+/+9 9+BER&+E0 REPRE0EN&E> BFAMA>O #A& +NC+ON#,

Petitioners,

- versus -

E>GAR>O R. ERM+&A, EQECG&+/E 0ECRE&ARF,A/E9+NO J. CRG, JR., 0ECRE&ARF, >N>RONA9>O /. PGNO, 0ECRE&ARF, >+9#,#ENERO0O 0EN#A, A)P C6+E) O) 0&A)),AR&GRO 9OM+BAO, C6+E) PNP,

Respondents.4-------------------------------------------------4+9G0AN# MAFO GNO, REPRE0EN&E> BF +&0C6A+RPER0ON E9MER C. 9ABO# AN> 0ECRE&ARF#ENERA9 JOE9 MA#9GN0O>, NA&+ONA9

)E>ERA&+ON O) 9ABOR GN+ON0 +9G0AN#MAFO GNO 1NA)9G-MG3, REPRE0EN&E> BF +&0NA&+ONA9 PRE0+>EN&, JO0E9+&O /. G0&ARE,AN&ON+O C. PA0CGA9, 0A9/A>OR &. CARRANA,EM+9+A P. >APG9AN#, MAR&+N CG0&O>+O, JR.,AN> ROLGE M. &AN,

Petitioners,

#.R. No. =72

#.R. No. =7EN& #9OR+AMACAPA#A9-ARROFO, &6E 6ONORAB9EEQECG&+/E 0ECRE&ARF, E>GAR>O ERM+&A, &6EC6+E) O) 0&A)), ARME> )ORCE0 O) &6EP6+9+PP+NE0, #ENERO0O 0EN#A, AN> &6E PNP>+REC&OR #ENERA9, AR&GRO 9OM+BAO,

Respondents.4-------------------------------------------------4A9&ERNA&+/E 9A( #ROGP0, +NC. 1A9#3,

Petitioner,- versus -

EQECG&+/E 0ECRE&ARF E>GAR>O R. ERM+&A, 9&.#EN. #ENERO0O 0EN#A, AN> >+REC&OR#ENERA9 AR&GRO 9OM+BAO,

Respondents.4-------------------------------------------------4

JO0E AN0E9MO +. CA>+, )E9+C+ANO M. BAG&+0&A,ROMG9O R. R+/ERA, JO0E AMOR M. AMORA>O,A9+C+A A. R+0O0-/+>A9, )E9+MON C. ABE9+&A +++,MANGE9 P. 9E#A0P+, J.B. JO/F C. BERNABE,BERNAR> 9. >A#CG&A, RO#E9+O /. #ARC+A AN>+N&E#RA&E> BAR O) &6E P6+9+PP+NE0 1+BP3,

Petitioners,

- versus -

6ON. EQECG&+/E 0ECRE&ARF E>GAR>O ERM+&A,#ENERA9 #ENERO0O 0EN#A, +N 6+0 CAPAC+&FA0 A)P C6+E) O) 0&A)), AN> >+REC&OR#ENERA9 AR&GRO 9OM+BAO, +N 6+0 CAPAC+&F A0PNP C6+E), Respondents.

4-------------------------------------------------49OREN B. 9E#AR>A, Petitioner,

- versus -

#9OR+A MACAPA#A9-ARROFO, +N 6ER CAPAC+&FA0 PRE0+>EN& AN> COMMAN>ER-+N-C6+E)K

#.R. No. =75

#.R. No. =722

#.R. No. =7

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

27/51

AR&GRO 9OM+BAO, +N 6+0 CAPAC+&F A0>+REC&OR-#ENERA9 O) &6E P6+9+PP+NENA&+ONA9 PO9+CE 1PNP3K #ENERO0O 0EN#A, +N6+0 CAPAC+&F A0 C6+E) O) 0&A)) O) &6E ARME>)ORCE0 O) &6E P6+9+PP+NE0 1A)P3K AN>E>GAR>O ERM+&A, +N 6+0 CAPAC+&F A0EQECG&+/E 0ECRE&ARF,

Respondents.

#.R. No. =787

4---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------EC+0+ON

0AN>O/A9-#G&+ERRE,

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

28/51

%o "9orc o(*!"c %o a %h a:# a"* %o a *cr#,or*r# a"* r;)a%!o"# $ro');a%* (& ' $r#o"a& or)$o" '& *!rc%!o"K and a# $ro!** !" Sc%!o" 17, Ar%!c 12o9 %h Co"#%!%)%!o" *o hr(& *car a S%a% o9 Na%!o"aE'r;"c&.

0he cited the follo"in! facts as bases

3HEREAS, over these past %onths, ele%ents inthe $o!%!ca o$$o#!%!o" ha co"#$!r* :!%h a)%hor!%ar!a"#o9 %h

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

29/51

+ hereb$ direct the Chief of 0taff of the A)P and the Chief of

the PNP, as "ell as the officers and %en of the A)P and PNP, %o!''*!a%& carr& o)% %h "c##ar& a"* a$$ro$r!a%ac%!o"# a"* 'a#)r# %o #)$$r## a"* $r"% ac%# o9%rror!#' a"* a:## !o"c.

On March 5, 822, e4actl$ one "ee* after the declaration of a state of

national e%er!enc$ and after all these petitions had been filed, the President lifted

PP 2=. 0he issued Procla%ation No. 28 "hich reads

3HEREAS, pursuant to 0ection , Article /++ and0ection =, Article Q++ of the Constitution, Procla%ation No. 2=dated )ebruar$ 87, 822, "as issued declarin! a state of nationale%er!enc$K

3HEREAS, b$ virtue of #eneral Order No.< and No.dated )ebruar$ 87, 822, "hich "ere issued on the basis ofProcla%ation No. 2=, the Ar%ed )orces of the Philippines 1A)P3and the Philippine National Police 1PNP3, "ere directed to%aintain la" and order throu!hout the Philippines, prevent and

suppress all for% of la"less violence as "ell as an$ act ofrebellion and to underta*e such action as %a$ be necessar$K

3HEREAS, the A)P and PNP have effectivel$ prevented,suppressed and ?uelled the acts la"less violence and rebellionK

NO3, THEREORE, , GORA MACAPAGA-ARROO,President of the Republic of the Philippines, b$ virtueof the po"ers vested in %e b$ la", hereb$ *car %ha% %h#%a% o9 "a%!o"a 'r;"c& ha# ca#* %o

+n their presentation of the factual bases of PP 2= and #.O. No. urin! the oral ar!u%ents held on March =, 822, the 0olicitor #eneralspecified the facts leadin! to the issuance of PP 2= and #.O. No.

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

30/51

W0he /ommunist !arty and revo#utionary movement and the entire peop#e #ookforward to the possibi#ity in the coming year of accomp#ishing its immediate task ofbringing down the 3rroyo regimeE of rendering it to weaken and unab#e to ru#e that itwi## not take much #onger to end it.XS

On the other hand, Cesar Renerio, spo*es%an for the National >e%ocratic)ront 1N>)3 at North Central Mindanao, publicl$ announced W3nti;3rroyo groupswithin the mi#itary and po#ice are growing rapid#y& hastened by the economicdifficu#ties suffered by the fami#ies of 3,! officers and en#isted personne# whoundertake counter;insurgency operations in the fie#d.X 6e clai%ed that "ith theforces of the national de%ocratic %ove%ent, the anti-Arro$o conservative political

parties, coalitions, plus the !roups that have been reinforcin! since June 8220A. &hat sa%e evenin!, hundreds of riot police%en bro*e upan E>0A celebration rall$ held alon! A$ala Avenue and Paseo de Ro4as 0treet inMa*ati Cit$.8S

Accordin! to petitioner ?i#usang 2ayo -no, the police cited PP 2= as the!round for the dispersal of their asse%blies.

>urin! the dispersal of the rall$ists alon! E>0A, police arrested 1"ithout"arrant3 petitioner Randolf 0. >avid, a professor at the Gniversit$ of the Philippines

and ne"spaper colu%nist. Also arrested "as his co%panion, Ronald 9la%as,president of part$-list3kbayan.

At around 882 in the earl$ %ornin! of )ebruar$ 8etection #roup 1C+>#3 of the PNP, on the basis of PP2= and #.O. No. istrict "ere stationed outside the buildin!.5S

A fe" %inutes after the search and sei@ure at the ai#y 0ribuneoffices, the

police surrounded the pre%ises of another pro-opposition paper, Mala$a, and itssister publication, the tabloid Abante.

&he raid, accordin! to Presidential Chief of 0taff Michael>efensor, isDmeant to show a Fstrong presence&@ to te## media out#ets not to conniveor do anything that wou#d he#p the rebe#s in bringing down this government.C &hePNP "arned that it "ould ta*e over an$ %edia or!ani@ation that "ould notfollo" Dstandards set by the government during the state of nationa#emergency.C >irector #eneral 9o%ibao stated that Dif they do not fo##ow thestandards G and the standards are ; if they wou#d contribute to instabi#ity in thegovernment& or if they do not subscribe to what is in Henera# (rder o. 9 and !roc.o. 1:1I G we wi## recommend a Ftakeover.@C National &eleco%%unicationsVCo%%issioner Ronald 0olis ur!ed television and radio net"or*s to DcooperateC"iththe !overn%ent for the duration of the state of national e%er!enc$. 6e as*edfor Dba#anced reportingC fro% broadcasters "hen coverin! the events surroundin!the coup atte%pt foiled b$ the !overn%ent. 6e "arned that his a!enc$ "ill nothesitate to reco%%end the closure of an$ broadcast outfit that violates rules set outfor %edia covera!e "hen the national securit$ is threatened.7S

Also, on )ebruar$ 8

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

31/51

On March 5, 822, President Arro$o issued PP 28 declarin! that the stateof national e%er!enc$ has ceased to e4ist.

+n the interi%, these seven 1=3 petitions challen!in! the constitutionalit$ ofPP 2= and #.O. No. < "ere filed "ith this Court a!ainst the above-na%edrespondents. &hree 153 of these petitions i%pleaded President Arro$o as respondent. +nG.R. No. 1716, petitioners Randolf 0. >avid,et a#. assailed PP 2= onthe !rounds that 1Fit encroaches on the e%er!enc$ po"ers of Con!ressK 2F itis asubterfu!e to avoid the constitutional re?uire%ents for the i%position of %artial la"Kand Fit violates the constitutional !uarantees of freedo% of the press, of speechand of asse%bl$.

+n G.R. No. 17140, petitioners Nine@ Cacho-Olivares and 0ribunePublishin!Co., +nc.challen!ed the C+>#Vs act of raidin! the ai#y 0ribuneoffices as a clear caseof WcensorshipX or Wprior restraint.X &he$ also clai%ed that the ter% We%er!enc$Xrefers onl$ to tsuna%i, t$phoon, hurricane and si%ilar occurrences, hence, there isWabso#ute#y no emergencyX that "arrants the issuance of PP 2=.

+n G.R. No. 17145& petitioners herein are Representative )rancis Joseph #.Escudero, and t"ent$ one 183 other %e%bers of the 6ouse of Representatives,includin! Representatives 0atur Oca%po, Rafael Mariano, &eodoro CasiDo, 9i@a Ma@a,and Josel /irador. &he$ asserted that PP 2= and #.O. No. < constitute Wusurpationof #egis#ative powersXK Wvio#ation of freedom of e4pressionX and Wa dec#aration ofmartia# #aw.X &he$ alle!ed that President Arro$o W!rave#y abused her discretion inca##ing out the armed forces without c#ear and verifiab#e factua# basis of the

possibi#ity of #aw#ess vio#ence and a showing that there is necessity to do so.X +n G.R. No. 1714&petitioners MG, NA)9G-MG, and their %e%bers

averred that PP 2= and #.O. No. < are unconstitutional because 1F the$ arro!ateunto President Arro$o the po"er to enact la"s and decreesK 2F their issuance "as"ithout factual basisK and F the$ violate freedo% of e4pression and the ri!ht of thepeople to peaceabl$ asse%ble to redress their !rievances.

+n G.R. No. 171400& petitioner Alternative 9a" #roups, +nc. 1A9#+3 alle!edthat PP 2= and #.O. No. < are unconstitutional because the$ violate aF 0ection7

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

32/51

of such actual case or controvers$, contendin! that the present petitions "ererendered W%oot and acade%icX b$ President Arro$oVs issuance of PP 28.

0uch contention lac*s %erit.A %oot and acade%ic case is one that ceases to present a usticiable

controvers$ b$ virtue of supervenin! events, 8Sso that a declaration thereon "ouldbe of no practical use or value. 8=S #enerall$, courts decline urisdiction over suchcase8Sor dis%iss it on !round of %ootness.8S

&he Court holds that President Arro$oVs issuance of PP 28 did not renderthe present petitions %oot and acade%ic. >urin! the ei!ht 13 da$s that PP 2="as operative, the police officers, accordin! to petitioners, co%%itted ille!al acts in

i%ple%entin! it. Ar PP 1017 a"* G.O. No. 5 co"#%!%)%!o"a or a!*L Do %h&=)#%!9& %h# a;* !;a ac%#L&hese are the vital issues that %ust beresolved in the present petitions. +t %ust be stressed that Wa" )"co"#%!%)%!o"a ac%!# "o% a a:, !% co"9r# "o r!;h%#, !% !'$o## "o *)%!#, !% a99or*# "o$ro%c%!o"B !% !# !" ;a co"%'$a%!o", !"o$ra%! .X52S

&he W%oot and acade%icX principle is not a %a!ical for%ula that canauto%aticall$ dissuade the courts in resolvin! a case. Courts "ill decide cases,other"ise %oot and acade%ic, if first&there is a !rave violation of the ConstitutionK5Ssecond, the e4ceptional character of the situation and the para%ount publicinterest is involvedK58Sthird& "hen constitutional issue raised re?uires for%ulation ofcontrollin! principles to !uide the bench, the bar, and the publicK 55Sand fourth&thecase is capable of repetition $et evadin! revie".57S

All the fore!oin! e4ceptions are present here and ustif$ this CourtVsassu%ption of urisdiction over the instant petitions. Petitioners alle!ed that theissuance of PP 2= and #.O. No. < violates the Constitution. &here is no ?uestionthat the issues bein! raised affect the publicVs interest, involvin! as the$ do thepeopleVs basic ri!hts to freedo% of e4pression, of asse%bl$ and of thepress. Moreover, the Court has the dut$ to for%ulate !uidin! and controllin!constitutional precepts, doctrines or rules. +t has the s$%bolic function of educatin!the bench and the bar, and in the present petitions, %h '!!%ar& a"* %h $o!c,on the e4tent of the protection !iven b$ constitutional !uarantees.5

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

33/51

Con!ress, and civic or!ani@ations to prosecute actions involvin! the constitutionalit$or validit$ of la"s, re!ulations and rulin!s.avid and9la%as, is be$ond doubt. &he sa%e holds true "ith petitioners in G.R. No. 17140,Cacho-Olivares and 0ribunePublishin! Co. +nc. &he$ alle!ed Wdirect inur$X resultin!fro% Wille!al arrestX and Wunla"ful searchX co%%itted b$ police operatives pursuantto PP 2=. Ri!htl$ so, the 0olicitor #eneral does not ?uestion their le!al standin!. +n G.R. No. 17145, the opposition Con!ress%en alle!ed there "as usurpationof le!islative po"ers. &he$ also raised the issue of "hether or not the concurrenceof Con!ress is necessar$ "henever the alar%in! po"ers incident to Martial 9a" areused. Moreover, it is in the interest of ustice that those affected b$ PP 2= can berepresented b$ their Con!ress%en in brin!in! to the attention of the Court thealle!ed violations of their basic ri!hts. +n G.R. No. 171400, 1A9#+3, this Court applied the liberalit$ rule in !hi#consa v.5nriquez,2S?apatiran g 2ga ag#i#ingkod sa !amaha#aan ng !i#ipinas& )nc. v. 0an,S3ssociation of ma## 7andowners in the !hi#ippines& )nc. v. ecretary of 3grarian*eform,8SBasco v. !hi#ippine 3musement and Haming /orporation&5Sand 0aNada v.0uvera,7S that "hen the issue concerns a public ri!ht, it is sufficient that thepetitioner is a citi@en and has an interest in the e4ecution of the la"s.

+n G.R. No. 1714, MGVs assertion that PP 2= and #.O. No. < violatedits ri!ht to peaceful asse%bl$ %a$ be dee%ed sufficient to !ive it le!alstandin!. Or;a"!?a%!o"# 'a& ( ;ra"%* #%a"*!"; %o a##r% %h r!;h%# o9%h!r ''(r#.

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

34/51

issuances prevented her fro% pursuin! her occupation. 6er sub%ission that she haspendin! electoral protest before the Presidential Electoral &ribunal is li*e"ise of norelevance. 0he has not sufficientl$ sho"n that PP 2= "ill affect the proceedin!s orresult of her case. But considerin! once %ore the transcendental i%portance of theissue involved, this Court %a$ rela4 the standin! rules.

+t %ust al"a$s be borne in %ind that the ?uestion of #ocus standiis butcorollar$ to the bi!!er ?uestion of proper e4ercise of udicial po"er. &his is theunderl$in! le!al tenet of the Wliberalit$ doctrineX on le!al standin!. +t cannot bedoubted that the validit$ of PP No. 2= and #.O. No. < is a udicial ?uestion "hich isof para%ount i%portance to the )ilipino people. &o paraphrase Justice 9aurel, the

"hole of Philippine societ$ no" "aits "ith bated breath the rulin! of this Court onthis ver$ critical %atter. &he petitions thus call for the application of theW%ra"#c"*"%a !'$or%a"cX doctrine, a rela4ation of the standin! re?uire%entsfor the petitioners in the WPP 2= cases.X

&his Court holds that all the petitioners herein have #ocus standi.+ncidentall$, it is not proper to i%plead President Arro$o as

respondent. 0ettled is the doctrine that the President, durin! his tenure of office oractual incu%benc$,=S%a$ not be sued in any civil or cri%inal case, and there is noneed to provide for it in the Constitution or la". +t "ill de!rade the di!nit$ of the hi!hoffice of the President, the 6ead of 0tate, if he can be dra!!ed into court liti!ations"hile servin! as such. )urther%ore, it is i%portant that he be freed fro% an$ for% ofharass%ent, hindrance or distraction to enable hi% to full$ attend to the perfor%anceof his official duties and functions. Gnli*e the le!islative and udicial branch, onl$ oneconstitutes the e4ecutive branch and an$thin! "hich i%pairs his usefulness in thedischar!e of the %an$ !reat and i%portant duties i%posed upon hi% b$ theConstitution necessaril$ i%pairs the operation of the #overn%ent. 6o"ever, thisdoes not %ean that the President is not accountable to an$one. 9i*e an$ otherofficial, he re%ains accountable to the peopleSbut he %a$ be re%oved fro% officeonl$ in the %ode provided b$ la" and that is b$ i%peach%ent.S

/. SU/STANTE

I. "e#iew of $actual %ases

Petitioners %aintain that PP 2= has no factual basis. 6ence, it "as notWnecessar$X for President Arro$o to issue such Procla%ation.

&he issue of "hether the Court %a$ revie" the factual bases of thePresidentVs e4ercise of his Co%%ander-in-Chief po"er has reached its distilled point -fro% the indul!ent da$s of Barce#on v. Baker=2S and2ontenegro v./astaneda=Sto the volatile era of 7ansang v. Harcia&=8S3quino&

:ar or "a%!o"a 'r;"c&, %h Pr#!*"% ')#% ( ;!" a(#o)% co"%ro9or %h r& !9 o9 %h "a%!o" a"* %h ;or"'"% !# !" ;ra% $r!. ThPr#!*"%, !% !"%o"*, !# a"#:ra( o"& %o h!# co"#c!"c, %h Po$, a"*Go*.X=S

&he )ntegrated Bar of the !hi#ippines v. Mamora2S;; a recent case %ostpertinent to these cases at bar --echoed a principle si%ilar to 7ansang. (hile theCourt considered the PresidentVs Wcallin!-outX po"er as a discretionar$ po"er solel$vested in his "isdo%, it stressed that W %h!# *o# "o% $r"% a"

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

35/51

Ar%$ sho"in! the !ro"in! alliance bet"een the NPA and the %ilitar$. Petitionerspresented nothin! to refute such events. &hus, absent an$ contrar$ alle!ations, theCourt is convinced that the President "as ustified in issuin! PP 2= callin! for%ilitar$ aid.

+ndeed, ud!in! the seriousness of the incidents, President Arro$o "as note4pected to si%pl$ fold her ar%s and do nothin! to prevent or suppress "hat shebelieved "as la"less violence, invasion or rebellion. 6o"ever, the e4ercise of such

po"er or dut$ %ust not stifle libert$.

II. 'onstitutionality of PP ()(* and +.. o.

Doc%r!"# o9 Sra Po!%!ca Thor!#%#o" %h Po:r o9 %h Pr#!*"%

!" T!'# o9 E'r;"c&

&his case brin!s to fore a contentious subect -- the po"er of the Presidentin ti%es of e%er!enc$. A !li%pse at the various political theories relatin! to thissubect provides an ade?uate bac*drop for our ensuin! discussion.

John 9oc*e, describin! the architecture of civil !overn%ent, called upon theEn!lish doctrine of prero!ative to cope "ith the proble% of e%er!enc$. +n ti%es of

dan!er to the nation, positive la" enacted b$ the le!islature %i!ht be inade?uate oreven a fatal obstacle to the pro%ptness of action necessar$ to avert catastrophe. +nthese situations, the Cro"n retained a prero!ative W$o:r %o ac% accor*!"; %o*!#cr%!o" 9or %h $)(!c ;oo*, :!%ho)% %h $ro#cr!$%!o" o9 %h a: a"*#o'%!'# " a;a!"#% !%.X7SBut 9oc*e reco!ni@ed that this %oral restraint%i!ht not suffice to avoid abuse of prero!ative po"ers. 3ho #ha =)*; %h"* 9or r#or%!"; %o %h $rro;a%! a"* ho: 'a& !%# a()# (ao!**L 6ere, 9oc*e readil$ ad%itted defeat, su!!estin! that%h $o$ ha"o o%hr r'*& !" %h!#, a# !" a o%hr ca## :hr %h& ha "o =)*; o"ar%h, ()% %o a$$a %o Ha".X

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

36/51

( #%r!c%& ;!%!'a% !" charac%r!"a a)%hor!%& %o *%r'!" %h "*9or *!c%a%or#h!$ !" a"& ;!" ca# ')#% "r r#% :!%h %h *!c%a%orh!'#9X7Sand the obective of such an e%er!enc$ dictatorship should be W#%r!c%$o!%!ca co"#ra%!#'.X

Carl J. )riedrich cast his anal$sis in ter%s si%ilar to those of (at*ins.

Clinton 9. Rossiter, after surve$in! the histor$ of the e%plo$%ent ofe%er!enc$ po"ers in #reat Britain, )rance, (ei%ar, #er%an$ and the Gnited 0tates,reverted to a description of a sche%e of Wconstitutional dictatorshipX as solution tothe ve4in! proble%s presented b$ e%er!enc$.S 9i*e (at*ins and )riedrich, hestateda priorithe conditions of success of the Wconstitutional dictatorship,X thus

1FNo !eneral re!i%e or particular institution ofconstitutional dictatorship should be initiated unless it isnecessar$ or even indispensable to the preservation of the0tate and its constitutional order

2F the decision to institute a constitutional

dictatorship should never be in the hands of the %an or%en "ho "ill constitute the dictator

F No !overn%ent should initiate a

constitutional dictatorship "ithout %a*in! specificprovisions for its ter%ination

4F all uses of e%er!enc$ po"ers and all

readust%ents in the or!ani@ation of the !overn%entshould be effected in pursuit of constitutional or le!alre?uire%ents

5F no dictatorial institution should be

adopted, no ri!ht invaded, no re!ular procedure alteredan$ %ore than is absolutel$ necessar$ for the con?uest ofthe particular crisis . . .

6F &he %easures adopted in the prosecution of

the a constitutional dictatorship should never beper%anent in character or effect

7F &he dictatorship should be carried on b$

persons representative of ever$ part of the citi@enr$

interested in the defense of the e4istin! constitutionalorder. . .

F Glti%ate responsibilit$ should be %aintained

for ever$ action ta*en under a constitutional dictatorship. ..

F &he decision to ter%inate a constitutional

dictatorship, li*e the decision to institute one should neverbe in the hands of the %an or %en "ho constitute the

dictator. . .10FNo constitutional dictatorship should e4tend

be$ond the ter%ination of the crisis for "hich it "asinstituted

11Fthe ter%ination of the crisis %ust be

follo"ed b$ a co%plete return as possible to the politicaland !overn%ental conditions e4istin! prior to the initiationof the constitutional dictatorshipS

Rossiter accorded to le!islature a far !reater role in the oversi!ht e4ercise ofe%er!enc$ po"ers than did (at*ins. 6e "ould secure to Con!ress finalresponsibilit$ for declarin! the e4istence or ter%ination of an e%er!enc$, and heplaces !reat faith in the effectiveness of con!ressional investi!atin! co%%ittees.22S

cott and /otter, in anal$@in! the above conte%porar$ theories in li!ht ofrecent e4perience, "ere one in sa$in! that, W%h #);;#%!o" %ha% *'ocrac!##)rr"*r %h co"%ro o9 ;or"'"% %o a" a)%hor!%ar!a" r)r !" %!' o9;ra *a";r %o %h "a%!o" !# not(a#* )$o" #o)"* co"#%!%)%!o"a %hor&.X

&o appraise e%er!enc$ po"er in ter%s of constitutional dictatorship serves %erel$ todistort the proble% and hinder realistic anal$sis. +t %atters not "hether the ter%WdictatorX is used in its nor%al sense 1as applied to authoritarian rulers3 or ise%plo$ed to e%brace all chief e4ecutives ad%inisterin! e%er!enc$ po"ers. 6o"everused, Wconstitutional dictatorshipX cannot be divorced fro% the i%plication ofsuspension of the processes of constitutionalis%. &hus, the$ favored instead theWconcept of constitutionalis%X articulated b$ Charles 6. Mc+l"ain

A concept of constitutionalis% "hich is less %isleadin! in

the anal$sis of proble%s of e%er!enc$ po"ers, and "hich isconsistent "ith the findin!s of this stud$, is that for%ulated b$Charles 6. Mc+l"ain. (hile it does not b$ an$ %eans necessaril$e4clude so%e indeter%inate li%itations upon the substantivepo"ers of !overn%ent, full e%phasis is placed upon $roc*)ra!'!%a%!o"#, and $o!%!ca r#$o"#!(!!%&. Mc+l"ain clearl$reco!ni@ed the need to repose ade?uate po"er in !overn%ent. Andin discussin! the %eanin! of constitutionalis%, he insisted thatthe h!#%or!ca a"* $ro$r %#% o9 co"#%!%)%!o"a!#' :a# %h

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/may2006/G.R.%20No.%20171396.htm#_ftn95http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/may2006/G.R.%20No.%20171396.htm#_ftn95http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/may2006/G.R.%20No.%20171396.htm#_ftn96http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/may2006/G.R.%20No.%20171396.htm#_ftn97http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/may2006/G.R.%20No.%20171396.htm#_ftn98http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/may2006/G.R.%20No.%20171396.htm#_ftn98http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/may2006/G.R.%20No.%20171396.htm#_ftn99http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/may2006/G.R.%20No.%20171396.htm#_ftn100http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/may2006/G.R.%20No.%20171396.htm#_ftn101http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/may2006/G.R.%20No.%20171396.htm#_ftn95http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/may2006/G.R.%20No.%20171396.htm#_ftn96http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/may2006/G.R.%20No.%20171396.htm#_ftn97http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/may2006/G.R.%20No.%20171396.htm#_ftn98http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/may2006/G.R.%20No.%20171396.htm#_ftn99http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/may2006/G.R.%20No.%20171396.htm#_ftn100http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/may2006/G.R.%20No.%20171396.htm#_ftn101

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

37/51

separation of po"ers and substantive li%itations on !overn%entalpo"er. 6e found that the reall$ effective chec*s on despotis% haveconsisted not in the "ea*enin! of !overn%ent but, but rather inthe !'!%!"; o9 !%K bet"een "hich there is a !reat and ver$si!nificant difference. " a##oc!a%!"; co"#%!%)%!o"a!#' :!%h!'!%* a# *!#%!";)!#h* 9ro' :a8 ;or"'"%,Mc:a!" 'a"% ;or"'"% !'!%* %o %h or*r&$roc*)r o9 a: a# o$$o#* %o %h $roc### o9 9orc. Th%:o 9)"*a'"%a corra%! '"%# o9 co"#%!%)%!o"a!#'9or :h!ch a or# o9 !(r%& ')#% &% 9!;h% ar %h ;a

!'!%# %o ar(!%rar& $o:r a"* a co'$% $o!%!car#$o"#!(!!%& o9 ;or"'"% %o %h ;or"*.2S

+n the final anal$sis, the various approaches to e%er!enc$ of the above

political theorists - fro% 9oc*Vs Wtheor$ of prero!ative,X to (at*insV doctrine ofWconstitutional dictatorshipX and, eventuall$, to Mc+l"ainVs Wprinciple ofconstitutionalis%X --- ulti%atel$ ai% to solve one real proble% in e%er!enc$!overnance, i.e.,%ha% o9 ao%%!"; !"cra#!"; ara# o9 *!#cr%!o"ar& $o:r %o%h Ch!9 E

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

38/51

%h )"co"#%!%)%!o"a a#$c%# o9 %h a: (& !"a!*a%!"; !%#!'$ro$r a$$!ca%!o"# o" a ca# %o ca# (a#!#. Moror,cha";r# %o a a: ar "o% $r'!%%* %o ra!# %h r!;h%# o9%h!r* $ar%!# a"* ca" o"& a##r% %h!r o:" !"%r#%#. "or(ra*%h a"a!#, %ho# r)# ;! :a&B cha";# ar$r'!%%* %o ra!# %h r!;h%# o9 %h!r* $ar%!#K and the courtinvalidates the entire statute Won its face,X not %erel$ Was appliedforX so that the overbroad la" beco%es unenforceable until aproperl$ authori@ed court construes it %ore narro"l$. &he factorthat %otivates courts to depart fro% the nor%al adudicator$ rules

is the concern "ith the Wchillin!KX deterrent effect of the overbroadstatute on third parties not coura!eous enou!h to brin! suit. &heCourt assu%es that an overbroad la"Vs Wver$ e4istence %a$ causeothers not before the court to refrain fro% constitutionall$protected speech or e4pression.X An overbreadth rulin! isdesi!ned to re%ove that deterrent effect on the speech of thosethird parties.

+n other "ords, a facial challen!e usin! the overbreadth doctrine "ill re?uirethe Court to e4a%ine PP 2= and pinpoint its fla"s and defects, not on the basis ofits actual operation to petitioners, but on the assu%ption or prediction that its ver$e4istence %a$ cause o%hr# "o% (9or %h Co)r% to refrain fro% constitutionall$protected speech or e4pression. +n Oounger v. +arris,2Sit "as held that

&She tas* of anal$@in! a proposed statute, pinpointin! its

deficiencies, and re?uirin! correction of these deficiencies beforethe statute is put into effect, is rarel$ if ever an appropriate tas* forthe udiciar$. &he co%bination of the ra%! r'o%"## o9 %hco"%ror#& , the !'$ac% o" %h ;!#a%! $roc## o9 %hr!9 #o);h%, and above all %h #$c)a%! a"* a'or$ho)#"a%)r o9 %h r)!r* !"-(&-!" a"a!# o9 *%a!*#%a%)%#,...ordinaril$ results in a *ind of case that is:ho&)"#a%!#9ac%or&for decidin! constitutional ?uestions, "hichever"a$ the$ %i!ht be decided.And third&a facial challen!e on the !round of overbreadth is the %ost

difficult challen!e to %ount successfull$, since the challen!er %ust establishthat %hr ca" ( "o !"#%a"c :h" %h a##a!* a: 'a& ( a!*. 6ere,petitioners did not even atte%pt to sho" "hether this situation e4ists.

Petitioners li*e"ise see* a facial revie" of PP 2= on the !round of

va!ueness. &his, too, is un"arranted.

Related to the WoverbreadthX doctrine is the Wvoid for va!ueness doctrineX"hich holds that Wa a: !# 9ac!a& !"a!* !9 '" o9 co''o" !"%!;"c ')#%"c##ar!& ;)## a% !%# 'a"!"; a"* *!99r a# %o !%# a$$!ca%!o". X2S+t issubect to the sa%e principles !overnin! overbreadth doctrine. )or one, it is also ananal$tical tool for testin! Won their facesX #%a%)%# !" 9r #$ch ca##. And li*eoverbreadth, it is said that a liti!ant %a$ challen!e a statute on its face onl$ if itisa;) !" a !%# $o##!( a$$!ca%!o"#. A;a!", $%!%!o"r# *!* "o% "

a%%'$% %o #ho: %ha% PP 1017 !# a;) !" a !%# a$$!ca%!o". &he$ also failedto establish that %en of co%%on intelli!ence cannot understand the %eanin! andapplication of PP 2=.

(. Co"#%!%)%!o"a /a#!# o9 PP 1017

No" on the constitutional foundation of PP 2=.

&he operative portion of PP 2= %a$ be divided into three i%portantprovisions, thus

$irst pro#ision:

Wb$ virtue of the po"er vested upon %e b$ 0ection ,Artilce /++ do hereb$ co%%and the Ar%ed )orces of thePhilippines, to %aintain la" and order throu!hout the Philippines,prevent or suppress all for%s of la"less violence as "ell an$ act ofinsurrection or rebellionX

Second pro#ision:

Wand to enforce obedience to all the la"s and to alldecrees, orders and re!ulations pro%ul!ated b$ %e personall$ orupon %$ directionKX

/&ird pro#ision:

Was provided in 0ection =, Article Q++ of the Constitutiondo hereb$ declare a 0tate of National E%er!enc$.X

$irst Pro#ision: 'alling-out Power

&he first provision pertains to the PresidentVs callin!-out po"er. +n

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/may2006/G.R.%20No.%20171396.htm#_ftn110http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/may2006/G.R.%20No.%20171396.htm#_ftn110http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/may2006/G.R.%20No.%20171396.htm#_ftn111http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/may2006/G.R.%20No.%20171396.htm#_ftn110http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/may2006/G.R.%20No.%20171396.htm#_ftn111

8/14/2019 Cases 1-3.doc

39/51

an#akas v. 54ecutive ecretary,S this Court, throu!h Mr. Justice >ante O.&in!a, held that 0ection , Article /++ of the Constitution reproduced as follo"s

Sc. 1.&he President shall be the Co%%ander-in-Chief ofall ar%ed forces of the Philippines and :h"r !% (co'#"c##ar&, h 'a& ca o)% #)ch ar'* 9orc# %o $r"% or#)$$r## a:## !o"c,