KILOSBAYAN V.

MORATO

• Facts
o In a previous ruling of the SC, the Contract of Lease for certain equipment between
the PCSO and the PGMC was invalidated, for reasons that it was in contravention
with the PCSO charter. Now, an Equipment Lease Agreement was entered instead,
but was likewise assailed as being the same as the former Contract of Lease
o Petitioners invoked Article II Sections 5 (maintenance of peace and order), 12
(rearing of the youth for civic efficiency and development), 13 (vital role of the
youth in nation- building, and 17 (promotion of total human liberation and
development) as ground to render the said ELA as unconstitutional. SC denied the
MR, the provisions of the Constitution being invoked by the petitioners are not self-
executing, they do not embody judicially enforceable constitutional rights, and they
merely serve as guide for the legislature in their lawmaking.
• Issue
o W/N Petitoners had locus standi NO
o W/N the said provisions in Article II are self-executory provisions? NO
• Ratio
o The real issue in this case is not whether the petitioners have locus standi but
whether they are the real parties-in- interest under Rule 3, Sec. 2 of Rules of Court
which requires that "every action must be prosecuted and defended in the name of
the real party in interest." The court decided that petitioners do not in fact show
what particularized interest they have for bringing this suit.
o Time and again, the Court has ruled that generally, provisions of Article II are not
self-executing. They are merely statements of principles and policies. To give them
effect, legislative enactment is required. They do not embody judicially enforceable
constitutional rights but guidelines for legislation