David vs.

Macapagal Arroyo May 3, 2006 Justice Salvador-Gutierrez

Facts:

- Consists of 7 cases consolidated alleging that in issuing Presidential Proclamation No. 1017 (PP
1017) and General Order No. 5 (G.O. No. 5), President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo committed
grave abuse of discretion
- On February 24, 2006 issued PP 1017 declaring a state of national emergency saying that the
Communist insurgents are in a systematic conspiracy to bring down the government with
Magdalo Group and Gen. Lim and Marine Commander Ariel Querubin (clear and present
danger); suppress terrorism and lawless violence
- Pursuant to the order, warrantless arrests and take-over of facilities may be done
- During the dispersal of the rallyists along EDSA, police arrested (without warrant) petitioner
Randolf S. David, a professor at the University of the Philippines and newspaper columnist. Also
arrested was his companion, Ronald Llamas, president of party-list Akbayan
- At around 12:20 in the early morning of February 25, 2006, operatives of the Criminal
Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) of the PNP, on the basis of PP 1017 and G.O. No. 5,
raided the Daily Tribune offices in Manila. The raiding team confiscated news stories by
reporters, documents, pictures, and mock-ups of the Saturday issue
- During the hearing, the Solicitor General narrated the events that led to the proclamation of the
Decree: from the discovery of bomb in the PMA Reunion Arroyo was suppose to attend to
factual documents seized from a Magdalo member detailing the military takeover of the
government led by the Philippine Marines
- The petitioners did not contend the facts stated by the Solicitor General

Issue:

WON the implementation of PP 1017 is unconstitutional

- It encroaches on the emergency powers of Congress/they arrogate unto President Arroyo the
power to enact laws and decrees
- It is a deception to avoid the constitutional requirements for the imposition of martial law
- It violates the constitutional guarantees of freedom of the press, of speech and of assembly

Ratio Decidendi:

- Generally, Congress is the repository of emergency powers. This is evident in the tenor of
Section 23 (2), Article VI authorizing it to delegate such powers to the President. Certainly, a
body cannot delegate a power not reposed upon it. However, knowing that during grave
emergencies, it may not be possible or practicable for Congress to meet and exercise its powers,
the Framers of our Constitution deemed it wise to allow Congress to grant emergency powers to
the President, subject to certain conditions, thus:
o There must be a war or other emergency.
o The delegation must be for a limited period only
o The delegation must be subject to such restrictions as the Congress may prescribe.
o The emergency powers must be exercised to carry out a national policy declared by
Congress
 - The Court rules that the assailed PP 1017 is unconstitutional insofar as it grants President Arroyo
the authority to promulgate “decrees.” Legislative power is peculiarly within the province of the
Legislature. Sec. 1, Art. VI categorically states that “the legislative power shall be vested in the
Congress of the Philippines which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives.” To
be sure, neither Martial Law nor a state of rebellion nor a state of emergency can justify
President Arroyo’s exercise of legislative power by issuing decrees
- The President also cannot call the military to enact laws such as laws on family, corporate laws,
obligations and contracts, etc. Under the PP 1017, she can only call out the military to suppress
lawless violence
- The President is authorized to declare a state of national emergency. However, without
legislation, she has no power to take over privately-owned public utility or business affected
with public interest. The President cannot decide whether exceptional circumstances exist
warranting the take over of privately-owned public utility or business affected with public
interest. Nor can she determine when such exceptional circumstances have ceased. Likewise,
without legislation, the President has no power to point out the types of businesses affected
with public interest that should be taken over. In short, the President has no absolute authority
to exercise all the powers of the State under Section 17, Article VII in the absence of an
emergency powers act passed by Congress

Decision:

- PP 1017 is CONSTITUTIONAL as far as the ‘calling out of the military’ to suppress lawless
violence. However, the military cannot enforce other laws
- PP 1017 is UNCONSTITUTIONAL when it comes to promulgating Decrees. Only the 2 Houses of
Congress can legislate laws
- Warrantless arrests and seizures conducted without proof that they are part of rebellion,
lawless violence, and takeover is UNCONSTITUTIONAL