David vs. Macapagal-ArroyoMay 3, 2006Petitioners: David, et al; Cacho-Olivares; Escudero, et al; KMU, et al; ALGI; Cadiz,et al; LegardaI.FACTS
On 17 January 2006, Captain Nathaniel Rabonza and First LieutenantsSonny Sarmiento, Lawrence San Juan and Patricio Bumidang of theMagdalo Group, involved in the Oakwood mutiny, escaped from detention,and vowed “to remain defiant and to elude arrest at all costs. Theyencouraged people to
“show and proclaim our displeasure at the shamregime. Let us demonstrate our disgust, not only by going to the streets in protest, but also by wearing red bands on our left arms.”
B.On 17 February 2006, authorities discovered a plan (Oplan Hackle 1) tobomb a PMA Alumni Homecoming and to kill the President. A bomb wasfound the following morning.
On 21 February 2006, Lt. San Juan was arrested in a communistsafehouse in Batangas with subversive documents and minutes of themeetings between the Magdalo Group and the NPA. “Prior to his arrest,he said that
“Magdalo’s D-Day would be on February 24, 2006.”
D.On 23 February 2006, the President cancelled Edsa celebrations, revokedrally permits.E.On 24 February 2006, the President issued Presidential Proclamation1017 and General Order No. 5. On the same day, protesters fromKilusang Mayo Uno and National Federation of Labor Unions-KilusangMayo Uno were dispersed in various parts of Metro Manila. The policealong EDSA arrested Randolf David and Ronald Llamas.
On 25 February 2006, the PNP-CIDG raided the office of the Daily Tribunewith only the presence of the security guard on duty.G.On 3 March 2006, the President issued PP1021, declaring that the state of emergency has ceased.H.7 petitions were filed on the constitutionality of PP 1017 and GO 5I.The Solicitor-General said that:1) the petitions should be dismissed for being moot;2) GR 171400 (ALGI), 171424 (Legarda), 17183 (KMU), 171485(Escudero) and 171489 (Cadiz) have no legal standing;3) it is not necessary for the petitioners to implead the President;4) PP1017 has constitutional and legal basis; and5) PPP1017 does not violate the people’s right to free expression andredress grievances.
A.Whether the issuance of PP 1021 renders the petitions moot andacademic.