You are on page 1of 51

Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC G.R. No.

146710-15 March 2, 2001

&he e4pos; i%%ediatel$ i!nited reactions of ra!e. &he ne4t da$, October <, 8222, 0enator &eofisto #uin!ona, Jr., then the 0enate Minorit$ 9eader, too* the floor and delivered a fier$ privile!e speech entitled :+ Accuse.: 6e accused the petitioner of receivin! so%e P882 %illion in jueteng %one$ fro% #overnor 0in!son fro% Nove%ber ,--. to Au!ust 8222. 6e also char!ed that the petitioner too* fro% #overnor 0in!son P=2 %illion on e4cise ta4 on ci!arettes intended for +locos 0ur. &he privile!e speech "as referred b$ then 0enate President )ran*lin >rilon, to the Blue Ribbon Co%%ittee 1then headed b$ 0enator A?uilino Pi%entel3 and the Co%%ittee on Justice 1then headed b$ 0enator Renato Ca$etano3 for oint investi!ation. 8 &he 6ouse of Representatives did no less. &he 6ouse Co%%ittee on Public Order and 0ecurit$, then headed b$ Representative Roilo #ole@, decided to investi!ate the e4pos; of #overnor 0in!son. On the other hand, Representatives 6eherson Alvare@, Ernesto 6errera and Michael >efensor spearheaded the %ove to i%peach the petitioner. Calls for the resi!nation of the petitioner filled the air. On October ,,, Archbishop Jai%e Cardinal 0in issued a pastoral state%ent in behalf of the Presb$teral Council of the Archdiocese of Manila, as*in! petitioner to step do"n fro% the presidenc$ as he had lost the %oral authorit$ to !overn.5 &"o da$s later or on October ,5, the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines oined the cr$ for the resi!nation of the petitioner.7 )our da$s later, or on October ,=, for%er President Cora@on C. A?uino also de%anded that the petitioner ta*e the :supre%e self-sacrifice: of resi!nation.< )or%er President )idel Ra%os also oined the chorus. Earl$ on, or on October ,8, respondent Arro$o resi!ned as 0ecretar$ of the >epart%ent of 0ocial (elfare and 0ervicesA and later as*ed for petitioner's resi!nation.= 6o"ever, petitioner strenuousl$ held on to his office and refused to resi!n. &he heat "as on. On Nove%ber ,, four 173 senior econo%ic advisers, %e%bers of the Council of 0enior Econo%ic Advisers, resi!ned. &he$ "ere Jai%e Au!usto Bobel de A$ala, for%er Pri%e Minister Cesar /irata, for%er 0enator /icente Paterno and (ashin!ton 0$cip.. On Nove%ber 8, 0ecretar$ Mar Ro4as ++ also resi!ned fro% the >epart%ent of &rade and +ndustr$.- On Nove%ber 5, 0enate President )ran*lin >rilon, and 6ouse 0pea*er Manuel /illar, to!ether "ith so%e 7= representatives defected fro% the rulin! coalition, 9apian n! Masan! Pilipino. ,2 &he %onth of Nove%ber ended "ith a bi! ban!. +n a tu%ultuous session on Nove%ber ,5, 6ouse 0pea*er /illar trans%itted the Articles of +%peach%ent ,, si!ned b$ ,,< representatives, or %ore than ,C5 of all the %e%bers of the 6ouse of Representatives to the 0enate. &his caused political convulsions in both houses of Con!ress. 0enator >rilon "as replaced b$ 0enator Pi%entel as 0enate President. 0pea*er /illar "as unseated b$ Representative )uentebella. ,8 On Nove%ber 82, the 0enate for%all$ opened the i%peach%ent trial of the petitioner. &"ent$-one 18,3 senators too* their oath as ud!es "ith 0upre%e Court Chief Justice 6ilario #. >avide, Jr., presidin!.,5 &he political te%perature rose despite the cold >ece%ber. On >ece%ber =, the i%peach%ent trial started.,7 &he battle ro$ale "as fou!ht b$ so%e of the %ar?uee na%es in the le!al profession. 0tandin! as prosecutors "ere then 6ouse Minorit$

JOSEPH E. ESTRADA, petitioner, vs. AN ANO DES ERTO, !" h!# ca$ac!%& a# O'()*#'a", RAMON GON+A,ES, -O,UNTEERS AGA NST CR ME AND CORRUPT ON, GRA.T .REE PH , PP NES .OUNDAT ON, NC., ,EONARD DE -ERA, DENN S .UNA, ROMEO CAPU,ONG a"* ERNESTO /. .RANC SCO, JR., respondent. ---------------------------------------G.R. No. 146701 March 2, 2001

JOSEPH E. ESTRADA, petitioner, vs. G,OR A MACAPAGA,-ARRO2O, respondent. PUNO, J.: On the line in the cases at bar is the office of the President. Petitioner Joseph E ercito Estrada alle!es that he is the President on leave "hile respondent #loria Macapa!alArro$o clai%s she is the President. &he "arrin! personalities are i%portant enou!h but %ore transcendental are the constitutional issues e%bedded on the parties' dispute. (hile the si!nificant issues are %an$, the u!ular issue involves the relationship 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 the office of the President. +n the Ma$ ,,, ,--. elections, petitioner Joseph E ercito Estrada "as elected President "hile respondent #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o "as elected /ice-President. 0o%e ten 1,23 %illion )ilipinos voted for the petitioner believin! he "ould rescue the% fro% life's adversit$. 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 of proble%s that slo"l$ but surel$ eroded his popularit$. 6is sharp descent fro% po"er started on October 7, 8222. +locos 0ur #overnor, 9uis :Chavit: 0in!son, a lon!ti%e friend of the petitioner, "ent on air and accused the petitioner, his fa%il$ and friends of receivin! %illions of pesos fro% jueteng lords.,

)loor 9eader )eliciano Bel%onte and Representatives Jo*er Arro$o, (i!berto &aDada, 0er!io Apostol, Raul #on@ales, Oscar Moreno, 0alacnib Baterina, Roan 9ibarios, Oscar Rodri!ue@, Clavel Martine@ and Antonio Nachura. &he$ "ere assisted b$ a batter$ of private prosecutors led b$ no" 0ecretar$ of Justice 6ernando Pere@ and no" 0olicitor #eneral 0i%eon Marcelo. 0ervin! as defense counsel "ere for%er Chief Justice Andres 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 the 6ouse Raul >a@a, Att$. 0ie!fried )ortun and his brother, Att$. Ra$%und )ortun. &he da$ to da$ trial "as covered b$ live &/ and durin! its course en o$ed the hi!hest vie"in! ratin!. +ts hi!h and lo" points "ere the constant conversational piece of the chatterin! classes. &he dra%atic point of the >ece%ber hearin!s "as the testi%on$ of Clarissa Oca%po, senior vice president of E?uitable-PC+ Ban*. 0he testified that she "as one foot a"a$ fro% petitioner Estrada "hen he affi4ed the si!nature :Jose /elarde: on docu%ents involvin! a P<22 %illion invest%ent a!ree%ent "ith their ban* on )ebruar$ 7, 8222.,< After the testi%on$ of Oca%po, the i%peach%ent trial "as ad ourned in the spirit of Christ%as. (hen it resu%ed on Januar$ 8, 822,, %ore bo%bshells "ere e4ploded b$ the prosecution. On Januar$ ,,, Att$. Ed!ardo Espiritu "ho served as petitioner's 0ecretar$ of )inance too* the "itness stand. 6e alle!ed that the petitioner ointl$ o"ned B( Resources Corporation "ith Mr. >ante &an "ho "as facin! char!es of insider tradin!.,A &hen ca%e the fateful da$ of Januar$ ,A, "hen b$ a vote of ,,,2,= the senator- ud!es ruled a!ainst the openin! of the second envelope "hich alle!edl$ contained evidence sho"in! that petitioner held P5.5 billion in a secret ban* account under the na%e :Jose /elarde.: &he public and private prosecutors "al*ed out in protest of the rulin!. +n dis!ust, 0enator Pi%entel resi!ned as 0enate President.,. &he rulin! %ade at ,2E22 p.%. "as %et b$ a spontaneous outburst of an!er that hit the streets of the %etropolis. B$ %idni!ht, thousands had asse%bled at the E>0A 0hrine and speeches full of sulphur "ere delivered a!ainst the petitioner and the eleven 1,,3 senators. On Januar$ ,=, the public prosecutors sub%itted a letter to 0pea*er )uentebella tenderin! their collective resi!nation. &he$ also filed their Manifestation of (ithdra"al of Appearance "ith the i%peach%ent tribunal. ,-0enator Raul Roco ?uic*l$ %oved for the indefinite postpone%ent of the i%peach%ent proceedin!s until the 6ouse of Representatives shall have resolved the issue of resi!nation of the public prosecutors. Chief Justice >avide !ranted the %otion. 82 Januar$ ,. sa" the hi!h velocit$ intensification of the call for petitioner's resi!nation. A ,2-*ilo%eter line of people holdin! li!hted candles for%ed a hu%an chain fro% the Nino$ A?uino Monu%ent on A$ala Avenue in Ma*ati Cit$ to the E>0A 0hrine to s$%boli@e the people's solidarit$ in de%andin! petitioner's resi!nation. 0tudents and teachers "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$sics of persuasion, attracted %ore and %ore people.8, On Januar$ ,-, the fall fro% po"er of the petitioner appeared inevitable. At ,E82 p.%., the petitioner infor%ed E4ecutive 0ecretar$ Ed!ardo An!ara that #eneral An!elo Re$es, Chief of 0taff of the Ar%ed )orces of the Philippines, had defected. At

8E52 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 5E22 p.%., 0ecretar$ of National >efense Orlando Mercado and #eneral Re$es, to!ether "ith the chiefs of all the ar%ed services "ent to the E>0A 0hrine. 88 +n the presence of for%er Presidents A?uino and Ra%os and hundreds of thousands of cheerin! de%onstrators, #eneral Re$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! our support to this !overn%ent.:85 A little later, PNP Chief, >irector #eneral Panfilo 9acson and the %a or 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. 8< Rallies for the resi!nation of the petitioner e4ploded in various parts of the countr$. &o ste% the tide of ra!e, petitioner announced he "as orderin! his la"$ers to a!ree to the openin! of the hi!hl$ controversial second envelope.8A &here "as no turnin! bac* the tide. &he tide had beco%e a tsuna%i. Januar$ 82 turned to be the da$ of surrender. At ,8E82 a.%., the first round of ne!otiations for the peaceful and orderl$ transfer of po"er started at MalacaDan!'' Mabini 6all, Office of the E4ecutive 0ecretar$. 0ecretar$ Ed!ardo An!ara, 0enior >eput$ 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 Presidential Mana!e%ent 0taff, ne!otiated for the petitioner. Respondent Arro$o "as represented b$ no" E4ecutive 0ecretar$ Renato de /illa, no" 0ecretar$ of )inance Alberto Ro%ulo and no" 0ecretar$ of Justice 6ernando Pere@. 8= Outside the palace, there "as a brief encounter at Mendiola bet"een pro and anti-Estrada protesters "hich resulted in stone-thro"in! and caused %inor in uries. &he ne!otiations consu%ed all %ornin! until the ne"s bro*e out that Chief Justice >avide "ould ad%inister the oath to respondent Arro$o at hi!h noon at the E>0A 0hrine. At about ,8E22 noon, Chief Justice >avide ad%inistered the oath to respondent Arro$o as President of the Philippines.8. At 8E52 p.%., petitioner and his fa%il$ hurriedl$ left MalacaDan! Palace.8- 6e issued the follo"in! press state%entE 52 :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$, + have stron! and serious doubts about the le!alit$ and constitutionalit$ of her procla%ation as President, + do not "ish to be a factor that "ill prevent the restoration of unit$ and order in our civil societ$. +t is for this reason that + no" leave MalacaDan! Palace, the seat of the presidenc$ of this countr$, for the sa*e of peace and in order to be!in the

healin! process of our nation. + leave the Palace of our people "ith !ratitude for 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 our countr$. + call on all %$ supporters and follo"ers to oin %e in to pro%otion of a constructive 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! letterE5, :0irE B$ virtue of the provisions of 0ection ,,, Article /++ of the Constitution, + a% hereb$ trans%ittin! this declaration that + a% unable to e4ercise the po"ers and duties of %$ office. B$ operation of la" and the Constitution, the /icePresident 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 .E52 a.%. on Januar$ 82.85 Another cop$ "as trans%itted to 0enate President Pi%entel on the sa%e da$ althou!h it "as received onl$ at -E22 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 Court issued the follo"in! Resolution in Ad%inistrative Matter No. 2,-,-2<-0C, to "itE :A.M. No. 2,-,-2<-0C I +n reE Re?uest of /ice President #loria Macapa!alArro$o to &a*e her Oath of Office as President of the Republic of the Philippines before the Chief Justice I Actin! on the ur!ent re?uest of /ice President #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o to be s"orn in as President of the Republic of the Philippines, addressed to the Chief Justice and confir%ed b$ a letter to the Court, dated Januar$ 82, 822,, "hich re?uest "as treated as an ad%inistrative %atter, the court Resolve unani%ousl$ to confir% the authorit$ !iven b$ the t"elve 1,83 %e%bers of the Court then present to the Chief Justice on Januar$ 82, 822, to ad%inister the oath of office of /ice President #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o as President of the Philippines, at noon of Januar$ 82, 822,.1wphi1.nt

&his resolution is "ithout pre udice to the disposition of an$ usticiable case that %a$ be filed b$ a proper part$.: Respondent Arro$o appointed %e%bers of her Cabinet as "ell as a%bassadors and special envo$s.57Reco!nition of respondent Arro$o's !overn%ent b$ forei!n !overn%ents s"iftl$ follo"ed. On Januar$ 85, in a reception or vin d' honneur at MalacaDan!, led b$ the >ean of the >iplo%atic Corps, Papal Nuncio Antonio )ranco, %ore than a hundred forei!n diplo%ats reco!ni@ed the !overn%ent of respondent Arro$o.5< G0 President #eor!e (. Bush !ave the respondent a telephone call fro% the (hite 6ouse conve$in! G0 reco!nition of her !overn%ent. 5A On Januar$ 87, Representative )eliciano Bel%onte "as elected ne" 0pea*er of the 6ouse of Representatives.5=&he 6ouse then passed Resolution No. ,=< :e4pressin! the full support of the 6ouse of Representatives to the ad%inistration of 6er E4cellenc$, #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o, President of the Philippines.: 5. +t also approved Resolution No. ,=A :e4pressin! the support of the 6ouse of Representatives to the assu%ption into office b$ /ice President #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o as President of the Republic of the Philippines, e4tendin! its con!ratulations and e4pressin! its support for her ad%inistration as a partner in the attain%ent of the nation's !oals under the Constitution.:5On Januar$ 8A, the respondent si!ned into la" the 0olid (aste Mana!e%ent Act. 72 A fe" da$s later, she also si!ned into la" the Political Advertisin! ban and )air Election Practices Act.7, On )ebruar$ A, respondent Arro$o no%inated 0enator &eofisto #uin!ona, Jr., as her /ice President.78 &he ne4t da$, )ebruar$ =, the 0enate adopted Resolution No. .8 confir%in! the no%ination of 0enator #uin!ona, Jr. 750enators Miria% >efensor0antia!o, Juan Ponce Enrile, and John Os%ena voted :$es: "ith reservations, citin! as reason therefor the pendin! challen!e on the le!iti%ac$ of respondent Arro$o's presidenc$ before the 0upre%e Court. 0enators &eresa A?uino-Oreta and Robert Barbers "ere absent.77 &he 6ouse of Representatives also approved 0enator #uin!ona's no%ination in Resolution No. ,=.. 7< 0enator #uin!ona, Jr. too* his oath as /ice President t"o 183 da$s later.7A On )ebruar$ =, the 0enate passed Resolution No. .5 declarin! that the i%peach%ent court is functus officio and has been ter%inated.7= 0enator Miria% >efensor-0antia!o stated :for the record: that she voted a!ainst the closure of the i%peach%ent court on the !rounds that the 0enate had failed to decide on the i%peach%ent case and that the resolution left open the ?uestion of "hether Estrada "as still ?ualified to run for another elective post.7. Mean"hile, in a surve$ conducted b$ Pulse Asia, President Arro$o's public acceptance ratin! ac*ed up fro% ,AJ on Januar$ 82, 822, to 5.J on Januar$ 8A, 822,.7- +n another surve$ conducted b$ the AB0-CBNC0(0 fro% )ebruar$ 8-=, 822,, results sho"ed that A,J of the )ilipinos nation"ide accepted President Arro$o as replace%ent of petitioner Estrada. &he surve$ also revealed that President Arro$o is accepted b$ A2J in Metro Manila, b$ also A2J in the balance of 9u@on, b$ =,J in the

/isa$as, and <<J in Mindanao. 6er trust ratin! increased to <8J. 6er presidenc$ is accepted b$ %a orities in all social classesE <.J in the ABC or %iddle-to-upper classes, A7J in the > or %ass class, and <7J a%on! the E's or ver$ poor class. <2 After his fall fro% the pedestal of po"er, the petitioner's le!al proble%s appeared in clusters. 0everal cases previousl$ filed a!ainst hi% in the Office of the O%buds%an "ere set in %otion. &hese areE 1,3 OMB Case No. 2-22-,A8-, filed b$ Ra%on A. #on@ales on October 85, 8222 for briber$ and !raft and corruptionK 183 OMB Case No. 2-22-,=<7 filed b$ the /olunteers A!ainst Cri%e and Corruption on Nove%ber ,=, 8222 for plunder, forfeiture, !raft and corruption, briber$, per ur$, serious %isconduct, violation of the Code of Conduct for #overn%ent E%plo$ees, etcK 153 OMB Case No. 2-22-,=<< filed b$ the #raft )ree Philippines )oundation, +nc. on Nove%ber 87, 8222 for plunder, forfeiture, !raft and corruption, briber$, per ur$, serious %isconductK 173 OMB Case No. 2-22-,=<A filed b$ Ro%eo Capulon!, et al., on Nove%ber 8., 8222 for %alversation of public funds, ille!al use of public funds and propert$, plunder, etc.K 1<3 OMB Case No. 2-22-,=<= filed b$ 9eonard de /era, et al., on Nove%ber 8., 8222 for briber$, plunder, indirect briber$, violation of P> ,A28, P> ,.8-, P> 7A, and RA =2.2K and 1A3 OMB Case No. 2-22-,=<. filed b$ Ernesto B. )rancisco, Jr. on >ece%ber 7, 8222 for plunder, !raft and corruption. A special panel of investi!ators "as forth"ith created b$ the respondent O%buds%an to investi!ate the char!es a!ainst the petitioner. +t is chaired b$ Overall >eput$ O%buds%an Mar!arito P. #ervasio "ith the follo"in! as %e%bers, vizE >irector Andre" A%u$utan, Prosecutor Pela$o Apostol, Att$. Jose de Jesus and Att$. E%%anuel 9aureso. On Januar$ 88, the panel issued an Order directin! the petitioner to file his counter-affidavit and the affidavits of his "itnesses as "ell as other supportin! docu%ents in ans"er to the afore%entioned co%plaints a!ainst hi%. &hus, the sta!e for the cases at bar "as set. On )ebruar$ <, petitioner filed "ith this Court #R No. ,7A=,2-,<, a petition for prohibition "ith a pra$er for a "rit of preli%inar$ in unction. +t sou!ht to en oin the respondent O%buds%an fro% :conductin! an$ further proceedin!s in Case Nos. OMB 2-22-,A8-, ,=<7, ,=<<, ,=<A, ,=<= and ,=<. or in an$ other cri%inal co%plaint that %a$ be filed in his office, until after the ter% of petitioner as President is over and onl$ if le!all$ "arranted.: &hru another counsel, petitioner, on )ebruar$ A, filed #R No. ,7A=5. for Luo (arranto. 6e pra$ed for ud!%ent :confir%in! petitioner to be the la"ful and incu%bent President of the Republic of the Philippines te%poraril$ unable to dischar!e the duties of his office, and declarin! respondent to have ta*en her oath as and to be holdin! the Office of the President, onl$ in an actin! capacit$ pursuant to the provisions of the Constitution.: Actin! on #R Nos. ,7A=,2-,<, the Court, on the sa%e da$, )ebruar$ A, re?uired the respondents :to co%%ent thereon "ithin a non-e4tendible period e4pirin! on ,8 )ebruar$ 822,.: On )ebruar$ ,5, the Court ordered the consolidation of #R Nos. ,7A=,2-,< and #R No. ,7A=5. and the filin! of the respondents' co%%ents :on or before .E22 a.%. of )ebruar$ ,<.: On )ebruar$ ,<, the consolidated cases "ere orall$ ar!ued in a four-hour hearin!. Before the hearin!, Chief Justice >avide, Jr. <, and Associate Justice Arte%io Pan!aniban<8 recused the%selves on %otion of petitioner's counsel, for%er 0enator Rene A. 0a!uisa!. &he$ debun*ed the char!e of counsel 0a!uisa! that the$ have

:co%pro%ised the%selves b$ indicatin! that the$ have thro"n their "ei!ht on one side: but nonetheless inhibited the%selves. &hereafter, the parties "ere !iven the short period of five 1<3 da$s to file their %e%oranda and t"o 183 da$s to sub%it their si%ultaneous replies. +n a resolution dated )ebruar$ 82, actin! on the ur!ent %otion for copies of resolution and press state%ent for :#a! Order: on respondent O%buds%an filed b$ counsel for petitioner in #.R. No. ,7A=5., the Court resolvedE :1,3 to infor% the parties that the Court did not issue a resolution on Januar$ 82, 822, declarin! the office of the President vacant and that neither did the Chief Justice issue a press state%ent ustif$in! the alle!ed resolutionK 183 to order the parties and especiall$ their counsel "ho are officers of the Court under pain of bein! cited for conte%pt to refrain fro% %a*in! an$ co%%ent or discussin! in public the %erits of the cases at bar "hile the$ are still pendin! decision b$ the Court, and 153 to issue a 52-da$ status ?uo order effective i%%ediatel$ en oinin! the respondent O%buds%an fro% resolvin! or decidin! the cri%inal cases pendin! investi!ation in his office a!ainst petitioner, Joseph E. Estrada and sub ect of the cases at bar, it appearin! fro% ne"s reports that the respondent O%buds%an %a$ i%%ediatel$ resolve the cases a!ainst petitioner Joseph E. Estrada seven 1=3 da$s after the hearin! held on )ebruar$ ,<, 822,, "hich action "ill %a*e the cases at bar %oot and acade%ic.:<5 &he parties filed their replies on )ebruar$ 87. On this date, the cases at bar "ere dee%ed sub%itted for decision. &he bedroc* issues for resolution of this Court areE + (hether the petitions present a usticiable controvers$. ++ Assu%in! that the petitions present a usticiable controvers$, "hether petitioner Estrada is a President on leave "hile respondent Arro$o is an Actin! President. +++

(hether conviction in the i%peach%ent proceedin!s is a condition precedent for the cri%inal prosecution of petitioner Estrada. +n the ne!ative and on the assu%ption that petitioner is still President, "hether he is i%%une fro% cri%inal prosecution. +/ (hether the prosecution of petitioner Estrada should be en oined on the !round of pre udicial publicit$. (e shall discuss the issues in seriatim.

presence. &he doctrine of "hich "e treat is one of 'political ?uestions', not of 'political cases'.: +n the Philippine settin!, this Court has been continuousl$ confronted "ith cases callin! for a fir%er delineation of the inner and outer peri%eters of a political ?uestion.<= Our leadin! case is Ta"a*a 5. C)4"co,<. "here this Court, throu!h for%er Chief Justice Roberto Concepcion, held that political ?uestions refer :to those ?uestions "hich, under the Constitution, are to be *4c!*4* (& %h4 $4o$64 in their soverei!n capacit$, or in re!ard to "hich9)66 *!#cr4%!o"ar& a)%hor!%& has been dele!ated to the le!islative or e4ecutive branch of the !overn%ent. +t is concerned "ith issues dependent upon the :!#*o', not 64;a6!%& of a particular %easure.: &o a !reat de!ree, the ,-.= Constitution has narro"ed the reach of the political ?uestion doctrine "hen it e4panded the po"er of udicial revie" of this court not onl$ to settle actual controversies involvin! ri!hts "hich are le!all$ de%andable and enforceable ()% a6#o %o *4%4r'!"4 :h4%h4r or "o% %h4r4 ha# (44" a ;ra54 a()#4 o9 *!#cr4%!o" a'o)"%!"; %o 6ac8 or 4<c4## o9 =)r!#*!c%!o" o" %h4 $ar% o9 a"& (ra"ch or !"#%r)'4"%a6!%& o9 ;o54r"'4"%. <- 6eretofore, the udiciar$ has focused on the :thou shalt not's: of the Constitution directed a!ainst the e4ercise of its urisdiction.A2 (ith the ne" provision, ho"ever, courts are !iven a !reater prero!ative to deter%ine "hat it can do to prevent !rave abuse of discretion a%ountin! to lac* or e4cess of urisdiction on the part of an$ branch or instru%entalit$ of !overn%ent. C64ar6&, %h4 "4: $ro5!#!o" *!* "o% =)#% ;ra"% %h4 Co)r% $o:4r o9 *o!"; "o%h!";. +n s$nc and s$%%etr$ "ith this intent are other provisions of the ,-.= Constitution tri%%in! the so called political thic*et. Pro%inent of these provisions is section ,. of Article /++ "hich e%po"ers this Court in li%pid lan!ua!e to :4 4 4 revie", in an appropriate proceedin! filed b$ an$ citi@en, the sufficienc$ of the factual basis of the procla%ation of %artial la" or the suspension of the privile!e of the "rit 1of habeas corpus3 or the e4tension thereof 4 4 4.: Respondents rel$ on the case of ,a:&4r# ,4a;)4 9or a /4%%4r Ph!6!$$!"4# a"*>or O6!54r A. ,o?a"o 5. Pr4#!*4"% Cora?o" C. A7)!"o, 4% a6.A, and related casesA8 to support their thesis that since the cases at bar involve the 64;!%!'ac& o9 %h4 ;o54r"'4"% o9 r4#$o"*4"% Arro&o, er!o, the$ present a political ?uestion. A %ore cerebral readin! of the cited cases "ill sho" that the$ are inapplicable. +n the cited cases, "e held that the !overn%ent of for%er Pr4#!*4"% A7)!"o "as the result of a #)cc4##9)6 r45o6)%!o" b$ the soverei!n people, albeit a peaceful one. No less than the .r44*o' Co"#%!%)%!o"A5 declared that the A?uino !overn%ent "as installed throu!h a direct e4ercise of the po"er of the )ilipino people @!" *49!a"c4 o9 %h4 $ro5!#!o"# o9 %h4 1A70 Co"#%!%)%!o", a# a'4"*4*.@ +n is fa%iliar learnin! that the le!iti%ac$ of a !overn%ent sired b$ a successful revolution b$ people po"er is be$ond udicial scrutin$ for that !overn%ent auto%aticall$ orbits out of the constitutional loop. +n chec*ered contrast, %h4 ;o54r"'4"% o9 r4#$o"*4"% Arro&o !# "o% r45o6)%!o"ar& !" charac%4r. &he oath that she too* at the E>0A 0hrine is the oath under the ,-.= Constitution.A7 " h4r oa%h, #h4 ca%4;or!ca66& #:or4 %o $r4#4r54 a"* *494"* %h4 1A17 Co"#%!%)%!o" . +ndeed, she has stressed that she is dischar!in! the po"ers of the presidenc$ under the authorit$ of the ,-.= Constitution.

3h4%h4r or "o% %h4 ca#4# A% (ar !"5o654 a $o6!%!ca6 7)4#%!o" Private respondents<7 raise the threshold issue that the cases at bar pose a political ?uestion, and hence, are be$ond the urisdiction of this Court to decide. &he$ contend that shorn of its e%broideries, the cases at bar assail the :le!iti%ac$ of the Arro$o ad%inistration.: &he$ stress that respondent Arro$o ascended the presidenc$ throu!h people po"erK that she has alread$ ta*en her oath as the ,7 th President of the RepublicK that she has e4ercised the po"ers of the presidenc$ and that she has been reco!ni@ed b$ forei!n !overn%ents. &he$ sub%it that these realities on !round constitute the political thic*et, "hich the Court cannot enter. (e re ect private respondents' sub%ission. &o be sure, courts here and abroad, have tried to lift the shroud on political ?uestion but its e4act latitude still splits the best of le!al %inds. >eveloped b$ the courts in the 82th centur$, the political ?uestion doctrine "hich rests on the principle of separation of po"ers and on prudential considerations, continue to be refined in the %ills of constitutional la". << +n the Gnited 0tates, the %ost authoritative !uidelines to deter%ine "hether a ?uestion is political "ere spelled out b$ Mr. Justice Brennan in the ,-A8 case or /a84r 5. Carr,<A vizE :4 4 4 Pro%inent on the surface of an$ case held to involve a political ?uestion is found a te4tuall$ de%onstrable constitutional co%%it%ent of the issue to a coordinate political depart%ent or a lac* of udiciall$ discoverable and %ana!eable standards for resolvin! it, or the i%possibilit$ of decidin! "ithout an initial polic$ deter%ination of a *ind clearl$ for non- udicial discretionK or the i%possibilit$ of a court's underta*in! independent resolution "ithout e4pressin! lac* of the respect due coordinate branches of !overn%entK or an unusual need for un?uestionin! adherence to a political decision alread$ %adeK or the potentialit$ of e%barrass%ent fro% %ultifarious pronounce%ents b$ various depart%ents on ?uestion. Gnless one of these for%ulations is ine4tricable fro% the case at bar, there should be no dis%issal for non usticiabilit$ on the !round of a political ?uestion's

+n fine, the 64;a6 *!#%!"c%!o" bet"een E>0A People Po"er + E>0A People Po"er ++ is clear. EDSA involves the e4ercise of the $4o$64 $o:4r o9 r45o6)%!o" "hich o54r%hr4: %h4 :ho64 ;o54r"'4"%. EDSA is an e4ercise of $4o$64 $o:4r o9 9r44*o' o9 #$44ch a"* 9r44*o' o9 a##4'(6& %o $4%!%!o" %h4 ;o54r"'4"% 9or r4*r4## o9 ;r!45a"c4# "hich o"6& a994c%4* %h4 o99!c4 o9 %h4 Pr4#!*4"%. EDSA !# 4<%ra co"#%!%)%!o"a6 and the le!iti%ac$ of the ne" !overn%ent that resulted fro% it cannot be the sub ect of udicial revie", but EDSA !# !"%ra co"#%!%)%!o"a6 and the resi!nation of the sittin! President that it caused and the succession of the /ice President as President are sub ect to udicial revie". EDSA $r4#4"%4* a $o6!%!ca6 7)4#%!o"B EDSA !"5o654# 64;a6 7)4#%!o"#. A brief discourse on freedo% of speech and of the freedo% of asse%bl$ to petition the !overn%ent for redress of !rievance "hich are the c)%%!"; 4*;4 o9 EDSA P4o$64 Po:4r is not inappropriate. )reedo% of speech and the ri!ht of asse%bl$ are treasured b$ )ilipinos. >enial of these ri!hts "as one of the reasons of our ,.-. revolution a!ainst 0pain. Our national hero, Jose P. Ri@al, raised the clarion call for the reco!nition of freedo% of the press of the )ilipinos and included it as a%on! :the refor%s sine quibus non.:A< &heMa6o6o# Co"#%!%)%!o" , "hich is the "or* of the revolutionar$ Con!ress in ,.-., provided in its Bill of Ri!hts that )ilipinos shall not be deprived 1,3 of the ri!ht to freel$ e4press his ideas or opinions, orall$ or in "ritin!, throu!h the use of the press or other si%ilar %eansK 183 of the ri!ht of association for purposes of hu%an life and "hich are not contrar$ to public %eansK and 153 of the ri!ht to send petitions to the authorities, individuall$ or collectivel$.: Th4#4 9)"*a'4"%a6 r!;h%# :4r4 $r4#4r54* :h4" %h4 U"!%4* S%a%4# ac7)!r4* =)r!#*!c%!o" o54r %h4 Ph!6!$$!"4#. +n the +nstruction to the 0econd Philippine Co%%ission of April =, ,-22 issued b$ President McMinle$, it is specificall$ provided :that no la" shall be passed abrid!in! the freedo% of speech or of the press or of the ri!hts of the people to peaceabl$ asse%ble and petition the #overn%ent for redress of !rievances.: &he !uarant$ "as carried over in the Philippine Bill, the Act of Con!ress of Jul$ ,, ,-28 and the Jones 9a", the Act of Con!ress of Au!ust 8-, ,-AA.AA &hence on, the !uarant$ "as set in stone in our 1A05 Co"#%!%)%!o",A= and the 1A70A. Co"#%!%)%!o". &hese ri!hts are no" safel$ ensconced in section 7, Article +++ of the ,-.= Constitution, vizE :0ec. 7. No la" shall be passed abrid!in! the freedo% of speech, of e4pression, or of the press, or the ri!ht of the people peaceabl$ to asse%ble and petition the !overn%ent for redress of !rievances.: &he indispensabilit$ of the people's freedo% of speech and of asse%bl$ to de%ocrac$ is no" self-evident. &he reasons are "ell put b$ E%ersonE first, freedo% of e4pression is essential as a %eans of assurin! individual fulfill%entK second, it is an essential process for advancin! *no"led!e and discoverin! truthK third, it is essential to provide for participation in decision-%a*in! b$ all %e%bers of societ$K and fourth, it is a %ethod of achievin! a %ore adaptable and hence, a %ore stable co%%unit$ of %aintainin! the precarious balance bet"een health$ cleava!e and necessar$ consensus.:A- " %h!# #4"#4, 9r44*o' o9 #$44ch a"* o9 a##4'(6& $ro5!*4# a 9ra'4:or8 !" :h!ch %h4 @co"96!c% "4c4##ar& %o %h4 $ro;r4## o9 a

#oc!4%& ca" %a84 $6ac4 :!%ho)% *4#%ro&!"; %h4 #oc!4%&.@ =2 +n Ha;)4 5. Co''!%%44 9or "*)#%r!a6 Or;a"!?a%!o", =, this function of free speech and asse%bl$ "as echoed in the amicus curiae filed b$ the Bill of Ri!hts Co%%ittee of the A%erican Bar Association "hich e%phasi@ed that :the basis of the ri!ht of asse%bl$ is the substitution of the e4pression of opinion and belief b$ %a68 ra%h4r %ha" 9orc4K and this %eans %a68 9or a66 a"* (& a66.:=8 +n the relativel$ recent case of S)(a&co 5. Sa"*!;a"(a&a",=5 this Court si%ilar stressed that :N it should be clear even to those "ith intellectual deficits that "hen the soverei!n people asse%ble to petition for redress of !rievances, all should listen. .or !" a *4'ocrac&, !% !# %h4 $4o$64 :ho co)"%B %ho#4 :ho ar4 *4a9 %o %h4!r ;r!45a"c4# ar4 c!$h4r# .: Needless to state, the cases at bar pose le!al and not political ?uestions. &he principal issues for resolution re?uire the proper interpretation of certain provisions in the ,-.= Constitution, notabl$ section , of Article ++,=7 and section .=< of Article /++, and the allocation of !overn%ental po"ers under section ,, =A of Article /++. &he issues li*e"ise call for a rulin! on the scope of presidential i%%unit$ fro% suit. &he$ also involve the correct calibration of the ri!ht of petitioner a!ainst pre udicial publicit$. As earl$ as the ,.25 case of Mar()r& 5. Ma*!#o",== the doctrine has been laid do"n that :!% !# 4'$ha%!ca66& %h4 $ro5!"c4 a"* *)%& o9 %h4 =)*!c!a6 *4$ar%'4"% %o #a& :ha% %h4 6a: !# . . .: &hus, respondent's in vocation of the doctrine of political ?uestion is but a fora$ in the dar*.

3h4%h4r or "o% %h4 $4%!%!o"4r R4#!;"4* a# Pr4#!*4"% (e no" slide to the second issue. None of the parties considered this issue as posin! a political ?uestion. +ndeed, it involves a le!al ?uestion "hose factual in!redient is deter%inable fro% the records of the case and b$ resort to udicial notice. Petitioner denies he resi!ned as President or that he suffers fro% a per%anent disabilit$. 6ence, he sub%its that the office of the President "as not vacant "hen respondent Arro$o too* her oath as President. &he issue brin!s under the %icroscope the %eanin! of section ., Article /++ of the Constitution "hich providesE :0ec. .. +n case of death, per%anent disabilit$, re%oval fro% office or resi!nation of the President, the /ice President shall beco%e the President to serve the une4pired ter%. +n case of death, per%anent disabilit$, re%oval fro% office, or resi!nation of both the President and /ice President, the President of the 0enate or, in case of his inabilit$, the 0pea*er of the 6ouse of Representatives, shall then act as President until the President or /ice President shall have been elected and ?ualified. 4 4 4.:

&he issue then is "hether the petitioner resi!ned as President or should be considered resi!ned as of Januar$ 82, 822, "hen respondent too* her oath as the ,7th President of the Public. Resi!nation is not a hi!h level le!al abstraction. +t is a factual ?uestion and its 464'4"%# are be$ond ?uibbleE %h4r4 ')#% (4 a" !"%4"% %o r4#!;" a"* %h4 !"%4"% ')#% (4 co)$64* (& ac%# o9 r46!"7)!#h'4"%. =. &he validit$ of a resi!nation is not !overn%ent b$ an$ for%al re?uire%ent as to for%. +t can be oral. +t can be "ritten. +t can be e4press. +t can be i%plied. As lon! as the resi!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 of resi!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 not petitioner resi!ned has to be deter%ined fro% his act and o%issions before, durin! and after Januar$ 82, 822, or b$ the %o%a6!%& o9 $r!or, co"%4'$ora"4o)# a"* $o#%4r!or 9ac%# a"* c!rc)'#%a"%!a6 45!*4"c4 (4ar!"; a 'a%4r!a6 r4645a"c4 o" %h4 !##)4. Gsin! this totalit$ test, :4 ho6* %ha% $4%!%!o"4r r4#!;"4* a# Pr4#!*4"%. &o appreciate the public pressure that led to the resi!nation of the petitioner, it is i%portant to follo" the succession of events after the e4pos; of #overnor 0in!son. &he 0enate Blue Ribbon Co%%ittee investi!ated. &he %ore detailed revelations of petitioner's alle!ed %is!overnance in the Blue Ribbon investi!ation spi*ed the hate a!ainst hi%. &he Articles of +%peach%ent filed in the 6ouse of Representatives "hich initiall$ "as !iven a near cipher chance of succeedin! sno"balled. +n e4press speed, it !ained the si!natures of ,,< representatives or %ore than ,C5 of the 6ouse of Representatives. 0oon, petitioner's po"erful political allies be!an desertin! hi%. Respondent Arro$o ?uit as 0ecretar$ of 0ocial (elfare. 0enate President >rilon and for%er 0pea*er /illar defected "ith 7= representatives in to". &hen, his respected senior econo%ic advisers resi!ned to!ether "ith his 0ecretar$ of &rade and +ndustr$. As the political isolation of the petitioner "orsened, the people's call for his resi!nation intensified. &he call reached a ne" crescendo "hen the eleven 1,,3 %e%bers of the i%peach%ent tribunal refused to open the second envelope. +t sent the people to paro4$s%s of outra!e. Before the ni!ht of Januar$ ,A "as over, the E>0A 0hrine "as s"ar%in! "ith people cr$in! for redress of their !rievance. &heir nu%ber !re" e4ponentiall$. Rallies and de%onstration ?uic*l$ spread to the countr$side li*e a brush fire. As events approached Januar$ 82, "e can have an authoritative "indo" on the #%a%4 o9 '!"* of the petitioner. &he "indo" is provided in the :)inal >a$s of Joseph E ercito Estrada,: the diar$ of E4ecutive 0ecretar$ An!ara seriali@ed in the Ph!6!$$!"4 Da!6& "7)!r4r .=- &he An!ara >iar$ reveals that in the %ornin! of Januar$ ,-, petitioner's lo$al advisers "ere "orried about the s"ellin! of the cro"d at E>0A, hence, the$ decided to create an ad hoc co%%ittee to handle it. &heir "orr$ "ould "orsen. At ,E82 p.%., petitioner pulled 0ecretar$ An!ara into his s%all office at the presidential residence and e4clai%edE :Ed, ser$oso na ito. Mu%alas na si An!elo 1Re$es3 1Ed, this is serious. An!elo has defected.3: .2 An hour later or at 8E52 p.%., the petitioner decided to call for a snap presidential election a"* #%r4##4* h4 :o)6*

"o% (4 a ca"*!*a%4. Th4 $ro$o#a6 9or a #"a$ 464c%!o" 9or $r4#!*4"% !" Ma& :h4r4 h4 :o)6* "o% (4 a ca"*!*a%4 !# a" !"*!c!)' %ha% $4%!%!o"4r ha* !"%4"*4* %o ;!54 )$ %h4 $r4#!*4"c& 454" a% %ha% %!'4 . At 5E22 p.%., #eneral Re$es oined the sea of E>0A de%onstrators de%andin! the resi!nation of the petitioner and dra%aticall$ announced the A)P's "ithdra"al of support fro% the petitioner and their pled!e of support to respondent Arro$o. &he seis%ic shift of support left petitioner "ea* as a president. Accordin! to 0ecretar$ An!ara, he as*ed 0enator Pi%entel to advise petitioner to consider the option of@*!;"!9!4* 4<!% or r4#!;"a%!o".@11 P4%!%!o"4r *!* "o% *!#a;r44 ()% 6!#%4"4* !"%4"%6&. .8 &he s*$ "as fallin! fast on the petitioner. At -E52 p.%., 0enator Pi%entel repeated to the petitioner the ur!enc$ of %a*in! a !raceful and di!nified e4it. 6e !ave the proposal a s"eetener b$ sa$in! that petitioner "ould be allo"ed to !o abroad "ith enou!h funds to support hi% and his fa%il$. .5 S!;"!9!ca"%6&, %h4 $4%!%!o"4r 4<$r4##4* "o o(=4c%!o" %o %h4 #);;4#%!o" 9or a ;rac49)6 a"* *!;"!9!4* 4<!% ()% #a!* h4 :o)6* "454r 64a54 %h4 co)"%r&. .7 At ,2E22 p.%., petitioner revealed to 0ecretar$ An!ara, :Ed, An!ie 1Re$es3 !uaranteed that + "ould have five da$s to a "ee* in the palace.:.< Th!# !# $roo9 %ha% $4%!%!o"4r ha* r4co"c!64* h!'#469 %o %h4 r4a6!%& %ha% h4 ha* %o r4#!;". H!# '!"* :a# a6r4a*& co"c4r"4* :!%h %h4 9!54-*a& ;rac4 $4r!o* h4 co)6* #%a& !" %h4 $a6ac4. % :a# a 'a%%4r o9 %!'4. &he pressure continued pilin! up. B$ ,,E22 p.%., for%er President Ra%os called up 0ecretar$ An!ara and re?uested, :Ed, %a!tulun!an ta$o para %a!*aroon ta$o n! 1let's cooperate to ensure a3 $4ac49)6 a"* or*4r6& %ra"#94r o9 $o:4r.:.A &here "as no defiance to the re?uest. 0ecretar$ An!ara readil$ a!reed. A!ain, "e note that at this sta!e, %h4 $ro(64' :a# a6r4a*& a(o)% a $4ac49)6 a"* or*4r6& %ra"#94r o9 $o:4r. Th4 r4#!;"a%!o" o9 %h4 $4%!%!o"4r :a# !'$6!4*. &he 9!r#% "4;o%!a%!o" for a peaceful and orderl$ transfer of po"er i%%ediatel$ started at ,8E82 a.%. of Januar$ 82, that fateful 0aturda$. &he "4;o%!a%!o" :a# 6!'!%4* to three 153 pointsE 1,3 the transition period of five da$s after the petitioner's resi!nationK 183 the !uarantee of the safet$ of the petitioner and his fa%il$, and 153 the a!ree%ent to open the second envelope to vindicate the na%e of the petitioner..= A;a!", :4 "o%4 %ha% %h4 r4#!;"a%!o" o9 $4%!%!o"4r :a# "o% a *!#$)%4* $o!"%. Th4 $4%!%!o"4r ca""o% 94!;" !;"ora"c4 o9 %h!# 9ac%. Accordin! to 0ecretar$ An!ara, at 8E52 a.%., he briefed the petitioner on the three points and the follo"in! entr$ in the A";ara D!ar& #ho:# %h4 r4ac%!o" o9 %h4 $4%!%!o"4r, vizE :4 4 4 + e4plain "hat happened durin! the first round of ne!otiations. &he Pr4#!*4"% i%%ediatel$ stresses that h4 =)#% :a"%# the five-da$ period pro%ised b$ Re$es, as "ell as to open the second envelope to clear his na%e. 9 %h4 4"546o$4 !# o$4"4*, o" Mo"*a&, h4 #a&#, h4 :!66 64a54 (& Mo"*a&.

&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 r4* %a$4, ()r4a)crac&, !"%r!;a. C a' 54r& %!r4*. *o"D% :a"% a"& 'or4 o9 %h!# E !%D# %oo $a!"9)6. D' %!r4* o9 %h4 r4* %a$4, %h4 ()r4a)crac&, %h4 !"%r!;)4.F =)#% :a"% %o c64ar '& "a'4, %h4" :!66 ;o.@ ..

Our deal (e brin! out, too, our discussion draft "hich readsE &he undersi!ned parties, for and in behalf of their respective principals, a!ree and underta*e as follo"sE ',. A transition "ill occur and ta*e place on (ednesda$, 87 Januar$ 822,, at "hich ti%e President Joseph E ercito Estrada "ill turn over the presidenc$ to /ice President #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o. '8. +n return, President Estrada and his fa%ilies are !uaranteed securit$ and safet$ of their person and propert$ throu!hout their natural lifeti%es. 9i*e"ise, President Estrada and his fa%ilies are !uarantee freedo% fro% persecution or retaliation fro% !overn%ent and the private sector throu!hout their natural lifeti%es. &his co%%it%ent shall be !uaranteed b$ the Ar%ed )orces of the Philippines 1A)P3 throu!h the Chief of 0taff, as approved b$ the national %ilitar$ and police authorities O /ice President 1Macapa!al3. '5. Both parties shall endeavor to ensure that the 0enate sittin! as an i%peach%ent court "ill authori@e the openin! of the second envelope in the i%peach%ent trial as proof that the sub ect savin!s account does not belon! to President Estrada. '7. >urin! the five-da$ transition period bet"een 82 Januar$ 822, and 87 Januar$ 822, 1the '&ransition Period:3, the inco%in! Cabinet %e%bers shall receive an appropriate briefin! fro% the out!oin! Cabinet officials as part of the orientation pro!ra%. >urin! the &ransition Period, the A)P and the Philippine National Police 1PNP3 shall function /ice President 1Macapa!al3 as national %ilitar$ and police authorities. Both parties hereto a!ree that the A)P chief of staff and PNP director !eneral shall obtain all the necessar$ si!natures as affi4ed to this a!ree%ent and insure faithful i%ple%entation and observance thereof. /ice President #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o shall issue a public state%ent in the for% and tenor provided for in :Anne4 A: heretofore attached to this a!ree%ent.:.&he second round of ne!otiation ce%ents the readin! that the petitioner has resi!ned. +t "ill be noted that durin! this second round of ne!otiation, the resi!nation of the petitioner "as a!ain treated as a !iven fact. &he onl$ unsettled points at that

A;a!", %h!# !# h!;h ;ra*4 45!*4"c4 %ha% %h4 $4%!%!o"4r ha# r4#!;"4*. &he intent to resi!n is clear "hen he said :4 4 4 A&o8o "a %as$ado nan! %asa*it.: :A&o8o "a: are :or*# o9 r4#!;"a%!o". &he #4co"* ro)"* o9 "4;o%!a%!o" resu%ed at =E52 a.%. Accordin! to the An!ara >iar$, the follo"in! happenedE :Opposition's deal =E52 a.%. O Rene arrives "ith Bert Ro%ulo and 1Ms. Macapa!al's spo*esperson3 Rene Corona. )or this round, + a% acco%panied b$ >ondon Ba!atsin! and Macel. Rene pulls out a docu%ent titled :Ne!otiatin! Points.: +t readsE ',. &he President shall si!n a resi!nation docu%ent "ithin the da$, 82 Januar$ 822,, that "ill be effective on (ednesda$, 87 Januar$ 822,, on "hich da$ the /ice President "ill assu%e the Presidenc$ of the Republic of the Philippines. 8. Be!innin! to da$, 82 Januar$ 822,, the transition process for the assu%ption of the ne" ad%inistration shall co%%ence, and persons desi!nated b$ the /ice President to various positions and offices of the !overn%ent shall start their orientation activities in coordination "ith the incu%bent officials concerned. 5. &he Ar%ed )orces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police shall function under the /ice President as national %ilitar$ and police authorit$ 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$ the national %ilitar$ and police authorit$ 1/ice President3. <. +t is to be noted that the 0enate "ill open the second envelope in connection "ith the alle!ed savin!s account of the President in the E?uitable PC+ Ban* in accordance "ith the rules of the 0enate, pursuant to the re?uest to the 0enate President.

ti%e "ere the %easures to be underta*en b$ the parties durin! and after the transition period. Accordin! to 0ecretar$ An!ara, the draft a!ree%ent, "hich "as pre%ised on the resi!nation of the petitioner "as further refined. +t "as then, si!ned b$ their side and he "as read$ to fa4 it to #eneral Re$es and 0enator Pi%entel to a"ait the si!nature of the Gnited Opposition. 6o"ever, the si!nin! b$ the part$ of the respondent Arro$o "as aborted b$ her oath-ta*in!. &he An!ara diar$ narrates the fateful events, vizK-2 :444 ,,E22 a.%. O Bet"een #eneral Re$es and %$self, there is a fir% a!ree%ent on the five points to effect a peaceful transition. + can hear the !eneral clearin! all these points "ith a !roup he is "ith. + hear voices in the bac*!round. A!ree%ent. &he a!ree%ent startsE ,. &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. 444 &he rest of the a!ree%ent follo"sE 8. &he transition process for the assu%ption of the ne" ad%inistration shall co%%ence on 82 Januar$ 822,, "herein persons desi!nated b$ the /ice President 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%ilies throu!hout their natural lifeti%es as approved b$ the national %ilitar$ and police authorit$ O /ice President. '7. &he A)P and the Philippine National Police 1PNP3 shall function under the /ice President as national %ilitar$ and police authorities. '<. Both parties re?uest the i%peach%ent court to open the second envelope in the i%peach%ent trial, the contents of "hich shall be offered as proof that the sub ect savin!s account does not belon! to the President. &he /ice President shall issue a public state%ent in the for% and tenor provided for in Anne4 :B: heretofore attached to this a!ree%ent.

,,E82 a.%. O + a% all set to fa4 #eneral Re$es and Nene Pi%entel our a!ree%ent, si!ned b$ our side and a"aitin! the si!nature of the Gnited opposition. And then it happens. #eneral Re$es calls %e to sa$ that the 0upre%e Court has decided that #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o is President and "ill be s"orn in at ,8 noon. 'Bakit hindi naman kayo nakahintay !aano na ang agreement "why cou#dn't you wait $hat about the agreement% ' + as*ed. Re$es ans"eredE '$a#a na& sir "it's over, sir3.' + as* hi%E 'i yung transition period, %oot and acade%ic naP' And #eneral Re$es ans"ersE ' (o nga& ) delete na natin& sir 1$es, "e're deletin! the part3.' Contrar$ to subse?uent reports, + do not react and sa$ that there "as a double cross. But + i%%ediatel$ instruct Macel to delete the first provision on resi!nation since this %atter is alread$ %oot and acade%ic. (ithin %o%ents, Macel erases the first provision and fa4es the docu%ents, "hich have been si!ned b$ %$self, >ondon and Macel, to Nene Pi%entel and #eneral Re$es. + direct >e%aree Ravel to rush the ori!inal docu%ent to #eneral Re$es for the si!natures of the other side, as it is i%portant that the provisions on securit$, at least, should be respected. + then advise the President that the 0upre%e Court has ruled that Chief Justice >avide "ill ad%inister the oath to #loria at ,8 noon. &he President is too stunned for "ordsE )inal %eal ,8 noon O #loria ta*es her oath as president of the Republic of the Philippines. ,8E82 p.%. O &he P0# distributes firear%s to so%e people inside the co%pound.

&he president is havin! his final %eal at the presidential Residence "ith the fe" friends and Cabinet %e%bers "ho have !athered. B$ this ti%e, de%onstrators have alread$ bro*en do"n the first line of defense at Mendiola. Onl$ the P0# is there to protect the Palace, since the police and %ilitar$ have alread$ "ithdra"n their support for the President. , p.%. O &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 a final state%ent before leavin! MalacaDan!. &he state%ent readsE 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$, + have stron! and serious doubts about the le!alit$ and constitutionalit$ of her procla%ation as President, + do not "ish to be a factor that "ill prevent the restoration of unit$ and order in our civil societ$. +t is for this reason that + no" leave MalacaDan! Palace, the seat of the presidenc$ of this countr$, for the sa*e of peace and in order to be!in the healin! process of our nation. + leave the Palace of our people "ith !ratitude for the opportunities !iven to %e for service to our people. + "ill not shir* fro% an$ future challen!es that %a$ co%e ahead in the sa%e service of our countr$. + call on all %$ supporters and follo"ers to oin %e in the pro%otion of a constructive 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 "as confir%ed b$ his leavin! MalacaDan!. +n the press release containin! his final state%ent, 1,3 he ac*no"led!ed the oath-ta*in! of the respondent as President of the Republic albeit "ith reservation about its le!alit$K 183 he e%phasi@ed he "as leavin! the Palace, the seat of the presidenc$, for the sa*e of peace and in order to be!in the healin! process of our nation. 6e did not sa$ he "as leavin! the Palace due to an$ *ind inabilit$ and that he "as !oin! to re-assu%e the presidenc$ as soon as the disabilit$ disappearsE 153 he e4pressed his !ratitude to the people for the opportunit$ 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 the president "hich he has !iven upK and 1<3 he called on his supporters to oin hi% in the pro%otion of a constructive national spirit of reconciliation and solidarit$. Certainl$, the national spirit of reconciliation and solidarit$ could not be attained if he did not !ive up the presidenc$. &he press release "as petitioner's valedictor$, his final act of fare"ell. 6is presidenc$ is no" in the part tense. +t is, ho"ever, ur!ed that the petitioner did not resi!n but onl$ too* a te%porar$ leave dated Januar$ 82, 822, of the petitioner sent to 0enate President Pi%entel and 0pea*er )uentebella is cited. A!ain, "e refer to the said letter, vi@E :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"ers and duties of %$ office. B$ operation of la" and the Constitution, the /ice President shall be the Actin! president. 10!d.3 Joseph E ercito Estrada: &o sa$ the least, the above letter is "rapped in %$ster$. -, &he pleadin!s filed b$ the petitioner in the cases at bar did not discuss, %a$ even inti%ate, the circu%stances that led to its preparation. Neither did the counsel of the petitioner reveal to the Court these circu%stances durin! the oral ar!u%ent. +t stri*es the Court as stran!e that the letter, despite its le!al value, "as never referred to b$ the petitioner durin! the "ee*-lon! crisis. &o be sure, there "as not the sli!htest hint of its e4istence "hen he issued his final press release. +t "as all too eas$ for hi% to tell the )ilipino people in his press release that he "as te%poraril$ unable to !overn and that he "as leavin! the reins of !overn%ent to respondent Arro$o for the ti%e bearin!. Gnder an$ circu%stance, ho"ever, the %$sterious letter cannot ne!ate the resi!nation of the petitioner. +f it "as prepared before the press release of the petitioner clearl$ as a later act. +f, ho"ever, it "as prepared after the press released, still, it co%%ands scant le!al si!nificance. Petitioner's resi!nation fro% the presidenc$ cannot be the sub ect of a chan!in! caprice nor of a "hi%sical "ill especiall$ if the resi!nation is the result of his reputation b$ the people. &here is another reason "h$ this Court cannot !iven an$ le!al si!nificance to petitioner's letter and this shall be discussed in issue nu%ber +++ of this >ecision. After petitioner contended that as a %atter of fact he did not resi!n, he also ar!ues that he could not resi!n as a %atter of la". 6e relies on section ,8 of RA No. 52,-, other"ise *no"n as the Anti-!raft and Corrupt Practices Act, "hich alle!edl$ prohibits his resi!nation, vizE :0ec. ,8. No public officer shall be allo"ed to resi!n or retire pendin! an investi!ation, cri%inals or ad%inistrative, or pendin! a prosecution a!ainst hi%, for an$ offense under this Act or under the provisions of the Revised Penal Code on briber$.:

A readin! of the le!islative histor$ of RA No. 52,- "ill hardl$ provide an$ co%fort to the petitioner. RA No. 52,- ori!inated for% 0enate Bill No. 8-5. &he ori!inal draft of the bill, "hen it "as sub%itted to the 0enate, did not contain a provision si%ilar to section ,8 of the la" as it no" stands. 6o"ever, in his sponsorship speech, 0enator Arturo &olentino, the author of the bill, :reserved to propose durin! the period of a%end%ents the inclusion of a provision to the effect that no public official "ho is under prosecution for an$ act of !raft or corruption, or is under ad%inistrative investi!ation, shall be allo"ed to voluntaril$ resi!n or retire.: -8 >urin! the period of a%end%ents, the follo"in! provision "as inserted as section ,<E :0ec. ,<. &er%ination of office O No public official shall be allo"ed to resi!n or retire pendin! an investi!ation, cri%inal or ad%inistrative, or pendin! a prosecution a!ainst hi%, for an$ offense under the Act or under the provisions of the Revised Penal Code on briber$. &he separation or cessation of a public official for% office shall not be a bar to his prosecution under this Act for an offense co%%itted durin! his incu%benc$.:-5 &he bill "as vetoed b$ then President Carlos P. #arcia "ho ?uestioned the le!alit$ of the second para!raph of the provision and insisted that the President's i%%unit$ should e4tend after his tenure. 0enate Bill No. <=,, "hich "as substantiall$ si%ilar 0enate Bill No. 8-5, "as thereafter passed. 0ection ,< above beca%e section ,5 under the ne" bill, but the deliberations on this particular provision %ainl$ focused on the i%%unit$ of the President, "hich "as one of the reasons for the veto of the ori!inal bill. &here "as hardl$ an$ debate on the prohibition a!ainst the resi!nation or retire%ent of a public official "ith pendin! cri%inal and ad%inistrative cases a!ainst hi%. Be that as it %a$, the intent of the la" ou!ht to be obvious. +t is to prevent the act of resi!nation or retire%ent fro% bein! used b$ a public official as a protective shield to stop the investi!ation of a pendin! cri%inal or ad%inistrative case a!ainst hi% and to prevent his prosecution under the Anti-#raft 9a" or prosecution for briber$ under the Revised Penal Code. &o be sure, no person can be co%pelled to render service for that "ould be a violation of his constitutional ri!ht.-7 A public official has the ri!ht not to serve if he reall$ "ants to retire or resi!n. Nevertheless, if at the ti%e he resi!ns or retires, a public official is facin! ad%inistrative or cri%inal investi!ation or prosecution, such resi!nation or retire%ent "ill not cause the dis%issal of the cri%inal or ad%inistrative proceedin!s a!ainst hi%. 6e cannot use his resi!nation or retire%ent to avoid prosecution. &here is another reason "h$ petitioner's contention should be re ected. +n the cases at bar, the records sho" that "hen petitioner resi!ned on Januar$ 82, 822,, the cases filed a!ainst hi% before the O%buds%an "ere OMB Case Nos. 2-22-,A8-, 222-,=<<, 2-22-,=<A, 2-22-,=<= and 2-22-,=<.. (hile these cases have been filed, the respondent O%buds%an refrained fro% conductin! the preli%inar$ investi!ation of the petitioner for the reason that as the sittin! President then, petitioner "as i%%une fro% suit. &echnicall$, the said cases cannot be considered as pendin! for the O%buds%an lac*ed urisdiction to act on the%. 0ection ,8 of RA No. 52,- cannot

therefore be invo*ed b$ the petitioner for it conte%plates of cases "hose investi!ation or prosecution do not suffer fro% an$ insuperable le!al obstacle li*e the i%%unit$ fro% suit of a sittin! President. Petitioner contends that the i%peach%ent proceedin! is an ad%inistrative investi!ation that, under section ,8 of RA 52,-, bars hi% fro% resi!nin!. (e hold other"ise. &he e4act nature of an i%peach%ent proceedin! is debatable. But even assu%in! arguendo that it is an ad%inistrative proceedin!, it can not be considered pendin! at the ti%e petitioner resi!ned because the process alread$ bro*e do"n "hen a %a orit$ of the senator- ud!es voted a!ainst the openin! of the second envelope, the public and private prosecutors "al*ed out, the public prosecutors filed their Manifestation of (ithdra"al of Appearance, and the proceedin!s "ere postponed indefinitel$. &here "as, in effect, no i%peach%ent case pendin! a!ainst petitioner "hen he resi!ned.

3h4%h4r or "o% %h4 $4%!%!o"4r # o"6& %4'$orar!6& )"a(64 %o Ac% a# Pr4#!*4"%. (e shall no" tac*le the contention of the petitioner that he is %erel$ te%poraril$ unable to perfor% the po"ers and duties of the presidenc$, and hence is a President on leave. As aforestated, the inabilit$ clai% is contained in the Januar$ 82, 822, letter of petitioner sent on the sa%e da$ to 0enate President Pi%entel and 0pea*er )uentebella. Petitioner postulates that respondent Arro$o as /ice President has no po"er to ad ud!e the inabilit$ of the petitioner to dischar!e the po"ers and duties of the presidenc$. 6is si!nificant sub%ittal is that :Con!ress has the ulti%ate authorit$ under the Constitution to deter%ine "hether the President is incapable of perfor%in! his functions in the %anner provided for in section ,, of article /++.: -< &his contention is the c4"%4r$!4c4 o9 $4%!%!o"4rD# #%a"c4 that he is a President on leave and respondent Arro$o is onl$ an Actin! President. An e4a%ination of section ,,, Article /++ is in order. +t providesE :0EC. ,,. (henever the President trans%its to the President of the 0enate and the 0pea*er of the 6ouse of Representatives his "ritten declaration that he is unable to dischar!e the po"ers and duties of his office, and until he trans%its to the% a "ritten declaration to the contrar$, such po"ers and duties shall be dischar!ed b$ the /ice-President as Actin! President. (henever a %a orit$ of all the Me%bers of the Cabinet trans%it to the President of the 0enate and to the 0pea*er of the 6ouse of Representatives their "ritten declaration that the President is unable to dischar!e the po"ers and duties of his office, the /ice-President shall i%%ediatel$ assu%e the po"ers and duties of the office as Actin! President.

&hereafter, "hen the President trans%its to the President of the 0enate and to the 0pea*er of the 6ouse of Representatives his "ritten declaration that no inabilit$ e4ists, he shall reassu%e the po"ers and duties of his office. Mean"hile, should a %a orit$ of all the Me%bers of the Cabinet trans%it "ithin five da$s to the President of the 0enate and to the 0pea*er of the 6ouse of Representatives their "ritten declaration that the President is unable to dischar!e the po"ers and duties of his office, the Con!ress shall decide the issue. )or that purpose, the Con!ress shall convene, if it is not in session, "ithin fort$-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$, that the President is unable to dischar!e the po"ers and duties of his office, the /ice-President shall act as PresidentK other"ise, the President shall continue e4ercisin! the po"ers and duties of his office.: &hat is the la". No", the operative factsE ,. 8. 5. Petitioner, on Januar$ 82, 822,, sent the above letter clai%in! inabilit$ to the 0enate President and 0pea*er of the 6ouseK Gna"are of the letter, respondent Arro$o too* her oath of office as President on Januar$ 82, 822, at about ,8E52 p.%.K >espite receipt of the letter, the 6ouse of Representatives passed on Januar$ 87, 822, 6ouse Resolution No. ,=<K-A

(6EREA0, i%%ediatel$ thereafter, %e%bers of the international co%%unit$ had e4tended their reco!nition to 6er E4cellenc$, #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o as President of the Republic of the PhilippinesK (6EREA0, 6er E4cellenc$, President #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o has espoused a polic$ of national healin! and reconciliation "ith ustice for the purpose of national unit$ and develop%entK (6EREA0, it is a4io%atic that the obli!ations of the !overn%ent cannot be achieved if it is divided, thus b$ reason of the constitutional dut$ of the 6ouse 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 of Representatives %ust ensure to the people a stable, continuin! !overn%ent and therefore %ust re%ove all obstacles to the attain%ent thereofK (6EREA0, it is a conco%itant dut$ of the 6ouse of Representatives to e4ert all efforts to unif$ the nation, to eli%inate fractious tension, to heal social and political "ounds, and to be an instru%ent of national reconciliation and solidarit$ 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%ent of all the fore!oin!, for the 6ouse of Representatives to e4tend its support and collaboration to the ad%inistration of 6er E4cellenc$, President #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o, and to be a constructive partner in nation-buildin!, the national interest de%andin! no lessE No", therefore, be it *eso#ved by the +ouse of *epresentatives , &o e4press its support to the assu%ption into office b$ /ice President #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o as President of the Republic of the Philippines, to e4tend its con!ratulations and to e4press its support for her ad%inistration as a partner in the attain%ent of the Nation's !oals under the Constitution. Adopted, 10!d.3 )E9+C+ANO BE9MON&E JR. 0pea*er &his Resolution "as adopted b$ the 6ouse of Representatives on Januar$ 87, 822,. 10!d.3 ROBER&O P. NABARENO 0ecretar$ #eneral: On )ebruar$ =, 822,, the 6ouse of the Representatives passed Ho)#4 R4#o6)%!o" No. 171-. "hich statesE

On the sa%e date, the 6ouse of the Representatives passed Ho)#4 R4#o6)%!o" No. 176-= "hich statesE :RE0O9G&+ON EQPRE00+N# &6E 0GPPOR& O) &6E 6OG0E O) REPRE0EN&A&+/E0 &O &6E A00GMP&+ON +N&O O))+CE BF /+CE PRE0+>EN& #9OR+A MACAPA#A9-ARROFO A0 PRE0+>EN& O) &6E REPGB9+C O) &6E P6+9+PP+NE0, EQ&EN>+N# +&0 CON#RA&G9A&+ON0 AN> EQPRE00+N# +&0 0GPPOR& )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 E ercito Estrada to effectivel$ !overn, the Ar%ed )orces of the Philippines, the Philippine National Police and %a orit$ of his cabinet had "ithdra"n support fro% hi%K (6EREA0, upon authorit$ of an en banc resolution of the 0upre%e Court, /ice President #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o "as s"orn in as President of the Philippines on 82 Januar$ 822, before Chief Justice 6ilario #. >avide, Jr.K

:RE0O9G&+ON CON)+RM+N# PRE0+>EN& #9OR+A MACAPA#A9-ARROFO'0 NOM+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 the assu%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 "ho shall assu%e office upon confir%ation b$ a %a orit$ vote of all %e%bers of both 6ouses votin! separatel$K (6EREA0, 6er E4cellenc$, President #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o has no%inated 0enate Minorit$ 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 of true states%anship, havin! served the !overn%ent in various capacities, a%on! others, as >ele!ate to the Constitutional Convention, Chair%an of the Co%%ission on Audit, E4ecutive 0ecretar$, 0ecretar$ of Justice, 0enator of the Philippines O ?ualities "hich %erit his no%ination to the position of /ice President of the RepublicE No", therefore, be it *eso#ved as it is hereby reso#ved by the +ouse of *epresentatives& &hat the 6ouse 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. NABARENO 0ecretar$ #eneral: 173 Also, despite receipt of petitioner's letter clai%in! inabilit$, so%e t"elve 1,83 %e%bers of the 0enate si!ned the follo"in!E

:RE0O9G&+ON (6EREA0, the recent transition in !overn%ent offers the nation an opportunit$ for %eanin!ful chan!e and challen!eK (6EREA0, to attain desired chan!es and overco%e a"eso%e challen!es the nation needs unit$ of purpose and resolve cohesive resolute 1sic3 "illK (6EREA0, the 0enate of the Philippines has been the foru% for vital le!islative %easures in unit$ despite diversities in perspectivesK (6ERE)ORE, "e reco!ni@e and e4press support to the ne" !overn%ent of President #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o and resolve to dischar!e and overco%e the nation's challen!es.: -On )ebruar$ =, the S4"a%4 also passed S4"a%4 R4#o6)%!o" No. 12,22 "hich statesE :RE0O9G&+ON CON)+RM+N# PRE0+>EN& #9OR+A MACAPA#A9 ARROFO'0 NOM+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 the assu%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 "ho shall assu%e office upon confir%ation b$ a %a orit$ vote of all %e%bers of both 6ouses votin! separatel$K (6EREA0, 6er E4cellenc$, President #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o has no%inated 0enate Minorit$ 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$, co%petence and coura!eK "ho has served the )ilipino people "ith dedicated responsibilit$ and patriotis%K (6EREA0, 0en. &eofisto &. #uin!ona, Jr. possesses sterlin! ?ualities of true state%anship, havin! served the !overn%ent in various capacities, a%on! others, as >ele!ate to the Constitutional Convention, Chair%an of the Co%%ission on Audit, E4ecutive 0ecretar$, 0ecretar$ of Justice, 0enator of the land - "hich ?ualities %erit his no%ination to the position of /ice President of the RepublicE No", therefore, be it

*eso#ved& as it is hereby reso#ved& &hat the 0enate confir% the no%ination of 0en. &eofisto &. #uin!ona, Jr. as /ice President of the Republic of the Philippines. 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 9G&#AR>O B. BARBO 0ecretar$ of the 0enate: On the sa%e date, )ebruar$ =, the S4"a%4 li*e"ise passed S4"a%4 R4#o6)%!o" No. 10,2, "hich statesE :RE0O9G&+ON RECO#N+B+N# &6A& &6E +MPEAC6MEN& COGR& +0 ,-./0-1 (,,)/)( *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$, Januar$ ,<, &uesda$, Januar$ ,A and (ednesda$, Januar$ ,=, 822, be considered approved. *eso#ved& further& &hat the records of the +%peach%ent Court includin! the :second envelope: be transferred to the Archives of the 0enate for proper safe*eepin! and preservation in accordance "ith the Rules of the 0enate. >isposition and retrieval thereof shall be %ade onl$ upon "ritten approval of the 0enate president. *eso#ved& fina##y. &hat all parties concerned be furnished copies of this Resolution. 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 9G&#AR>O B. BARBO 0ecretar$ of the 0enate: 1<3 On )ebruar$ ., the 0enate also passed R4#o6)%!o" No. 14 :certif$in! to the e4istence of vacanc$ in the 0enate and callin! on the COME9EC to fill up such vacanc$ throu!h election to be held si%ultaneousl$ "ith the re!ular election on Ma$ ,7, 822, and the 0enatorial candidate !arnerin! the thirteenth 1,5 th3 hi!hest nu%ber of votes shall serve onl$ for the une4pired ter% of 0enator &eofisto &. #uin!ona, Jr.' 1A3 /o%h ho)#4# o9 Co";r4## started sendin! (!66# %o (4 #!;"4* !"%o 6a: b$ respondent Arro&o a# Pr4#!*4"%. 1=3 >espite the lapse of ti%e and still "ithout an$ functionin! Cabinet, "ithout an$ reco!nition fro% an$ sector of !overn%ent, and "ithout an$ support fro% the Ar%ed )orces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police, the petitioner continues to clai% that his inabilit$ to !overn is onl$ %o%entar$. 3ha% 64a$# %o %h4 4&4 9ro' %h4#4 !rr49)%a(64 9ac%# !# %ha% (o%h ho)#4# o9 Co";r4## ha54 r4co;"!?4* r4#$o"*4"% Arro&o a# %h4 Pr4#!*4"%. '$6!c!%6& c64ar !" %ha% r4co;"!%!o" !# %h4 $r4'!#4 %ha% %h4 !"a(!6!%& o9 $4%!%!o"4r E#%ra*a. # "o 6o";4r %4'$orar&. Co";r4## ha# c64ar6& r4=4c%4* $4%!%!o"4rD# c6a!' o9 !"a(!6!%&. Th4 7)4#%!o" !# :h4%h4r %h!# Co)r% ha# =)r!#*!c%!o" %o r45!4: %h4 c6a!' o9 %4'$orar& !"a(!6!%& o9 $4%!%!o"4r E#%ra*a and thereafter r45!#4 %h4 *4c!#!o" o9 (o%h Ho)#4# o9 Co";r4## reco!ni@in! respondent Arro$o as president of the Philippines. )ollo"in! TaGa*a 5. C)4"co,,28 "e hold that this Court cannot e4ercise its udicial po"er or this is an issue :in re!ard to "hich full discretionar$ authorit$ has been dele!ated to the 9e!islative 444 branch of the !overn%ent.: Or to use the lan!ua!e in /a84r 5#. Carr,,25 there is a :te4tuall$ de%onstrable or a lac* of udiciall$ discoverable and %ana!eable standards for resolvin! it.: Clearl$, the Court cannot pass upon petitioner's clai% of inabilit$ to dischar!e the po"er and duties of the presidenc$. Th4 7)4#%!o" !# $o6!%!ca6 !" "a%)r4 a"* a**r4##4* #o646& %o Co";r4## (& co"#%!%)%!o"a6 9!a%. +t is a political issue, "hich cannot be decided b$ this Court "ithout trans!ressin! the principle of separation of po"ers. " 9!"4, 454" !9 %h4 $4%!%!o"4r ca" $ro54 %ha% h4 *!* "o% r4#!;", #%!66, h4 ca""o% #)cc4##9)66& c6a!' %ha% h4 !# a Pr4#!*4"% o" 64a54 o" %h4 ;ro)"* %ha% h4 !# '4r46& )"a(64 %o ;o54r" %4'$orar!6&. Tha% c6a!' ha# (44" 6a!* %o r4#% (& Co";r4## a"* %h4 *4c!#!o" %ha% r4#$o"*4"% Arro&o !# %h4 *4 =)r4, $r4#!*4"% 'a*4 (& a co-47)a6 (ra"ch o9 ;o54r"'4"% ca""o% (4 r45!4:4* (& %h!# Co)r%. 3h4%h4r or "o% %h4 $4%!%!o"4r 4"=o&# !'')"!%& 9ro' #)!%.

A##)'!"; h4 4"=o&# !'')"!%&, %h4 4<%4"% o9 %h4 !'')"!%& Petitioner Estrada %a*es t"o sub%issionsE 9!r#%, the cases filed a!ainst hi% before the respondent O%buds%an should be prohibited because he has not been convicted in the i%peach%ent proceedin!s a!ainst hi%K and#4co"*, he en o$s !'')"!%& fro% a66 *inds of suit, "hether cri%inal or civil. Before resolvin! petitioner's contentions, a revisit of our le!al histor$ e4ecutive i%%unit$ "ill be %ost enli!htenin!. &he doctrine of e4ecutive i%%unit$ in this urisdiction e%er!ed a# a ca#4 6a:. +n the 1A10 case o9 .or(4#, 4%c. 5#. Ch)oco T!aco a"* Cro#9!46*,,27 the respondent &iaco, a Chinese citi@en, sued petitioner (. Ca%eron )orbes, #overnor-#eneral of the Philippine +slands. J.E. 6ardin! and C.R. &ro"brid!e, Chief of Police and Chief of the 0ecret 0ervice of the Cit$ of Manila, respectivel$, for da%a!es for alle!edl$ conspirin! to deport hi% to China. +n !rantin! a "rit of prohibition, this Court, spea*in! thru Mr. Justice Johnson, heldE : &he principle of nonliabilit$, as herein enunciated, does not %ean that the udiciar$ has no authorit$ to touch the acts of the #overnor-#eneralK that he %a$, under cover of his office, do "hat he "ill, uni%peded and unrestrained. 0uch a construction "ould %ean that t$rann$, under the !uise of the e4ecution of the la", could "al* defiantl$ abroad, destro$in! ri!hts of person and of propert$, "holl$ free fro% interference of courts or le!islatures. &his does not %ean, either that a person in ured b$ the e4ecutive authorit$ b$ an act un ustifiable under the la" has n re%ed$, but %ust sub%it in silence. On the contrar$, it %eans, si%pl$, that the !overnors-!eneral, li*e the ud!es if the courts and the %e%bers of the 9e!islature, %a$ not be personall$ %ulcted in civil da%a!es for the conse?uences of an act e4ecuted in the perfor%ance of his official duties. &he udiciar$ has full po"er to, and "ill, "hen the %ater is properl$ presented to it and the occasion ustl$ "arrants it, declare an act of the #overnor-#eneral ille!al and void and place as nearl$ as possible in status ?uo an$ person "ho has been deprived his libert$ or his propert$ b$ such act. &his re%ed$ is assured to ever$ person, ho"ever hu%ble or of "hatever countr$, "hen his personal or propert$ ri!hts have been invaded, even b$ the hi!hest authorit$ of the state. &he thin! "hich the udiciar$ can not do is %ulct the #overnor-#eneral personall$ in da%a!es "hich result fro% the perfor%ance of his official dut$, an$ %ore than it can a %e%ber of the Philippine Co%%ission of the Philippine Asse%bl$. Public polic$ forbids it. Neither does this principle of nonliabilit$ %ean that the chief e4ecutive %a$ not be personall$ sued at all in relation to acts "hich he clai%s to perfor% as such official. On the contrar$, it clearl$ appears fro% the discussion heretofore had, particularl$ that portion "hich touched the liabilit$ of ud!es and dre" an analo!$ bet"een such liabilit$ and that of the #overnor#eneral, that the latter is liable "hen he acts in a case so plainl$ outside of his po"er and authorit$ that he can not be said to have e4ercised discretion in deter%inin! "hether or not he had the ri!ht to act. (hat is held here is that he "ill be protected fro% personal liabilit$ for da%a!es not onl$ "hen he acts "ithin his authorit$, but also "hen he is "ithout authorit$, provided

he actuall$ used discretion and ud!e%ent, that is, the udicial facult$, in deter%inin! "hether he had authorit$ to act or not. +n other "ords, in deter%inin! the ?uestion of his authorit$. +f he decide "ron!l$, he is still protected provided the ?uestion of his authorit$ "as one over "hich t"o %en, reasonabl$ ?ualified for that position, %i!ht honestl$ differK but he s not protected if the lac* of authorit$ to act is so plain that t"o such %en could not honestl$ differ over its deter%ination. +n such case, be acts, not as #overnor-#eneral but as a private individual, and as such %ust ans"er for the conse?uences of his act.: Mr. Justice Johnson underscored the conse?uences if the Chief E4ecutive "as not !ranted i%%unit$ fro% suit, viz:444. Action upon i%portant %atters of state dela$edK the ti%e and substance of the chief e4ecutive spent in "ran!lin! liti!ationK disrespect en!endered for the person of one of the hi!hest officials of the state and for the office he occupiesK a tendenc$ to unrest and disorder resultin! in a "a$, in distrust as to the inte!rit$ of !overn%ent itself.: ,2< Our ,-5< Constitution too* effect but it did not contain an$ specific provision on e4ecutive i%%unit$. &hen ca%e the tu%ult of the %artial la" $ears under the late President )erdinand E. Marcos and the ,-=5 Constitution "as born. +n ,-.,, it "as a%ended and one of the a%end%ents involved e4ecutive i%%unit$. 0ection ,=, Article /++ statedE :&he President shall be i%%une fro% suit durin! his tenure. &hereafter, no suit "hatsoever shall lie for official acts done b$ hi% or b$ others pursuant to his specific orders durin! his tenure. &he i%%unities herein provided shall appl$ to the incu%bent President referred to in Article Q/++ of this Constitution. +n his second /icente #. 0inco professional Chair lecture entitled, :Presidential +%%unit$ and All &he Min!'s MenE &he 9a" of Privile!e As a >efense &o Actions )or >a%a!es,:,2A petitioner's learned counsel, for%er >ean of the GP Colle!e of 9a", Att$. Pacificao A!abin, bri!htened the %odifications effected b$ this constitutional a%end%ent on the e4istin! la" on e4ecutive privile!e. &o ?uote his dis?uisitionE :+n the Philippines, thou!h, "e sou!ht to do the A%ericans one better b$ enlar!in! and fortif$in! the absolute i%%unit$ concept. )irst, "e e4tended it to shield the President not onl$ for% civil clai%s but also fro% cri%inal cases and other clai%s. 0econd, "e enlar!ed its scope so that it "ould cover even acts of the President outside the scope of official duties. And third, "e broadened its covera!e so as to include not onl$ the President but also other persons, be the$ !overn%ent officials or private individuals, "ho acted upon orders of the President. +t can be said that at that point %ost of us "ere sufferin! fro% A+>0 1or absolute i%%unit$ defense s$ndro%e3.: &he Opposition in the then Batasan Pa%bansa sou!ht the repeal of this Marcosian concept of e4ecutive i%%unit$ in the ,-=5 Constitution. &he %ove "as led b$ the%

Me%ber of Parlia%ent, no" 0ecretar$ of )inance, Alberto Ro%ulo, "ho ar!ued that the after incu%benc$ i%%unit$ !ranted to President Marcos violated the principle that a public office is a public trust. 6e denounced the i%%unit$ as a return to the anachronis% :the *in! can do no "ron!.:,2= &he effort failed. &he ,-=5 Constitution ceased to e4ist "hen President Marcos "as ousted fro% office b$ the People Po"er revolution in ,-.A. (hen the ,-.= Constitution "as crafted, its fra%ers did not reenact the e4ecutive i%%unit$ provision of the ,-=5 Constitution. &he follo"in! e4planation "as !iven b$ dele!ate J. Bernas visE,2. :Mr. 0uare@. &han* $ou. &he last ?uestion is "ith reference to the Co%%ittee's o%ittin! in the draft proposal the i%%unit$ provision for the President. + a!ree "ith Co%%issioner Nolledo that the Co%%ittee did ver$ "ell in stri*in! out second 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%bers not a!ree to a restoration of at least the first sentence that the President shall be i%%une fro% suit durin! his tenure, considerin! that if "e do not provide hi% that *ind of an i%%unit$, he %i!ht be spendin! all his ti%e facin! liti!ation's, as the President-in-e4ile in 6a"aii is no" facin! liti!ation's al%ost dail$P )r. Bernas. &he reason for the o%ission is that "e consider it understood in present 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 other thin!s. Mr. 0uare@. On that understandin!, + "ill not press for an$ %ore ?uer$, Mada% President. + thin* the Co%%issioner for the clarifications.: (e shall no" rule on the contentions of petitioner in the li!ht of this histor$. (e re ect his ar!u%ent that he cannot be prosecuted for the reason that he %ust first be convicted in the i%peach%ent proceedin!s. &he i%peach%ent trial of petitioner Estrada "as aborted b$ the "al*out of the prosecutors and b$ the events that led to his loss of the presidenc$. +ndeed, on )ebruar$ =, 822,, the 0enate passed 0enate Resolution No. .5 :Reco!ni@in! that the +%peach%ent Court is )unctus Officio.:,2- 0ince, the +%peach%ent Court is no" functus officio, it is untenable for petitioner to de%and that he should first be i%peached and then convicted before he can be prosecuted. &he plea if !ranted, "ould put a perpetual bar a!ainst his prosecution. 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 sub ected to i%peach%ent proceedin!s and $et can be the ob ect of a cri%inal prosecution. &o be sure, the debates in the Constitutional Co%%ission %a*e it clear that "hen i%peach%ent proceedin!s have beco%e %oot due to the resi!nation of the President, the proper cri%inal and civil cases %a$ alread$ be filed a!ainst hi%, vi@E ,,2 :444 Mr. A?uino. On another point, if an i%peach%ent proceedin! has been filed a!ainst the President, for e4a%ple, and the President resi!ns before ud!e%ent of conviction has been rendered b$ the i%peach%ent court or b$ the bod$, ho" does it affect the i%peach%ent proceedin!P (ill it be necessaril$ droppedP 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 ReE 0aturnino Ber%ude@,,, that 'incu%bent Presidents are i%%une fro% suit or fro% bein! brou!ht to court durin! the period of their incu%benc$ and tenure: but not be$ond. Considerin! the peculiar circu%stance that the i%peach%ent process a!ainst the petitioner has been aborted and thereafter he lost the presidenc$, petitioner Estrada cannot de%and as a condition sine ?ua non to his cri%inal prosecution before the O%buds%an that he be convicted in the i%peach%ent proceedin!s. 6is reliance on the case of 9ecaro@ vs. 0andi!anba$an,,8 and related cases,,5 are inapropos for the$ have a different factual %ilieu. (e no" co%e to the scope of i%%unit$ that can be clai%ed b$ petitioner as a nonsittin! 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 the i%a!ination can these cri%es, especiall$ plunder "hich carries the death penalt$, be covered b$ the alle!ed %antle of i%%unit$ of a non-sittin! president. Petitioner cannot cite an$ decision of this Court licensin! the President to co%%it cri%inal acts and "rappin! hi% "ith post-tenure i%%unit$ fro% liabilit$. +t "ill be ano%alous to hold that i%%unit$ 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 the officer "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 a udicial disinclination to e4pand the privile!e especiall$ "hen it i%pedes the search for truth or i%pairs the vindication of a ri!ht. +n the ,-=7 case of G0 v. Ni4on, ,,< G0 President Richard Ni4on, a sittin! President, "as subpoenaed to produce certain recordin!s and docu%ents relatin! to his conversations "ith aids and advisers. 0even advisers of President Ni4on's associates "ere facin! char!es of conspirac$ to obstruct Justice and other offenses, "hich "ere co%%itted in a bur!lar$ of the

>e%ocratic National 6ead?uarters in (ashin!ton's (ater!ate 6otel durin! the -=8 presidential ca%pai!n. President Ni4on hi%self "as na%ed an unindicted coconspirator. President Ni4on %oved to ?uash the subpoena on the !round, a%on! others, that the President "as not sub ect to udicial process and that he should first be i%peached and re%oved fro% office before he could be %ade a%enable to udicial proceedin!s. &he clai% "as re ected b$ the G0 0upre%e Court. +t concluded that :"hen the !round for assertin! privile!e as to subpoenaed %aterials sou!ht for use in a cri%inal trial is based onl$ on the !enerali@ed interest in confidentialit$, it cannot prevail over the funda%ental de%ands of due process of la" in the fair ad%inistration of cri%inal ustice.: +n the ,-.8 case of Ni4on v. )it@!erald, ,,A the G0 0upre%e Court further held that the i%%unit$ of the president fro% civil da%a!es covers onl$ :official acts.: Recentl$, the G0 0upre%e Court had the occasion to reiterate this doctrine in the case of Clinton v. Jones ,,= "here it held that the G0 President's i%%unit$ fro% suits for %one$ da%a!es arisin! out of their official acts is inapplicable to unofficial conduct. &here are %ore reasons not to be s$%pathetic to appeals to stretch the scope of e4ecutive i%%unit$ 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 positive and effective %easures a!ainst !raft and corruptio.: ,,- it ordained that :public officers 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 recover properties 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 or estoppel.:,8, +t %aintained the 0andi!anba$an as an anti-!raft court. ,88 +t created the office of the O%buds%an and endo"ed it "ith enor%ous po"ers, a%on! "hich is to :investi!ate on its o"n, or on co%plaint b$ 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 be ille!al, un ust i%proper or inefficient.: ,85 &he Office of the O%buds%an "as also !iven fiscal autono%$.,87 &hese constitutional policies "ill be devalued if "e sustain petitioner's clai% that a non-sittin! president en o$s i%%unit$ fro% suit for cri%inal acts co%%itted durin! his incu%benc$. 3h4%h4r or "o% %h4 $ro#4c)%!o" o9 $4%!%!o"4r E#%ra*a #ho)6* (4 4"=o!"4* *)4 %o $r4=)*!c!a6 $)(6!c!%& Petitioner also contends that the respondent O%buds%an should be stopped fro% conductin! the investi!ation of the cases filed a!ainst hi% due to the barra!e of pre udicial publicit$ on his !uilt. 6e sub%its that the respondent O%buds%an has developed bias and is all set file the cri%inal cases violation of his ri!ht to due process.

&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 profile cases.,8< &he British approach the proble% "ith the presu%ption that publicit$ "ill pre udice a ur$. &hus, En!lish courts readil$ sta$ and stop cri%inal trials "hen the ri!ht of an accused to fair trial suffers a threat. ,8A &he A%erican approach is different. G0 courts assu%e a s*eptical approach about the potential effect of pervasive publicit$ on the ri!ht of an accused to a fair trial. &he$ have developed different strains of tests to resolve this issue, i.e., substantialK probabilit$ of irreparable har%, stron! li*elihood, clear and present dan!er, etc. &his is not the first ti%e the issue of trial b$ publicit$ has been raised in this Court to stop the trials or annul convictions in hi!h profile cri%inal cases.,8= +n People vs. &eehan*ee, Jr.,,8. later reiterated in the case of 9arrana!a vs. court of Appeals, et al.,,8- "e laid do"n the doctrine thatE :(e cannot sustain appellant's clai% that he "as denied the ri!ht to i%partial trial due to pre udicial publicit$. +t is true that the print and broadcast %edia !ave the case at bar pervasive publicit$, ust li*e all hi!h profile and hi!h sta*e cri%inal trials. &hen and no", "e rule that the ri!ht of an accused to a fair trial is not inco%patible to a free press. &o be sure, responsible reportin! enhances accused's ri!ht to a fair trial for, as "ell pointed out, a responsible press has al"a$s been re!arded as the cri%inal field 444. &he press does not si%pl$ publish infor%ation about trials but !uards a!ainst the %iscarria!e of ustice b$ sub ectin! the police, prosecutors, and udicial processes to e4tensive public scrutin$ and criticis%. Pervasive publicit$ is not per se pre udicial to the ri!ht of an accused to fair trial. &he %ere fact that the trial of appellant "as !iven a da$-to-da$, !avelto-!avel covera!e does not b$ itself prove that the publicit$ so per%eated the %ind of the trial ud!e and i%paired his i%partialit$. )or one, it is i%possible to seal the %inds of %e%bers of the bench fro% pre-trial and other off-court publicit$ of sensational cri%inal cases. &he state of the art of our co%%unication s$ste% brin!s ne"s as the$ happen strai!ht to our brea*fast tables and ri!ht to our bedroo%s. &hese ne"s for% part of our ever$da$ %enu of the facts and fictions of life. )or another, our idea of a fair and i%partial ud!e is not that of a her%it "ho is out of touch "ith the "orld. (e have not installed the ur$ s$ste% "hose %e%bers are overl$ protected fro% publicit$ lest the$ lose there i%partiall$. 444 444 444. Our ud!es are learned in the la" and trained to disre!ard off-court evidence and on-ca%era perfor%ances of parties to liti!ation. &heir %ere e4posure to publications and publicit$ stunts does not per se fatall$ infect their i%partialit$. At best, appellant can onl$ con ure possibilit$ of pre udice on the part of the trial ud!e due to the barra!e of publicit$ that characteri@ed the investi!ation and trial of the case. +n Martelino, et al. v. Ale andro, et al., "e re ected this standard of possibilit$ of pre udice and adopted the test of actual pre udice as "e ruled that to "arrant a findin! of pre udicial publicit$,

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$. +n the case at a bar, the records do not sho" that the trial ud!e developed actual bias a!ainst appellants as a conse?uence of the e4tensive %edia covera!e of the pre-trial and trial of his case. &he totalit$ of circu%stances of the case does not prove that the trial ud!e ac?uired a fi4ed opinion as a result of pre udicial publicit$, "hich is incapable of chan!e even b$ evidence presented durin! the trial. Appellant has the burden to prove this actual bias and he has not dischar!ed the burden.' (e e4pounded further on this doctrine in the subse?uent case of (ebb vs. 6on. Raul de 9eon, etc.,52 and its co%panion cases, vi@E :A!ain petitioners raise the effect of pre udicial publicit$ on their ri!ht to due process "hile under!oin! preli%inar$ investi!ation. (e find no procedural i%pedi%ent to its earl$ invocation considerin! the substantial ris* to their libert$ "hile under!oin! a preli%inar$ investi!ation. 444 &he de%ocratic settin!s, %edia covera!e of trials of sensational cases cannot be avoided and oftenti%es, its e4cessiveness has been a!!ravated b$ *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$ that attended the preli%inar$ investi!ation of the case at bar. Our dail$ diet of facts and fiction about the case continues unabated even toda$. Co%%entators still bo%bard the public "ith vie"s not too %an$ of "hich are sober and subli%e. +ndeed, even the principal actors in the case O the NB+, the respondents, their la"$ers and their s$%pathi@ers have participated in this %edia blit@. &he possibilit$ of %edia abuses and their threat 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%ond Ne"spapers, +nc. v. /ir!inia, it "as 444 a. &he historical evidence of the evolution of the cri%inal trial in An!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 here and in En!land had lon! been presu%ptivel$ open, thus !ivin! assurance that the proceedin!s "ere conducted fairl$ to all concerned and discoura!in! per ur$, the %isconduct of participants, or decisions based on secret bias or partialit$. +n addition, the si!nificant co%%unit$ therapeutic value of public trials "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 thereafter the open processes of ustice serve an i%portant proph$lactic purpose, providin! an outlet for co%%unit$ concern, hostilit$ and

b.

c.

e%otion. &o "or* effectivel$, it is i%portant that societ$'s cri%inal process satisf$ the appearance of ustice,' Offutt v. Gnited 0tates, 57. G0 ,,, ,7, -- 9 E> ,,, =< 0 Ct ,,, "hich can best be provided b$ allo"in! people to observe such process. )ro% this unbro*en, uncontradicted histor$, supported b$ reasons as valid toda$ as in centuries past, it %ust be concluded that a presu%ption of openness inheres in the ver$ nature of a cri%inal trial under this Nation's s$ste% of ustice, Cf., e,!., 9evine v. Gnited 0tates, 5A8 G0 A,2, 7 9 Ed 8d -.-, .2 0 Ct ,25.. &he freedo%s of speech. Press and asse%bl$, e4pressl$ !uaranteed b$ the )irst A%end%ent, share a co%%on core purpose of assurin! freedo% of co%%unication on %atters relatin! to the functionin! of !overn%ent. +n !uaranteein! freedo% such as those of speech and press, the )irst A%end%ent can be read as protectin! the ri!ht of ever$one to attend trials so as !ive %eanin! to those e4plicit !uaranteesK the )irst A%end%ent ri!ht to receive infor%ation and ideas %eans, in the conte4t of trials, that the !uarantees of speech and press, standin! alone, prohibit !overn%ent fro% su%%aril$ closin! courtroo% doors "hich had lon! been open to the public at the ti%e the )irst A%end%ent "as adopted. Moreover, the ri!ht of asse%bl$ is also relevant, havin! been re!arded not onl$ as an independent ri!ht but also as a catal$st to au!%ent the free e4ercise of the other )irst A%end%ent ri!hts "ith "hich the drafts%en deliberatel$ lin*ed it. A trial courtroo% is a public place "here the people !enerall$ and representatives of the %edia have a ri!ht to be present, and "here their presence historicall$ has been thou!ht to enhance the inte!rit$ and ?ualit$ of "hat ta*es place. Even thou!h the Constitution contains no provision "hich be its ter%s !uarantees to the public the ri!ht to attend cri%inal trials, various funda%ental ri!hts, not e4pressl$ !uaranteed, have been reco!ni@ed as indispensable to the en o$%ent of enu%erated ri!hts. &he ri!ht to attend cri%inal trial is i%plicit in the !uarantees of the )irst A%end%entE "ithout the freedo% to attend such trials, "hich people have e4ercised for centuries, i%portant aspects of freedo% of speech and of the press be eviscerated.

Be that as it %a$, "e reco!ni@e that pervasive and pre udicial publicit$ under certain circu%stances can deprive an accused of his due process ri!ht to fair trial. &hus, in 2arte#ino& et a#. vs. 3#ejandro& et a#., "e held that to "arrant a findin! of pre udicial publicit$ there %ust be allegation and proof that the ud!es have been undul$ influenced, not si%pl$ that the$ %i!ht be, b$ the barra!e of publicit$. +n the case at bar, "e find nothin! in the records that "ill prove that the tone and content of the publicit$ that attended the investi!ation of petitioners fatall$ infected the fairness and i%partialit$ of the >OJ Panel. Petitioners cannot ust rel$ on the subli%inal effects of publicit$ on the sense of fairness of the >OJ Panel, for these are basicall$ unbe*no"n and be$ond *no"in!. &o be sure, the >OJ Panel is co%posed of an Assistant Chief 0tate Prosecutor and 0enior 0tate Prosecutors. &heir lon! e4perience in cri%inal investi!ation is a factor to consider in deter%inin! "hether the$ can easil$ be blinded b$ the *lie!

li!hts of publicit$. +ndeed, their 8A-pa!e Resolution carries no indubitable indicia of bias for it does not appear that the$ considered an$ e4tra-record evidence e4cept evidence properl$ adduced b$ the parties. &he len!th of ti%e the investi!ation "as conducted despite its su%%ar$ nature and the !enerosit$ "ith "hich the$ acco%%odated the discover$ %otions of petitioners spea* "ell of their fairness. At no instance, "e note, did petitioners see* the dis?ualification of an$ %e%ber of the >OJ Panel on the !round of bias resultin! fro% their bo%bard%ent of pre udicial publicit$.: 1e%phasis supplied3 Appl$in! the above rulin!, "e hold that %h4r4 !# "o% 4"o);h 45!*4"c4 %o :arra"% %h!# Co)r% %o 4"=o!" %h4 $r46!'!"ar& !"54#%!;a%!o" o9 %h4 $4%!%!o"4r (& %h4 r4#$o"*4"% O'()*#'a". Petitioner needs to offer %ore than hostile headlines to dischar!e his burden of proof.,5, 6e needs to sho" %ore "ei!ht$ social science evidence to successfull$ prove the i%paired capacit$ of a ud!e to render a bias-free decision. (ell to note, the cases a!ainst the petitioner are #%!66 )"*4r;o!"; preli%inar$ investi!ation b$ a special panel of prosecutors in the office of the respondent O%buds%an. No alle!ation "hatsoever has been %ade b$ the petitioner that the %inds of the %e%bers of this special panel have alread$ been infected b$ bias because of the pervasive pre udicial publicit$ a!ainst hi%. +ndeed, the special panel has $et to co%e out "ith its findin!s and the Court cannot second !uess "hether its reco%%endation "ill be unfavorable to the petitioner. 1wphi1.nt &he records sho" that petitioner has instead char!ed respondent O%buds%an hi%self "ith bias. &o ?uote petitioner's sub%ission, the respondent O%buds%an :has been influenced b$ the barra!e of slanted ne"s reports, and he has buc*led to the threats 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$ pre ud!ed the cases of the petitioner,55 and it is postulated that the prosecutors investi!atin! the petitioner "ill be influenced b$ this bias of their superior. A!ain, "e hold that the 45!*4"c4 proffered b$ the petitioner is !"#)(#%a"%!a6. &he accurac$ of the ne"s reports referred to b$ the petitioner cannot be the sub ect of udicial notice b$ this Court especiall$ in li!ht of the denials of the respondent O%buds%an as to his alle!ed pre udice and the presu%ption of !ood faith and re!ularit$ in the perfor%ance of official dut$ to "hich he is entitled. Nor ca" :4 a*o$% %h4 %h4or& o9 *4r!5a%!54 $r4=)*!c4 o9 $4%!%!o"4r, !.4., %ha% %h4 $r4=)*!c4 o9 r4#$o"*4"% O'()*#'a" 96o:# %o h!# #)(or*!"a%4# . +n truth, our Revised Rules of Cri%inal Procedure, !ive investi!ation prosecutors the independence 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%pelled cases "hich the$ believe deserve dis%issal. +n other "ords, investi!atin! prosecutors should not be treated li*e unthin*in! slot %achines. Moreover, if the respondent O%buds%an resolves to file the cases a!ainst the petitioner and the latter believes that the findin!s of probable cause a!ainst hi% is the result of bias, he still has the re%ed$ of assailin! it before the proper court. -.

E$!6o;)4 A "ord of caution to the :hootin! thron!.: &he cases a!ainst the petitioner "ill no" ac?uire a different di%ension and then %ove to a ne" sta!e - - - the Office of the O%buds%an. Predictabl$, the call fro% the %a orit$ for instant ustice "ill hit a hi!her decibel "hile the !nashin! of teeth of the %inorit$ "ill be %ore threatenin!. +t is the sacred dut$ of the respondent O%buds%an to balance the ri!ht of the 0tate to prosecute the !uilt$ and the ri!ht of an accused to a fair investi!ation and trial "hich has been cate!ori@ed as the :%ost funda%ental of all freedo%s.: ,5<&o be sure, the dut$ of a prosecutor is %ore to do ustice and less to prosecute. 6is is the obli!ation to insure that the preli%inar$ investi!ation of the petitioner shall have a circus-free at%osphere. 6e has to provide the restraint a!ainst "hat 9ord Br$ce calls :the i%patient vehe%ence of the %a orit$.: Ri!hts in a de%ocrac$ are not decided b$ the %ob "hose ud!%ent is dictated b$ ra!e and not b$ reason. Nor are ri!hts necessaril$ resolved b$ the po"er of nu%ber for in a de%ocrac$, the do!%atis% of the %a orit$ is not and should never be the definition of the rule of la". +f de%ocrac$ has proved to be the best for% of !overn%ent, it is because it has respected the ri!ht of the %inorit$ to convince the %a orit$ that it is "ron!. &olerance of %ultifor%it$ of thou!hts, ho"ever offensive the$ %a$ be, is the *e$ to %an's pro!ress fro% the cave to civili@ation. 9et us not thro" a"a$ that *e$ ust to pander to so%e people's pre udice. N - E3 3HEREO., the petitions of Joseph E ercito Estrada challen!in! the respondent #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o as the de jure ,7th President of the Republic are D SM SSED. SO ORDERED. Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC

G.R. No. 111577 March 7, 1AA5 JUAN TO MAR ANO, JR. 4% a6., petitioners, vs. THE COMM SS ON ON E,ECT ONS, THE MUN C PA, T2 O. MAHAT , HON. JEJOMAR / NA2, THE MUN C PA, TREASURER, AND SANGGUN ANG /A2AN O. MAHAT , respondents. G.R. No. 111627 March 7, 1AA5

JOHN R. OSMEIA, petitioner, vs. THE COMM SS ON ON E,ECT ONS, THE MUN C PA, T2 O. MAHAT , HON. JEJOMAR / NA2, MUN C PA, TREASURER, AND SANGGUN ANG /A2AN O. MAHAT , respondents.

1c3 the addition of another le!islative district in Ma*ati is not in accord "ith 0ection < 153, Article /+ of the Constitution for as of the latest surve$ 1,--2 census3, the population of Ma*ati stands at onl$ 7<2,222. #.R. No. ,,.A8= "as filed b$ the petitioner John 6. Os%eDa as senator, ta4pa$er, and concerned citi@en. Petitioner assails section <8 of R.A. No. =.<7 as unconstitutional on the sa%e !rounds as aforestated. (e find no %erit in the petitions. + 0ection 8, Article + of R.A. No. =.<7 delineated the land areas of the proposed cit$ of Ma*ati, thusE 0ec. 8. 0he /ity of 2akati. I &he Municipalit$ of Ma*ati shall be converted into a hi!hl$ urbani@ed cit$ to be *no"n as the Cit$ of Ma*ati, hereinafter referred to as the Cit$, which sha## comprise the present territory of the 2unicipa#ity of 2akati in 2etropo#itan 2ani#a 3rea over "hich it has urisdiction bounded on the northeast b$ Pasi! River and be$ond b$ the Cit$ of Mandalu$on! and the Municipalit$ of Pasi!K on the southeast b$ the %unicipalities of Pateros and &a!ui!K on the south"est b$ the Cit$ of Pasa$ and the Municipalit$ of &a!ui!K and, on the north"est, b$ the Cit$ of Manila. &he fore!oin! provision shall be without prejudice to the reso#ution by the appropriate agency or forum of e4isting boundary disputes or cases invo#ving questions of territoria# jurisdiction between the /ity of 2akati and the adjoining #oca# government units . 1E%phasis supplied3 +n #.R. No. ,,.<==, petitioners clai% that this delineation violates sections = and 7<2 of the 9ocal #overn%ent Code "hich re?uire that the area of a local !overn%ent unit should be %ade b$ %etes and bounds "ith technical descriptions. 2 &he i%portance of dra"in! "ith precise stro*es the territorial boundaries of a local unit of !overn%ent cannot be overe%phasi@ed. &he boundaries %ust be clear for the$ define the li%its of the territorial urisdiction of a local !overn%ent unit. +t can le!iti%atel$ e4ercise po"ers of !overn%ent onl$ "ithin the li%its, its acts are u#tra vires. Needless to state, an$ uncertaint$ in the boundaries of local !overn%ent units "ill so" costl$ conflicts in the e4ercise of !overn%ental po"ers "hich ulti%atel$ "ill pre udice the people's "elfare. &his is the evil sou!ht to avoided b$ the 9ocal #overn%ent Code in re?uirin! that the land area of a local !overn%ent unit %ust be spelled out in %etes and bounds, "ith technical descriptions.

PUNO, J.: At bench are t"o 183 petitions assailin! certain provisions of Republic Act No. =.<7 as unconstitutional. R.A. No. =.<7 as unconstitutional. R.A. No. =.<7 is entitled, :An Act Convertin! the Municipalit$ of Ma*ati +nto a 6i!hl$ Grbani@ed Cit$ to be *no"n as the Cit$ of Ma*ati.: 1 #.R. No. ,,.<== involves a petition for prohibition and declarator$ relief. +t "as filed b$ petitioners Juanito Mariano, Jr., 9i!a$a 0. Bautista, &eresita &iba$, Ca%ilo 0antos, )ran*ie Cru@, Ricardo Pascual, &eresita Aban!, /alentina Pitalvero, Rufino Caldo@a, )lorante Alba, and Perfecto Alba. Of the petitioners, onl$ Mariano, Jr., is a resident of Ma*ati. &he others are residents of +ba$o Gsusan, &a!ui!, Metro Manila. 0uin! as ta4pa$ers, the$ assail as unconstitutional sections 8, <,, and <8 of R.A. No. =.<7 on the follo"in! !roundsE ,. 0ection 8 of R.A. No. =.<7 did not properl$ identif$ the land area or territorial urisdiction of Ma*ati b$ %etes and bounds, "ith technical descriptions, in violation of 0ection ,2, Article Q of the Constitution, in relation to 0ections = and 7<2 of the 9ocal #overn%ent CodeK 8. 0ection <, of R.A. No. =.<7 atte%pts to alter or restart the :three consecutive ter%: li%it for local elective officials, in violation of 0ection ., Article Q and 0ection =, Article /+ of the Constitution. 5. 0ection <8 of R.A. No. =.<7 is unconstitutional forE 1a3 it increased the le!islative district of Ma*ati onl$ b$ special la" 1the Charter in violation of the constitutional provision re?uirin! a !eneral reapportion%ent la" to be passed b$ Con!ress "ithin three 153 $ears follo"in! the return of ever$ censusK 1b3 the increase in le!islative district "as not e4pressed in the title of the billK and

#iven the facts of the cases at bench, "e cannot perceive ho" this evil can be brou!ht about b$ the description %ade in section 8 of R.A. No. =.<7, Petitioners have not de%onstrated that the delineation of the land area of the proposed Cit$ of Ma*ati "ill cause confusion as to its boundaries. (e note that said delineation did not chan!e even b$ an inch the land area previousl$ covered b$ Ma*ati as a %unicipalit$. 0ection 8 did not add, subtract, divide, or %ultipl$ the established land area of Ma*ati. +n lan!ua!e that cannot be an$ clearer, section 8 stated that, the cit$'s land area :shall co%prise the present territor$ of the %unicipalit$.: &he deliberations of Con!ress "ill reveal that there is a le!iti%ate reason "h$ the land area of the proposed Cit$ of Ma*ati "as not defined b$ %etes and bounds, "ith technical descriptions. At the ti%e of the consideration of R.A. No. =.<7, the territorial dispute bet"een the %unicipalities of Ma*ati and &a!ui! over )ort Bonifacio "as under court liti!ation. Out of a beco%in! sense of respect to co-e?ual depart%ent of !overn%ent, le!islators felt that the dispute should be left to the courts to decide. &he$ did not "ant to foreclose the dispute b$ %a*in! a le!islative findin! of fact "hich could decide the issue. &his "ould have ensued if the$ defined the land area of the proposed cit$ b$ its e4act %etes and bounds, "ith technical descriptions. 0 (e ta*e udicial notice of the fact that Con!ress has also refrained fro% usin! the %etes and bounds description of land areas of other local !overn%ent units "ith unsettled boundar$ disputes. 4 (e hold that the e4istence of a boundar$ dispute does not per se present an insur%ountable difficult$ "hich "ill prevent Con!ress fro% definin! "ith reasonable certitude the territorial urisdiction of a local !overn%ent unit. +n the cases at bench, Con!ress %aintained the e4istin! boundaries of the proposed Cit$ of Ma*ati but as an act of fairness, %ade the% sub ect to the ulti%ate resolution b$ the courts. Considerin! these peculiar circu%stances, "e are not prepared to hold that section 8 of R.A. No. =.<7 is unconstitutional. (e sustain the sub%ission of the 0olicitor #eneral in this re!ard, viz.E #oin! no" to 0ections = and 7<2 of the 9ocal #overn%ent Code, it is be$ond cavil that the re?uire%ent stated therein, viz.E :the territorial urisdiction of ne"l$ created or converted cities should be described b$ %eted and bounds, "ith technical descriptions: I "as %ade in order to provide a %eans b$ "hich the area of said cities %a$ be reasonabl$ ascertained. +n other "ords, the re?uire%ent on %etes and bounds "as %eant %erel$ as tool in the establish%ent of local !overn%ent units. +t is not an end in itself. 5rgo, so lon! as the territorial urisdiction of a cit$ %a$ be reasonabl$ ascertained, i.e., b$ referrin! to co%%on boundaries "ith nei!hborin! %unicipalities, as in this case, then, it %a$ be concluded that the le!islative intent behind the la" has been sufficientl$ served. Certainl$, Con!ress did not intends that la"s creatin! ne" cities %ust contain therein detailed technical descriptions si%ilar to those appearin! in &orrens titles, as petitioners see% to i%pl$. &o re?uire such description in the la" as a condition sine qua non for its

validit$ "ould be to defeat the ver$ purpose "hich the 9ocal #overn%ent Code to see*s to serve. &he %anifest intent of the Code is to e%po"er local !overn%ent units and to !ive the% their ri!htful due. +t see*s to %a*e local !overn%ents %ore responsive to the needs of their constituents "hile at the sa%e ti%e servin! as a vital co! in national develop%ent. &o invalidate R.A. No. =.<7 on the %ere !round that no cadastral t$pe of description "as used in the la" "ould serve the letter but defeat the spirit of the Code. +t then beco%es a case of the %aster servin! the slave, instead of the other "a$ around. &his could not be the intend%ent of the la". &oo "ell settled is the rule that la"s %ust be enforced "hen ascertained, althou!h it %a$ not be consistent "ith the strict letter of the statute. Courts "ill not follo" the letter of the statute "hen to do so "ould depart fro% the true intent of the le!islature or "ould other"ise $ield conclusions inconsistent "ith the !eneral purpose of the act. 1&orres v. 9i% ap, <A Phil., ,7,K &aDada v. Cuenco, ,25 Phil. ,2<,K 6idal!o v. 6idal!o, 55 0CRA ,,2<3. 9e!islation is an active instru%ent of !overn%ent, "hich, for purposes of interpretation, %eans that la"s have ends to achieve, and statutes should be so construed as not to defeat but to carr$ out such ends and purposes 1Bocolbo v. Estanislao, =8 0CRA <823. &he sa%e rule %ust indubitabl$ appl$ to the case at bar. ++ Petitioners in #.R. No. ,,.<== also assail the constitutionalit$ of section <,, Article Q of R.A. No. =.<7. 0ection <, statesE 0ec. <,. (fficia#s of the /ity of 2akati. I &he represent elective officials of the Municipalit$ of Ma*ati shall continue as the officials of the Cit$ of Ma*ati and shall e4ercise their po"ers and functions until such ti%e that a ne" election is held and the dul$ elected officials shall have alread$ ?ualified and assu%e their officesE !rovided, 0he new city wi## acquire a new corporate e4istence. &he appointive officials and e%plo$ees of the Cit$ shall li*e"ise continues e4ercisin! their functions and duties and the$ shall be auto%aticall$ absorbed b$ the cit$ !overn%ent of the Cit$ of Ma*ati. &he$ contend that this section collides "ith section ., Article Q and section =, Article /+ of the Constitution "hich provideE 0ec. .. &he ter% of office of elective local officials, e4cept baran!a$ officials, "hich shall be deter%ined b$ la", shall be three $ears and no such officia# sha## serve for more than three consecutive terms. /oluntar$ renunciation of the office for an$ len!th of ti%e

shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuit$ of his service for the full ter% for "hich he "as elected. 444 444 444 0ec. =. &he Me%bers of the 6ouse of Representatives shall be elected for a ter% of three $ears "hich shall be!in, unless other"ise provided b$ la", at noon on the thirtieth da$ of June ne4t follo"in! their election. No Me%ber of the 6ouse of Representatives shall serve for %ore than three consecutive ter%s. /oluntar$ renunciation of the office for an$ len!th of ti%e shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuit$ of his service for the full ter% for "hich he "as elected. Petitioners stress that under these provisions, e#ective #oca# officia#s& inc#uding 2embers of the +ouse of *epresentative& have a term of three 163 years and are prohibited from serving for more than three 163 consecutive terms. &he$ ar!ue that b$ providin! that the ne" cit$ shall ac?uire a new corporate e4istence, section <, of R.A. No. =.<7 restarts the ter% of the present %unicipal elective officials of Ma*ati and disre!ards the ter%s previousl$ served b$ the%. +n particular, petitioners point that section <, favors the incu%bent Ma*ati Ma$or, respondent Je o%ar Bina$, "ho has alread$ served for t"o 183 consecutive ter%s. &he$ further ar!ue that should Ma$or Bina$ decide to run and eventuall$ "in as city mayor in the co%in! elections, he can still run for the sa%e position in ,--. and see* another three-$ear consecutive ter% since his previous three-$ear consecutive ter% as municipa# mayor "ould not be counted. &hus, petitioners conclude that said section <, has been convenientl$ crafted to suit the political a%bitions of respondent Ma$or Bina$. (e cannot entertain this challen!e to the constitutionalit$ of section <,. &he re?uire%ents before a liti!ant can challen!e the constitutionalit$ of a la" are "ell delineated. &he$ areE ,3 there %ust be an actual case or controvers$K 183 the ?uestion of constitutionalit$ %ust be raised b$ the proper part$K 153 the constitutional ?uestion %ust be raised at the earliest possible opportunit$K and 173 the decision on the constitutional ?uestion %ust be necessar$ to the deter%ination of the case itself. 5 Petitioners have far fro% co%plied "ith these re?uire%ents. &he petition is pre%ised on the occurrence of %an$ contin!ent events, i.e., that Ma$or Bina$ "ill run a!ain in this co%in! %a$oralt$ electionsK that he "ould be re-elected in said electionsK and that he "ould see* re-election for the sa%e position in the ,--. elections. Considerin! that these contin!encies %a$ or %a$ not happen, petitioners %erel$ pose a h$pothetical issue "hich has $et to ripen to an actual case or controvers$. Petitioners "ho are residents of &a!ui! 1e4cept Mariano3 are not also the proper parties to raise this abstract issue. (orse, the$ hoist this futuristic issue in a petition for declarator$ relief over "hich this Court has no urisdiction.

+++ )inall$, petitioners in the t"o 183 cases at bench assail the constitutionalit$ of section <8, Article Q of R.A. No. =.<7. 0ection <8 of the Charter providesE 0ec. <8. 7egis#ative 'istricts. I Gpon its conversion into a hi!hl$urbani@ed cit$, Ma*ati shall thereafter have at least two "8% #egis#ative districts that shall initiall$ correspond to the t"o 183 e4istin! districts created under 0ection 51a3 of Republic Act. No. =,AA as i%ple%ented b$ the Co%%ission on Elections to co%%ence at the ne4t national elections to be held after the effectivit$ of this Act. 6enceforth, baran!a$s Ma!allanes, >as%ariDas and )orbes shall be "ith the first district, in lieu of Baran!a$ #uadalupe-/ie o "hich shall for% part of the second district. 1e%phasis supplied3 &he$ contend. that the addition of another le!islative district in Ma*ati is unconstitutional forE 1,3 reapportion%ent 6cannot %ade b$ a special la", 183 the addition of a le!islative district is not e4pressed in the title of the bill 7 and 153 Ma*ati's population, as per the ,--2 census, stands at onl$ four hundred fift$ thousand 17<2,2223. &hese issues have been laid to rest in the recent case of 0obias v. 3ba#os. 1 +n said case, "e ruled that reapportion%ent of le!islative districts %a$ be %ade throu!h a special la", such as in the charter of a ne" cit$. &he Constitution A clearl$ provides that Con!ress shall be co%posed of not %ore than t"o hundred fift$ 18<23 %e%bers, un#ess otherwise fi4ed by #aw. As thus "orded, the Constitution did not preclude Con!ress fro% increasin! its %e%bership b$ passin! a la", other than a !eneral reapportion%ent of the la". &his is its e4actl$ "hat "as done b$ Con!ress in enactin! R.A. No. =.<7 and providin! for an increase in Ma*ati's le!islative district. Moreover, to hold that reapportion%ent can onl$ be %ade throu!h a !eneral apportion%ent la", "ith a revie" of all the le!islative districts allotted to each local !overn%ent unit nation"ide, "ould create an ine?uitable situation "here a ne" cit$ or province created b$ Con!ress "ill be denied le!islative representation for an indeter%inate period of ti%e. 10 &he intolerable situations "ill deprive the people of a ne" cit$ or province a particle of their soverei!nt$. 11 0overei!nt$ cannot ad%it of an$ *ind of subtraction. +t is indivisible. +t %ust be forever "hole or it is not soverei!nt$. Petitioners cannot insist that the addition of another le!islative district in Ma*ati is not in accord "ith section <153, Article /+ 12 of the Constitution for as of the latest surve$ 1,--2 census3, the population of Ma*ati stands at onl$ four hundred fift$ thousand 17<2,2223. 10 0aid section provides, inter a#ia, that a cit$ "ith a population of at #east two hundred fifty thousand 18<2,2223 shall have at #east one representative. Even !rantin! that the population of Ma*ati as of the ,--2 census stood at four hundred fift$ thousand 17<2,2223, its le!islative district %a$ still be increased since it has %et the %ini%u% population re?uire%ent of t"o hundred fift$ thousand 18<2,2223. +n fact, section 5 of the Ordinance appended to the Constitution

provides that a cit$ "hose population has increased to more than two hundred fifty thousand "89:&:::% shall be entitled to at #east one congressiona# representative . 14 )inall$, "e do not find %erit in petitioners' contention that the creation of an additional le!islative district in Ma*ati should have been e4pressl$ stated in the title of the bill. +n the sa%e case of 0obias v. 3ba#os& op cit., "e reiterated the polic$ of the Court favorin! a liberal construction of the :one tit#e;one subject: rule so as not to i%pede le!islation. &o be sure, "ith Constitution does not co%%and that the title of 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 sub ect and all the provisions are !er%ane to such !eneral sub ect.: (6ERE)ORE, the petitions are hereb$ >+0M+00E> for lac* of %erit No costs. 0O OR>ERE>. .arvasa& /.<.& ,e#iciano& !adi##a& Bidin& *ega#ado& *omero& Be##osi##o& 2e#o& =uiason& >itug& ?apunan& 2endoza and ,rancisco& <<.& concur.

&he o%ission of R.A. No. =.<7 13n 3ct /onverting the 2unicipa#ity of 2akati )nto a +igh#y -rbanized /ity to be ?nown as the /ity of 2akati 3 to describe the territorial boundaries of the cit$ b$ %etes and bounds does not %a*e R.A. No. =.<7 unconstitutional or ille!al. &he Constitution does not provide for a description b$ %etes and bounds as a condition sine qua non for the creation of a local !overn%ent unit or its conversion fro% one level to another. &he criteria provided for in 0ection = of R.A. No. =.<7 are not absolute, for, as a %atter of fact, the section starts "ith the clause :as a genera# ru#e.: &he petitioners' reliance on 0ection 7<2 of R.A. No. =,A2 is unavailin! 0aid section onl$ applies to the conversion of a %unicipalit$ or a cluster of baran!a$s into a COMPONEN& C+&F, not a hi!hl$ urbani@ed cit$. +t pertinentl$ reads as follo"sE 0ec. 7<2. *equisite for creation. I 1a3 A %unicipalit$ or a cluster of baran!a$s %a$ be converted into a co%ponent cit$ if it has an avera!e annual inco%e, as certified b$ the >epart%ent of )inance, of at least &"ent$ %illion pesos 1P82,222,222.223 for the last t"o 183 consecutive $ears based on ,--, constant prices, and if it has either of the follo"in! re?uisitesE 444 444 444 1b3 &he territorial urisdiction of a ne"l$ created cit$ shall be properl$ identified b$ %etes and bounds. . . . &he constitution classifies cities as either high#y urbanized or co%ponent. 0ection ,8 of Article Q thereof providesE

S4$ara%4 O$!"!o"#

DA- DE, JR., J., concurrin!E + concur in the "ell "ritten opinion of Mr. Justice Re$nato 0. Puno. + "ish, ho"ever, to add a fe" observations. +. 0ection ,2, Article Q of the Constitution provides that :RnSo province, cit$, %unicipalit$ or baran!a$ %a$ be created, divided, %er!ed, abolished, or its boundar$ substantiall$ altered, e4cept in accordance "ith the criteria established in the local !overn%ent code and sub ect to the approval b$ a %a orit$ of the votes cast in a plebiscite in the political units directl$ affected.: &hese criteria are no" set forth in 0ection = of the 9ocal #overn%ent Code of ,--, 1R.A. No. =,A23. One of these is that the territorial urisdiction of the local !overn%ent unit to be created or converted should be properl$ identified b$ %etes and bounds "ith technical descriptions.

0ec. ,8. Cities that are hi!hl$ urbani@ed, as deter%ined b$ la", and co%ponent cities "hose charters prohibit their voters fro% votin! for provincial elective officials, shall be independent of the province. &he voters of co%ponent cities "ithin a province, "hose charters contain no such prohibition, shall not be deprived of their ri!ht to vote for elective provincial officials. And 0ection 7<, of R.A. No. =,A2 providesE 0ec. 7<,. /ities /#assified. I A cit$ %a$ either be co%ponent or hi!hl$ urbani@edE !rovided& however, &hat the criteria established in this Code shall not affect the classification and corporate status of e4istin! cities. +ndependent co%ponent cities are those co%ponent cities "hose charters prohibit their voters fro% votin! for provincial elective officials. +ndependent co%ponent cities shall be independent of the province. ++.

0trictl$ spea*in!, the increase in the nu%ber of le!islative seats for the Cit$ of Ma*ati provided for in R.A. No. =.<7 is not an increase ustified b$ the clause un#ess otherwise fi4ed by #aw in para!raph ,, 0ection <, Article /+ of the Constitution. &hat clause conte%plates of the reapportionment %entioned in the succeedin! para!raph 173 of the said 0ection "hich reads in full as follo"sE (ithin three $ears follo"in! the return of ever$ census, the Con!ress shall %a*e a reapportion%ent of le!islative districts based on the standards provided in this section. +n short, the clause refers to a genera# reapportionment #aw. &he increase under R.A. No. =.<7 is a per%issible increase under 0ections , and 5 of the Ordinance appended to the Constitution "hich readsE 0ec. ,. )or purposes of the election of Me%bers of the 6ouse of Representatives of the )irst Con!ress of the Philippines under the Constitution proposed b$ the ,-.A Constitutional Co%%ission and subsequent e#ections& and unti# otherwise provided by #aw , the Me%bers thereof shall be elected fro% le!islative districts apportioned a%on! the provinces, cities, and the 2etropo#itan 2ani#a 3rea as follo"sE ME&ROPO9+&AN MAN+9A AREA 444 444 444 MAMA&+ one 1,3 444 444 444 0ec. 5. An$ province that %a$ hereafter be created, or any city whose popu#ation may hereafter increase to more than two hundred fifty thousand sha## be entit#ed in the immediate#y fo##owing e#ection to at #east one 2ember or such number of 2embers as it may be entit#ed to on the basis of the number of its inhabitants and according to the standards set forth in paragraph "6%& 1ection 9 of 3rtic#e >) of the /onstitution . &he nu%ber of Me%bers apportioned to the province out of "hich such ne" province "as created, or "here the cit$, "hose population has so increased, is !eo!raphicall$ located shall be correspondin!l$ ad usted b$ the Co%%ission on Elections but such ad ust%ent shall not be %ade "ithin one hundred and t"ent$ da$s before the election. 1E%phases supplied3

S4$ara%4 O$!"!o"# DA- DE, JR., J., concurrin!E + concur in the "ell "ritten opinion of Mr. Justice Re$nato 0. Puno. + "ish, ho"ever, to add a fe" observations. +. 0ection ,2, Article Q of the Constitution provides that :RnSo province, cit$, %unicipalit$ or baran!a$ %a$ be created, divided, %er!ed, abolished, or its boundar$ substantiall$ altered, e4cept in accordance "ith the criteria established in the local !overn%ent code and sub ect to the approval b$ a %a orit$ of the votes cast in a plebiscite in the political units directl$ affected.: &hese criteria are no" set forth in 0ection = of the 9ocal #overn%ent Code of ,--, 1R.A. No. =,A23. One of these is that the territorial urisdiction of the local !overn%ent unit to be created or converted should be properl$ identified b$ %etes and bounds "ith technical descriptions. &he o%ission of R.A. No. =.<7 13n 3ct /onverting the 2unicipa#ity of 2akati )nto a +igh#y -rbanized /ity to be ?nown as the /ity of 2akati 3 to describe the territorial boundaries of the cit$ b$ %etes and bounds does not %a*e R.A. No. =.<7 unconstitutional or ille!al. &he Constitution does not provide for a description b$ %etes and bounds as a condition sine qua non for the creation of a local !overn%ent unit or its conversion fro% one level to another. &he criteria provided for in 0ection = of R.A. No. =.<7 are not absolute, for, as a %atter of fact, the section starts "ith the clause :as a genera# ru#e.: &he petitioners' reliance on 0ection 7<2 of R.A. No. =,A2 is unavailin! 0aid section onl$ applies to the conversion of a %unicipalit$ or a cluster of baran!a$s into a COMPONEN& C+&F, not a hi!hl$ urbani@ed cit$. +t pertinentl$ reads as follo"sE 0ec. 7<2. *equisite for creation. I 1a3 A %unicipalit$ or a cluster of baran!a$s %a$ be converted into a co%ponent cit$ if it has an avera!e annual inco%e, as certified b$ the >epart%ent of )inance, of at least &"ent$ %illion pesos 1P82,222,222.223 for the last t"o 183 consecutive $ears based on ,--, constant prices, and if it has either of the follo"in! re?uisitesE 444 444 444 1b3 &he territorial urisdiction of a ne"l$ created cit$ shall be properl$ identified b$ %etes and bounds. . . .

&he constitution classifies cities as either high#y urbanized or co%ponent. 0ection ,8 of Article Q thereof providesE 0ec. ,8. Cities that are hi!hl$ urbani@ed, as deter%ined b$ la", and co%ponent cities "hose charters prohibit their voters fro% votin! for provincial elective officials, shall be independent of the province. &he voters of co%ponent cities "ithin a province, "hose charters contain no such prohibition, shall not be deprived of their ri!ht to vote for elective provincial officials. And 0ection 7<, of R.A. No. =,A2 providesE 0ec. 7<,. /ities /#assified. I A cit$ %a$ either be co%ponent or hi!hl$ urbani@edE !rovided& however, &hat the criteria established in this Code shall not affect the classification and corporate status of e4istin! cities. +ndependent co%ponent cities are those co%ponent cities "hose charters prohibit their voters fro% votin! for provincial elective officials. +ndependent co%ponent cities shall be independent of the province. ++. 0trictl$ spea*in!, the increase in the nu%ber of le!islative seats for the Cit$ of Ma*ati provided for in R.A. No. =.<7 is not an increase ustified b$ the clause un#ess otherwise fi4ed by #aw in para!raph ,, 0ection <, Article /+ of the Constitution. &hat clause conte%plates of the reapportionment %entioned in the succeedin! para!raph 173 of the said 0ection "hich reads in full as follo"sE (ithin three $ears follo"in! the return of ever$ census, the Con!ress shall %a*e a reapportion%ent of le!islative districts based on the standards provided in this section. +n short, the clause refers to a genera# reapportionment #aw. &he increase under R.A. No. =.<7 is a per%issible increase under 0ections , and 5 of the Ordinance appended to the Constitution "hich readsE 0ec. ,. )or purposes of the election of Me%bers of the 6ouse of Representatives of the )irst Con!ress of the Philippines under the Constitution proposed b$ the ,-.A Constitutional Co%%ission and subsequent e#ections& and unti# otherwise provided by #aw , the Me%bers thereof shall be elected fro% le!islative districts apportioned a%on! the provinces, cities, and the 2etropo#itan 2ani#a 3rea as follo"sE

ME&ROPO9+&AN MAN+9A AREA 444 444 444 MAMA&+ one 1,3 444 444 444 0ec. 5. An$ province that %a$ hereafter be created, or any city whose popu#ation may hereafter increase to more than two hundred fifty thousand sha## be entit#ed in the immediate#y fo##owing e#ection to at #east one 2ember or such number of 2embers as it may be entit#ed to on the basis of the number of its inhabitants and according to the standards set forth in paragraph "6%& 1ection 9 of 3rtic#e >) of the /onstitution. &he nu%ber of Me%bers apportioned to the province out of "hich such ne" province "as created, or "here the cit$, "hose population has so increased, is !eo!raphicall$ located shall be correspondin!l$ ad usted b$ the Co%%ission on Elections but such ad ust%ent shall not be %ade "ithin one hundred and t"ent$ da$s before the election. 1E%phases supplied3

5. B3./ PRO). RAN>O9) 0. >A/+>, 9ORENBO &ATA>A +++, RONA9> 99AMA0, 6. 6ARRF 9. ROLGE, JR., JOE9 RG+B 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, A0 PRE0+>EN& AN> COMMAN>ER-+N-C6+E), EQECG&+/E 0ECRE&ARF E>GAR>O ERM+&A, 6ON. A/E9+NO CRGB ++, 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-------------------------------------------------4 N+TEB CAC6O-O9+/ARE0 AN> &R+BGNE PGB9+06+N# CO., +NC., Petitioners, #.R. No. ,=,5-A PresentE
U

PAN#AN+BAN, /.<., PGNO, LG+0GMB+N#, FNARE0-0AN&+A#O, 0AN>O/A9-#G&+ERREB, CARP+O, AG0&R+A-MAR&+NEB, CORONA, CARP+O MORA9E0, CA99EJO, 0R., ABCGNA, &+N#A, C6+CO-NABAR+O, #ARC+A, and /E9A0CO, <<. Pro%ul!atedE Ma$ 5, 822A

- 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+BA 9. MABA, +MEE R. MARCO0, RENA&O B. MA#&GBO, JG0&+N MARC 0B. C6+PECO, RO+9O #O9EB, >AR9ENE AN&ON+NOCG0&O>+O, 9ORE&&A ANN P. RO0A9E0, JO0E9 #. /+RA>OR, RA)AE9 /. MAR+ANO, #+9BER& C. REMG99A, )9ORENC+O #. NOE9, ANA &6ERE0+A 6ON&+/ERO0-BARALGE9, +ME9>A C. N+CO9A0, MAR/+C M./.). 9EONEN, NER+ JA/+ER CO9MENARE0, MO/EMEN& O) CONCERNE> C+&+BEN0 )OR C+/+9 9+BER&+E0 REPRE0EN&E> BF AMA>O #A& +NC+ON#, Petitioners, - versus E>GAR>O R. ERM+&A, EQECG&+/E 0ECRE&ARF, A/E9+NO J. CRGB, 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 M+9G0AN# MAFO GNO, REPRE0EN&E> BF +&0 C6A+RPER0ON E9MER C. 9ABO# AN> 0ECRE&ARF #ENERA9 JOE9 MA#9GN0O>, NA&+ONA9 )E>ERA&+ON O) 9ABOR GN+ON0 O M+9G0AN# MAFO GNO 1NA)9G-MMG3, REPRE0EN&E> BF +&0 NA&+ONA9 PRE0+>EN&, JO0E9+&O /. G0&AREB, AN&ON+O C. PA0CGA9, 0A9/A>OR &. CARRANBA, EM+9+A P. >APG9AN#, MAR&+N CG0&O>+O, JR., AN> ROLGE M. &AN, Petitioners,

#.R. No. ,=,72-

- versus -

#.R. No. ,=,7.5

#.R. No. ,=,7.<

6ER EQCE99ENCF, PRE0+>EN& #9OR+A MACAPA#A9-ARROFO, &6E 6ONORAB9E EQECG&+/E 0ECRE&ARF, E>GAR>O ERM+&A, &6E C6+E) O) 0&A)), ARME> )ORCE0 O) &6E P6+9+PP+NE0, #ENERO0O 0EN#A, AN> &6E PNP >+REC&OR #ENERA9, AR&GRO 9OM+BAO, Respondents. 4-------------------------------------------------4 A9&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>+B, )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+&F A0 A)P C6+E) O) 0&A)), AN> >+REC&OR #ENERA9 AR&GRO 9OM+BAO, +N 6+0 CAPAC+&F A0 PNP C6+E), Respondents. 4-------------------------------------------------4 9OREN B. 9E#AR>A, Petitioner, - versus #9OR+A MACAPA#A9-ARROFO, +N 6ER CAPAC+&F A0 PRE0+>EN& AN> COMMAN>ER-+N-C6+E)K

#.R. No. ,=,722

#.R. No. ,=,7.-

AR&GRO 9OM+BAO, +N 6+0 CAPAC+&F A0 >+REC&OR-#ENERA9 O) &6E P6+9+PP+NE NA&+ONA9 PO9+CE 1PNP3K #ENERO0O 0EN#A, +N 6+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 A0 EQECG&+/E 0ECRE&ARF, Respondents.

restrict funda%ental ri!hts co%e to the courts W"ith a heav$ presu%ption a!ainst their constitutional validit$.X R8S

&hese seven 1=3 consolidated petitions for certiorari and prohibition alle!e that in issuin! Presidential Procla%ation No. ,2,= 1PP ,2,=3 and #eneral Order No. < 1#.O. No. <3, President #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o co%%itted !rave abuse of discretion. Petitioners contend that respondent officials of the #overn%ent, in their professed efforts to defend and preserve de%ocratic institutions, are actuall$ tra%plin! #.R. No. ,=,787 upon the ver$ freedo% !uaranteed and protected b$ the

Constitution. 6ence, such issuances are void for bein! unconstitutional.

4---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------< Once a!ain, the Court is faced "ith an a!e-old but persistentl$ %odern >EC+0+ON 0AN>O/A9-#G&+ERREB, <.E proble%. +ow does the /onstitution of a free peop#e combine the degree of liberty& without which& #aw becomes tyranny& with the degree of law& without which& #iberty becomes #icensePR5S

All po"ers need so%e restraintK practical ad ust%ents rather than ri!id for%ula are necessar$.R,S 0uperior stren!th O the use of force O cannot %a*e "ron!s into ri!hts. +n this re!ard, the courts should be vi!ilant in safe!uardin! the constitutional ri!hts of the citi@ens, specificall$ their libert$. Chief Justice Arte%io /. Pan!anibanVs philosoph$ of libert$ is thus %ost relevant. 6e saidE W " ca#4# !"5o65!"; 6!(4r%&, %h4 #ca64# o9 =)#%!c4 #ho)6* :4!;h h4a5!6& a;a!"#% ;o54r"'4"% a"* !" 9a5or o9 %h4 $oor, %h4 o$$r4##4*, %h4 'ar;!"a6!?4*, %h4 *!#$o##4##4* a"* %h4 :4a8 .X 9a"s and actions that

On )ebruar$ 87, 822A, as the nation celebrated the 82 th Anniversar$ of the 5dsa !eop#e !ower ), President Arro$o issued PP ,2,= declarin! a state of national e%er!enc$, thusE NO3, THERE.ORE, +, #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o, President of the Republic of the Philippines and Co%%ander-in-Chief of the Ar%ed )orces of the Philippines, b$ virtue of the po"ers vested upon %e b$ 0ection ,., Article = of the Philippine Constitution "hich states thatE W&he President. . . "henever it beco%es necessar$, . . . %a$ call out 1the3 ar%ed forces to prevent or suppress. . .rebellion. . .,X and in %$ capacit$ as their Co%%anderin-Chief, *o h4r4(& co''a"* %h4 Ar'4* .orc4# o9 %h4 Ph!6!$$!"4#, %o 'a!"%a!" 6a: a"* or*4r %hro);ho)% %h4 Ph!6!$$!"4#, $r454"% or #)$$r4## a66 9or'# o9 6a:64## 5!o64"c4 a# :466 a# a"& ac% o9 !"#)rr4c%!o" or r4(466!o" a"*

%o 4"9orc4 o(4*!4"c4 %o a66 %h4 6a:# a"* %o a66 *4cr44#, or*4r# a"* r4;)6a%!o"# $ro')6;a%4* (& '4 $4r#o"a66& or )$o" '& *!r4c%!o" K and a# $ro5!*4* !" S4c%!o" 17, Ar%!c64 12 o9 %h4 Co"#%!%)%!o" *o h4r4(& *4c6ar4 a S%a%4 o9 Na%!o"a6 E'4r;4"c&.

On the sa%e da$, the President issued #. O. No. < i%ple%entin! PP ,2,=, thusE 3HEREAS, over these past %onths, ele%ents in the political opposition have conspired "ith authoritarians of the e4tre%e 9eft, represented b$ the N>)-CPP-NPA and the e4tre%e Ri!ht, represented b$ %ilitar$ adventurists - the historical ene%ies of the de%ocratic Philippine 0tate O and "ho are no" in a tactical alliance and en!a!ed in a concerted and s$ste%atic conspirac$, over a broad front, to brin! do"n the dul$-constituted #overn%ent elected in Ma$ 8227K 3HEREAS, these conspirators have repeatedl$ tried to brin! do"n our republican !overn%entK 3HEREAS, the clai%s of these ele%ents have been rec*lessl$ %a!nified b$ certain se!%ents of the national %ediaK 3HEREAS, these series of actions is hurtin! the Philippine 0tate b$ obstructin! !overnance, includin! hinderin! the !ro"th of the econo%$ and sabota!in! the peopleVs confidence in the !overn%ent and their faith in the future of this countr$K 3HEREAS, these actions are adversel$ affectin! the econo%$K 3HEREAS, these activities !ive totalitarian forcesK of both the e4tre%e 9eft and e4tre%e Ri!ht the openin! to intensif$ their avo"ed ai%s to brin! do"n the de%ocratic Philippine 0tateK 3HEREAS, Article 8, 0ection 7 of our Constitution %a*es the defense and preservation of the de%ocratic institutions and the 0tate the pri%ar$ dut$ of #overn%entK 3HEREAS, the activities above-described, their conse?uences, ra%ifications and collateral effects constitute a clear and present dan!er to the safet$ and the inte!rit$ of the Philippine 0tate and of the )ilipino peopleK 3HEREAS, Procla%ation ,2,= date )ebruar$ 87, 822A has been issued declarin! a 0tate of National E%er!enc$K NO3, THERE.ORE, G,OR A MACAPAGA,ARRO2O, b$ virtue of the po"ers vested in %e under the Constitution as President of the Republic of the Philippines, and Co%%ander-in-Chief of the Republic of the Philippines, and pursuant to Procla%ation No. ,2,= dated )ebruar$ 87, 822A, do hereb$ call upon the Ar%ed )orces of the Philippines 1A)P3 and the Philippine National Police 1PNP3, to prevent and suppress acts of terroris% and la"less violence in the countr$K

0he cited the follo"in! facts as basesE 3HEREAS, over these past %onths, ele%ents in the $o6!%!ca6 o$$o#!%!o" ha54 co"#$!r4* :!%h a)%hor!%ar!a"# o9 %h4 4<%r4'4 ,49% r4$r4#4"%4* (& %h4 ND.-CPP-NPA a"* %h4 4<%r4'4 R!;h%, r4$r4#4"%4* (& '!6!%ar& a*54"%)r!#%# E %h4 h!#%or!ca6 4"4'!4# o9 %h4 *4'ocra%!c Ph!6!$$!"4 S%a%4 O "ho are no" in a tactical alliance and en!a!ed in a concerted and s$ste%atic conspirac$, over a broad front, to brin! do"n the dul$ constituted #overn%ent elected in Ma$ 8227K 3HEREAS, these conspirators have repeatedl$ tried to brin! do"n the PresidentK 3HEREAS, %h4 c6a!'# o9 %h4#4 464'4"%# ha54 (44" r4c864##6& 'a;"!9!4* (& c4r%a!" #4;'4"%# o9 %h4 "a%!o"a6 '4*!aB 3HEREAS, this series of actions is hurtin! the Philippine 0tate O b$ obstructin! !overnance includin! h!"*4r!"; %h4 ;ro:%h o9 %h4 4co"o'& a"* #a(o%a;!"; %h4 $4o$64J# co"9!*4"c4 !" ;o54r"'4"% a"* %h4!r 9a!%h !" %h4 9)%)r4 o9 %h!# co)"%r&K 3HEREAS, these ac%!o"# ar4 a*54r#46& a994c%!"; %h4 4co"o'&B 3HEREAS, %h4#4 ac%!5!%!4# ;!54 %o%a6!%ar!a" 9orc4# o9 (o%h %h4 4<%r4'4 ,49% a"* 4<%r4'4 R!;h% %h4 o$4"!"; %o !"%4"#!9& %h4!r a5o:4* a!'# %o (r!"; *o:" %h4 *4'ocra%!c Ph!6!$$!"4 S%a%4K 3HEREAS, Article 8, 0ection 7 of the our Constitution %a*es the defense and preservation of the de%ocratic institutions and the 0tate the pri%ar$ dut$ of #overn%entK 3HEREAS, the activities above-described, their conse?uences, ra%ifications and collateral effects constitute a c64ar a"* $r4#4"% *a";4r to the safet$ and the inte!rit$ of the Philippine 0tate and of the )ilipino peopleK

+ 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 !''4*!a%46& carr& o)% %h4 "4c4##ar& a"* a$$ro$r!a%4 ac%!o"# a"* '4a#)r4# %o #)$$r4## a"* $r454"% ac%# o9 %4rror!#' a"* 6a:64## 5!o64"c4.

On March 5, 822A, 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 readsE 3HEREAS, pursuant to 0ection ,., Article /++ and 0ection ,=, Article Q++ of the Constitution, Procla%ation No. ,2,= dated )ebruar$ 87, 822A, "as issued declarin! a state of national e%er!enc$K 3HEREAS, b$ virtue of #eneral Order No.< and No.A dated )ebruar$ 87, 822A, "hich "ere issued on the basis of Procla%ation No. ,2,=, the Ar%ed )orces of the Philippines 1A)P3 and 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 of rebellion 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, THERE.ORE, , G,OR A MACAPAGA,ARRO2O, President of the Republic of the Philippines, b$ virtue of the po"ers vested in %e b$ la", hereb$ *4c6ar4 %ha% %h4 #%a%4 o9 "a%!o"a6 4'4r;4"c& ha# c4a#4* %o 4<!#%. +n their presentation of the factual bases of PP ,2,= and #.O. No. <, respondents stated that the pro4i%ate cause behind the e4ecutive issuances "as the conspirac$ a%on! so%e %ilitar$ officers, leftist insur!ents of the Ne" PeopleVs Ar%$ 1NPA3, and so%e %e%bers of the political opposition in a plot to unseat or assassinate President Arro$o.R7S &he$ considered the ai% to oust or assassinate the President and ta*e-over the rei!ns of !overn%ent as a clear and present dan!er. >urin! the oral ar!u%ents held on March =, 822A, the 0olicitor #eneral specified the facts leadin! to the issuance of PP ,2,= and #.O. No. <. S!;"!9!ca"%6&, %h4r4 :a# "o r49)%a%!o" 9ro' $4%!%!o"4r#J co)"#46#. &he 0olicitor #eneral ar!ued that the intent of the Constitution is to !ive full *!#cr4%!o"ar& $o:4r# to the President in deter%inin! the necessit$ of callin! out the ar%ed forces. 6e e%phasi@ed that none of the petitioners has sho"n that PP ,2,= "as "ithout factual bases. (hile he e4plained that it is not respondentsV tas*

to state the facts behind the ?uestioned Procla%ation, ho"ever, the$ are presentin! the sa%e, narrated hereunder, for the elucidation of the issues. On Januar$ ,=, 822A, Captain Nathaniel Rabon@a and )irst 9ieutenants 0onn$ 0ar%iento, 9a"rence 0an Juan and Patricio Bu%idan!, %e%bers of the Ma!dalo #roup indicted in the Oa*"ood %utin$, escaped their detention cell in )ort Bonifacio, &a!ui! Cit$. +n a public state%ent, the$ vo"ed to re%ain defiant and to elude arrest at all costs. &he$ called upon the people to W show and proc#aim our disp#easure at the sham regime. 7et us demonstrate our disgust& not on#y by going to the streets in protest& but a#so by wearing red bands on our #eft arms. X R<S On )ebruar$ ,=, 822A, the authorities !ot hold of a docu%ent entitled W(p#an +ack#e ) X "hich detailed plans for bo%bin!s and attac*s durin! the Philippine Militar$ Acade%$ Alu%ni 6o%eco%in! in Ba!uio Cit$. &he plot "as to assassinate selected tar!ets includin! so%e cabinet %e%bers and President Arro$o herself. RAS Gpon the advice of her securit$, President Arro$o decided not to attend the Alu%ni 6o%eco%in!. &he ne4t da$, at the hei!ht of the celebration, a bo%b "as found and detonated at the PMA parade !round. On )ebruar$ 8,, 822A, 9t. 0an Juan "as recaptured in a co%%unist safehouse in Batan!as province. )ound in his possession "ere t"o 183 flash dis*s containin! %inutes of the %eetin!s bet"een %e%bers of the Ma!dalo #roup and the National PeopleVs Ar%$ 1NPA3, a tape recorder, audio cassette cartrid!es, dis*ettes, and copies of subversive docu%ents.R=S Prior to his arrest, 9t. 0an Juan announced throu!h >BR6 that the W2agda#o@s ';'ay wou#d be on ,ebruary 8A& 8::B& the 8:th 3nniversary of 5dsa ).C On )ebruar$ 85, 822A, PNP Chief Arturo 9o%ibao intercepted infor%ation that %e%bers of the PNP- 0pecial Action )orce "ere plannin! to defect. &hus, he i%%ediatel$ ordered 0A) Co%%andin! #eneral Marcelino )ranco, Jr. to DdisavowC an$ defection. &he latter pro%ptl$ obe$ed and issued a public state%entE W3## 13, units are under the effective contro# of responsib#e and trustworthy officers with proven integrity and unquestionab#e #oya#ty. X On the sa%e da$, at the house of for%er Con!ress%an Pepin! Co uan!co, President Cor$ A?uinoVs brother, business%en and %id-level !overn%ent officials plotted %oves to brin! do"n the Arro$o ad%inistration. Nell$ 0inda$en of &+ME Ma!a@ine reported that Pastor 0a$con, lon!ti%e Arro$o critic, called a G.0. !overn%ent official about his !roupVs plans if President Arro$o is ousted. 0a$con also phoned a %an code-na%ed >elta. 0a$con identified hi% as BC#en. >anilo 9i%, Co%%ander of the Ar%$Vs elite 0cout Ran!er. 9i% said Wit was a## systems go for the p#anned movement against 3rroyo.XR.S BC#en. >anilo 9i% and Bri!ade Co%%ander Col. Ariel Luerubin confided to #en. #eneroso 0en!a, Chief of 0taff of the Ar%ed )orces of the Philippines 1A)P3, that a hu!e nu%ber of soldiers "ould oin the rallies to provide a critical %ass and ar%ed co%ponent to the Anti-Arro$o protests to be held on )ebruar$ 87, 822<. Accordin! to these t"o 183 officers, there "as no "a$ the$ could possibl$ stop the soldiers because the$ too, "ere brea*in! the chain of co%%and to oin the forces foist to unseat the President. 6o"ever, #en. 0en!a has re%ained faithful to his Co%%ander-in-Chief and to the chain of co%%and. 6e i%%ediatel$ too* custod$ of BC#en. 9i% and directed Col. Luerubin to return to the Philippine Marines 6ead?uarters in )ort Bonifacio. Earlier, the CPP-NPA called for intensification of political and revolutionar$ "or* "ithin the %ilitar$ and the police establish%ents in order to for!e alliances "ith its %e%bers and *e$ officials. NPA spo*es%an #re!orio WMa Ro!erX Rosal declaredE

W0he /ommunist !arty and revo#utionary movement and the entire peop#e #ook forward to the possibi#ity in the coming year of accomp#ishing its immediate task of bringing down the 3rroyo regimeE of rendering it to weaken and unab#e to ru#e that it wi## not take much #onger to end it.XR-S On the other hand, Cesar Renerio, spo*es%an for the National >e%ocratic )ront 1N>)3 at North Central Mindanao, publicl$ announcedE W 3nti;3rroyo groups within the mi#itary and po#ice are growing rapid#y& hastened by the economic difficu#ties suffered by the fami#ies of 3,! officers and en#isted personne# who undertake counter;insurgency operations in the fie#d. X 6e clai%ed that "ith the forces of the national de%ocratic %ove%ent, the anti-Arro$o conservative political parties, coalitions, plus the !roups that have been reinforcin! since June 822<, it is probable that the PresidentVs ouster is nearin! its concludin! sta!e in the first half of 822A. Respondents further clai%ed that the bo%bin! of teleco%%unication to"ers and cell sites in Bulacan and Bataan "as also considered as additional factual basis for the issuance of PP ,2,= and #.O. No. <. 0o is the raid of an ar%$ outpost in Ben!uet resultin! in the death of three 153 soldiers. And also the directive of the Co%%unist Part$ of the Philippines orderin! its front or!ani@ations to oin <,222 Metro Manila radicals and 8<,222 %ore fro% the provinces in %ass protests. R,2S B$ %idni!ht of )ebruar$ 85, 822A, the President convened her securit$ advisers and several cabinet %e%bers to assess the !ravit$ of the fer%entin! peace and order situation. 0he directed both the A)P and the PNP to account for all their %en and ensure that the chain of co%%and re%ains solid and undivided. &o protect the $oun! students fro% an$ possible trouble that %i!ht brea* loose on the streets, the President suspended classes in all levels in the entire National Capital Re!ion. .or %h4!r $ar%, $4%!%!o"4r# c!%4* %h4 454"%# %ha% 9o66o:4* a9%4r %h4 !##)a"c4 o9 PP 1017 a"* G.O. No. 5. +%%ediatel$, the Office of the President announced the cancellation of all pro!ra%s and activities related to the 82 th anniversar$ celebration of 5dsa !eop#e !ower )K and revo*ed the per%its to hold rallies issued earlier b$ the local !overn%ents. Justice 0ecretar$ Raul #on@ales stated that political rallies, "hich to the PresidentVs %ind "ere or!ani@ed for purposes of destabili@ation, are cancelled. Presidential Chief of 0taff Michael >efensor announced that Wwarrant#ess arrests and take;over of faci#ities& inc#uding media& can a#ready be imp#emented .XR,,S Gndeterred b$ the announce%ents that rallies and public asse%blies "ould not be allo"ed, !roups of protesters 1%e%bers of ?i#usang 2ayo -no RMMGS and National )ederation of 9abor Gnions- ?i#usang 2ayo -no RNA)9G-MMGS3, %arched fro% various parts of Metro Manila "ith the intention of conver!in! at the E>0A shrine. &hose "ho "ere alread$ near the E>0A site "ere violentl$ dispersed b$ hu!e clusters of anti-riot police. &he "ell-trained police%en used truncheons, bi! fiber !lass shields, "ater cannons, and tear !as to stop and brea* up the %archin! !roups, and scatter the %assed participants. &he sa%e police action "as used a!ainst the protesters %archin! for"ard to Cubao, Lue@on Cit$ and to the corner of 0antolan 0treet and E>0A. &hat sa%e evenin!, hundreds of riot police%en bro*e up an E>0A celebration rall$ held alon! A$ala Avenue and Paseo de Ro4as 0treet in Ma*ati Cit$.R,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$-list 3kbayan. At around ,8E82 in the earl$ %ornin! of )ebruar$ 8<, 822A, operatives of the Cri%inal +nvesti!ation and >etection #roup 1C+>#3 of the PNP, on the basis of PP ,2,= and #.O. No. <, raided the 'ai#y 0ribune offices in Manila. &he raidin! tea% confiscated ne"s stories b$ reporters, docu%ents, pictures, and %oc*-ups of the 0aturda$ issue. Police%en fro% Ca%p Cra%e in Lue@on Cit$ "ere stationed inside the editorial and business offices of the ne"spaperK "hile police%en fro% the Manila Police >istrict "ere stationed outside the buildin!.R,5S A fe" %inutes after the search and sei@ure at the 'ai#y 0ribune offices, the police surrounded the pre%ises of another pro-opposition paper, Mala$a, and its sister publication, the tabloid Abante. &he raid, accordin! to Presidential Chief of 0taff Michael >efensor, is Dmeant to show a Fstrong presence&@ to te## media out#ets not to connive or do anything that wou#d he#p the rebe#s in bringing down this government.C &he PNP "arned that it "ould ta*e over an$ %edia or!ani@ation that "ould not follo" Dstandards set by the government during the state of nationa# emergency.C >irector #eneral 9o%ibao stated that Dif they do not fo##ow the standards G and the standards are ; if they wou#d contribute to instabi#ity in the government& 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%%unicationsV Co%%issioner Ronald 0olis ur!ed television and radio net"or*s to DcooperateC "ith the !overn%ent for the duration of the state of national e%er!enc$. 6e as*ed for Dba#anced reportingC fro% broadcasters "hen coverin! the events surroundin! the coup atte%pt foiled b$ the !overn%ent. 6e "arned that his a!enc$ "ill not hesitate to reco%%end the closure of an$ broadcast outfit that violates rules set out for %edia covera!e "hen the national securit$ is threatened. R,7S Also, on )ebruar$ 8<, 822A, the police arrested Con!ress%an Crispin Beltran, representin! the 3nakpawis Part$ and Chair%an of ?i#usang 2ayo -no 1MMG3, "hile leavin! his far%house in Bulacan. &he police sho"ed a "arrant for his arrest dated ,-.<. BeltranVs la"$er e4plained that the "arrant, "hich ste%%ed fro% a case of incitin! to rebellion filed durin! the Marcos re!i%e, had lon! been ?uashed. Beltran, ho"ever, is not a part$ in an$ of these petitions. (hen %e%bers of petitioner MMG "ent to Ca%p Cra%e to visit Beltran, the$ "ere told the$ could not be ad%itted because of PP ,2,= and #.O. No. <. &"o %e%bers "ere arrested and detained, "hile the rest "ere dispersed b$ the police. Bayan 2una Representative 0atur Oca%po eluded arrest "hen the police "ent after hi% durin! a public foru% at the 0ulo 6otel in Lue@on Cit$. But his t"o drivers, identified as Roel and Art, "ere ta*en into custod$. Retired Ma or #eneral Ra%on MontaDo, for%er head of the Philippine Constabular$, "as arrested "hile "ith his "ife and !olf%ates at the Orchard #olf and Countr$ Club in >as%ariDas, Cavite. Atte%pts "ere %ade to arrest 3nakpawis Representative 0atur Oca%po, Representative Rafael Mariano, Bayan 2una Representative &eodoro CasiDo and #abriela Representative 9i@a Ma@a. Bayan 2una Representative Josel /irador "as arrested at the PA9 &ic*et Office in >avao Cit$. 9ater, he "as turned over to the custod$ of the 6ouse of Representatives "here the WBatasan <X decided to sta$ indefinitel$. 9et it be stressed at this point that the alle!ed violations of the ri!hts of Representatives Beltran, 0atur Oca%po, et a#., are not bein! raised in these petitions.

On March 5, 822A, President Arro$o issued PP ,28, declarin! that the state of national e%er!enc$ has ceased to e4ist. +n the interi%, these seven 1=3 petitions challen!in! the constitutionalit$ of PP ,2,= and #.O. No. < "ere filed "ith this Court a!ainst the above-na%ed respondents. &hree 153 of these petitions i%pleaded President Arro$o as respondent. +n G.R. No. 1710A6, petitioners Randolf 0. >avid, et a#. assailed PP ,2,= on the !rounds that C1F it encroaches on the e%er!enc$ po"ers of Con!ressK C2F it is a subterfu!e to avoid the constitutional re?uire%ents for the i%position of %artial la"K and C0F it violates the constitutional !uarantees of freedo% of the press, of speech and of asse%bl$. +n G.R. No. 17140A, petitioners Nine@ Cacho-Olivares and 0ribune Publishin! Co., +nc. challen!ed the C+>#Vs act of raidin! the 'ai#y 0ribune offices as a clear case of WcensorshipX or Wprior restraint.X &he$ also clai%ed that the ter% We%er!enc$X refers onl$ to tsuna%i, t$phoon, hurricane and si%ilar occurrences, hence, there is Wabso#ute#y no emergencyX that "arrants the issuance of PP ,2,=. +n G.R. No. 171415& petitioners herein are Representative )rancis Joseph #. Escudero, and t"ent$ one 18,3 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 W usurpation of #egis#ative powersXK Wvio#ation of freedom of e4pression X and Wa dec#aration of martia# #aw.X &he$ alle!ed that President Arro$o W! rave#y abused her discretion in ca##ing out the armed forces without c#ear and verifiab#e factua# basis of the possibi#ity of #aw#ess vio#ence and a showing that there is necessity to do so. X +n G.R. No. 171410& petitioners MMG, NA)9G-MMG, and their %e%bers averred that PP ,2,= and #.O. No. < are unconstitutional because C1F the$ arro!ate unto President Arro$o the po"er to enact la"s and decreesK C2F their issuance "as "ithout factual basisK and C0F the$ violate freedo% of e4pression and the ri!ht of the people to peaceabl$ asse%ble to redress their !rievances. +n G.R. No. 171400& petitioner Alternative 9a" #roups, +nc. 1A9#+3 alle!ed that PP ,2,= and #.O. No. < are unconstitutional because the$ violate CaF 0ection 7R,<S of Article ++, C(F 0ections ,,R,AS 8,R,=S and 7R,.S of Article +++, CcF 0ection 85R,-S of Article /+, and C*F 0ection ,=R82S of Article Q++ of the Constitution. +n G.R. No. 17141A, petitioners Jose Ansel%o +. Cadi@ et a#.& alle!ed that PP ,2,= is an Warbitrary and un#awfu# e4ercise by the !resident of her 2artia# 7aw powers.X And assu%in! that PP ,2,= is not reall$ a declaration of Martial 9a", petitioners ar!ued that Wit amounts to an e4ercise by the !resident of emergency powers without congressiona# approva#. X +n addition, petitioners asserted that PP ,2,= Wgoes beyond the nature and function of a proc#amation as defined under the *evised 3dministrative /ode.C And lastl$, in G.R. No. 171424, petitioner 9oren B. 9e!arda %aintained that PP ,2,= and #.O. No. < are Wunconstitutiona# for being vio#ative of the freedom of e4pression& inc#uding its cognate rights such as freedom of the press and the right to access to information on matters of pub#ic concern& a## guaranteed under 3rtic#e )))& 1ection A of the 1JKI /onstitution. X +n this re!ard, she stated that these issuances prevented her fro% full$ prosecutin! her election protest pendin! before the Presidential Electoral &ribunal. +n respondentsV Consolidated Co%%ent, the 0olicitor #eneral countered thatE first& the petitions should be dis%issed for bein! %ootK second& petitioners in #.R. Nos. ,=,722 1A9#+3, ,=,787 19e!arda3, ,=,7.5 1MMG et a#.3, ,=,7.< 1Escudero et a#.3 and ,=,7.- 1Cadi@ et a#.3 have no le!al standin!K third, it is not necessar$ for petitioners to i%plead President

Arro$o as respondentK fourth& PP ,2,= has constitutional and le!al basisK and fifth& PP ,2,= does not violate the peopleVs ri!ht to free e4pression and redress of !rievances. On March =, 822A, the Court conducted oral ar!u%ents and heard the parties on the above interloc*in! issues "hich %a$ be su%%ari@ed as follo"sE A. PROCEDURA,K 1F (hether the issuance of PP ,28, renders the petitions %oot and acade%ic. 2F (hether petitioners in 171415 1Escudero et a#.3, G.R. No#. 171400 1A9#+3, 171410 1MMG et a#.3, 17141A 1Cadi@ et a#.3, and 17142419e!arda3 have le!al standin!. /. SU/STANT -EK 1F (hether the 0upre%e Court can revie" the factual bases of PP ,2,=. 2F (hether PP ,2,= and #.O. No. < are unconstitutional. a. )acial Challen!e (. Constitutional Basis c. As Applied Challen!e A. PROCEDURA,

)irst, "e %ust resolve the procedural roadbloc*s. I- Moot and Academic Principle One of the !reatest contributions of the A%erican s$ste% to this countr$ is the concept of udicial revie" enunciated in 2arbury v. 2adison.R8,S &his concept rests on the e4traordinar$ si%ple foundation -&he Constitution is the supre%e la". +t "as ordained b$ the people, the ulti%ate source of all political authorit$. +t confers li%ited po"ers on the national !overn%ent. 4 4 4 9 %h4 ;o54r"'4"% co"#c!o)#6& or )"co"#c!o)#6& o54r#%4$# %h4#4 6!'!%a%!o"# %h4r4 ')#% (4 #o'4 a)%hor!%& co'$4%4"% %o ho6* !% !" co"%ro6, %o %h:ar% !%# )"co"#%!%)%!o"a6 a%%4'$%, a"* %h)# %o 5!"*!ca%4 a"* $r4#4r54 !"5!o6a%4 %h4 :!66 o9 %h4 $4o$64 a# 4<$r4##4* !" %h4 Co"#%!%)%!o". Th!# $o:4r %h4 co)r%# 4<4rc!#4. Th!# !# %h4 (4;!""!"; a"* %h4 4"* o9 %h4 %h4or& o9 =)*!c!a6 r45!4: .R88S But the po"er of udicial revie" does not repose upon the courts a Wself-startin! capacit$.XR85S Courts %a$ e4ercise such po"er onl$ "hen the follo"in! re?uisites are presentE first& there %ust be an actual case or controvers$K second& petitioners have to raise a ?uestion of constitutionalit$K third& the constitutional ?uestion %ust be raised at the earliest opportunit$K and fourth& the decision of the constitutional ?uestion %ust be necessar$ to the deter%ination of the case itself. R87S Respondents %aintain that the first and second re?uisites are absent, hence, "e shall li%it our discussion thereon. An actual case or controvers$ involves a conflict of le!al ri!ht, an opposite le!al clai%s susceptible of udicial resolution. +t is Wdefinite and concrete, touchin! the le!al relations of parties havin! adverse le!al interestKX a real and substantial controvers$ ad%ittin! of specific relief. R8<S &he 0olicitor #eneral refutes the e4istence

of such actual case or controvers$, contendin! that the present petitions "ere rendered W%oot and acade%icX b$ 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, R8AS so that a declaration thereon "ould be of no practical use or value. R8=S #enerall$, courts decline urisdiction over such caseR8.S or dis%iss it on !round of %ootness.R8-S &he Court holds that President Arro$oVs issuance of PP ,28, did not render the present petitions %oot and acade%ic. >urin! the ei!ht 1.3 da$s that PP ,2,= "as operative, the police officers, accordin! to petitioners, co%%itted ille!al acts in i%ple%entin! it. Ar4 PP 1017 a"* G.O. No. 5 co"#%!%)%!o"a6 or 5a6!*L Do %h4& =)#%!9& %h4#4 a664;4* !664;a6 ac%#L &hese are the vital issues that %ust be resolved in the present petitions. +t %ust be stressed that Wa" )"co"#%!%)%!o"a6 ac% !# "o% a 6a:, !% co"94r# "o r!;h%#, !% !'$o#4# "o *)%!4#, !% a99or*# "o $ro%4c%!o"B !% !# !" 64;a6 co"%4'$6a%!o", !"o$4ra%!54 .XR52S &he W%oot and acade%icX principle is not a %a!ical for%ula that can auto%aticall$ dissuade the courts in resolvin! a case. Courts "ill decide cases, other"ise %oot and acade%ic, ifE first& there is a !rave violation of the ConstitutionK R5,S second, the e4ceptional character of the situation and the para%ount public interest is involvedKR58S third& "hen constitutional issue raised re?uires for%ulation of controllin! principles to !uide the bench, the bar, and the publicK R55S and fourth& the case is capable of repetition $et evadin! revie". R57S All the fore!oin! e4ceptions are present here and ustif$ this CourtVs assu%ption of urisdiction over the instant petitions. Petitioners alle!ed that the issuance of PP ,2,= and #.O. No. < violates the Constitution. &here is no ?uestion that the issues bein! raised affect the publicVs interest, involvin! as the$ do the peopleVs basic ri!hts to freedo% of e4pression, of asse%bl$ and of the press. 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, %h4 '!6!%ar& a"* %h4 $o6!c4, on the e4tent of the protection !iven b$ constitutional !uarantees. R5<S And lastl$, respondentsV contested actions are capable of repetition. Certainl$, the petitions are sub ect to udicial revie". +n their atte%pt to prove the alle!ed %ootness of this case, respondents cited Chief Justice Arte%io /. Pan!anibanVs 0eparate Opinion in 1an#akas v. 54ecutive 1ecretary.R5AS 6o"ever, the$ failed to ta*e into account the Chief JusticeVs ver$ state%ent that an other"ise W%ootX case %a$ still be decided W provided the party raising it in a proper case has been andLor continues to be prejudiced or damaged as a direct resu#t of its issuance. X &he present case falls ri!ht "ithin this e4ception to the %ootness rule pointed out b$ the Chief Justice. II- Legal Standing +n vie" of the nu%ber of petitioners suin! in various personalities, the Court dee%s it i%perative to have a %ore than passin! discussion on le!al standin! or#ocus standi. 7ocus standi is defined as Wa ri!ht of appearance in a court of ustice on a !iven ?uestion.XR5=S +n private suits, standin! is !overned b$ the Wreal-parties-in interestX rule as contained in 0ection 8, Rule 5 of the ,--= Rules of Civil Procedure, as a%ended. +t provides that W454r& ac%!o" ')#% (4 $ro#4c)%4* or *494"*4* !" %h4 "a'4 o9 %h4 r4a6 $ar%& !" !"%4r4#% .X Accordin!l$, the Wreal-part$-in interestX is W%h4 $ar%& :ho #%a"*# %o (4 (4"49!%4* or !"=)r4* (& %h4 =)*;'4"% !" %h4

#)!% or %h4 $ar%& 4"%!%64* %o %h4 a5a!6# o9 %h4 #)!%. XR5.S 0uccinctl$ put, the plaintiffVs standin! is based on his o"n ri!ht to the relief sou!ht. &he difficult$ of deter%inin! #ocus standi arises in $)(6!c #)!%#. 6ere, the plaintiff "ho asserts a Wpublic ri!htX in assailin! an alle!edl$ ille!al official action, does so as a representative of the !eneral public. 6e %a$ be a person "ho is affected no differentl$ fro% an$ other person. 6e could be suin! as a Wstran!er,X or in the cate!or$ of a Wciti@en,X or Yta4pa$er.X +n either case, he has to ade?uatel$ sho" that he is entitled to see* udicial protection. +n other "ords, he has to %a*e out a sufficient interest in the vindication of the public order and the securin! of relief as a Wciti@enX or Wta4pa$er. Case la" in %ost urisdictions no" allo"s both Wciti@enX and Wta4pa$erX standin! in public actions. &he distinction "as first laid do"n in Beauchamp v. 1i#k, R5-S "here it "as held that the plaintiff in a ta4pa$erVs suit is in a different cate!or$ fro% the plaintiff in a citi@enVs suit. " %h4 9or'4r, %h4 $6a!"%!99 !# a994c%4* (& %h4 4<$4"*!%)r4 o9 $)(6!c 9)"*#, :h!64 !" %h4 6a%%4r, h4 !# ()% %h4 '4r4 !"#%r)'4"% o9 %h4 $)(6!c co"c4r". As held b$ the Ne" For* 0upre%e Court in !eop#e e4 re# /ase v. /o##insER72S W " 'a%%4r o9 '4r4 $)(6!c r!;h%, ho:454rM %h4 $4o$64 ar4 %h4 r4a6 $ar%!4#M % !# a% 64a#% %h4 r!;h%, !9 "o% %h4 *)%&, o9 454r& c!%!?4" %o !"%4r94r4 a"* #44 %ha% a $)(6!c o994"c4 (4 $ro$4r6& $)r#)4* a"* $)"!#h4*, a"* %ha% a $)(6!c ;r!45a"c4 (4 r4'4*!4* .X (ith respect to ta4pa$erVs suits, 0err v. <ordanR7,S held that W%h4 r!;h% o9 a c!%!?4" a"* a %a<$a&4r %o 'a!"%a!" a" ac%!o" !" co)r%# %o r4#%ra!" %h4 )"6a:9)6 )#4 o9 $)(6!c 9)"*# %o h!# !"=)r& ca""o% (4 *4"!4*.X 6o"ever, to prevent ust about an$ person fro% see*in! udicial interference in an$ official polic$ or act "ith "hich he disa!reed "ith, and thus hinders the activities of !overn%ental a!encies en!a!ed in public service, the Gnited 0tate 0upre%e Court laid do"n the %ore strin!ent W*!r4c% !"=)r&X %4#% in 54 !arte 7evitt,R78Slater reaffir%ed in 0i#eston v. -##man.R75S &he sa%e Court ruled that for a private individual to invo*e the udicial po"er to deter%ine the validit$ of an e4ecutive or le!islative action, h4 ')#% #ho: %ha% h4 ha# #)#%a!"4* a *!r4c% !"=)r& a# a r4#)6% o9 %ha% ac%!o", a"* !% !# "o% #)99!c!4"% %ha% h4 ha# a ;4"4ra6 !"%4r4#% co''o" %o a66 '4'(4r# o9 %h4 $)(6!c. &his Court adopted the N*!r4c% !"=)r&O %4#% in our urisdiction. +n !eop#e v. >era,R77S it held that the person "ho i%pu!ns the validit$ of a statute %ust have W a $4r#o"a6 a"* #)(#%a"%!a6 !"%4r4#% !" %h4 ca#4 #)ch %ha% h4 ha# #)#%a!"4*, or :!66 #)#%a!" *!r4c% !"=)r& a# a r4#)6% .X &he >era doctrine "as upheld in a litan$ of cases, such as, /ustodio v. !resident of the 1enate ,R7<S 2ani#a *ace +orse 0rainers@ 3ssociation v. 'e #a ,uente ,R7AS !ascua# v. 1ecretary of !ub#ic $orks R7=Sand 3nti; /hinese 7eague of the !hi#ippines v. ,e#i4. R7.S 6o"ever, bein! a %ere procedural technicalit$, the re?uire%ent of #ocus standi %a$ be "aived b$ the Court in the e4ercise of its discretion. &his "as done in the1A4A E'4r;4"c& Po:4r# Ca#4#, 3raneta v. 'ing#asan,R7-S "here the W%ra"#c4"*4"%a6 !'$or%a"c4X of the cases pro%pted the Court to act liberall$. 0uch liberalit$ "as neither a rarit$ nor accidental. +n 3quino v. /ome#ec, R<2S this Court resolved to pass upon the issues raised due to the W 9ar-r4ach!"; !'$6!ca%!o"#X of the petition not"ithstandin! its cate!orical state%ent that petitioner therein had no personalit$ to file the suit. +ndeed, there is a chain of cases "here this liberal polic$ has been observed, allo"in! ordinar$ citi@ens, %e%bers of

Con!ress, and civic or!ani@ations to prosecute actions involvin! the constitutionalit$ or validit$ of la"s, re!ulations and rulin!s.R<,S &hus, the Court has adopted a rule that even "here the petitioners have failed to sho" direct in ur$, the$ have been allo"ed to sue under the principle of W%ra"#c4"*4"%a6 !'$or%a"c4 .X Pertinent are the follo"in! casesE C1F /havez v. !ub#ic 5states 3uthority& R<8S "here the Court ruled that %h4 4"9orc4'4"% o9 %h4 co"#%!%)%!o"a6 r!;h% %o !"9or'a%!o" a"* %h4 47)!%a(64 *!99)#!o" o9 "a%)ra6 r4#o)rc4# ar4 'a%%4r# o9 %ra"#c4"*4"%a6 !'$or%a"c4 :h!ch c6o%h4 %h4 $4%!%!o"4r :!%h locus standiB !F Bagong 3#yansang 2akabayan v. Mamora& R<5S "herein the Court held that N;!54" %h4 %ra"#c4"*4"%a6 !'$or%a"c4 o9 %h4 !##)4# !"5o654*, %h4 Co)r% 'a& r46a< %h4 #%a"*!"; r47)!r4'4"%# a"* a66o: %h4 #)!% %o $ro#$4r *4#$!%4 %h4 6ac8 o9 *!r4c% !"=)r& %o %h4 $ar%!4# #448!"; =)*!c!a6 r45!4:O of the /isitin! )orces A!ree%entK C0F 7im v. 54ecutive 1ecretary,R<7S "hile the Court noted that the petitioners %a$ not file suit in their capacit$ as ta4pa$ers absent a sho"in! that WBali*atan 28-2,X involves the e4ercise of Con!ressV ta4in! or spendin! po"ers, it reiterated its rulin! in Bagong 3#yansang 2akabayan v. Mamora& R<<S tha% !" ca#4# o9 %ra"#c4"*4"%a6 !'$or%a"c4, %h4 ca#4# ')#% (4 #4%%64* $ro'$%6& a"* *49!"!%46& a"* #%a"*!"; r47)!r4'4"%# 'a& (4 r46a<4*. B$ "a$ of su%%ar$, the follo"in! rules %a$ be culled fro% the cases decided b$ this Court. &a4pa$ers, voters, concerned citi@ens, and le!islators %a$ be accorded standin! to sue, provided that the follo"in! re?uire%ents are %etE C1F the cases involve constitutional issuesK C2F for %a<$a&4r#, there %ust be a clai% of ille!al disburse%ent of public funds or that the ta4 %easure is unconstitutionalK C0F for 5o%4r#, there %ust be a sho"in! of obvious interest in the validit$ of the election la" in ?uestionK C4F for co"c4r"4* c!%!?4"#, there %ust be a sho"in! that the issues raised are of transcendental i%portance "hich %ust be settled earl$K and C5F for 64;!#6a%or#, there %ust be a clai% that the official action co%plained of infrin!es upon their prero!atives as le!islators. 0i!nificantl$, recent decisions sho" a certain tou!henin! in the CourtVs attitude to"ard le!al standin!. +n ?i#osbayan& )nc. v. 2orato,R<AS the Court ruled that the status of ?i#osbayan as a peopleVs or!ani@ation does not !ive it the re?uisite personalit$ to ?uestion the validit$ of the on-line lotter$ contract, %ore so "here it does not raise an$ issue of constitutionalit$. Moreover, it cannot sue as a ta4pa$er absent an$ alle!ation that public funds are bein! %isused. Nor can it sue as a concerned citi@en as it does not alle!e an$ specific in ur$ it has suffered. +n 0e#ecommunications and Broadcast 3ttorneys of the !hi#ippines& )nc. v. /ome#ec,R<=S the Court reiterated the Wdirect in ur$X test "ith respect to concerned citi@ensV cases involvin! constitutional issues. +t held that Wthere %ust be a sho"in!

that the citi@en personall$ suffered so%e actual or threatened in ur$ arisin! fro% the alle!ed ille!al official act.X +n 7acson v. !erez,R<.S the Court ruled that one of the petitioners, 7aban ng 'emokratikong !i#ipino 19>P3, is not a real part$-in-interest as it had not de%onstrated an$ in ur$ to itself or to its leaders, %e%bers or supporters. +n 1an#akas v. 54ecutive 1ecretary ,R<-S the Court ruled that onl$ the petitioners "ho are %e%bers of Con!ress have standin! to sue, as the$ clai% that the PresidentVs declaration of a state of rebellion !# a )#)r$a%!o" o9 %h4 4'4r;4"c& $o:4r# o9 Co";r4##, %h)# !'$a!r!"; %h4!r 64;!#6a%!54 $o:4r# . As to petitioners1an#akas& !artido 2anggagawa& and 1ocia# <ustice 1ociety , the Court declared the% to be devoid of standin!, e?uatin! the% "ith the 9>P in 7acson. No", the application of the above principles to the present petitions. &he #ocus standi of petitioners in G.R. No. 1710A6, particularl$ >avid and 9la%as, is be$ond doubt. &he sa%e holds true "ith petitioners in G.R. No. 17140A, Cacho-Olivares and 0ribune Publishin! Co. +nc. &he$ alle!ed Wdirect in ur$X resultin! fro% Wille!al arrestX and Wunla"ful searchX co%%itted b$ police operatives pursuant to PP ,2,=. Ri!htl$ so, the 0olicitor #eneral does not ?uestion their le!al standin!. +n G.R. No. 171415, the opposition Con!ress%en alle!ed there "as usurpation of le!islative po"ers. &he$ also raised the issue of "hether or not the concurrence of Con!ress is necessar$ "henever the alar%in! po"ers incident to Martial 9a" are used. Moreover, it is in the interest of ustice that those affected b$ PP ,2,= can be represented b$ their Con!ress%en in brin!in! to the attention of the Court the alle!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,RA2S ?apatiran .g 2ga .ag#i#ingkod sa !amaha#aan ng !i#ipinas& )nc. v. 0an , RA,S 3ssociation of 1ma## 7andowners in the !hi#ippines& )nc. v. 1ecretary of 3grarian *eform,RA8S Basco v. !hi#ippine 3musement and Haming /orporation& RA5S and 0aNada v. 0uvera,RA7S that "hen the issue concerns a public ri!ht, it is sufficient that the petitioner is a citi@en and has an interest in the e4ecution of the la"s. +n G.R. No. 171410, MMGVs assertion that PP ,2,= and #.O. No. < violated its ri!ht to peaceful asse%bl$ %a$ be dee%ed sufficient to !ive it le!al standin!. Or;a"!?a%!o"# 'a& (4 ;ra"%4* #%a"*!"; %o a##4r% %h4 r!;h%# o9 %h4!r '4'(4r#.RA<S (e ta*e udicial notice of the announce%ent b$ the Office of the President bannin! all rallies and cancelin! all per%its for public asse%blies follo"in! the issuance of PP ,2,= and #.O. No. <. +n G.R. No. 17141A, petitioners, /adiz et a#.& "ho are national officers of the +nte!rated Bar of the Philippines 1+BP3 have no le!al standin!, havin! failed to alle!e an$ direct or potential in ur$ "hich the +BP as an institution or its %e%bers %a$ suffer as a conse?uence of the issuance of PP No. ,2,= and #.O. No. <. +n)ntegrated Bar of the !hi#ippines v. Mamora& RAAS the Court held that the %ere invocation b$ the +BP of its dut$ to preserve the rule of la" and nothin! %ore, "hile undoubtedl$ true, is not sufficient to clothe it "ith standin! in this case. &his is too !eneral an interest "hich is shared b$ other !roups and the "hole citi@enr$. 6o"ever, in vie" of the transcendental i%portance of the issue, this Court declares that petitioner have #ocus standi. +n G.R. No. 171424, 9oren 9e!arda has no personalit$ as a ta4pa$er to file the instant petition as there are no alle!ations of ille!al disburse%ent of public funds. &he fact that she is a for%er 0enator is of no conse?uence. 0he can no lon!er sue as a le!islator on the alle!ation that her prero!atives as a la"%a*er have been i%paired b$ PP ,2,= and #.O. No. <. 6er clai% that she is a %edia personalit$ "ill not li*e"ise aid her because there "as no sho"in! that the enforce%ent of these

issuances prevented her fro% pursuin! her occupation. 6er sub%ission that she has pendin! electoral protest before the Presidential Electoral &ribunal is li*e"ise of no relevance. 0he has not sufficientl$ sho"n that PP ,2,= "ill affect the proceedin!s or result of her case. But considerin! once %ore the transcendental i%portance of the issue involved, this Court %a$ rela4 the standin! rules. +t %ust al"a$s be borne in %ind that the ?uestion of #ocus standi is but corollar$ to the bi!!er ?uestion of proper e4ercise of udicial po"er. &his is the underl$in! le!al tenet of the Wliberalit$ doctrineX on le!al standin!. +t cannot be doubted that the validit$ of PP No. ,2,= and #.O. No. < is a udicial ?uestion "hich is of 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 on this ver$ critical %atter. &he petitions thus call for the application of the W%ra"#c4"*4"%a6 !'$or%a"c4 X doctrine, a rela4ation of the standin! re?uire%ents for the petitioners in the WPP ,2,= cases.X &his Court holds that all the petitioners herein have #ocus standi. +ncidentall$, it is not proper to i%plead President Arro$o as respondent. 0ettled is the doctrine that the President, durin! his tenure of office or actual incu%benc$,RA=S %a$ not be sued in any civil or cri%inal case, and there is no need to provide for it in the Constitution or la". +t "ill de!rade the di!nit$ of the hi!h office 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% of harass%ent, hindrance or distraction to enable hi% to full$ attend to the perfor%ance of his official duties and functions. Gnli*e the le!islative and udicial branch, onl$ one constitutes the e4ecutive branch and an$thin! "hich i%pairs his usefulness in the dischar!e of the %an$ !reat and i%portant duties i%posed upon hi% b$ the Constitution necessaril$ i%pairs the operation of the #overn%ent. 6o"ever, this does not %ean that the President is not accountable to an$one. 9i*e an$ other official, he re%ains accountable to the people RA.S but he %a$ be re%oved fro% office onl$ in the %ode provided b$ la" and that is b$ i%peach%ent. RA-S /. SU/STANT -E I. "e#iew of $actual %ases

(a6a"c4#, N)"*4r :h!ch %h4 Pr4#!*4"% !# #)$r4'4, < < < o"6& if a"* w&en h4 ac%# :!%h!" %h4 #$h4r4 a66o%%4* %o h!' (& %h4 /a#!c ,a:, a"* %h4 a)%hor!%& %o *4%4r'!"4 :h4%h4r or "o% h4 ha# #o ac%4* !# 54#%4* !" %h4 J)*!c!a6 D4$ar%'4"%, w&ic& in t&is respect, !#, !" %)r", co"#%!%)%!o"a66& supreme.XR=AS +n ,-=5, the unani%ous Court of 7ansang "as divided in 3quino v. 5nri#e.R==S &here, the Court "as al%ost evenl$ divided on the issue of "hether the validit$ of the i%position of Martial 9a" is a political or usticiable ?uestion. R=.S &hen ca%e Harcia;!adi##a v. 5nri#e "hich !reatl$ diluted 7ansang. +t declared that there is a need to re-e4a%ine the latter case, ratiocinatin! that W !" %!'4# o9 :ar or "a%!o"a6 4'4r;4"c&, %h4 Pr4#!*4"% ')#% (4 ;!54" a(#o6)%4 co"%ro6 9or %h4 54r& 6!94 o9 %h4 "a%!o" a"* %h4 ;o54r"'4"% !# !" ;r4a% $4r!6. Th4 Pr4#!*4"%, !% !"%o"4*, !# a"#:4ra(64 o"6& %o h!# co"#c!4"c4, %h4 P4o$64, a"* Go*.XR=-S &he )ntegrated Bar of the !hi#ippines v. Mamora R.2S ;; a recent case %ost pertinent to these cases at bar -- echoed a principle si%ilar to 7ansang. (hile the Court considered the PresidentVs Wcallin!-outX po"er as a discretionar$ po"er solel$ vested in his "isdo%, it stressed that W %h!# *o4# "o% $r454"% a" 4<a'!"a%!o" o9 :h4%h4r #)ch $o:4r :a# 4<4rc!#4* :!%h!" $4r'!##!(64 co"#%!%)%!o"a6 6!'!%# or :h4%h4r !% :a# 4<4rc!#4* !" a 'a""4r co"#%!%)%!"; ;ra54 a()#4 o9 *!#cr4%!o" .X &his rulin! is %ainl$ a result of the CourtVs reliance on 0ection ,, Article /+++ of ,-.= Constitution "hich fortifies the authorit$ of the courts to deter%ine in an appropriate action the validit$ of the acts of the political depart%ents. Gnder the ne" definition of udicial po"er, the courts are authori@ed not onl$ Wto settle actual controversies involvin! ri!hts "hich are le!all$ de%andable and enforceable,X but also W%o *4%4r'!"4 :h4%h4r or "o% %h4r4 ha# (44" a ;ra54 a()#4 o9 *!#cr4%!o" a'o)"%!"; %o 6ac8 or 4<c4## o9 =)r!#*!c%!o" o" %h4 $ar% o9 a"& (ra"ch or !"#%r)'4"%a6!%& o9 %h4 ;o54r"'4"% .X &he latter part of the authorit$ represents a broadenin! of udicial po"er to enable the courts of ustice to revie" "hat "as before a forbidden territor$, to "it, the discretion of the political depart%ents of the !overn%ent.R.,S +t spea*s of udicial prero!ative not onl$ in ter%s of $o:4r but also of *)%&.R.8S As to ho" the Court %a$ in?uire into the PresidentVs e4ercise of po"er, 7ansang adopted the test that W udicial in?uir$ can go no further than to satisf$ the Court not that the PresidentVs decision is correct&X but that Wthe President did not act arbitrari#y.X &hus, the standard laid do"n is not correctness, but arbitrariness.R.5S +n )ntegrated Bar of the !hi#ippines, this Court further ruled that W!% !# !"c)'(4"% )$o" %h4 $4%!%!o"4r %o #ho: %ha% %h4 Pr4#!*4"%J# *4c!#!o" !# %o%a66& (4r49% o9 9ac%)a6 (a#!# X and that if he fails, b$ "a$ of proof, to support his assertion, then W%h!# Co)r% ca""o% )"*4r%a84 a" !"*4$4"*4"% !"54#%!;a%!o" (4&o"* %h4 $64a*!";#.X Petitioners failed to sho" that President Arro$oVs e4ercise of the callin!-out po"er, b$ issuin! PP ,2,=, is totall$ bereft of factual basis. A readin! of the 0olicitor #eneralVs Consolidated Co%%ent and Me%orandu% sho"s a detailed narration of the events leadin! to the issuance of PP ,2,=, "ith supportin! reports for%in! part of the records. Mentioned are the escape of the Ma!dalo #roup, their audacious threat of the 2agda#o ';'ay, the defections in the %ilitar$, particularl$ in the Philippine Marines, and the reprovin! state%ents fro% the co%%unist leaders. &here "as also the Minutes of the +ntelli!ence Report and 0ecurit$ #roup of the Philippine

Petitioners %aintain that PP ,2,= has no factual basis. 6ence, it "as not Wnecessar$X for President Arro$o to issue such Procla%ation. &he issue of "hether the Court %a$ revie" the factual bases of the PresidentVs e4ercise of his Co%%ander-in-Chief po"er has reached its distilled point fro% the indul!ent da$s of Barce#on v. BakerR=2S and 2ontenegro v. /astanedaR=,S to the volatile era of 7ansang v. Harcia&R=8S 3quino& <r. v. 5nri#e& R=5S and Harcia;!adi##a v. 5nri#e.R=7S &he tu!-of-"ar al"a$s cuts across the line definin! Wpolitical ?uestions,X particularl$ those ?uestions Win re!ard to "hich full discretionar$ authorit$ has been dele!ated to the le!islative or e4ecutive branch of the !overn%ent.XR=<S Barce#on and 2ontenegro "ere in unison in declarin! that the a)%hor!%& %o *4c!*4 :h4%h4r a" 4<!;4"c& ha# ar!#4" (46o";# %o %h4 Pr4#!*4"% and h!# *4c!#!o" !# 9!"a6 a"* co"c6)#!54 o" %h4 co)r%# . 7ansang too* the opposite vie". &here, the %e%bers of the Court "ere unani%ous in the conviction that the Court has the authorit$ to in?uire into the e4istence of factual bases in order to deter%ine their constitutional sufficienc$. .ro' %h4 $r!"c!$64 o9 #4$ara%!o" o9 $o:4r#, !% #h!9%4* %h4 9oc)# %o %h4 #&#%4' o9 ch4c8# a"*

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

no%inate a supre%e la"$er, "ho shall silence all the la"s and suspend for a %o%ent the soverei!n authorit$. +n such a case, there is no doubt about the !eneral "ill, and it clear that the peopleVs first intention is that the 0tate shall not perish.R.AS Rosseau did not fear the abuse of the e%er!enc$ dictatorship or W #)$r4'4 'a;!#%rac&X as he ter%ed it. )or hi%, it "ould %ore li*el$ be cheapened b$ Windiscreet use.X 6e "as un"illin! to rel$ upon an W a$$4a6 %o h4a54".X +nstead, he relied upon a tenure of office of prescribed duration to avoid perpetuation of the dictatorship.R.=S John 0tuart Mill concluded his ardent defense of representative !overn%entE W a' 9ar 9ro' co"*4'"!";, !" ca#4# o9 4<%r4'4 "4c4##!%&, %h4 a##)'$%!o" o9 a(#o6)%4 $o:4r !" %h4 9or' o9 a %4'$orar& *!c%a%or#h!$ .XR..S Nicollo MachiavelliVs vie" of e%er!enc$ po"ers, as one ele%ent in the "hole sche%e of li%ited !overn%ent, furnished an ironic contrast to the 9oc*ean theor$ of prero!ative. 6e reco!ni@ed and atte%pted to brid!e this chas% in de%ocratic political theor$, thusE No", in a "ell-ordered societ$, it should never be necessar$ to resort to e4tra Oconstitutional %easuresK for althou!h the$ %a$ for a ti%e be beneficial, $et the precedent is pernicious, for if the practice is once established for !ood ob ects, the$ "ill in a little "hile be disre!arded under that prete4t but for evil purposes. &hus, no republic "ill ever be perfect if she has not b$ la" provided for ever$thin!, havin! a re%ed$ for ever$ e%er!enc$ and fi4ed rules for appl$in! it.R.-S Machiavelli O in contrast to 9oc*e, Rosseau and Mill O sou!ht to incorporate into the constitution a re!ulari@ed s$ste% of standb$ e%er!enc$ po"ers to be invo*ed "ith suitable chec*s and controls in ti%e of national dan!er. 6e atte%pted forthri!htl$ to %eet the proble% of co%binin! a capacious reserve of po"er and speed and vi!or in its application in ti%e of e%er!enc$, "ith effective constitutional restraints.R-2S Conte%porar$ political theorists, addressin! the%selves to the proble% of response to e%er!enc$ b$ constitutional de%ocracies, have e%plo$ed the doctrine of constitutional dictatorship.R-,S )rederic* M. (at*ins sa" W"o r4a#o" :h& a(#o6)%!#' #ho)6* "o% (4 )#4* a# a '4a"# 9or %h4 *494"#4 o9 6!(4ra6 !"#%!%)%!o"#,X provided it W#4r54# %o $ro%4c% 4#%a(6!#h4* !"#%!%)%!o"# 9ro' %h4 *a";4r o9 $4r'a"4"% !"=)r& !" a $4r!o* o9 %4'$orar& 4'4r;4"c& a"* !# 9o66o:4* (& a $ro'$% r4%)r" %o %h4 $r45!o)# 9or'# o9 $o6!%!ca6 6!94 .XR-8S 6e reco!ni@ed the t"o 183 *e$ ele%ents of the proble% of e%er!enc$ !overnance, as "ell as all constitutional !overnanceE !"cr4a#!"; a*'!"!#%ra%!54 $o:4r# o9 %h4 4<4c)%!54, :h!64 a% %h4 #a'4 %!'4 N!'$o#!"; 6!'!%a%!o" )$o" %ha% $o:4r.XR-5S (at*ins placed his real faith in a sche%e of constitutional dictatorship. &hese are the conditions of success of such a dictatorshipE NTh4 $4r!o* o9 *!c%a%or#h!$ ')#% (4 r46a%!546& #hor%MD!c%a%or#h!$ #ho)6* a6:a&#

+ndeed, ud!in! the seriousness of the incidents, President Arro$o "as not e4pected to si%pl$ fold her ar%s and do nothin! to prevent or suppress "hat she believed "as la"less violence, invasion or rebellion. 6o"ever, the e4ercise of such po"er or dut$ %ust not stifle libert$. II. 'onstitutionality of PP ()(* and +.,. -o. . Doc%r!"4# o9 S454ra6 Po6!%!ca6 Th4or!#%# o" %h4 Po:4r o9 %h4 Pr4#!*4"% !" T!'4# o9 E'4r;4"c& &his case brin!s to fore a contentious sub ect -- the po"er of the President in ti%es of e%er!enc$. A !li%pse at the various political theories relatin! to this sub ect provides an ade?uate bac*drop for our ensuin! discussion. John 9oc*e, describin! the architecture of civil !overn%ent, called upon the En!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 or even a fatal obstacle to the pro%ptness of action necessar$ to avert catastrophe. +n these situations, the Cro"n retained a prero!ative W $o:4r %o ac% accor*!"; %o *!#cr4%!o" 9or %h4 $)(6!c ;oo*, :!%ho)% %h4 $ro#cr!$%!o" o9 %h4 6a: a"* #o'4%!'4# 454" a;a!"#% !%.XR.7S But 9oc*e reco!ni@ed that this %oral restraint %i!ht not suffice to avoid abuse of prero!ative po"ers. 3ho #ha66 =)*;4 %h4 "44* 9or r4#or%!"; %o %h4 $r4ro;a%!54 a"* ho: 'a& !%# a()#4 (4 a5o!*4*L 6ere, 9oc*e readil$ ad%itted defeat, su!!estin! that N%h4 $4o$64 ha54 "o o%h4r r4'4*& !" %h!#, a# !" a66 o%h4r ca#4# :h4r4 %h4& ha54 "o =)*;4 o" 4ar%h, ()% %o a$$4a6 %o H4a54".XR.<S Jean-Jac?ues Rousseau also assu%ed the need for te%porar$ suspension of de%ocratic processes of !overn%ent in ti%e of e%er!enc$. Accordin! to hi%E &he infle4ibilit$ of the la"s, "hich prevents the% fro% adoptin! the%selves to circu%stances, %a$, in certain cases, render the% disastrous and %a*e the% brin! about, at a ti%e of crisis, the ruin of the 0tateN +t is "ron! therefore to "ish to %a*e political institutions as stron! as to render it i%possible to suspend their operation. Even 0parta allo"ed its la" to lapse... +f the peril is of such a *ind that the paraphernalia of the la"s are an obstacle to their preservation, the %ethod is to

(4 #%r!c%6& 64;!%!'a%4 !" charac%4rM.!"a6 a)%hor!%& %o *4%4r'!"4 %h4 "44* 9or *!c%a%or#h!$ !" a"& ;!54" ca#4 ')#% "454r r4#% :!%h %h4 *!c%a%or h!'#469NXR-7S and the ob ective of such an e%er!enc$ dictatorship should be W #%r!c% $o6!%!ca6 co"#4r5a%!#'.X Carl J. )riedrich cast his anal$sis in ter%s si%ilar to those of (at*ins. R-<S W+t is a proble% of concentratin! po"er O in a !overn%ent "here po"er has consciousl$ been divided O to cope "ithN situations of unprecedented %a!nitude and !ravit$. &here %ust be a broad !rant of po"ers, sub ect to e?uall$ stron! li%itations as to "ho shall e4ercise such po"ers, "hen, for ho" lon!, and to "hat end.XR-AS )riedrich, too, offered criteria for ud!in! the ade?uac$ of an$ of sche%e of e%er!enc$ po"ers, to "itE NTh4 4'4r;4"c& 4<4c)%!54 ')#% (4 a$$o!"%4* (& co"#%!%)%!o"a6 '4a"# E !.4., h4 ')#% (4 64;!%!'a%4B h4 #ho)6* "o% 4"=o& $o:4r %o *4%4r'!"4 %h4 4<!#%4"c4 o9 a" 4'4r;4"c&B 4'4r;4"c& $o:4r# #ho)6* (4 4<4rc!#4* )"*4r a #%r!c% %!'4 6!'!%a%!o"B a"* 6a#%, %h4 o(=4c%!54 o9 4'4r;4"c& ac%!o" ')#% (4 %h4 *494"#4 o9 %h4 co"#%!%)%!o"a6 or*4r .XR-=S Clinton 9. Rossiter, after surve$in! the histor$ of the e%plo$%ent of e%er!enc$ 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 to the ve4in! proble%s presented b$ e%er!enc$. R-.S 9i*e (at*ins and )riedrich, he stated a priori the conditions of success of the Wconstitutional dictatorship,X thusE 1F No !eneral re!i%e or particular institution of constitutional dictatorship should be initiated unless it is necessar$ or even indispensable to the preservation of the 0tate and its constitutional orderN 2F Nthe decision to institute a constitutional dictatorship should never be in the hands of the %an or %en "ho "ill constitute the dictatorN 0F No !overn%ent should initiate a constitutional dictatorship "ithout %a*in! specific provisions for its ter%inationN 4F Nall uses of e%er!enc$ po"ers and all read ust%ents in the or!ani@ation of the !overn%ent should be effected in pursuit of constitutional or le!al re?uire%entsN 5F N no dictatorial institution should be adopted, no ri!ht invaded, no re!ular procedure altered an$ %ore than is absolutel$ necessar$ for the con?uest of the particular crisis . . . 6F &he %easures adopted in the prosecution of the a constitutional dictatorship should never be per%anent in character or effectN 7F &he dictatorship should be carried on b$ persons representative of ever$ part of the citi@enr$

interested in the defense of the e4istin! constitutional order. . . 1F Glti%ate responsibilit$ should be %aintained for ever$ action ta*en under a constitutional dictatorship. . . AF &he decision to ter%inate a constitutional dictatorship, li*e the decision to institute one should never be in the hands of the %an or %en "ho constitute the dictator. . . 10F No constitutional dictatorship should e4tend be$ond the ter%ination of the crisis for "hich it "as institutedN 11F Nthe ter%ination of the crisis %ust be follo"ed b$ a co%plete return as possible to the political and !overn%ental conditions e4istin! prior to the initiation of the constitutional dictatorshipNR--S Rossiter accorded to le!islature a far !reater role in the oversi!ht e4ercise of e%er!enc$ po"ers than did (at*ins. 6e "ould secure to Con!ress final responsibilit$ for declarin! the e4istence or ter%ination of an e%er!enc$, and he places !reat faith in the effectiveness of con!ressional investi!atin! co%%ittees. R,22S 1cott and /otter, in anal$@in! the above conte%porar$ theories in li!ht of recent e4perience, "ere one in sa$in! that, W %h4 #);;4#%!o" %ha% *4'ocrac!4# #)rr4"*4r %h4 co"%ro6 o9 ;o54r"'4"% %o a" a)%hor!%ar!a" r)64r !" %!'4 o9 ;ra54 *a";4r %o %h4 "a%!o" !# not (a#4* )$o" #o)"* co"#%!%)%!o"a6 %h4or&.X &o appraise e%er!enc$ po"er in ter%s of constitutional dictatorship serves %erel$ to distort the proble% and hinder realistic anal$sis. +t %atters not "hether the ter% WdictatorX is used in its nor%al sense 1as applied to authoritarian rulers3 or is e%plo$ed to e%brace all chief e4ecutives ad%inisterin! e%er!enc$ po"ers. 6o"ever used, Wconstitutional dictatorshipX cannot be divorced fro% the i%plication of suspension of the processes of constitutionalis%. &hus, the$ favored instead the Wconcept of constitutionalis%X articulated b$ Charles 6. Mc+l"ainE A concept of constitutionalis% "hich is less %isleadin! in the anal$sis of proble%s of e%er!enc$ po"ers, and "hich is consistent "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 substantive po"ers of !overn%ent, full e%phasis is placed upon $roc4*)ra6 6!'!%a%!o"#, and $o6!%!ca6 r4#$o"#!(!6!%& . Mc+l"ain clearl$ reco!ni@ed the need to repose ade?uate po"er in !overn%ent. And in discussin! the %eanin! of constitutionalis%, he insisted that the h!#%or!ca6 a"* $ro$4r %4#% o9 co"#%!%)%!o"a6!#' :a# %h4 4<!#%4"c4 o9 a*47)a%4 $roc4##4# 9or 844$!"; ;o54r"'4"% r4#$o"#!(64. 6e refused to e?uate constitutionalis% "ith the enfeeblin! of !overn%ent b$ an e4a!!erated e%phasis upon

separation of po"ers and substantive li%itations on !overn%ental po"er. 6e found that the reall$ effective chec*s on despotis% have consisted not in the "ea*enin! of !overn%ent but, but rather in the 6!'!%!"; o9 !%K bet"een "hich there is a !reat and ver$ si!nificant difference. " a##oc!a%!"; co"#%!%)%!o"a6!#' :!%h N6!'!%4*O a# *!#%!";)!#h4* 9ro' N:4a8O ;o54r"'4"%, Mc 6:a!" '4a"% ;o54r"'4"% 6!'!%4* %o %h4 or*4r6& $roc4*)r4 o9 6a: a# o$$o#4* %o %h4 $roc4##4# o9 9orc4. Th4 %:o 9)"*a'4"%a6 corr46a%!54 464'4"%# o9 co"#%!%)%!o"a6!#' 9or :h!ch a66 6o54r# o9 6!(4r%& ')#% &4% 9!;h% ar4 %h4 64;a6 6!'!%# %o ar(!%rar& $o:4r a"* a co'$64%4 $o6!%!ca6 r4#$o"#!(!6!%& o9 ;o54r"'4"% %o %h4 ;o54r"4* .R,2,S +n the final anal$sis, the various approaches to e%er!enc$ of the above political theorists O- fro% 9oc*Vs Wtheor$ of prero!ative,X to (at*insV doctrine of Wconstitutional dictatorshipX and, eventuall$, to Mc+l"ainVs Wprinciple of constitutionalis%X --- ulti%atel$ ai% to solve one real proble% in e%er!enc$ !overnance, i.e.,%ha% o9 a66o%%!"; !"cr4a#!"; ar4a# o9 *!#cr4%!o"ar& $o:4r %o %h4 Ch!49 E<4c)%!54, :h!64 !"#)r!"; %ha% #)ch $o:4r# :!66 (4 4<4rc!#4* :!%h a #4"#4 o9 $o6!%!ca6 r4#$o"#!(!6!%& a"* )"*4r 4994c%!54 6!'!%a%!o"# a"* ch4c8#. Our Constitution has fairl$ coped "ith this proble%. )resh fro% the fetters of a repressive re!i%e, the ,-.A Constitutional Co%%ission, in draftin! the ,-.= Constitution, endeavored to create a !overn%ent in the concept of Justice Jac*sonVs Wbalanced po"er structure.X R,28S E4ecutive, le!islative, and udicial po"ers are dispersed to the President, the Con!ress, and the 0upre%e Court, respectivel$. Each is supre%e "ithin its o"n sphere. /)% "o"4 ha# %h4 'o"o$o6& o9 $o:4r !" %!'4# o9 4'4r;4"c&. Each (ra"ch !# ;!54" a ro64 %o #4r54 a# 6!'!%a%!o" or ch4c8 )$o" %h4 o%h4r. &his s$ste% does not :4a84" the President, it ust 6!'!%# his po"er, usin! the lan!ua!e of Mc+l"ain. +n other "ords, in ti%es of e%er!enc$, our Constitution reasonabl$ de%ands that "e repose a certain a%ount of faith in the basic inte!rit$ and "isdo% of the Chief E4ecutive but, at the sa%e ti%e, !% o(6!;4# h!' %o o$4ra%4 :!%h!" car49)66& $r4#cr!(4* $roc4*)ra6 6!'!%a%!o"#. a. N.ac!a6 Cha664";4O Petitioners contend that PP ,2,= is void on its face because of its Woverbreadth.X &he$ clai% that its enforce%ent encroached on both unprotected and protected ri!hts under 0ection 7, Article +++ of the Constitution and sent a Wchillin! effectX to the citi@ens. A facial revie" of PP ,2,=, usin! the overbreadth doctrine, is uncalled for. ,irst and foremost, the overbreadth doctrine is an anal$tical tool developed for testin! Won their facesX statutes in 9r44 #$44ch ca#4#, also *no"n under the A%erican 9a" as )irst A%end%ent cases.R,25S

A plain readin! of PP ,2,= sho"s that it is not pri%aril$ directed to speech or even speech-related conduct. +t is actuall$ a call upon the A)P to prevent or suppress all for%s of 6a:64## 5!o64"c4. +n -nited 1tates v. 1a#erno,R,27S the G0 0upre%e Court held that W:4 ha54 "o% r4co;"!?4* a" Po54r(r4a*%hJ *oc%r!"4 o)%#!*4 %h4 6!'!%4* co"%4<% o9 %h4 .!r#% A'4"*'4"%O C9r44*o' o9 #$44chF . Moreover, the overbreadth doctrine is not intended for testin! the validit$ of a la" that Wreflects le!iti%ate state interest in %aintainin! co%prehensive control over har%ful, constitutionall$ unprotected conduct.X Gndoubtedl$, la"less violence, insurrection and rebellion are considered Whar%fulX and Wconstitutionall$ unprotected conduct.X +n Broadrick v. (k#ahoma&R,2<S it "as heldE +t re%ains a Y%atter of no little difficult$V to deter%ine "hen a la" %a$ properl$ be held void on its face and "hen Ysuch su%%ar$ actionV is inappropriate. /)% %h4 $6a!" !'$or% o9 o)r ca#4# !#, a% %h4 54r& 64a#%, %ha% 9ac!a6 o54r(r4a*%h a*=)*!ca%!o" !# a" 4<c4$%!o" %o o)r %ra*!%!o"a6 r)64# o9 $rac%!c4 a"* %ha% !%# 9)"c%!o", a 6!'!%4* o"4 a% %h4 o)%#4%, a%%4")a%4# a# %h4 o%h4r:!#4 )"$ro%4c%4* (4ha5!or %ha% !% 9or(!*# %h4 S%a%4 %o #a"c%!o" 'o54# 9ro' P$)r4 #$44chJ %o:ar* co"*)c% and %ha% co"*)c% E454" !9 4<$r4##!54 E 9a66# :!%h!" %h4 #co$4 o9 o%h4r:!#4 5a6!* cr!'!"a6 6a:# %ha% r4964c% 64;!%!'a%4 #%a%4 !"%4r4#%# !" 'a!"%a!"!"; co'$r4h4"#!54 co"%ro6# o54r har'9)6, co"#%!%)%!o"a66& )"$ro%4c%4* co"*)c%. &hus, clai%s of facial overbreadth are entertained in cases involvin! statutes "hich, (& %h4!r %4r'#, see* to re!ulate onl$ W #$o84" :or*#X and a!ain, that Wo54r(r4a*%h c6a!'#, !9 4"%4r%a!"4* a% a66, ha54 (44" c)r%a!64* :h4" !"5o84* a;a!"#% or*!"ar& cr!'!"a6 6a:# %ha% ar4 #o);h% %o (4 a$$6!4* %o $ro%4c%4* co"*)c%.XR,2AS 6ere, the incontrovertible fact re%ains that PP ,2,= pertains to a spectru% of co"*)c%, not free speech, "hich is %anifestl$ sub ect to state re!ulation. 1econd& facial invalidation of la"s is considered as W 'a"!94#%6& #%ro"; '4*!c!"4,X to be used W#$ar!";6& a"* o"6& a# a 6a#% r4#or% ,X and is W;4"4ra66& *!#9a5or4*KXR,2=S &he reason for this is obvious. E%bedded in the traditional rules !overnin! constitutional ad udication is the principle that a person to "ho% a la" %a$ be applied "ill not be heard to challen!e a la" on the !round that it %a$ conceivabl$ be applied unconstitutionall$ to others, i.e., !" o%h4r #!%)a%!o"# "o% (49or4 %h4 Co)r%.R,2.S A "riter and scholar in Constitutional 9a" e4plains furtherE Th4 'o#% *!#%!"c%!54 94a%)r4 o9 %h4 o54r(r4a*%h %4ch"!7)4 !# %ha% !% 'ar8# a" 4<c4$%!o" %o #o'4 o9 %h4 )#)a6 r)64# o9 co"#%!%)%!o"a6 6!%!;a%!o". Or*!"ar!6&, a $ar%!c)6ar 6!%!;a"% c6a!'# %ha% a #%a%)%4 !# )"co"#%!%)%!o"a6 a# a$$6!4* %o h!' or h4rB !9 %h4 6!%!;a"% $r45a!6#, %h4 co)r%# car54 a:a&

%h4 )"co"#%!%)%!o"a6 a#$4c%# o9 %h4 6a: (& !"5a6!*a%!"; !%# !'$ro$4r a$$6!ca%!o"# o" a ca#4 %o ca#4 (a#!#. Mor4o54r, cha664";4r# %o a 6a: ar4 "o% $4r'!%%4* %o ra!#4 %h4 r!;h%# o9 %h!r* $ar%!4# a"* ca" o"6& a##4r% %h4!r o:" !"%4r4#%#. " o54r(r4a*%h a"a6&#!#, %ho#4 r)64# ;!54 :a&B cha664";4# ar4 $4r'!%%4* %o ra!#4 %h4 r!;h%# o9 %h!r* $ar%!4# K and the court invalidates the entire statute Won its face,X not %erel$ Was applied forX so that the overbroad la" beco%es unenforceable until a properl$ authori@ed court construes it %ore narro"l$. &he factor that %otivates courts to depart fro% the nor%al ad udicator$ rules is the concern "ith the Wchillin!KX deterrent effect of the overbroad statute on third parties not coura!eous enou!h to brin! suit. &he Court assu%es that an overbroad la"Vs Wver$ e4istence %a$ cause others not before the court to refrain fro% constitutionall$ protected speech or e4pression.X An overbreadth rulin! is desi!ned to re%ove that deterrent effect on the speech of those third parties. +n other "ords, a facial challen!e usin! the overbreadth doctrine "ill re?uire the Court to e4a%ine PP ,2,= and pinpoint its fla"s and defects, not on the basis of its actual operation to petitioners, but on the assu%ption or prediction that its ver$ e4istence %a$ cause o%h4r# "o% (49or4 %h4 Co)r% to refrain fro% constitutionall$ protected speech or e4pression. +n Oounger v. +arris,R,2-S it "as held thatE R&She tas* of anal$@in! a proposed statute, pinpointin! its deficiencies, and re?uirin! correction of these deficiencies before the statute is put into effect, is rarel$ if ever an appropriate tas* for the udiciar$. &he co%bination of the r46a%!54 r4'o%4"4## o9 %h4 co"%ro54r#&, the !'$ac% o" %h4 64;!#6a%!54 $roc4## o9 %h4 r46!49 #o);h%, and above all %h4 #$4c)6a%!54 a"* a'or$ho)# "a%)r4 o9 %h4 r47)!r4* 6!"4-(&-6!"4 a"a6&#!# o9 *4%a!64* #%a%)%4#,...ordinaril$ results in a *ind of case that is :ho66& )"#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 establish that %h4r4 ca" (4 "o !"#%a"c4 :h4" %h4 a##a!64* 6a: 'a& (4 5a6!* . 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 6a: !# 9ac!a66& !"5a6!* !9 '4" o9 co''o" !"%466!;4"c4 ')#% "4c4##ar!6& ;)4## a% !%# '4a"!"; a"* *!994r a# %o !%# a$$6!ca%!o". XR,,2S +t is sub ect to the sa%e principles !overnin! overbreadth doctrine. )or one, it is also an anal$tical tool for testin! Won their facesX #%a%)%4# !" 9r44 #$44ch ca#4#. And li*e overbreadth, it is said that a liti!ant %a$ challen!e a statute on its face onl$ if it is5a;)4 !" a66 !%# $o##!(64 a$$6!ca%!o"#. A;a!", $4%!%!o"4r# *!* "o% 454"

a%%4'$% %o #ho: %ha% PP 1017 !# 5a;)4 !" a66 !%# a$$6!ca%!o". &he$ also failed to establish that %en of co%%on intelli!ence cannot understand the %eanin! and application of PP ,2,=. (. Co"#%!%)%!o"a6 /a#!# o9 PP 1017 No" on the constitutional foundation of PP ,2,=. &he operative portion of PP ,2,= %a$ be divided into three i%portant provisions, thusE $irst pro#ision: Wb$ virtue of the po"er vested upon %e b$ 0ection ,., Artilce /++ N do hereb$ co%%and the Ar%ed )orces of the Philippines, to %aintain la" and order throu!hout the Philippines, prevent or suppress all for%s of la"less violence as "ell an$ act of insurrection or rebellionX Second pro#ision:

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

/&ird pro#ision:

Was provided in 0ection ,=, Article Q++ of the Constitution do 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

1an#akas v. 54ecutive 1ecretary,R,,,S this Court, throu!h Mr. Justice >ante O. &in!a, held that 0ection ,., Article /++ of the Constitution reproduced as follo"sE S4c. 11. &he President shall be the Co%%ander-in-Chief of all ar%ed forces of the Philippines and :h4"454r !% (4co'4# "4c4##ar&, h4 'a& ca66 o)% #)ch ar'4* 9orc4# %o $r454"% or #)$$r4## 6a:64## 5!o64"c4, !"5a#!o" or r4(466!o" . +n case of invasion or rebellion, "hen the public safet$ re?uires it, he %a$, for a period not e4ceedin! si4t$ da$s, suspend the privile!e of the "rit of habeas corpus or place the Philippines or an$ part thereof under %artial la". (ithin fort$-ei!ht hours fro% the procla%ation of %artial la" or the suspension of the privile!e of the "rit of habeas corpus, the President shall sub%it a report in person or in "ritin! to the Con!ress. &he Con!ress, votin! ointl$, b$ a vote of at least a %a orit$ of all its Me%bers in re!ular or special session, %a$ revo*e such procla%ation or suspension, "hich revocation shall not be set aside b$ the President. Gpon the initiative of the President, the Con!ress %a$, in the sa%e %anner, e4tend such procla%ation or suspension for a period to be deter%ined b$ the Con!ress, if the invasion or rebellion shall persist and public safet$ re?uires it. &he Con!ress, if not in session, shall "ithin t"ent$-four hours follo"in! such procla%ation or suspension, convene in accordance "ith its rules "ithout need of a call. &he 0upre%e Court %a$ revie", in an appropriate proceedin! filed b$ an$ citi@en, the sufficienc$ of the factual bases of the procla%ation of %artial la" or the suspension of the privile!e of the "rit or the e4tension thereof, and %ust pro%ul!ate its decision thereon "ithin thirt$ da$s fro% its filin!. A state of %artial la" does not suspend the operation of the Constitution, nor supplant the functionin! of the civil courts or le!islative asse%blies, nor authori@e the confer%ent of urisdiction on %ilitar$ courts and a!encies over civilians "here civil courts are able to function, nor auto%aticall$ suspend the privile!e of the "rit. &he suspension of the privile!e of the "rit shall appl$ onl$ to persons udiciall$ char!ed for rebellion or offenses inherent in or directl$ connected "ith invasion. >urin! the suspension of the privile!e of the "rit, an$ person thus arrested or detained shall be udiciall$ char!ed "ithin three da$s, other"ise he shall be released. !rants the President, as Co%%ander-in-Chief, a Wse?uenceX of !raduated po"ers. )ro% the %ost to the least beni!n, these areE the callin!-out po"er, the po"er to suspend the privile!e of the "rit of habeas corpus, and the po"er to declare Martial 9a". Citin! )ntegrated Bar of the !hi#ippines v. Mamora,R,,8S the Court ruled

that the onl$ criterion for the e4ercise of the callin!-out po"er is that W :h4"454r !% (4co'4# "4c4##ar&,X the President %a$ call the ar%ed forces W %o $r454"% or #)$$r4## 6a:64## 5!o64"c4, !"5a#!o" or r4(466!o" .X 3re these conditions present in the instant casesP As stated earlier, considerin! the circu%stances then prevailin!, President Arro$o found it necessar$ to issue PP ,2,=. O"in! to her OfficeVs vast intelli!ence net"or*, she is in the best position to deter%ine the actual condition of the countr$. Gnder the callin!-out po"er, the President %a$ su%%on the ar%ed forces to aid hi% in suppressin! 6a:64## 5!o64"c4, !"5a#!o" a"* r4(466!o" . &his involves ordinar$ police action. But ever$ act that !oes be$ond the PresidentVs callin!-out po"er is considered ille!al or u#tra vires. )or this reason, a President %ust be careful in the e4ercise of his po"ers. 6e cannot invo*e a !reater po"er "hen he "ishes to act under a lesser po"er. &here lies the "isdo% of our Constitution, the !reater the po"er, the !reater are the li%itations. +t is pertinent to state, ho"ever, that there is a distinction bet"een the PresidentVs authorit$ to declare a Wstate of rebellionX 1in 1an#akas3 and the authorit$ to proclai% a state of national e%er!enc$. (hile President Arro$oVs authorit$ to declare a Wstate of rebellionX e%anates fro% her po"ers as Chief E4ecutive, the statutor$ authorit$ cited in 1an#akas "as 0ection 7, Chapter 8, Boo* ++ of the Revised Ad%inistrative Code of ,-.=, "hich providesE 0EC. 7. O Procla%ations. O Acts of the President fi4in! a date or declarin! a status or condition of public %o%ent or interest, upon the e4istence of "hich the operation of a specific la" or re!ulation is %ade to depend, shall be pro%ul!ated in procla%ations "hich shall have the force of an e4ecutive order. President Arro$oVs declaration of a Wstate of rebellionX "as %erel$ an act declarin! a status or condition of public %o%ent or interest, a declaration allo"ed under 0ection 7 cited above. 0uch declaration, in the "ords of 1an#akas, is har%less, "ithout le!al si!nificance, and dee%ed not "ritten. +n these cases, PP ,2,= is %ore than that. +n declarin! a state of national e%er!enc$, President Arro$o did not onl$ rel$ on 0ection ,., Article /++ of the Constitution, a provision callin! on the A)P to prevent or suppress la"less violence, invasion or rebellion. 0he also relied on 0ection ,=, Article Q++, a provision on the 0tateVs e4traordinar$ po"er to ta*e over privatel$-o"ned public utilit$ and business affected "ith public interest. +ndeed, PP ,2,= calls for the e4ercise of an a:4#o'4 $o:4r. Obviousl$, such Procla%ation cannot be dee%ed har%less, "ithout le!al si!nificance, or not "ritten, as in the case of 1an#akas. 0o%e of the petitioners vehe%entl$ %aintain that PP ,2,= is actuall$ a declaration of Martial 9a". +t is no so. (hat defines the character of PP ,2,= are its "ordin!s. +t is plain therein that "hat the President invo*ed "as her callin!-out po"er. &he declaration of Martial 9a" is a W"arnRin!S to citi@ens that the %ilitar$ po"er has been called upon b$ the e4ecutive to assist in the %aintenance of la" and order,

and that, "hile the e%er!enc$ lasts, the$ %ust, upon pain of arrest and punish%ent, not co%%it an$ acts "hich "ill in an$ "a$ render %ore difficult the restoration of order and the enforce%ent of la".X R,,5S +n his W1tatement before the 1enate /ommittee on <ustice X on March ,5, 822A, Mr. Justice /icente /. Mendo@a, R,,7S an authorit$ in constitutional la", said that of the three po"ers of the President as Co%%ander-in-Chief, the po"er to declare Martial 9a" poses the %ost severe threat to civil liberties. +t is a stron! %edicine "hich should not be resorted to li!htl$. +t cannot be used to stifle or persecute critics of the !overn%ent. +t is placed in the *eepin! of the President for the purpose of enablin! hi% to secure the people fro% har% and to restore order so that the$ can en o$ their individual freedo%s. +n fact, 0ection ,., Art. /++, providesE A state of %artial la" does not suspend the operation of the Constitution, nor supplant the functionin! of the civil courts or le!islative asse%blies, nor authori@e the confer%ent of urisdiction on %ilitar$ courts and a!encies over civilians "here civil courts are able to function, nor auto%aticall$ suspend the privile!e of the "rit. Justice Mendo@a also stated that PP ,2,= is not a declaration of Martial 9a". +t is no %ore than a call b$ the President to the ar%ed forces to prevent or suppress la"less violence. As such, it cannot be used to ustif$ acts that onl$ under a valid declaration of Martial 9a" can be done. +ts use for an$ other purpose is a perversion of its nature and scope, and an$ act done contrar$ to its co%%and is u#tra vires. Justice Mendo@a further stated that specificall$, 1a3 arrests and sei@ures "ithout udicial "arrantsK 1b3 ban on public asse%bliesK 1c3 ta*e-over of ne"s %edia and a!encies and press censorshipK and 1d3 issuance of Presidential >ecrees, are po"ers "hich can be e4ercised b$ the President as Co%%ander-in-Chief o"6& "here there is a valid declaration of Martial 9a" or suspension of the "rit of habeas corpus. Based on the above dis?uisition, it is clear that PP ,2,= is not a declaration of Martial 9a". % !# '4r46& a" 4<4rc!#4 o9 Pr4#!*4"% Arro&oJ# ca66!";-o)% $o:4r for the ar%ed forces to assist her in preventin! or suppressin! la"less violence.

As the E4ecutive in "ho% the e4ecutive po"er is vested, R,,<S the pri%ar$ function of the President is to enforce the la"s as "ell as to for%ulate policies to be e%bodied in e4istin! la"s. 6e sees to it that all la"s are enforced b$ the officials and e%plo$ees of his depart%ent. Before assu%in! office, he is re?uired to ta*e an oath or affir%ation to the effect that as President of the Philippines, he "ill, a%on! others, We4ecute its la"s.XR,,AS +n the e4ercise of such function, the President, if needed, %a$ e%plo$ the po"ers attached to his office as the Co%%ander-in-Chief of all the ar%ed forces of the countr$, R,,=S includin! the Philippine National PoliceR,,.S under the >epart%ent of +nterior and 9ocal #overn%ent. R,,-S Petitioners, especiall$ Representatives )rancis Joseph #. Escudero, 0atur Oca%po, Rafael Mariano, &eodoro CasiDo, 9i@a Ma@a, and Josel /irador ar!ue that PP ,2,= is unconstitutional as it arro!ated upon President Arro$o the po"er to enact la"s and decrees in violation of 0ection ,, Article /+ of the Constitution, "hich vests the po"er to enact la"s in Con!ress. &he$ assail the clause W %o 4"9orc4 o(4*!4"c4 %o a66 %h4 6a:# a"* %o a66 *4cr44#, or*4r# a"* r4;)6a%!o"# $ro')6;a%4* (& '4 $4r#o"a66& or )$o" '& *!r4c%!o" .X Z PetitionersV contention is understandable. A readin! of PP ,2,= operative clause sho"s that it "as liftedR,82S fro% )or%er President MarcosV Procla%ation No. ,2.,, "hich partl$ readsE NO3, THERE.ORE, , .ERD NAND E. MARCOS , President of the Philippines b$ virtue of the po"ers vested upon %e b$ Article /++, 0ection ,2, Para!raph 183 of the Constitution, do hereb$ place the entire Philippines as defined in Article ,, 0ection , of the Constitution under %artial la" and, in %$ capacit$ as their Co%%ander-in-Chief, *o h4r4(& co''a"* %h4 Ar'4* .orc4# o9 %h4 Ph!6!$$!"4#, %o 'a!"%a!" 6a: a"* or*4r %hro);ho)% %h4 Ph!6!$$!"4#, $r454"% or #)$$r4## a66 9or'# o9 6a:64## 5!o64"c4 a# :466 a# a"& ac% o9 !"#)rr4c%!o" or r4(466!o" a"* %o 4"9orc4 o(4*!4"c4 %o a66 %h4 6a:# a"* *4cr44#, or*4r# a"* r4;)6a%!o"# $ro')6;a%4* (& '4 $4r#o"a66& or )$o" '& *!r4c%!o".

Second Pro#ision: 0/a1e 'are2 Power &he second provision pertains to the po"er of the President to ensure that the la"s be faithfull$ e4ecuted. &his is based on 0ection ,=, Article /++ "hich readsE SEC. 17. &he President shall have control of all the e4ecutive depart%ents, bureaus, and offices. H4 #ha66 4"#)r4 %ha% %h4 6a:# (4 9a!%h9)66& 4<4c)%4*.

(e all *no" that it "as PP ,2., "hich !ranted President Marcos le!islative po"er. +ts enablin! clause statesE N%o 4"9orc4 o(4*!4"c4 %o a66 %h4 6a:# a"* *4cr44#, or*4r# a"* r4;)6a%!o"# $ro')6;a%4* (& '4 $4r#o"a66& or )$o" '& *!r4c%!o".O Gpon the other hand, the enablin! clause of PP ,2,= issued b$ President Arro$o isE %o 4"9orc4 o(4*!4"c4 %o a66 %h4 6a:# a"* to all *4cr44#, or*4r# a"* r4;)6a%!o"# $ro')6;a%4* (& '4 $4r#o"a66& or )$o" '& *!r4c%!o".X

)s it within the domain of !resident 3rroyo to promu#gate DdecreesC PP ,2,= states in partE Wto enforce obedience to all the la"s and *4cr44# 4 4 4 $ro')6;a%4* (& '4 $4r#o"a66& or )$o" '& *!r4c%!o".X &he President is !ranted an Ordinance Po"er under Chapter 8, Boo* +++ of E4ecutive Order No. 8-8 1Ad%inistrative Code of ,-.=3. 0he %a$ issue an$ of the follo"in!E 0ec. 8. 54ecutive (rders. I Acts of the President providin! for rules of a !eneral or per%anent character in i%ple%entation or e4ecution of constitutional or statutor$ po"ers shall be pro%ul!ated in e4ecutive orders. 0ec. 5. 3dministrative (rders. I Acts of the President "hich relate to particular aspect of !overn%ental operations in pursuance of his duties as ad%inistrative head shall be pro%ul!ated in ad%inistrative orders. 0ec. 7. !roc#amations. I Acts of the President fi4in! a date or declarin! a status or condition of public %o%ent or interest, upon the e4istence of "hich the operation of a specific la" or re!ulation is %ade to depend, shall be pro%ul!ated in procla%ations "hich shall have the force of an e4ecutive order. 0ec. <. 2emorandum (rders. I Acts of the President on %atters of ad%inistrative detail or of subordinate or te%porar$ interest "hich onl$ concern a particular officer or office of the #overn%ent shall be e%bodied in %e%orandu% orders. 0ec. A. 2emorandum /ircu#ars. I Acts of the President on %atters relatin! to internal ad%inistration, "hich the President desires to brin! to the attention of all or so%e of the depart%ents, a!encies, bureaus or offices of the #overn%ent, for infor%ation or co%pliance, shall be e%bodied in %e%orandu% circulars. 0ec. =. Henera# or 1pecia# (rders . I Acts and co%%ands of the President in his capacit$ as Co%%ander-in-Chief of the Ar%ed )orces of the Philippines shall be issued as !eneral or special orders. President Arro$oVs ordinance po"er is li%ited to the fore!oin! issuances. 0he cannot issue *4cr44# si%ilar to those issued b$ )or%er President Marcos under PP ,2.,. Presidential >ecrees are la"s "hich are of the sa%e cate!or$ and bindin! force as statutes because the$ "ere issued b$ the President in the e4ercise of his le!islative po"er durin! the period of Martial 9a" under the ,-=5 Constitution. R,8,S Th!# Co)r% r)64# %ha% %h4 a##a!64* PP 1017 !# )"co"#%!%)%!o"a6 !"#o9ar a# !% ;ra"%# Pr4#!*4"% Arro&o %h4 a)%hor!%& %o $ro')6;a%4 N*4cr44#.O 9e!islative po"er is peculiarl$ "ithin the province of the 9e!islature. 0ection ,, Article /+ cate!oricall$ states that W Q%Rh4 64;!#6a%!54 $o:4r #ha66 (4 54#%4* !" %h4 Co";r4## o9 %h4 Ph!6!$$!"4# :h!ch #ha66 co"#!#% o9 a S4"a%4 a"* a Ho)#4 o9 R4$r4#4"%a%!54# .X &o be sure, neither Martial 9a" nor a

state of rebellion nor a state of e%er!enc$ can ustif$ President Arro$oVs e4ercise of le!islative po"er b$ issuin! decrees. /an !resident 3rroyo enforce obedience to a## decrees and #aws through the mi#itaryP As this Court stated earlier, President Arro$o has no authorit$ to enact decrees. +t follo"s that these decrees are void and, therefore, cannot be enforced. (ith respect to Wla"s,X she cannot call the %ilitar$ to enforce or i%ple%ent certain la"s, such as custo%s la"s, la"s !overnin! fa%il$ and propert$ relations, la"s on obli!ations and contracts and the li*e. 0he can onl$ order the %ilitar$, under PP ,2,=, to enforce la"s pertinent to its dut$ %o #)$$r4## 6a:64## 5!o64"c4 .

/&ird Pro#ision: Power to /a1e ,#er &he pertinent provision of PP ,2,= statesE 4 4 4 and to enforce obedience to all the la"s and to all decrees, orders, and re!ulations pro%ul!ated b$ %e personall$ or upon %$ directionK a"* a# $ro5!*4* !" S4c%!o" 17, Ar%!c64 S o9 %h4 Co"#%!%)%!o" *o h4r4(& *4c6ar4 a #%a%4 o9 "a%!o"a6 4'4r;4"c&. &he i%port of this provision is that President Arro$o, durin! the state of national e%er!enc$ under PP ,2,=, can call the %ilitar$ not onl$ to enforce obedience Wto all the la"s and to all decrees 4 4 4X but also to act pursuant to the provision of 0ection ,=, Article Q++ "hich readsE S4c. 17. +n ti%es of national e%er!enc$, "hen the public interest so re?uires, the 0tate %a$, durin! the e%er!enc$ and under reasonable ter%s prescribed b$ it, te%poraril$ ta*e over or direct the operation of an$ privatel$-o"ned public utilit$ or business affected "ith public interest.

$hat cou#d be the reason of !resident 3rroyo in invoking the above provision when she issued !! 1:1I &he ans"er is si%ple. >urin! the e4istence of the state of national e%er!enc$, PP ,2,= purports to !rant the President, "ithout an$ authorit$ or dele!ation fro% Con!ress, to ta*e over or direct the operation of an$ privatel$-o"ned public utilit$ or business affected "ith public interest.

&his provision "as first introduced in the ,-=5 Constitution, as a product of the W%artial la"X thin*in! of the ,-=, Constitutional Convention. R,88S +n effect at the ti%e of its approval "as President MarcosV 9etter of +nstruction No. 8 dated 0epte%ber 88, ,-=8 instructin! the 0ecretar$ of National >efense to ta*e over Wthe management& contro# and operation of the 2ani#a 5#ectric /ompany& the !hi#ippine 7ong 'istance 0e#ephone /ompany& the .ationa# $aterworks and 1ewerage 3uthority& the !hi#ippine .ationa# *ai#ways& the !hi#ippine 3ir 7ines& 3ir 2ani#a "and% ,i#ipinas (rient 3irways . . . for the successfu# prosecution by the Hovernment of its effort to contain& so#ve and end the present nationa# emergency. X Petitioners, particularl$ the %e%bers of the 6ouse of Representatives, clai% that President Arro$oVs inclusion of 0ection ,=, Article Q++ in PP ,2,= is an encroach%ent on the le!islatureVs e%er!enc$ po"ers. &his is an area that needs delineation. A distinction %ust be dra"n bet"een the PresidentVs authorit$ to *4c6ar4 Wa state of national e%er!enc$X and to 4<4rc!#4 e%er!enc$ po"ers. &o the first, as elucidated b$ the Court, 0ection ,., Article /++ !rants the President such po"er, hence, no le!iti%ate constitutional ob ection can be raised. But to the second, %anifold constitutional issues arise. 0ection 85, Article /+ of the Constitution readsE SEC. 20. C1F &he Con!ress, b$ a vote of t"o-thirds of both 6ouses in oint session asse%bled, votin! separatel$, shall have the #o64 $o:4r %o *4c6ar4 %h4 4<!#%4"c4 o9 a #%a%4 o9 :ar. C2F +n ti%es of "ar or o%h4r "a%!o"a6 4'4r;4"c& , the Con!ress %a$, b$ la", authori@e the President, for a li%ited period and sub ect to such restrictions as it %a$ prescribe, to e4ercise po"ers necessar$ and proper to carr$ out a declared national polic$. Gnless sooner "ithdra"n b$ resolution of the Con!ress, such po"ers shall cease upon the ne4t ad ourn%ent thereof. +t %a$ be pointed out that the second para!raph of the above provision refers not onl$ to "ar but also to Wo%h4r "a%!o"a6 4'4r;4"c& .X +f the intention of the )ra%ers of our Constitution "as to "ithhold fro% the President the authorit$ to declare a Wstate of national e%er!enc$X pursuant to 0ection ,., Article /++ 1callin!out po"er3 and !rant it to Con!ress 1li*e the declaration of the e4istence of a state of "ar3, then the )ra%ers could have provided so. Clearl$, the$ did not intend that Con!ress should first authori@e the President before he can declare a Wstate of national e%er!enc$.X &he lo!ical conclusion then is that President Arro$o could validl$ declare the e4istence of a state of national e%er!enc$ even in the absence of a Con!ressional enact%ent. But the 4<4rc!#4 of e%er!enc$ po"ers, such as the ta*in! over of privatel$ o"ned public utilit$ or business affected "ith public interest, is a different %atter. &his re?uires a dele!ation fro% Con!ress.

Courts have often said that constitutional provisions in pari materia are to be construed to!ether. Other"ise stated, different clauses, sections, and provisions of a constitution "hich relate to the sa%e sub ect %atter "ill be construed to!ether and considered in the li!ht of each other.R,85S Considerin! that 0ection ,= of Article Q++ and 0ection 85 of Article /+, previousl$ ?uoted, relate to national e%er!encies, the$ %ust be read to!ether to deter%ine the li%itation of the e4ercise of e%er!enc$ po"ers. G4"4ra66&, Co";r4## !# %h4 r4$o#!%or& o9 4'4r;4"c& $o:4r# . &his is evident in the tenor of 0ection 85 183, Article /+ authori@in! it to dele!ate such po"ers to the President. C4r%a!"6&, a (o*& ca""o% *464;a%4 a $o:4r "o% r4$o#4* )$o" !%. 6o"ever, *no"in! that durin! !rave e%er!encies, it %a$ not be possible or practicable for Con!ress to %eet and e4ercise its po"ers, the )ra%ers of our Constitution dee%ed it "ise to allo" Con!ress to !rant e%er!enc$ po"ers to the President, sub ect to certain conditions, thusE C1F &here %ust be a :ar or o%h4r 4'4r;4"c&. C2F &he dele!ation %ust be for a 6!'!%4* $4r!o* o"6&. C0F &he dele!ation %ust be #)(=4c% %o #)ch r4#%r!c%!o"# a# %h4 Co";r4## 'a& $r4#cr!(4 . C4F &he e%er!enc$ po"ers %ust be e4ercised to carr& o)% a "a%!o"a6 $o6!c& declared b$ Con!ress.R,87S

0ection ,=, Article Q++ %ust be understood as an aspect of the e%er!enc$ po"ers clause. &he ta*in! over of private business affected "ith public interest is ust another facet of the e%er!enc$ po"ers !enerall$ reposed upon Con!ress. &hus, "hen 0ection ,= states that the W%h4 S%a%4 'a&, *)r!"; %h4 4'4r;4"c& a"* )"*4r r4a#o"a(64 %4r'# $r4#cr!(4* (& !%, %4'$orar!6& %a84 o54r or *!r4c% %h4 o$4ra%!o" o9 a"& $r!5a%46& o:"4* $)(6!c )%!6!%& or ()#!"4## a994c%4* :!%h $)(6!c !"%4r4#%,X it refers to Con!ress, not the President. No", "hether or not the President %a$ e4ercise such po"er is dependent on "hether Con!ress %a$ dele!ate it to hi% pursuant to a la" prescribin! the reasonable ter%s thereof. Ooungstown 1heet P 0ube /o. et a#. v. 1awyer&R,8<S heldE +t is clear that if the President had authorit$ to issue the order he did, it %ust be found in so%e provision of the Constitution. And it is not clai%ed that e4press constitutional lan!ua!e !rants this po"er to the President. &he contention is that presidential po"er should be i%plied fro% the a!!re!ate of his po"ers under the Constitution. Particular reliance is placed on provisions in Article ++ "hich sa$ that W&he e4ecutive Po"er shall be vested in a President . . . .KX that Whe shall ta*e Care that the 9a"s be faithfull$ e4ecutedKX and that he Wshall be Co%%ander-in-Chief of the Ar%$ and Nav$ of the Gnited 0tates.

&he order cannot properl$ be sustained as an e4ercise of the PresidentVs %ilitar$ po"er as Co%%ander-in-Chief of the Ar%ed )orces. &he #overn%ent atte%pts to do so b$ citin! a nu%ber of cases upholdin! broad po"ers in %ilitar$ co%%anders en!a!ed in da$-to-da$ fi!htin! in a theater of "ar. 0uch cases need not concern us here. E54" %ho);h N%h4a%4r o9 :arO (4 a" 4<$a"*!"; co"c4$%, :4 ca""o% :!%h 9a!%h9)6"4## %o o)r co"#%!%)%!o"a6 #&#%4' ho6* %ha% %h4 Co''a"*4r-!"-Ch!49 o9 %h4 Ar'4* .orc4# ha# %h4 )6%!'a%4 $o:4r a# #)ch %o %a84 $o##4##!o" o9 $r!5a%4 $ro$4r%& !" or*4r %o 844$ 6a(or *!#$)%4# 9ro' #%o$$!"; $ro*)c%!o". Th!# !# a =o( 9or %h4 "a%!o"J# 6a:'a84r#, "o% 9or !%# '!6!%ar& a)%hor!%!4#. Nor ca" %h4 #4!?)r4 or*4r (4 #)#%a!"4* (4ca)#4 o9 %h4 #454ra6 co"#%!%)%!o"a6 $ro5!#!o"# %ha% ;ra"% 4<4c)%!54 $o:4r %o %h4 Pr4#!*4"%. " %h4 9ra'4:or8 o9 o)r Co"#%!%)%!o", %h4 Pr4#!*4"%J# $o:4r %o #44 %ha% %h4 6a:# ar4 9a!%h9)66& 4<4c)%4* r49)%4# %h4 !*4a %ha% h4 !# %o (4 a 6a:'a84r. Th4 Co"#%!%)%!o" 6!'!%# h!# 9)"c%!o"# !" %h4 6a:'a8!"; $roc4## %o %h4 r4co''4"*!"; o9 6a:# h4 %h!"8# :!#4 a"* %h4 54%o!"; o9 6a:# h4 %h!"8# (a*. A"* %h4 Co"#%!%)%!o" !# "4!%h4r #!64"% "or 47)!5oca6 a(o)% :ho #ha66 'a84 6a:# :h!ch %h4 Pr4#!*4"% !# %o 4<4c)%4. Th4 9!r#% #4c%!o" o9 %h4 9!r#% ar%!c64 #a&# %ha% NA66 64;!#6a%!54 Po:4r# h4r4!" ;ra"%4* #ha66 (4 54#%4* !" a Co";r4## o9 %h4 U"!%4* S%a%4#. . .XR,8AS

MR. #A0CON. Fes. (hat is the Co%%itteeVs definition of Wnational e%er!enc$X "hich appears in 0ection ,5, pa!e <P +t readsE (hen the co%%on !ood so re?uires, the 0tate %a$ te%poraril$ ta*e over or direct the operation of an$ privatel$ o"ned public utilit$ or business affected "ith public interest. MR. /+99E#A0. (hat + %ean is threat fro% 4<%4r"a6 a;;r4##!o", for e4a%ple, ca6a'!%!4# or "a%)ra6 *!#a#%4r#. MR. #A0CON. &here is a ?uestion b$ Co%%issioner de los Re$es. (hat about stri*es and riotsP MR. /+99E#A0. 0tri*es, noK those "ould not be covered b$ the ter% Wnational e%er!enc$.X MR. BEN#BON. Gnless the$ are of such proportions such that the$ "ould paral$@e !overn%ent service. R,58S 4 4 4 4 4 4 MR. &+N#0ON. Ma$ + as* the co%%ittee if Wnational e%er!enc$X refers to '!6!%ar& "a%!o"a6 4'4r;4"c& or could this be 4co"o'!c 4'4r;4"c&PX MR. /+99E#A0. Fes, it could refer to (o%h '!6!%ar& or 4co"o'!c *!#6oca%!o"#. MR. &+N#0ON. &han* $ou ver$ %uch.R,55S +t %a$ be ar!ued that "hen there is national e%er!enc$, Con!ress %a$ not be able to convene and, therefore, unable to dele!ate to the President the po"er to ta*e over privatel$-o"ned public utilit$ or business affected "ith public interest. +n 3raneta v. 'ing#asan,R,57S this Court e%phasi@ed that le!islative po"er, throu!h "hich e4traordinar$ %easures are e4ercised, re%ains in Con!ress even in ti%es of crisis. W4 4 4

Petitioner /acho;(#ivares, et a#. contends that the ter% We%er!enc$X under 0ection ,=, Article Q++ refers to W%#)"a'!,X W%&$hoo",X Wh)rr!ca"4X andW#!'!6ar occ)rr4"c4#.X &his is a li%ited vie" of We%er!enc$.X

E%er!enc$, as a !eneric ter%, connotes the e4istence of conditions suddenl$ intensif$in! the de!ree of e4istin! dan!er to life or "ell-bein! be$ond that "hich is accepted as nor%al. +%plicit in this definitions are the ele%ents of intensit$, variet$, and perception.R,8=S E%er!encies, as perceived b$ le!islature or e4ecutive in the Gnited 0ates since ,-55, have been occasioned b$ a "ide ran!e of situations, classifiable under three 153 principal headsE aF 4co"o'!c,R,8.S (F "a%)ra6 *!#a#%4r,R,8-Sand cF "a%!o"a6 #4c)r!%& .R,52S

WE%er!enc$,X as conte%plated in our Constitution, is of the sa%e breadth. +t %a$ include rebellion, econo%ic crisis, pestilence or epide%ic, t$phoon, flood, or other si%ilar catastrophe of nation"ide proportions or effect. R,5,S &his is evident in the Records of the Constitutional Co%%ission, thusE

After all the criticis%s that have been %ade a!ainst the efficienc$ of the s$ste% of the separation of po"ers, the fact re%ains that the Constitution has set up this for% of !overn%ent, "ith all its defects and shortco%in!s, in preference to the co%%in!lin! of po"ers in one %an or !roup of %en. &he )ilipino people b$ adoptin! parlia%entar$ !overn%ent have !iven notice that the$ share the faith of other de%ocrac$-lovin! peoples in this s$ste%, "ith all its faults, as the ideal. &he point is, under this fra%e"or* of !overn%ent, le!islation is preserved for Con!ress all the ti%e, not e4ceptin! periods of crisis no %atter ho" serious. Never in the histor$ of the Gnited 0tates, the basic features of "hose Constitution have been copied in ours, have specific functions of the le!islative branch of enactin! la"s been surrendered to another depart%ent O unless "e re!ard as

le!islatin! the carr$in! out of a le!islative polic$ accordin! to prescribed standardsK no, not even "hen that Republic "as fi!htin! a total "ar, or "hen it "as en!a!ed in a lifeand-death stru!!le to preserve the Gnion. &he truth is that under our concept of constitutional !overn%ent, in ti%es of e4tre%e perils %ore than in nor%al circu%stances Ythe various branches, e4ecutive, le!islative, and udicial,V !iven the abilit$ to act, are called upon Yto perfor% the duties and dischar!e the responsibilities co%%itted to the% respectivel$.X )ollo"in! our interpretation of 0ection ,=, Article Q++, invo*ed b$ President Arro$o in issuin! PP ,2,=, this Court rules that such Procla%ation does not authori@e her durin! the e%er!enc$ to te%poraril$ ta*e over or direct the operation of an$ privatel$ o"ned public utilit$ or business affected "ith public interest "ithout authorit$ fro% Con!ress. 9et it be e%phasi@ed that "hile the President alone can declare a state of national e%er!enc$, ho"ever, "ithout le!islation, he has no po"er to ta*e over privatel$-o"ned public utilit$ or business affected "ith public interest. &he President cannot decide "hether e4ceptional circu%stances e4ist "arrantin! the ta*e over of privatel$-o"ned public utilit$ or business affected "ith public interest. Nor can he deter%ine "hen such e4ceptional circu%stances have ceased. 9i*e"ise, :!%ho)% 64;!#6a%!o" & the President has no po"er to point out the t$pes of businesses affected "ith public interest that should be ta*en over. +n short, the President has no absolute authorit$ to e4ercise all the po"ers of the 0tate under 0ection ,=, Article /++ in the absence of an e%er!enc$ po"ers act passed b$ Con!ress. c. NAS APP, ED CHA,,ENGEO One of the %isfortunes of an e%er!enc$, particularl$, that "hich pertains to securit$, is that %ilitar$ necessit$ and the !uaranteed ri!hts of the individual are often not co%patible. Our histor$ reveals that in the crucible of conflict, %an$ ri!hts are curtailed and tra%pled upon. 6ere, the r!;h% a;a!"#% )"r4a#o"a(64 #4arch a"* #4!?)r4B %h4 r!;h% a;a!"#% :arra"%64## arr4#%B and %h4 9r44*o' o9 #$44ch, o9 4<$r4##!o", o9 %h4 $r4##, a"* o9 a##4'(6& under the Bill of Ri!hts suffered the !reatest blo". Of the seven 1=3 petitions, three 153 indicate Wdirect in ur$.X +n G.R. No. 1710A6, petitioners >avid and 9la%as alle!ed that, on )ebruar$ 87, 822A, the$ "ere arrested "ithout "arrants on their "a$ to E>0A to celebrate the 82th Anniversar$ of !eop#e !ower ). &he arrestin! officers cited PP ,2,= as basis of the arrest. +n G.R. No. 17140A, petitioners Cacho-Olivares and 0ribune Publishin! Co., +nc. clai%ed that on )ebruar$ 8<, 822A, the C+># operatives Wraided and ransac*ed

"ithout "arrantX their office. &hree police%en "ere assi!ned to !uard their office as a possible Wsource of destabili@ation.X A!ain, the basis "as PP ,2,=. And in G.R. No. 171410, petitioners MMG and NA)9G-MMG et a#. alle!ed that their %e%bers "ere Wturned a"a$ and dispersedX "hen the$ "ent to E>0A and later, to A$ala Avenue, to celebrate the 82th Anniversar$ of !eop#e !ower ). A perusal of the Wdirect in uriesX alle!edl$ suffered b$ the said petitioners sho"s that the$ resulted fro% the !'$64'4"%a%!o" , pursuant to #.O. No. <, of PP ,2,=. /an this /ourt adjudge as unconstitutiona# !! 1:1I and H.(. .o 9 on the basis of these i##ega# acts +n !eneral, does the i##ega# imp#ementation of a #aw render it unconstitutiona# 0ettled is the rule that courts are not at libert$ to declare statutes invalid a6%ho);h %h4& 'a& (4 a()#4* a"* '!#a()#4* R,5<S and 'a& a99or* a" o$$or%)"!%& 9or a()#4 !" %h4 'a""4r o9 a$$6!ca%!o" .R,5AS &he validit$ of a statute or ordinance is to be deter%ined fro% its !eneral purpose and its efficienc$ to acco%plish the end desired, "o% 9ro' !%# 4994c%# !" a $ar%!c)6ar ca#4 .R,5=S PP ,2,= is %erel$ an invocation of the PresidentVs callin!-out po"er. +ts !eneral purpose is to co%%and the A)P to suppress all for%s of la"less violence, invasion or rebellion. +t had acco%plished the end desired "hich pro%pted President Arro$o to issue PP ,28,. But there is nothin! in PP ,2,= allo"in! the police, e4pressl$ or i%pliedl$, to conduct ille!al arrest, search or violate the citi@ensV constitutional ri!hts.

No", %a$ this Court ad ud!e a la" or ordinance unconstitutional on the !round that its i%ple%entor co%%itted ille!al actsP &he ans"er is no. &he criterion b$ "hich the validit$ of the statute or ordinance is to be %easured is the essential basis for the e4ercise of po"er, a"* "o% a '4r4 !"c!*4"%a6 r4#)6% ar!#!"; 9ro' !%# 4<4r%!o".R,5.S &his is lo!ical. Just i%a!ine the absurdit$ of situations "hen la"s %a$be declared unconstitutional ust because the officers i%ple%entin! the% have acted arbitraril$. +f this "ere so, ud!in! fro% the blunders co%%itted b$ police%en in the cases passed upon b$ the Court, %a orit$ of the provisions of the Revised Penal Code "ould have been declared unconstitutional a lon! ti%e a!o. President Arro$o issued #.O. No. < to carr$ into effect the provisions of PP ,2,=. #eneral orders are Wacts and co%%ands of the President in his capacit$ as Co%%ander-in-Chief of the Ar%ed )orces of the Philippines.X &he$ are internal rules issued b$ the e4ecutive officer to his subordinates precisel$ for the $ro$4r and499!c!4"% a*'!"!#%ra%!o" o9 6a:. 0uch rules and re!ulations create no relation e4cept bet"een the official "ho issues the% and the official "ho receives the%.R,5-S &he$ are based on and are the product of, a relationship in "hich po"er is their source, and obedience, their ob ect. R,72S )or these reasons, one re?uire%ent for these rules to be valid is that the$ %ust be r4a#o"a(64, "o% ar(!%rar& or ca$r!c!o)#.

#.O. No. < %andates the A)P and the PNP to i%%ediatel$ carr$ out the W"4c4##ar& a"* a$$ro$r!a%4 ac%!o"# a"* '4a#)r4# %o #)$$r4## a"* $r454"% ac%# o9 %4rror!#' a"* 6a:64## violence.X Gnli*e the ter% Wla"less violenceX "hich is unar!uabl$ e4tant in our statutes and the Constitution, and "hich is invariabl$ associated "ith Winvasion, insurrection or rebellion,X the phrase Wacts of terroris%X is still an a%orphous and va!ue concept. Con!ress has $et to enact a la" definin! and punishin! acts of terroris%.

+n fact, this Wdefinitional predica%entX or the Wabsence of an a!reed definition of terroris%X confronts not onl$ our countr$, but the international

co%%unit$ as "ell. &he follo"in! observations are ?uite aproposE +n the actual unipolar conte4t of international relations, the Wfi!ht a!ainst terroris%X has beco%e one of the basic slo!ans "hen it co%es to the ustification of the use of force a!ainst certain states and a!ainst !roups operatin! internationall$. 9ists of states Wsponsorin! terroris%X and of terrorist or!ani@ations are set up and constantl$ bein! updated accordin! to criteria that are not al"a$s *no"n to the public, but are clearl$ deter%ined b$ strate!ic interests. &he basic proble% underl$in! all these %ilitar$ actions O or threats of the use of force as the %ost recent b$ the Gnited 0tates a!ainst +ra? O consists in the absence of an a!reed definition of terroris%. Re%ar*able confusion persists in re!ard to the le!al cate!ori@ation of acts of violence either b$ states, b$ ar%ed !roups such as liberation %ove%ents, or b$ individuals. &he dile%%a can b$ su%%ari@ed in the sa$in! WOne countr$Vs terrorist is another countr$Vs freedo% fi!hter.X &he apparent contradiction or lac* of consistenc$ in the use of the ter% Wterroris%X %a$ further be de%onstrated b$ the historical fact that leaders of national liberation %ove%ents such as Nelson Mandela in 0outh Africa, 6abib Bour!ouiba in &unisia, or Ah%ed Ben Bella in Al!eria, to %ention onl$ a fe", "ere ori!inall$ labeled as terrorists b$ those "ho controlled the territor$ at the ti%e, but later beca%e internationall$ respected states%en. (hat, then, is the definin! criterion for terrorist acts O the differentia specifica distin!uishin! those acts fro% eventuall$ le!iti%ate acts of national resistance or self-defenseP 0ince the ti%es of the Cold (ar the Gnited Nations Or!ani@ation has been tr$in! in vain to reach a consensus on the basic issue of definition. &he or!ani@ation has intensified its efforts recentl$, but has been unable to brid!e the !ap bet"een those "ho associate Wterroris%X "ith an$ violent act b$ non-state !roups a!ainst civilians, state functionaries or infrastructure or %ilitar$ installations, and those "ho believe in the concept of the le!iti%ate use of force "hen resistance a!ainst forei!n occupation or a!ainst s$ste%atic oppression of ethnic andCor reli!ious !roups "ithin a state is concerned. &he dile%%a facin! the international co%%unit$ can best be illustrated b$ reference to the contradictin! cate!ori@ation of or!ani@ations and %ove%ents such as Palestine 9iberation Or!ani@ation 1P9O3 O "hich is a terrorist !roup for +srael and a liberation %ove%ent for Arabs and Musli%s O the Mash%iri resistance !roups O "ho are terrorists in the perception of +ndia,

liberation fi!hters in that of Pa*istan O the earlier Contras in Nicara!ua O freedo% fi!hters for the Gnited 0tates, terrorists for the 0ocialist ca%p O or, %ost drasticall$, the Af!hani Mu ahedeen 1later to beco%e the &aliban %ove%ent3E durin! the Cold (ar period the$ "ere a !roup of freedo% fi!hters for the (est, nurtured b$ the Gnited 0tates, and a terrorist !an! for the 0oviet Gnion. One could !o on and on in enu%eratin! e4a%ples of conflictin! cate!ori@ations that cannot be reconciled in an$ "a$ O because of opposin! political interests that are at the roots of those perceptions. 6o", then, can those contradictin! definitions and conflictin! perceptions and evaluations of one and the sa%e !roup and its actions be e4plainedP +n our anal$sis, the basic reason for these stri*in! inconsistencies lies in the diver!ent interest of states. >ependin! on "hether a state is in the position of an occup$in! po"er or in that of a rival, or adversar$, of an occup$in! po"er in a !iven territor$, the definition of terroris% "ill WfluctuateX accordin!l$. A state %a$ eventuall$ see itself as protector of the ri!hts of a certain ethnic !roup outside its territor$ and "ill therefore spea* of a Wliberation stru!!le,X not of Wterroris%X "hen acts of violence b$ this !roup are concerned, and vice-versa. &he Gnited Nations Or!ani@ation has been unable to reach a decision on the definition of terroris% e4actl$ because of these conflictin! interests of soverei!n states that deter%ine in each and ever$ instance ho" a particular ar%ed %ove%ent 1i.e. a non-state actor3 is labeled in re!ard to the terrorists-freedo% fi!hter dichoto%$. A Wpolic$ of double standardsX on this vital issue of international affairs has been the unavoidable conse?uence. &his Wdefinitional predica%entX of an or!ani@ation consistin! of soverei!n states O and not of peoples, in spite of the e%phasis in the Prea%ble to the Gnited Nations CharterH O has beco%e even %ore serious in the present !lobal po"er constellationE one superpo"er e4ercises the decisive role in the 0ecurit$ Council, for%er !reat po"ers of the Cold (ar era as "ell as %ediu% po"ers are increasin!l$ bein! %ar!inali@edK and the proble% has beco%e even %ore acute since the terrorist attac*s of ,, 0epte%ber 822, + the Gnited 0tates.R,7,S &he absence of a la" definin! Wacts of terroris%X %a$ result in abuse and oppression on the part of the police or %ilitar$. An illustration is "hen a !roup of persons are %erel$ en!a!ed in a drin*in! spree. Fet the %ilitar$ or the police %a$ consider the act as an act of terroris% and i%%ediatel$ arrest the% pursuant to #.O. No. <. Obviousl$, this is abuse and oppression on their part. +t %ust be re%e%bered that an act can onl$ be considered a cri%e if there is a la" definin! the sa%e as such and i%posin! the correspondin! penalt$ thereon.

0o far, the "ord Wterroris%X appears onl$ once in our cri%inal la"s, i.e., in P.>. No. ,.5< dated Januar$ ,A, ,-., enacted b$ President Marcos durin! the Martial 9a" re!i%e. &his decree is entitled WCodif$in! &he /arious 9a"s on Anti-0ubversion and +ncreasin! &he Penalties for Me%bership in 0ubversive Or!ani@ations.X &he "ord Wterroris%X is %entioned in the follo"in! provisionE W&hat one "ho conspires "ith an$ other person for the purpose of overthro"in! the #overn%ent of the Philippines 4 4 4 b$ force, violence, %4rror!#', 4 4 4 shall be punished b$ rec#usion tempora# 4 4 4.X

clothed "ith po"er to issue or refuse to issue search "arrants or "arrants of arrest.
R,75S

P.>. No. ,.5< "as repealed b$ E.O. No. ,A= 1"hich outla"s the Co%%unist Part$ of the Philippines3 enacted b$ President Cora@on A?uino on Ma$ <, ,-.<. &hese t"o 183 la"s, ho"ever, do not define Wacts of terroris%.X 0ince there is no la" definin! Wacts of terroris%,X it is President Arro$o alone, under #.O. No. <, "ho has the discretion to deter%ine "hat acts constitute terroris%. 6er ud!%ent on this aspect is absolute, "ithout restrictions. Conse?uentl$, there can be indiscri%inate arrest "ithout "arrants, brea*in! into offices and residences, ta*in! over the %edia enterprises, prohibition and dispersal of all asse%blies and !atherin!s unfriendl$ to the ad%inistration. All these can be effected in the na%e of #.O. No. <. &hese acts !o far be$ond the callin!-out po"er of the President. Certainl$, the$ violate the due process clause of the Constitution. &hus, this Court declares that the Wacts of terroris%X portion of #.O. No. < is unconstitutional.

+n the Brief AccountR,77S sub%itted b$ petitioner >avid, certain facts are establishedE first& he "as arrested "ithout "arrantK second& the PNP operatives arrested hi% on the basis of PP ,2,=K third& he "as brou!ht at Ca%p Marin!al, Lue@on Cit$ "here he "as fin!erprinted, photo!raphed and boo*ed li*e a cri%inal suspectKfourth& he "as treated brus?uel$ b$ police%en "ho Wheld his head and tried to push hi%X inside an un%ar*ed carK fifth& he "as char!ed "ith /iolation of /a%a# Pa'(a"#a /!6a"; No. 110R,7<S and "c!%!"; %o S4*!%!o" K si4th& he "as detained for seven 1=3 hoursK and seventh& he "as eventuall$ released for insufficienc$ of evidence.

0ection <, Rule ,,5 of the Revised Rules on Cri%inal Procedure providesE 0ec. <. Arrest wit&out warrant3 w&en lawful . - A peace officer or a private person %a$, "ithout a "arrant, arrest a personE CaF (hen, in his presence, the person to be arrested has co%%itted, is actuall$ co%%ittin!, or is atte%ptin! to co%%it an offense. C(F (hen an offense has ust been co%%itted and he has probable cause to believe based on personal *no"led!e of facts or circu%stances that the person to be arrested has co%%itted itK and 4 4 4.

0i!nificantl$, there is nothin! in #.O. No. < authori@in! the %ilitar$ or police to co%%it acts be$ond "hat are "4c4##ar& a"* a$$ro$r!a%4 %o #)$$r4## a"* $r454"% 6a:64## 5!o64"c4 , the li%itation of their authorit$ in pursuin! the Order. Other"ise, such acts are considered ille!al.

(e first e4a%ine G.R. No. 1710A6 1'avid et a#.3 Neither of the t"o 183 e4ceptions %entioned above ustifies petitioner >avidVs "arrantless arrest. >urin! the in?uest for the char!es of i"c!%!"; %o #4*!%!o" and5!o6a%!o" o9 /P 110, all that the arrestin! officers could invo*e "as their observation that so%e rall$ists "ere "earin! t-shirts "ith the invective D(ust H#oria .owC and their erroneous assu%ption that petitioner >avid "as the leader of the rall$.R,7AS Conse?uentl$, the +n?uest Prosecutor ordered his i%%ediate release on the !round of insufficienc$ of evidence. 6e noted that petitioner >avid "as not "earin! the sub ect t-shirt and even if he "as "earin! it, such fact is insufficient to char!e hi% "ith i "c!%!"; %o #4*!%!o" . )urther, he also stated that there is insufficient evidence for the char!e of 5!o6a%!o" o9 /P 110 as it "as not even *no"n "hether petitioner >avid "as the leader of the rall$. R,7=S

&he Constitution provides that Wthe ri!ht of the people to be secured in their persons, houses, papers and effects a!ainst unreasonable search and sei@ure of "hatever nature and for an$ purpose shall be in#iolable, and no search "arrant or :arra"% o9 arr4#% shall issue e4cept upon probable cause to be deter%ined personall$ b$ the ud!e after e4a%ination under oath or affir%ation of the co%plainant and the "itnesses he %a$ produce, and particularl$ describin! the place to be searched and the persons or thin!s to be sei@ed.X R,78S &he plain i%port of the lan!ua!e of the Constitution is that searches, sei@ures and arrests are "or'a66&unreasonable unless authori@ed b$ a validl$ issued search "arrant or "arrant of arrest. &hus, the funda%ental protection !iven b$ this provision is that bet"een person and police %ust stand the protective authorit$ of a %a!istrate

But "hat %ade it doubl$ "orse for petitioners >avid et a#. is that not onl$ "as their ri!ht a!ainst "arrantless arrest violated, but also their ri!ht to peaceabl$ asse%ble.

asse%blin! have co%%itted cri%es else"here, if the$ have for%ed or are en!a!ed in a conspirac$ a!ainst the public peace and order, the$ %a$ be prosecuted for their conspirac$ or other violations of valid la"s. /)% !% !# a *!994r4"% 'a%%4r :h4" %h4 S%a%4, !"#%4a* o9 $ro#4c)%!"; %h4' 9or #)ch o994"#4#, #4!?4# )$o" '4r4 $ar%!c!$a%!o" !" a $4ac4a(64 a##4'(6& a"* a 6a:9)6 $)(6!c *!#c)##!o" a# %h4 (a#!# 9or a cr!'!"a6 char;4.

0ection 7 of Article +++ !uaranteesE No la" shall be passed abrid!in! the freedo% of speech, of e4pression, or of the press, or the ri!ht of the people peaceabl$ to asse%ble and petition the !overn%ent for redress of !rievances. WAsse%bl$X %eans a ri!ht on the part of the citi@ens to %eet peaceabl$ for consultation in respect to public affairs. +t is a necessar$ conse?uence of our republican institution and co%ple%ents the ri!ht of speech. As in the case of freedo% of e4pression, this ri!ht is not to be li%ited, %uch less denied, e4cept on a sho"in! of a c64ar a"* $r4#4"% *a";4r of a substantive evil that Con!ress has a ri!ht to prevent. +n other "ords, li*e other ri!hts e%braced in the freedo% of e4pression, the ri!ht to asse%ble is not sub ect to previous restraint or censorship. +t %a$ not be conditioned upon the prior issuance of a per%it or authori@ation fro% the !overn%ent authorities e4cept, of course, if the asse%bl$ is intended to be held in a public place, a per%it for the use of such place, and not for the asse%bl$ itself, %a$ be validl$ re?uired.

On the basis of the above principles, the Court li*e"ise considers the dispersal and arrest of the %e%bers of MMG et a#. 1#.R. No. ,=,7.53 un"arranted. Apparentl$, their dispersal "as done %erel$ on the basis of MalacaDan!Vs directive cancelin! all per%its previousl$ issued b$ local !overn%ent units. &his is arbitrar$. &he "holesale cancellation of all per%its to rall$ is a blatant disre!ard of the principle that W9r44*o' o9 a##4'(6& !# "o% %o (4 6!'!%4*, ')ch 64## *4"!4*, 4<c4$% o" a #ho:!"; o9 a clear and present danger o9 a #)(#%a"%!54 45!6 %ha% %h4 S%a%4 ha# a r!;h% %o $r454"% .XR,7-S &olerance is the rule and li%itation is the e4ception. Onl$ upon a sho"in! that an asse%bl$ presents a clear and present dan!er that the 0tate %a$ den$ the citi@ensV ri!ht to e4ercise it. +ndeed, respondents failed to sho" or convince the Court that the rall$ists co%%itted acts a%ountin! to la"less violence, invasion or rebellion. (ith the blan*et revocation of per%its, the distinction bet"een protected and unprotected asse%blies "as eli%inated. Moreover, under BP ..2, the authorit$ to re!ulate asse%blies and rallies is lod!ed "ith the local !overn%ent units. &he$ have the po"er to issue per%its and to revo*e such per%its a9%4r *)4 "o%!c4 a"* h4ar!"; on the deter%ination of the presence of clear and present dan!er. 6ere, petitioners "ere not even notified and heard on the revocation of their per%its.R,<2S &he first ti%e the$ learned of it "as at the ti%e of the dispersal. 0uch absence of notice is a fatal defect. (hen a personVs ri!ht is restricted b$ !overn%ent action, it behooves a de%ocratic !overn%ent to see to it that the restriction is fair, reasonable, and accordin! to procedure.

&he rin!in! truth here is that petitioner >avid, et a#. "ere arrested "hile the$ "ere e4ercisin! their ri!ht to peaceful asse%bl$. &he$ "ere not co%%ittin! an$ cri%e, neither "as there a sho"in! of a clear and present dan!er that "arranted the li%itation of that ri!ht. As can be !leaned fro% circu%stances, the char!es of!"c!%!"; %o #4*!%!o" and 5!o6a%!o" o9 /P 110 "ere %ere afterthou!ht. Even the 0olicitor #eneral, durin! the oral ar!u%ent, failed to ustif$ the arrestin! officersV conduct. +n 'e <onge v. (regon,R,7.S it "as held that peaceable asse%bl$ cannot be %ade a cri%e, thusE Peaceable asse%bl$ for la"ful discussion cannot be %ade a cri%e. &he holdin! of %eetin!s for peaceable political action cannot be proscribed. &hose "ho assist in the conduct of such %eetin!s cannot be branded as cri%inals on that score. &he ?uestion, if the ri!hts of free speech and peaceful asse%bl$ are not to be preserved, is not as to the auspices under "hich the %eetin! "as held but as to its purposeK not as to the relations of the spea*ers, but "hether their utterances transcend the bounds of the freedo% of speech "hich the Constitution protects. +f the persons

G.R. No. 17140A, 1Cacho-Olivares, et a#.3 presents another facet of freedo% of speech i.e., the freedo% of the press. PetitionersV narration of facts, "hich the 0olicitor #eneral failed to refute, established the follo"in!E first& the 'ai#y 0ribune@s offices "ere searched "ithout "arrantK second& the police operatives sei@ed several %aterials for publicationK third, the search "as conducted at about ,E22 oV cloc* in the %ornin! of )ebruar$ 8<, 822AK fourth& the search "as conducted in the absence of an$ official of the 'ai#y 0ribune e4cept the securit$ !uard of the buildin!K and fifth& police%en stationed the%selves at the vicinit$ of the 'ai#y 0ribune offices. &hereafter, a "ave of "arnin! ca%e fro% !overn%ent officials. Presidential Chief of 0taff Michael >efensor "as ?uoted as sa$in! that such raid "as N'4a"% %o #ho: a P#%ro"; $r4#4"c4,J %o %466 '4*!a o)%64%# "o% %o co""!54 or *o a"&%h!"; %ha% :o)6* h46$ %h4 r4(46# !" (r!";!"; *o:" %h!# ;o54r"'4"%.O >irector #eneral 9o%ibao further stated that N!9 %h4& *o "o%

9o66o: %h4 #%a"*ar*# Ea"* %h4 #%a"*ar*# ar4 !9 %h4& :o)6* co"%r!()%4 %o !"#%a(!6!%& !" %h4 ;o54r"'4"%, or !9 %h4& *o "o% #)(#cr!(4 %o :ha% !# !" G4"4ra6 Or*4r No. 5 a"* Proc. No. 1017 E :4 :!66 r4co''4"* a Y%a84o54r.VX National &eleco%%unications Co%%issioner Ronald 0olis ur!ed television and radio net"or*s to DcooperateC "ith the !overn%ent for the duration of the state of national e%er!enc$. H4 :ar"4* %ha% h!# a;4"c& :!66 "o% h4#!%a%4 %o r4co''4"* %h4 c6o#)r4 o9 a"& (roa*ca#% o)%9!% %ha% 5!o6a%4# r)64# #4% o)% 9or '4*!a co54ra;4 *)r!"; %!'4# :h4" %h4 "a%!o"a6 #4c)r!%& !# %hr4a%4"4*.R,<,S &he search is ille!al. Rule ,8A of &he Revised Rules on Cri%inal Procedure la$s do"n the steps in the conduct of search and sei@ure. S4c%!o" 4 re?uires that a#4arch :arra"% be issued upon probable cause in connection "ith one specific offence to be deter%ined personall$ b$ the ud!e after e4a%ination under oath or affir%ation of the co%plainant and the "itnesses he %a$ produce. S4c%!o" 1 %andates that the search of a house, roo%, or an$ other pre%ise be %ade !" %h4 $r4#4"c4 o9 %h4 6a:9)6 occ)$a"% thereof or an$ %e%ber of his fa%il$ or in the absence of the latter, in the presence of t"o 183 "itnesses of sufficient a!e and discretion residin! in the sa%e localit$. And S4c%!o" A states that the "arrant %ust direct that it be served in the *a&%!'4, unless the propert$ is on the person or in the place ordered to be searched, in "hich case a direction %a$ be inserted that it be served at an$ ti%e of the da$ or ni!ht. All these rules "ere violated b$ the C+># operatives. Not onl$ that, the search violated petitionersV freedo% of the press. &he best !au!e of a free and de%ocratic societ$ rests in the de!ree of freedo% en o$ed b$ its %edia. +n the Burgos v. /hief of 1taffR,<8S this Court held that -As heretofore stated, the pre%ises searched "ere the business and printin! offices of the :2etropo#itan 2ai#: and the :$e ,orumX ne"spapers. As a conse?uence of the search and sei@ure, %h4#4 $r4'!#4# :4r4 $a*6oc84* a"* #4a64*, :!%h %h4 9)r%h4r r4#)6% %ha% %h4 $r!"%!"; a"* $)(6!ca%!o" o9 #a!* "4:#$a$4r# :4r4 *!#co"%!")4* . S)ch c6o#)r4 !# !" %h4 "a%)r4 o9 $r45!o)# r4#%ra!"% or c4"#or#h!$ a(horr4"% %o %h4 9r44*o' o9 %h4 $r4## ;)ara"%44* )"*4r %h4 9)"*a'4"%a6 6a:, a"* co"#%!%)%4# a 5!r%)a6 *4"!a6 o9 $4%!%!o"4r#D 9r44*o' %o 4<$r4## %h4'#4654# !" $r!"%. Th!# #%a%4 o9 (4!"; !# $a%4"%6& a"a%h4'a%!c %o a *4'ocra%!c 9ra'4:or8 :h4r4 a 9r44, a64r% a"* 454" '!6!%a"% $r4## !# 4##4"%!a6 9or %h4 $o6!%!ca6 4"6!;h%4"'4"% a"* ;ro:%h o9 %h4 c!%!?4"r& .

the 0he 'ai#y 0ribune offices, and the arro!ant "arnin! of !overn%ent officials to %edia, are plain censorship. +t is that officious functionar$ of the repressive !overn%ent "ho tells the citi@en that he %a$ spea* onl$ if allo"ed to do so, and no %ore and no less than "hat he is per%itted to sa$ on pain of punish%ent should he be so rash as to disobe$. R,<5S Gndoubtedl$, the 0he 'ai#y 0ribune "as sub ected to these arbitrar$ intrusions because of its anti-!overn%ent senti%ents. &his Court cannot tolerate the blatant disre!ard of a constitutional ri!ht even if it involves the %ost defiant of our citi@ens. )reedo% to co%%ent on public affairs is essential to the vitalit$ of a representative de%ocrac$. +t is the dut$ of the courts to be "atchful for the constitutional ri!hts of the citi@en, and a!ainst an$ stealth$ encroach%ents thereon. &he %otto should al"a$s be obsta principiis.R,<7S

+ncidentall$, durin! the oral ar!u%ents, the 0olicitor #eneral ad%itted that the search of the 0ribune@s offices and the sei@ure of its %aterials for publication and other papers are ille!alK and that the sa%e are inad%issible Wfor an$ purpose,X thusE JG0&+CE CA99EJOE Fou %ade ?uite a %outhful of ad%ission "hen $ou said that the police%en, "hen inspected the &ribune for the purpose of !atherin! evidence and $ou ad%itted that the police%en "ere able to !et the clippin!s. +s that not in ad%ission of the ad%issibilit$ of these clippin!s that "ere ta*en fro% the &ribuneP 0O9+C+&OR #ENERA9 BEN+PAFOE Gnder the la" the$ "ould see% to be, if the$ "ere ille!all$ sei@ed, + thin* and + *no", Four 6onor, and these are inad%issible for an$ purpose.R,<<S 444 444 444

0R. A00O. JG0&+CE PGNOE &hese have been published in the past issues of the >ail$ &ribuneK all $ou have to do is to !et those past issues. 0o "h$ do $ou have to !o there at , oVcloc* in the %ornin! and "ithout an$ search "arrantP >id the$ beco%e suddenl$ part of the evidence of rebellion or incitin! to sedition or "hatP 0O9#EN BEN+PAFOE

(hile ad%ittedl$, the 'ai#y 0ribune "as not padloc*ed and sealed li*e the W2etropo#itan 2ai#X and W$e ,orumX ne"spapers in the above case, $et it cannot be denied that the C+># operatives e4ceeded their enforce%ent duties. &he search and sei@ure of %aterials for publication, the stationin! of police%en in the vicinit$ of

(ell, it "as the police that did that, Four 6onor. Not upon %$ instructions. 0R. A00O. JG0&+CE PGNOE Are $ou sa$in! that the act of the police%an is ille!al, it is not based on an$ la", and it is not based on Procla%ation ,2,=. 0O9#EN BEN+PAFOE +t is not based on Procla%ation ,2,=, Four 6onor, because there is nothin! in ,2,= "hich sa$s that the police could !o and inspect and !ather clippin!s fro% >ail$ &ribune or an$ other ne"spaper. 0R. A00O. JG0&+CE PGNOE +s it based on an$ la"P 0O9#EN BEN+PAFOE As far as + *no", "o, Four 6onor, fro% the facts, "o. 0R. A00O. JG0&+CE PGNOE 0o, it has no "hatsoeverP basis, no le!al basis

&here see%s to be so%e confusions if not contradiction in $our theor$. 0O9+C+&OR #ENERA9 BEN+PAFOE + donVt *no" "hether this "ill clarif$. &he acts, the supposed ille!al or unla"ful acts co%%itted on the occasion of ,2,=, as + said, !% ca""o% (4 co"*o"4*. Fou cannot bla%e the President for, as $ou said, a %isapplication of the la". &hese are acts of the police officers, that is their responsibilit$.R,<=S

&he >issentin! Opinion states that PP ,2,= and #.O. No. < are constitutional in ever$ aspect and Wshould result in no constitutional or statutor$ breaches if applied accordin! to their letter.X &he Court has passed upon the constitutionalit$ of these issuances. +ts ratiocination has been e4haustivel$ presented. At this point, suffice it to reiterate that PP ,2,= is li%ited to the callin! out b$ the President of the %ilitar$ to prevent or suppress la"less violence, invasion or rebellion. (hen in i%ple%entin! its provisions, pursuant to #.O. No. <, the %ilitar$ and the police co%%itted acts "hich violate the citi@ensV ri!hts under the Constitution, this Court has to declare such acts unconstitutional and ille!al. +n this connection, Chief Justice Arte%io /. Pan!anibanVs concurrin! opinion, attached hereto, is considered an inte!ral part of this ponencia. SUMMAT ON

0O9#EN BEN+PAFOE Ma$be so, Four 6onor. Ma$be so, that is "h$ + said, + donVt *no" if it is pre%ature to sa$ this, :4 *o "o% co"*o"4 %h!#. 9 %h4 $4o$64 :ho ha54 (44" !"=)r4* (& %h!# :o)6* :a"% %o #)4 %h4', %h4& ca" #)4 a"* %h4r4 ar4 r4'4*!4# 9or %h!#.R,<AS 9i*e"ise, the "arrantless arrests and sei@ures e4ecuted b$ the police "ere, accordin! to the 0olicitor #eneral, ille!al and cannot be condoned, thusE C6+E) JG0&+CE PAN#AN+BANE

+n su%, the liftin! of PP ,2,= throu!h the issuance of PP ,28, O a supervenin! event O "ould have nor%all$ rendered this case %oot and acade%ic. 6o"ever, "hile PP ,2,= "as still operative, ille!al acts "ere co%%itted alle!edl$ in pursuance thereof. Besides, there is no !uarantee that PP ,2,=, or one si%ilar to it, %a$ not a!ain be issued. Alread$, there have been %edia reports on April 52, 822A that alle!edl$ PP ,2,= "ould be rei%posed Wif the Ma$ , ralliesX beco%e Wunrul$ and violent.X Conse?uentl$, the transcendental issues raised b$ the parties should not be WevadedKX the$ %ust no" be resolved to prevent future constitutional aberration. &he Court finds and so holds that PP ,2,= is constitutional insofar as it constitutes a call b$ the President for the A)P to prevent or suppress 6a:64## 5!o64"c4. &he procla%ation is sustained b$ 0ection ,., Article /++ of the Constitution and the relevant urisprudence discussed earlier. 6o"ever, PP ,2,=Vs e4traneous provisions !ivin! the President e4press or i%plied po"er 1,3 to issue decreesK 183 to direct the A)P to enforce obedience to a66 6a:# even those not related to la"less violence as "ell as decrees pro%ul!ated b$ the PresidentK and 153 to i%pose

standards on %edia or an$ for% of prior restraint on the press, are u#tra vires and)"co"#%!%)%!o"a6. &he Court also rules that under 0ection ,=, Article Q++ of the Constitution, the President, in the absence of a le!islation, cannot ta*e over privatel$-o"ned public utilit$ and private business affected "ith public interest.

constitutionalis%E %h4 'a!"%4"a"c4 o9 64;a6 6!'!%# %o ar(!%rar& and $o6!%!ca6 r4#$o"#!(!6!%& o9 %h4 ;o54r"'4"% %o %h4 ;o54r"4* .R,<.S

$o:4r ,

+n the sa%e vein, the Court finds #.O. No. < valid. +t is an Order issued b$ the President O actin! as Co%%ander-in-Chief O addressed to subalterns in the A)P to carr$ out the provisions of PP ,2,=. 0i!nificantl$, it also provides a valid standard O that the %ilitar$ and the police should ta*e onl$ the W "4c4##ar& a"* a$$ro$r!a%4 ac%!o"# a"* '4a#)r4# %o #)$$r4## a"* $r454"% ac%# o9 6a:64## 5!o64"c4.X But the "ords Wac%# o9 %4rror!#'X found in #.O. No. < have not been le!all$ defined and %ade punishable b$ Con!ress and should thus be dee%ed deleted fro% the said #.O. (hile Wterroris%X has been denounced !enerall$ in %edia, no la" has been enacted to !uide the %ilitar$, and eventuall$ the courts, to deter%ine the li%its of the A)PVs authorit$ in carr$in! out this portion of #.O. No. <.

3HERE.ORE, the Petitions are partl$ !ranted. &he Court rules that PP ,2,= is CONST TUT ONA, insofar as it constitutes a call b$ President #loria Macapa!al-Arro$o on the A)P %o $r454"% or #)$$r4## 6a:64## 5!o64"c4. 6o"ever, the provisions of PP ,2,= co%%andin! the A)P to enforce la"s not related to la"less violence, as "ell as decrees pro%ul!ated b$ the President, are declared UNCONST TUT ONA,. +n addition, the provision in PP ,2,= declarin! national e%er!enc$ under 0ection ,=, Article /++ of the Constitution is CONST TUT ONA,, but such declaration does not authori@e the President to ta*e over privatel$-o"ned public utilit$ or business affected "ith public interest "ithout prior le!islation. #.O. No. < is CONST TUT ONA, since it provides a standard b$ "hich the A)P and the PNP should i%ple%ent PP ,2,=, i.e. "hatever is W "4c4##ar& a"* a$$ro$r!a%4 ac%!o"# a"* '4a#)r4# %o #)$$r4## a"* $r454"% ac%# o9 6a:64## 5!o64"c4.X Considerin! that Wacts of terroris%X have not $et been defined and %ade punishable b$ the 9e!islature, such portion of #.O. No. < is declared UNCONST TUT ONA,.

On the basis of the relevant and uncontested facts narrated earlier, it is also pristine clear that 1,3 the "arrantless arrest of petitioners Randolf 0. >avid and Ronald 9la%asK 183 the dispersal of the rallies and "arrantless arrest of the MMG and NA)9G-MMG %e%bersK 153 the i%position of standards on %edia or an$ prior restraint on the pressK and 173 the "arrantless search of the 0ribune offices and the "hi%sical sei@ures of so%e articles for publication and other %aterials, are not authori@ed b$ the Constitution, the la" and urisprudence. Not even b$ the valid provisions of PP ,2,= and #.O. No. <. Other than this declaration of invalidit$, this Court cannot i%pose an$ civil, cri%inal or ad%inistrative sanctions on the individual police officers concerned. &he$ have not been individuall$ identified and !iven their da$ in court. &he civil co%plaints or causes of action andCor relevant cri%inal +nfor%ations have not been presented before this Court. Ele%entar$ due process bars this Court fro% %a*in! an$ specific pronounce%ent of civil, cri%inal or ad%inistrative liabilities.

&he "arrantless arrest of Randolf 0. >avid and Ronald 9la%asK the dispersal and "arrantless arrest of the MMG and NA)9G-MMG %e%bers durin! their rallies, in the absence of proof that these petitioners "ere co%%ittin! acts constitutin! la"less violence, invasion or rebellion and violatin! BP ..2K the i%position of standards on %edia or an$ for% of prior restraint on the press, as "ell as the "arrantless search of the 0ribune offices and "hi%sical sei@ure of its articles for publication and other %aterials, are declared UNCONST TUT ONA,. No costs. SO ORDERED.

+t is :466 %o r4'4'(4r %ha% '!6!%ar& $o:4r !# a '4a"# %o a" 4"* a"* #)(#%a"%!54 c!5!6 r!;h%# ar4 4"*# !" %h4'#4654#. Ho: %o ;!54 %h4 '!6!%ar& %h4 $o:4r !% "44*# %o $ro%4c% %h4 R4$)(6!c :!%ho)% )""4c4##ar!6& %ra'$6!"; !"*!5!*)a6 r!;h%# !# o"4 o9 %h4 4%4r"a6 (a6a"c!"; %a#8# o9 a *4'ocra%!c #%a%4. >urin! e%er!enc$, !overn%ental action %a$ var$ in breadth and intensit$ fro% nor%al ti%es, $et the$ should not be arbitrar$ as to undul$ restrain our peopleVs libert$. Perhaps, the vital lesson that "e %ust learn fro% the theorists "ho studied the various co%petin! political philosophies is that, it is possible to !rant !overn%ent the authorit$ to cope "ith crises "ithout surrenderin! the t"o vital principles of

You might also like