OCAMPO v.

ENRIQUEZ

• Facts
o In the campaign period for the 2016 Presidential Election, Rodrigo R. Duterte
publicly announced that he would allow the burial of former President Ferdinand
E. Marcos at the LNMB.
o On August 7, 2016 public respondent, Secretary of National Defense Delfin N.
Lorenzana issued a memorandum to the public respondent, Chief of Staff of AFP,
Gen. Ricardo Visaya, regarding the interment of Marcos at the LNMB
• Issue
o Procedural
1. W/N President Duterte's determination to have the remains of Marcos
interred at the LNMB poses a justiciable controversy
2. W/N petitioners have locus standi to file the instant petitions
3. W/N petitioners violated the doctrines of exhaustion of administrative
remedies and hierarchy of courts
o Substantive
1. W/N the respondents Secretary of National Defense and AFP Rear
Admiral committed grave abuse of disretion, amounting to lack or excess
of jurisdiction, when they issued the assailed memorandum and directive
in compliance with the verbal order of president Duterte to implement his
election campaign promise to have the remains of Marcos interred at the
LNMB.
2. Whether the issuance and implementation of the assailed memorandum
and directive violate the Constiution, domestic and international laws
• Ratio
1. The Court agrees with the OSG that President Duterte's decision to have the
remains of Marcos interred at the LNMB involves a political question that is not a
justiciable controversy. E.O. 292 (Administrative Code of 1987) allow the
interment of Marcos at the LNMB which is a land of public domain devoted for
national military cemetery and military shrine purposes.
1. National Shrines are governed by NHCP, military shrines are not. They
are governed by PVAO of DND. LNMB is a military shrine.
2. No, Locus Standi because they failed to show that they have suffered or will
suffer direct and personal injury as a result of the interment of Marcos at LNMB
3. Petitioners violated the doctrines of exhaustion of administrative remedies and
hierarchy of courts. They should seek reconsideration of the assailed
memorandum and directive before the Secretary of National Defense and give
them the opportunity to correct themselves, if warranted. If petitioners are still
dissatisfied with the Secretary’s decision they could have elevated it before the
Office of the President which has control and supervision of the DND.
4. Decision to bury Marcos at the LNMB is not done whimsically, capriciously or
arbitrarily, out of malice, ill will or personal bias. Presumption of regularity in the
performance of official duty prevails over the petitioners’ allegation of Duterte’s
utang na loob or bayad utang to the Marcoses. Petitioners should establish such
claims but failed to do so. Then again, the court is not a trier of facts.
 1. Petitioners did not dispute that Marcos was a former President and
Commander-in-Chief, a legislator, a Secretary of National Defense, a
military personnel, a veteran, and a Medal of Valor awardee. For his
alleged human rights abuses and corrupt practices, we may disregard
Marcos as a President and Commander-in-Chief, but we cannot deny him
the right to be acknowledged based on the other positions he held or the
awards he received.
5. The issuance and implementation of the assailed memorandum and directive does
not violate the Constitution, domestic and international laws.
1. The ICCPR as well as the U.N. principles on reparation and to combat
impunity, call for the enactment of legislative measures, establishment of
national programmes, and provision for administrative and judicial
recourse.
2. Our nation's history will not be instantly revised by a single resolve of
Pres. Duterte, acting through the public respondents, bury Marcos at
LNMB.
3. The presidential power of control over the Executive Branch of
Government is self-executing provision of the Constitution and does not
require statutory implementation, nor may its exercise be limited, much
less withdrawn, by the legislature.

i. President Duterte is not bound by the alleged 1992 Agreement between

Ramos and Marcos family to have the remains of Marcos interred in
Batac, Ilocos Norte. As the incumbent president he is free to amend,
revoke or rescind political agreements entered into by his predecessors and
to determine policies which he considers, based on informed judgment and
presumed wisdom, will be most effective in carrying out his mandate.