republic vs. sandoval (consti1)
DESCRIPTION
ConstiTRANSCRIPT
Death by digestsDeath by digestsSaturday, June 23, 2012
Republic vs. Sandoval (Consti1)(Two petitions consolidated.)
En Banc
Campos, Jr., March 19, 1993
Topic: Sovereignty - Suit not against the State - Beyond the Scope of AuthorityFacts:
The heirs of the deceased of the January 22, 1987 Mendiola massacre(background: Wiki), together with those injured (Caylao group), instituted thepetition, seeking the reversal and setting aside of the orders of respondentJudge Sandoval (May 31 and Aug 8, 1988) in "Erlinda Caylao, et al. vs. Republicof the Philippines, et al." which dismissed the case against the Republic of thePhilippines
May 31 order: Because the impleaded military officers are beingcharged in their personal and official capacity, holding them liable,if at all, would not result in financial responsibility of thegovernment
Aug 8 order: denied the motions filed by both parties forreconsideration
In January 1987, farmers and their sympathizers presented their demands forwhat they called "genuine agrarian reform"
The Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP), led by Jaime Tadeo, presentedtheir problems and demands such as:
giving lands for free to farmers
zero retention of lands by landlords
stop amortizations of land payments
Dialogue between the farmers and then Ministry of Agrarian Reform (MAR)began on January 15, 1987
On January 20, 1987, Tadeo met with MAR Minister Heherson Alvarez
Alvarez was only able to promise to do his best to bring the matter to theattention of then President Cory Aquino during the January 21 Cabinet meeting
Tension mounted the next day
The farmers, on their 7th day of encampment, barricaded the MAR premisesand prevented the employees from going inside their offices
On January 22, 1987, following a heated discussion between Alvarez andTadeo, Tadeo's group decided to march to Malacanang to air their demands
On their march to Malacanang, they were joined by Kilusang Mayo Uno (KMU),Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (BAYAN), League of Filipino Students (LFS), andKongreso ng Pagkakaisa ng Maralitang Lungsod (KPML)
Government intelligent reports were also received that the KMP was heavilyinfliltrated by CPP/NPA elements, and that an insurrection was impending
Government anti-riot forces assembled at Mendiola
The marchers numbered about 10,000 to 15,000 at around 4:30 pm
From CM Recto, they proceeded toward the police lines. No dialogue tookplace; "pandemonium broke loose"
After the clash, 12 marchers were officially confirmed dead (13 according to
▼ 2012 (34)
▼ June (34)
Shauf v. CA (consti1)
Co v. HRET (Re: Citizenship issue only)[consti1]
Roa v. Collector of Customs (Consti1)
Amigable v. Cuenca (Consti1)
US v. Ruiz (Consti1)
Malong v. PNR (Consti1)
People v. Echegaray (CRIM1)
Magno vs. CA (Crim1)
People vs. Oanis (Crim1)
People v. De La Cruz (Crim1)
People of the Philippines v. Carlos(CRIM1)
Adiong v. COMELEC (CRIM1)
US vs. Guinto (Consti1)
Republic vs. Villasor (Consti1)
EPG Construction Co. vs. Vigilar(Consti1)
Republic vs. Feliciano (Consti1)
De Los Santos vs. IAC (Consti1)
Lansang vs. Court of Appeals (Consti1)
Harden vs. Director of Prisons (Crim1)
People vs. Ferrer (Crim1)
US vs. Diaz-Conde (Crim1)
People vs. Formigones (Crim1)
Gascon vs. Arroyo (Consti1)
Santiago vs. Republic (Consti1)
Commissioner of Public Highways vs.Burgos (Consti...
Republic vs. Nolasco (Consti1)
Republic vs. Judge, Branch XV (Consti1)
Republic vs. Sandoval (Consti1)
Padilla vs. Dizon (Crim1)
US vs. Ah Chong (Crim1)
People vs. Puno (Crim1)
People vs. Talingdan (Crim1)
People v. Rosenthal & Osmena (Crim1)
People vs. Silvestre and Atienza (Crim1)
Blog Archive
About Me
0 Higit Pa Susunod na Blog» Bumuo ng Blog Mag-sign in
Tadeo)
39 were wounded by gunshots and 12 sustained minor injuries, all belonging tothe group of marchers
Of the police and military, 3 sustained gunshot wounds and 20 suffered minorphysical injuries
The "Citizens' Mendiola Commission" submitted its report on the incident onFebruary 27, 1987 as follows
The march did not have any permit
The police and military were armed with handguns prohibited by law
The security men assigned to protect the government units were incivilian attire (prohibited by law)
There was unnecessary firing by the police and military
The weapons carried by the marchers are prohibited by law
It is not clear who started the firing
The water cannons and tear gas were not put into effective use todisperse the crowd; the water cannons and fire trucks were not putinto operation because:
there was no order to use them
they were incorrectly prepositioned
they were out of range of the marchers
The Commission recommended the criminal prosecution of four unidentified,uniformed individuals shown either on tape or in pictures, firing at thedirection of the marchers
The Commission also recommended that all the commissioned officers of boththe Western Police District (WPD) and Integrated National Police (INP) whowere armed be prosecuted for violation of par. 4(g) of the Public Assembly Actof 1985
Prosecution of the marchers was also recommended
It was also recommended that Tadeo be prosecuted both for holding the rallywithout permit and for inciting sedition
Administrative sanctions were recommended for the following officers for theirfailure to make effective use of their skill and experience in directing thedispersal operations in Mendiola:
Gen. Ramon E. Montaño
Police Gen. Alfredo S. Lim
Police Gen. Edgar Dula Torres
Police Maj. Demetrio dela Cruz
Col. Cezar Nazareno
Maj. Filemon Gasmin
Last and most important recommendation: for the deceased and woundedvictims to be compensated by the government
It was this portion that petitioners (Caylao group) invoke in theirclaim for damages from the government
No concrete form of compensation was received by the victims
On January, 1988, petitioners instituted an action for damages against theRepublic of the Philippines, together with the military officers, and personnelinvolved in the Mendiola incident
Solicitor general filed a Motion to Dismiss on the ground that the Statecannot be sued without its consent
Petitioners said that the State has waived its immunity from suit
Judge Sandoval dismissed the case on the ground that there was no suchwaiver
Motion for Reconsideration was also denied
Issues:
1. Whether or not the State has waived its immunity from suit (i.e. Whether or notthis is a suit against the State with its consent)
Petitioners argue that by the recommendation made by the Commissionfor the government to indemnify the heirs and victims, and by public
Block Diegest Follow 1
View my completeprofile
Posted by Block Diegest at 6:25 PM
Labels: consti1
addresses made by President Aquino, the State has consented to besued
2. Whether or not the case qualifies as a suit against the State
Holding:
1. No.
This is not a suit against the State with its consent.
2. No.
Ratio:
1. Art. XIV, Sec. 3, 1987 Constitution: The State may not be sued without its consent
The recommendations by the Commission does not in any way mean thatliability automatically attaches to the State
The Commission was simply a fact-finding body; its findings shall serveonly as cause of action for litigation; it does not bind the Stateimmediately
President Aquino's speeches are likewise not binding on the State; theyare not tantamount to a waiver by the State
2. Some instances when a suit against the State is proper:
1. When the Republic is sued by name;
2. When the suit is against an unincorporated government agency
3. When the suit is on its face against a government officer but the case is suchthat the ultimate liability will belong not to the officer but to thegovernment
Although the military officers and personnel were discharging theirofficial functions during the incident, their functions ceased to beofficial the moment they exceeded their authority
There was lack of justification by the government forces in the use offirearms.
Their main purpose in the rally was to ensure peace and order, but theyfired at the crowd instead
No reversible error by the respondent Judge found. Petitions dismissed.
Recommend this on Google
No comments:
Post a Comment
Newer Post Older PostHome
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Enter your comment...
Comment as: Google Account
PublishPublish
PreviewPreview
Watermark template. Powered by Blogger.