Estrada v. Desierto, G.R. No. 146710-15, March 2, 2001, Puno, J.

:
DOCTRINE: The validity of a resignation is not governed by any formal
requirement as to form.
FACTS:
In the May 11, 1998 elections, the petitioner Joseph Ejercito Estrada was
elected President while Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo was elected Vice-President of
the Philippines. In October 2000, Ilocos Sur Governor, Luis “Chavit” Singson,
accused the petitioner of receiving 220 million in jueteng money from him. The
expose immediately ignited reactions of rage and an outcry for his resignation
began.
An impeachment was filed against the petitioner. On November 20, the Senate
then formally opened the impeachment trial of the petitioner and the trial then
started on December 7. A vote of 11-10 senator-judges ruled against the
opening of the second envelope which allegedly contained evidence showing that
the petitioner held 3.3 billion in a secret bank account under the name “Jose
Velarder”. After which, a group of public prosecutors submitted a letter to
Speaker Fuentebella tendering their collective resignation. People who were
holding a public position during the administration of the petitioner started
resigning, even to the point where General Reyes, the Chief of Staff of the
Armed Forces of the Philippines, along with 130,000 members of the AFP,
withdrew their support to the government. The petitioner then agreed to the
hold a snap election for President where he would not be a candidate. After
some time, a news broke out the Chief Justice Davide would administer the
oath of presidency to the vice president. The petitioner then issued 2
statements: (1) stating the reservations on the constitutionality of Arroyo’s
presidency and (2) stating that he is incapable of dispensing his responsibilities
as president, and thus allowing Arroyo to be the acting president.
Several cases were then filed against the petitioner in the Office of the
Ombudsman. These cases were then set in motion. The petitioner then filed to
the Supreme Court a petition for the prohibition with a prayer for a writ of
preliminary injunction. It sought to enjoin the respondent Ombudsman from
conducting further proceedings to cases filed against him and in any other
criminal complaint that may be filed in his office until after the term of
petitioner as President is over. The petitioner also filed a petition to be
confirmed as the lawful and incumbent president, temporarily unable to fulfill
his duties, thus making Arroyo an acting president only.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the petitioner resigned as President
RULING:
Yes. Although the petitioner did not write any formal letter of resignation before
he left Malacañang Palace on January 20 2001, where the oath-taking of
Arroyo took place, the acts and omissions before, during and after January 20,
2001, the court held the petitioner resigned as a President. The validity of a
resignation is not governed by any formal requirement as to form. It can be
oral, written, can be expressed, or can be implied. As long as the resignation is
clear, it must be given legal effect. The court held that the petitioner resigned
and that it was confirmed by his leaving Malacañang.