JASON CABALERO

KARIN MERCADO

PORMENTO V ESTRADA GR NO. 191988

FATCS:

 Private respondent ejercito Estrada was elected President of the Philippines on May, 1998.
 He was however ousted resigned according to the decision of the supreme court in ESTRADA v.
ARROYO (March 2001) from his office and was not able to finish his term.
 He sought the presidency again on the general election held on may 10, 2010.
 Petitioner Pormento opposed Erap’s candidacy and filed a petition for the latter’s disqualification in
accordance with the provision of Section 4, Article VII of the Constitution which was however denied
by the COMELEC 2 Division.
nd

 His motion for reconsideration was subsequently denied by the COMELEC en banc.
 He filed the present petition for certiorari before the Supreme Court, however, under the Rules of
Court, such filling does not stay the execution of judgment, or order of the COMELEC, Estrada was
able to participate as a candidate for President in the May 2010 election where he garnered the 2 nd

highest number of votes.

ISSUE:
Whether or not Estrada is covered by the ban on the President from any re-election re CONSTITUTION
SECTION 4, ARTICLE VII
RULLLING:

 The petition was denied and dismissed by the Supreme Court. Private respondent was not elected
president the second time he ran.
 Since the issue on the proper interpretation of the phrase “any re-election” will be premised on a
persons second election as president, there is no controversy to be solve in this case. No live conflict or
legal rights exist.
 Here, there is no definite, concrete, real or substantial controversy that touches on the legal relations of
parties having adverse legal interest.
 No specific relief may conclusively be de decreed upon y this course in this case that will benefit any
of the parties.
 As such, one of the requisites for the exercise of the power of judicial review is the existence of an
actual controversy, is sorely lacking in this case,
 As a well settled rule, a court may only adjudicate actual, ongoing controversies.
 An action is considered moot when it no longer presents a justiciable controversy because the issues
involved have become academic or dead. Hence, one is not entitled to judicial intervention.
 The petition was rendered moot by the failure of Estrada to be elected as President in the 2010
elections.