EN BANC

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Decision 28 G.R. Nos. 171396, 171400 171409, 171424, 171483 171485, 171489 pursuing her occupation. Her submission that she has pending electoral protest before the Presidential Electoral Tribunal is likewise of no relevance. She has not sufficiently shown that PP 1017 will affect the proceedings or result of her case. But considering once more the transcendental importance of the issue involved, this Court may relax the standing rules. It must always be borne in mind that the question of locus standi is but corollary to the bigger question of proper exercise of judicial power. This is the underlying legal tenet of the “liberality doctrine” on legal standing. It cannot be doubted that the validity of PP No. 1017 and G.O. No. 5 is a judicial question which is of paramount importance to the Filipino people. To paraphrase Justice Laurel, the whole of Philippine society now waits with bated breath the ruling of this Court on this very critical matter. The petitions thus call for the application of the “transcendental importance” doctrine, a relaxation of the standing requirements for the petitioners in the “PP 1017 cases.” This Court holds that all the petitioners herein have locus standi. Incidentally, it is not proper to implead President Arroyo as respondent. Settled is the doctrine that the President, during his tenure of office or actual incumbency, 67 may not be sued in any civil or criminal case, and there is no need to provide for it in the Constitution or law. It will degrade the dignity of the high office of the President, the Head of State, if he can be dragged into court litigations while serving as such. Furthermore, it is important that he be freed from any form of harassment, hindrance or distraction to enable him to fully attend to the performance of his official duties and functions. Unlike the legislative and judicial branch, only one constitutes the executive branch and anything which impairs his usefulness in the discharge of the many great and important duties imposed upon him by the Constitution necessarily impairs the operation of the Government. 67 From the deliberations of the Constitutional Commission, the intent of the framers is clear that the immunity of the President from suit is concurrent only with his tenure and not his term. (De Leon, Philippine Constitutional Law, Vol. 2, 2004 Ed., p. 302).
Decision 29 G.R. Nos. 171396, 171400 171409, 171424, 171483 171485, 171489 However, this does not mean that the President is not accountable to anyone. Like any other official, he remains accountable to the people 68 but he may be removed from office only in the mode provided by law and that is by impeachment. 69 B. SUBSTANTIVE I. Review of Factual Bases Petitioners maintain that PP 1017 has no factual basis. Hence, it was not “necessary” for President Arroyo to issue such Proclamation. The issue of whether the Court may review the factual bases of the President’s exercise of his Commander-in-Chief power has reached its distilled point - from the indulgent days of Barcelon v. Baker 70 and Montenegro v. Castaneda 71 to the volatile era of Lansang v. Garcia, 72 Aquino, Jr. v. Enrile, 73 and Garcia-Padilla v. Enrile. 74 The tug-ofwar always cuts across the line defining “political questions,” particularly those questions “in regard to which full discretionary authority has been delegated to the legislative or executive branch of the government.” 75 Barcelon and Montenegro were in unison in declaring that the authority to decide whether an exigency has arisen belongs to the President and his decision is final and conclusive on the courts. Lansang took the opposite view. There, the members of the Court were unanimous in the conviction that the Court has the authority to inquire into the existence of factual bases in order to determine their constitutional sufficiency. From the principle of separation of powers, it shifted the focus to the system of checks and 68 Section 1, Article XI of the Constitution provides: Public Office is a public trust. Public officers and employees must at all times be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty and efficiency, act with patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives. 69 Ibid., Sec. 2. 70 No. 2908, September 30, 2005, 471 SCRA 87. 71 91 Phil. 882 (1952). 72 No. L-33964, December 11, 1971, 42 SCRA 448. 73 No. L-35546, September 17, 1974, 59 SCRA 183. 74 No. L-61388, April 20, 1983, 121 SCRA 472. 75 Tañada v. Cuenco, 103 Phil. 1051 (1957).
Page 1 and 2: EN BANC PROF. RANDOLF S. DAVID, LOR
Page 3 and 4: Decision 3 G.R. Nos. 171396, 171400
Page 27: Decision 27 G.R. Nos. 171396, 17140
Page 77: Decision 77 G.R. Nos. 171396, 17140

EN BANC

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?