David vs. Arroyo G.R. No.

171396 May 3, 2006

Facts of the case:

During the celebration of People Power I, President Arroyo issued Presidential Proclamation 1017 (PP
1017 for brevity) declaring a state of national emergency. The President also issued General Order (G.O.)
No. 5 implementing PP 1017.

The President stated that over the past months, elements in political opposition have conspired with
extreme left represented by NDF- CCP- NPA and military adventurists, which caused her to declare such
order. The President considered aims to oust the President and take- over reigns of government as clear
and present danger.

On March 3, President Arroyo lifted PP 1017.

Solicitor General argued that the basis of declaring PP 1017 was that the intent of the Constitution is to
give full discretionary powers to the President in determining the necessity of calling out the AFP.

However despite the contentions of the Solicitor General, the Magdalo group indicted the Oakwood
mutiny and called to wear red bands on their left arms to show disgust.

At the same time Oplan Hackle I was discovered, which constitutes plans of bombings and attacks on
PMA Alumni Homecoming in Baguio, the same event where the President was invited. The next morning
after the alumni homecoming celebration, a bomb was found inside the campus.

PNP Chief Arturo Lomibao also intercepted information that PNP- SAF members are planning to defect
from the administration, while on the same view Congressman Peping Cojuanco plotted moves to bring
down the Arroyo Administration.

Huge number of soldiers joined the rallies to provide critical mass and armed component to Anti- Arroyo
protests.

Bombings of telephone communication towers and cell sites in Bulacaan and Bataan was also considered
as an additional factual basis after the issuance of PP 1017 and GO 5.

Because of these incidental series of events which clearly presents a critical situation, President Arroyo
cancelled all activities related to EDSA People Power I. Mike Arroyo, then Executive Secretary,
announced that warrantless arrest and takeover of facilities can be implemented.

Succeeding this announcement was the arrest of Randy David, a Filipino journalist and UP professor due
to a mistake of fact that he was actually involved in the street rallies. Seizure of Daily Tribune, Malaya and
Abante-- all local news publication, took place which, according to the PNP, was meant to show a strong
presence to tell the media outlets not to connive or do anything that would help rebels in bringing down
the government. Police also arrested Congressman Crispin Beltran, who then represented the Anakpawis
Party.


Issue:


Whether or not the issuance of Presidential Proclamation PP 1017 is unconstitutional? Whether or not the
arrest of Randy David and the seizure of Daily Tribune et. al., is unconstitutional?


Ruling of the court:


Respondents claim that such petition is moot and academic based on the issuance of PP 1017, but the
Court rejects such contention. A moot and academic case is one that ceases to present a justiciable
controversy. In this case, the Court is convinced that the President was justified in issuing PP 1017 which
calls for military aid.

Most people then equate it to martial law, but such case is different wherein the basis then was the 1973
Constitution. Under the present 1987 Constitution, the President may summon armed forces to aid him
in supporting lawless violence.

The President's declaration of state rebellion was merely an act declaring a status or conduction of a
public moment of interest. State of national emergency, however, is the prerogative of the President. Her
exercise of emergency powers such as the taking over of privately owned utility requires delegation from
the Congress, which is entirely different from the martial law.

As to the seizure of the Daily Tribune and the arrest of Randy David, the Court considers those actions
unlawful based on the fact that it violates the constitutional mandate of freedom of expression.