Case Title: Estrada vs.

Desierto
General Reference No. 146710
Promulgated on 2 March 2001
Facts: In the May 11, 1998 elections, petitioner Joseph Estrada was elected President
while respondent Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo was elected Vice-President. In the heat of
people power, at about 12:00 noon of January 20, 2001, Chief Justice Davide
administered the oath to respondent Arroyo as President of the Philippines and
subsequently, petitioner and his family hurriedly left Malacanang Palace. On Monday
January 22 after taking her oath, Arroyo immediately discharged the powers of the
duties of the Presidency. Petitioner Joseph Estrada alleges that he is the President on
leave contending that he could not resign as a matter of law.

Issue: Whether or not Joseph Estrada is the President on leave and could not resign as
a matter of law as Section 12 of Republic Act No. 3019, otherwise known as the Anti-
Graft and Corrupt Practices Act prohibits resignation. (Whether or not Section 12 of
Republic Act No. 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act prohibits his
resignation.)

Held: The Court held that a reading of the legislative history of RA. No. 3019 will hardly
provide any comfort to the petitioner. According to Senator Arturo Tolentino, the author
of Senate Bill No. 293 where RA No. 3019 originated, the inclusion of provision is to the
effect that no public official who is under prosecution for any act of graft or corruption, or
is under administrative investigation, shall be allowed to voluntarily resign or retire.
However, Senate Bill No. 293 was vetoed and Senate Bill No. 571, which was
substantially similar to Senate Bill No. 293, was thereafter passed. The intent of the law
is to prevent the act of resignation or retirement from being used by a public official as a
protective shield to stop the investigation of a pending criminal or administrative case
against him and to prevent his prosecution under the Anti- Graft Law or prosecution for
bribery under the RPC. Hence, Section 12 of RA No. 3019 cannot therefore be invoked
by the petitioner for it contemplates of cases whose investigation or prosecution do not
suffer from any insuperable legal obstacle like the immunity from suit of a sitting
president.