Political Question/Justiciable Controversy Issue

Garcia vs. Executive Secretary

Held: Quoting Justice Brennan in Baker v Carr, “a lack of judicially

discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it; or the impossibility
of deciding without an initial policy determination of a kind clearly for non-
judicial discretion…”; the questions of (1) what public interest requires and
(2) what the State reaction shall be essentially require the exercise of
discretion on the part of the State; the ruling that petitioner Garcia asks
requires "an initial policy determination of a kind clearly for non-judicial
discretion";

- Enforcement or issuance of a Writ of Kalikasan is not within the ambit

of the Executive branch, but with the Judiciary, as it is a court order.
The Political Question doctrine encompasses policy-formulation,
something to be decided amongst the other branches of government
within their constitutional limits.
- The issuance of a Writ of Continuing Mandamus based on the
negligence of the respondents in performing its obligations under the
Fisheries Code warrants the issuance of the same. There is no
question that there is no lack of juridically-discoverable issues.

Office of the Ombudsman vs. De Leon

Held: “The flagrant and culpable refusal or unwillingness of De Leon to

perform his official duties denoted gross neglect of duty also because the
illegal quarrying had been going for a period of time. The actions he took
were inadequate, and could even be probably seen as a conscious way to
mask a deliberate and intentional refusal to perform the duties that his
position required.”

Baker vs. Carr

Held: First instance of defining a political question- "[p]rominent on the

surface of any case held to involve a political question is found a textually
demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate
political department; or a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable
standards for resolving it; or the impossibility of deciding without an initial
policy determination of a kind clearly for non-judicial discretion; or the
impossibility of a court’s undertaking independent resolution without
expressing lack of the respect due coordinate branches of government; or
an unusual need for unquestioning adherence to a political decision already
made; or the potentiality of embarrassment from multifarious
pronouncements by various departments on the one question."