Case Digest: Vera vs Avelino

Facts of the Case:

The Commission on Elections submitted last May 19! to the "resident and the Congress a re#ort
regarding the national elections held in 19!$ %t stated that by reason of certain s#ecified acts of
terrorism and violence in certain #rovinces& namely "am#anga& 'ueva Eci(a& )ulacan and Tarlac& the
voting in said region did not reflect the accurate feedbac* of the local electorate$
During the session on May +,& 19!& a #endatum resolution -as a##roved referring to the re#ort
ordering that .ose /$ Vera& 0amon Dio*no and .ose E$ 0omero 1 -ho had been included among the 1!
candidates for senator receiving the highest number of votes and as #roclaimed by the Commissions on
Elections 1 shall not be s-orn& nor seated& as members of the chamber& #ending the termination of the
#rotest filed against their election$
"etitioners then immediately instituted an action against their colleagues -ho instituted the resolution&
#raying for its annulment and allo-ing them to occu#y their seats and to e2ercise their senatorial
duties$ 0es#ondents assert the validity of the #endatum resolution$
%ssues of the Case:
3hether or 'ot the Commission on Elections has the (urisdiction to determine -hether or not votes
cast in the said #rovinces are valid$
3hether or 'ot the administration of oath and the sitting of .ose /$ Vera& 0amon Dio*no and .ose
0omero should be deferred #ending hearing and decision on the #rotests lodged against their elections$
4eld:
The 5u#reme Court refused to intervene& under the conce#t of se#aration of #o-ers& holding that the
case -as not a 6contest7& and affirmed that it is the inherent right of the legislature to determine -ho
shall be admitted to its membershi#$ Follo-ing the #o-ers assigned by the Constitution& the 8uestion
raised -as #olitical in nature and therefore not under the (uridical revie- of the courts
The case is therefore dismissed
Today is Tuesday& 5e#tember 9+& +91
search
0e#ublic of the "hili##ines
5:"0EME C/:0T
Manila
E' )A'C
;$0$ 'o$ <=,> August >1& 19!
./5E /$ VE0A& ET A<$& #etitioners&
vs$
./5E A$ AVE<%'/& ET A<$& res#ondents$
.ose 3$ Dio*no and Antonio )arredo for #etitioners$
Vicente .$ Francisco and 5olicitor ;eneral Ta?ada for res#ondents$
.$ Antonio Araneta of the <a-yers@ ;uild as amicus curiae$
)E';A/'& .$:
"ursuant to a constitutional #rovision Bsection & Article CD& the Commission on elections submitted&
last May& to the "resident and the Congress of the "hili##ines& its re#ort on the national elections held
the #receding month& and& among other things& stated that& by reason of certain s#ecified acts of
terrorism and violence in the "rovinces of "am#anga& 'ueva Eci(a& )ulacan and Tarlac& the voting in
said region did not reflect the true and free e2#ression of the #o#ular -ill$
3hen the 5enate convened on May +,& 19!& it #roceeded -ith the selection of its officers$ Thereafter&
in the course of the session& a resolution -as a##roved referring to the re#ort and ordering that& #ending
the termination of the #rotest lodged against their election& the herein #etitioners& .ose /$ Vera& 0amon
Dio*no and .ose E$ 0omero E -ho had been included among the si2teen candidates for senator
receiving the highest number of votes& #roclaimed by the Commission on Elections E shall not be
s-orn& nor seated& as members of the chamber$
"ertinent #arts of the resolution E called "endatun E are these:
34E0EA5 the Commission on Elections& charged under the Constitution -ith the duty of insuring
free& orderly& and honest elections in the "hili##ines& re#orted to the "resident of the "hili##ines on
May +>& 19!& that
F$ $ $ 0e#orts also reached this Commission to the effect that in the "rovinces of )ulacan& "am#anga&
Tarlac and 'ueva Eci(a& the secrecy of the ballot -as actually violatedG the armed bands sa- to it that
their candidates -ere voted forG and that the great ma(ority of the voters& thus coerced or intimadated&
suffered from a #aralysis of (udgement in the matter of e2ercising the right of suffrageG considering all
those acts of terrorism& violence and intimidation in connection -ith elections -hich are more or less
general in the "rovinces of "am#anga& Tarlac& )ulacan and 'ueva Eci(a& this Commission believes that
the election in the #rovinces aforesaid did not reflect the true and free e2#ression of the #o#ular -ill$ %t
should be stated& ho-ever& that the Commission is -ithout (urisdiction& to determine -hether or not the
votes cast in the said #rovinces -hich& according to these re#orts have been cast under the influence of
threats or violence& are valid or invalid$ $ $ $F
34E0EA5& the minority re#ort of the 4on$ Vicente de Vera& member of the Commission on Elections&
says among other things& that F-e *no- that as a result of this chaotic condition& many residents of the
four #rovinces have voluntarily banished themselves from their home to-ns in order not to be
sub(ected to the #revailing o##ression and to avoid being victimiHed or losing their livesFG and that after
the election dead bodies had been found -ith notes attached to their nec*s& reading& F)omoto *ami *ay
0o2asF B-e voted for 0o2asDG
34E0EA5 the same .udge De Vera says in his minority re#ort that in the four "rovinces of "am#anga&
Tarlac& )ulacan and 'ueva Eci(a& the -orst terrorism reigned during and after the election& and that if
the elections held in the aforesaid #rovinces -ere annulled as demanded by the circumstances
mentioned in the re#ort of the Commission& .ose /$ Vera& 0amon Dio*no& and .ose 0omero& -ould not
and could not have been declared electedG
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
34E0EA5 the terrorism resorted to by the la-less elements in the four #rovinces mentioned above in
order to insure the election of the candidates of the Conservative -ing of the 'ationalist "arty is of
#ublic *no-ledge and that such terrorism continues to this dayG that before the elections .ose /$ Vera
himself declared as cam#aign Manager of the /sme?a faction that he -as sorry if "residential
Candidate Manuel A$ 0o2as could not cam#aign in the 4u* #rovinces because his life -ould be
endangeredG and that because of the constant murders of his candidates and leaders& "residential
Candidate 0o2as found it necessary to a##eal to American 4igh Commissioner "aul V$ Mc'utt for
#rotection& -hich a##eal American 4igh Commissioner #ersonallyreferred to "resident 5ergio
/smeIJIa for a##ro#riate action& and the "residentin turn ordered the 5ecretary of the e2istence and
reign of such terrorismG
34E0EA5 the "hili##ines& a 0e#ublic 5tate& embracing the #rinci#les ofdemocracy& must condem all
acts that see* to defeat the #o#ular -illG
34E0EA5 it is essential& in order to maintain alive the res#ect fordemocratic institutions among our
#eo#le& that no man or grou# of men be #ermitted to #rofit from the results of an election held under
coercion& in violation of la-& and contrary to the #rinci#le of freedom of choice -hich should underlie
all elections under the ConstitutionG
34E0EA5 #rotests against the election of .ose /$ Vega& 0amon Dio*no& and .ose 0omero& have been
filed -ith the electoral Tribunal of the 5enate of the "hili##ines on the basis of the findings of the
Commission on Elections above 8uotedG
'/3& T4E0EF/0E& be it resolved by the 5enate of the "hili##ines in session assembled& as it hereby
resolves& to defer the administration of oath and the sitting of .ose /$ Vera& 0amon Dio*no& and .ose
0omero& #ending the hearing and decision on the #rotests lodged against their elections& -herein the
terrorism averred in the re#ort of the Commission on Elections and in the re#ort of the "rovost Marshal
constitutes the ground of said #rotests and -ill therefore be the sub(ect of investigation and
determination$
"etitioners immediately instituted this action against their colleagues res#onsible for the resolution$
They #ray for an order annulling it& and com#elling res#ondents to #ermit them to occu#y their seats&
and to e2ercise their senatorial #rerogatives$
%n their #leadings& res#ondents traverse the (urisdiction of this court& and assert the validity of the
"endatun 0esolution$
The issues& fe- and clear=cut& -ere thoroughly discussed at the e2tended oral argument and in
com#rehensive memoranda submitted by both sides$
A$E'/ .:0%5D%CT%/'
3ay bac* in 19+& 5enator .ose Ale(andrino assaulted a fello-=member in the "hili##ine 5enate$ That
body& after investigation& ado#ted a resolution& sus#ending him from office for one year$ 4e a##lied
here for mandamus and in(unction to nullify the sus#ension and to re8uire his colleagues to reinstate
him$ This court believed the sus#ension -as legally -rong& because& as senator a##ointed by the
;overnor=;eneral& he could not be disci#lined by the "hili##ine 5enateG but it denied the #rayer for
relief& mainly u#on the theory of the se#aration of the three #o-ers& E2ecutive& <egislative and .udicial$
BAle(andrino vs$ KueHon& ! "hil$& L1$D 5aid the decision:
$ $ $ Mandamus -ill not lie against the legislative body& its members& or its officers& to com#el the
#erformance of duties #urely legislative in their character -hich therefore #ertain to their legislative
functions and over -hich they have e2clusive control$ The courts cannot dictate action in this res#ect
-ithout a gross usur#ation of #o-er$ 5o it has been held that -here a member has been e2#elled by the
legislative body& the courts have no #o-er& irres#ective of -hether the e2#ulsion -as right or -rong& to
issue a mandate to com#el his reinstatement$ BCode of civil "rocedure& section +++& ,1,G 1L 0$C$ <$&
1L!& 1LMG Cooley& Constitutional <imitations& 199G French vs$ 5enate N199,O& 1! CalG 4iss vs$ )artlett
N1L,,O& !9 Mass$& !LG E2 #arte Echols N1LL!O& >9 Ala$& !9LG 5tate vs$ )olte N1LL9O& 1,1 Mo$& >!+G De
Diego vs$ 4ouse of Delegates N199O& , "orto 0ico& +>,G ;reen-ood Cemetery <and Co$ vs$ 0outt
N1L9+O& 1M Colo$& 1,!G 5tate e2 rel$ Crammer vs$ Thorson N1L9!O& >> <$ 0$ A$& e2 rel$ )ruce vs$ Dunne
N191>O& +,L %ll$& 1G "eo#le e2 rel$ <a Chicote vs$ )est N199MO& 1LM '$ P$& 1G Abueva vs$ 3ood N19+O&
, "hil$& !1+$D B5u#ra& ##$ LL& L9$D
$ $ $ :nder our form of government the (udicial de#artment has no #o-er to revise even the most
arbitrary and unfair action of the legislative de#artment& or of either house thereof& ta*en in #ursuance
of the #o-er committed e2clusively to that de#artment by the constitution$ B5u#ra& #$ 9>D
'o court has ever held and -e a##rehend no court -ill ever hold that it #ossesses the #o-er to direct
the Chief E2ecutive or the <egislature or a branch thereof to ta*e any #articular action$ %f a court
should ever be so rash as to thus trench on the domain of either of the other de#artments& it -ill be the
end of #o#ular government as -e *no- it in democracies$ B5u#ra& #$ 9$D
Conceding therefore that the #o-er of the 5enate to #unish its members for disorderly behavior does
not authoriHe it to sus#end an a##ointive member from the e2ercise of his office for one year&
conceding -hat has been so -ell stated by the learned counsel for the #etitioner& conceding all this and
more& yet the -rit #rayed for cannot issue& for the all=conclusive reason that the 5u#reme Court does
not #ossess the #o-er of coercion to ma*e the "hili##ine 5enate ta*e any #articular action$ $ $ $ B5u#ra&
#$ 9M$D
The same hands=off #olicy had been #reviously follo-ed in 5everino vs$ ;overnor=;eneral and
"rovincial )oard of /ccidental 'egros B1! "hil$& >!!D and Abueva vs$ 3ood B, "hil$& !1+D
At this #oint -e could #retend to erudition by tracing the origin& develo#ment and various a##lications
of theory of se#aration of #o-ers& transcribing herein -hole #aragra#hs from ad(udicated cases to s-ell
the #ages of (udicial out#ut$ Pet the tem#tation must be resisted& and the #arties s#ared a stiff dose of
(uris #rudential lore about a #rinci#le& -hich& after all& is the first fundamental im#arted to every
student of Constitutional <a-$
'ot that a #assable e2cuse -ould be lac*ing for such a dissertation$ The advent of the 0e#ublic& and the
conse8uent finality of our vie-s on constitutional issues& may call for a definition of conce#ts and
attitudes$ )ut surely& there -ill be time enough& as cases come u# for ad(udication$
0eturning to the instant litigation& it #resents no more than the 8uestions& -hether the Ale(andro
doctrine still obtains& and -hether the admitted facts disclose any features (ustifying de#arture
therefrom$
3hen the Common-ealth Constitution -as a##roved in 19>,& the e2istence of three coordinate& co=
e8ual and co=im#ortant branches of the government -as ratified and confirmed$ That /rganic Act
contained some innovations -hich established additional e2ce#tions to the -ell=*no-n se#aration of
#o-ersG for instance& the creation of the Electoral Tribunal -herein .ustices of the 5u#reme Court
#artici#ate in the decision of congressional election #rotests& the grant of rule=ma*ing #o-er to the
5u#reme Court& etc$G but in the main& the inde#endence of one #o-er from the other -as maintained$
And the Convention E com#osed mostly of la-yers B1> out of a total of +9+ membersD& fully
ac8uainted -ith the Abueva& Ale(andrino and 5everino #recedents E did not choose to modify their
constitutional doctrine& even as it altered some fundamental tenets theretofore -ell established$1
4o-ever& it is alleged that& in 19>!& Angara vs$ Electoral Commission B!> "hil$& 1>9D& modified the
aforesaid ruling$ 3e do not agree$ There is no #ronouncement in the latter decision& ma*ing s#ecific
reference to the Ale(andrino incident regarding our #o-er E or lac* of it E to interfere -ith the
functions of the 5enate$ And three years later& in 19>9& the same .ustice <aurel& -ho had #enned it&
cited Ale(andrino vs$ KueHon as a binding authority of the se#aration of #o-ers$ B"lanas vs$ ;il& !M
"hil$& !+$D %t must be stressed that& in the Angara controversy& no legislative body or #erson -as a
litigant before the court& and -hatever obiter dicta& or general e2#ressions& may therein found can not
change the ultimate circumstance that no directive -as issued against a branch of the <egislature or any
member thereof$+ This Court& in that case& did not re8uire the 'ational Assembly or any assemblyman
to do any #articular act$ %t only found it Fhas (urisdiction over the Electoral Commission$F B5u#ra& !>
"hil$& 1!1$D
That this court in the Angara litigation made declarations& nullifying a resolution of the 'ational
Assembly& is not decisive$ %n #ro#er cases this court may annul any <egislative enactment that fails to
observe the constitutional limitations$ That is a #o-er conceded to the (udiciary since Chief .ustice
Marshall #enned Marbury vs$ Madison in 1L9>$ %ts foundation is e2#lained by .ustice 5utherland in the
Minimum 3age Case B+!1 :$ 5$& ,D$5aid the Court:
$ $ $ The Constitution& by its o-n terms& is the su#reme la- of the land& emanating from the #eo#le& the
re#ository of ultimate sovereignty under our form of government$ A congressional statute& on the other
hand& is the act of an agency of this sovereign authority& and if it conflicts -ith the Constitution& must
fallG for that -hich is not su#reme must yield to that -hich is$ To hold it invalid Bif it be invalidD is a
#lain e2ercise of the (udicial #o-er& E that #o-er vested in courts to enable them to administer (ustice
according to la-$ From the authority to ascertain and determine the la- in a given case there necessa
ruly results& in case of conflict& the duty to declare and enforce the rule of the su#reme la- and re(ect
that of an inferior act of legislation -hich& transcending the Constitution& is no effect& and binding on
no one$ This is not the e2ercise of a substantive #o-er to revie- and nullify acts of Congress& for such
no substantive #o-er e2ists$ %t is sim#ly a necessary concomitant of the #o-er to hear and dis#ose of a
case or controversy #ro#erly before the court& to the determination of -hich must be brought the test
and measure of the la-$
And the #o-er is no- e2#ressly recogniHed by our /rganic Act$ B5ee sections + and 19$ Article V%%%$D
)ut -e must em#hasiHe& the #o-er is to be e2ercised in #ro#er cases& -ith the a##ro#riate #arties$
%t must be conceded that the acts of the Chief e2ecutive #erformed -ithin the limits of his (urisdiction
are his official acts and courts -ill neither direct nor restrain e2ecutive action in such cases$ The rule is
non=interference$ )ut from this legal #remise& it does not necessarily follo- that -e are #recluded from
ma*ing an in8uiry into the validity or constitutionality of his acts -hen these are #ro#erly challenged in
an a##ro#riate legal #roceeding$ $ $ $ %n the #resent case& the "resident is not a #arty to the #roceeding$
4e is neither com#elled nor restrained to actin a #articular -ay$ $ $ $ This court& therefore& has
(urisdiction over the instant #roceedings and -ill accordingly #roceed to determine the merits of the
#resent controversy$F B"lanas vs$ ;il$& !M "hil$& !+& M>& M& M!$D BEm#hasis ours$D B5ee also <o#eH vs$ De
los 0eyes& ,, "hil$& 1M9$D
More about the Angara #recedent: The defendant there -as only the Electoral Commission -hich -as
Fnot a se#arate de#artment of the ;overnmentF BVol$ !>&#$ 1!9D& and e2ercised #o-ers F(udicial in
nature$F B5u#ra& #$ 1LD 4ence& against our authority& there -as no ob(ection based on the inde#endence
and se#aration of the three co=e8ual de#artments of ;overnment$ )esides& this court said no more than
that& there being a conflict of (urisdiction bet-een t-o constitutional bodies& it could not decline to ta*e
cogniHance of the controversy to determine the Fcharacter& sco#e and e2tentF of their res#ective
constitutional s#heres of action$ 4ere& there is actually no antagonism bet-een the Electoral Tribunal of
the 5enate and the 5enate itself& for it is not suggested has ado#ted a rule contradicting the "endatun
0esolution$ Conse8uently& there is no occasion for our intervention$ 5uch conflict of (urisdiction& #lus
the #artici#ation of the 5enate Electoral Tribunal are essential ingredients to ma*e the facts of this case
fit the mold of the Angara doctrine$
'o-& under the #rinci#les enunciated in the Ale(andrino case& may this #etition be entertainedQ The
ans-er must naturally be in the negative$ ;ranting that the #ost#onement of the administration of the
oath amounts to sus#ension of the #etitioners from their office& and conceding arguendo that such
sus#ension is beyond the #o-er of the res#ondents& -ho in effect are and acted as the "hili##ine 5enate
BAle(andrino vs$ KueHon& ! "hil$& L>& LLD&this #etition should be denied$ As -as e2#lained in the
Ale(andrino case& -e could not order one branch of the <egislature to reinstate a member thereof$ To do
so -ould be to establish (udicial #redominance& and to u#set the classic #attern of chec*s and balances
-isely -oven into our institutional setu#$
Adherence to established #rinci#le should generally be our guiding criterion& if -e are to esca#e the
criticism voiced once by )ryce in American Common-ealth thus:
The 5u#reme Court has changed its color i$ e$& its tem#er and tendencies& from time to time according
to the #olitical #roclivities of the men -ho com#osed it$ $ $ $ Their action flo-ed naturally from the
habits of thought they had formed before their accession to the bench and from the sym#athy they
could not feel for the doctrine on -hose behalf they had contended$ BThe Annals of the American
Academy of "olitical and 5ocial 5cience& May& 19>!& #$ ,9$D
'eedless to add& any order -e may issue in this case should& according to the rules& be enforceable by
contem#t #roceedings$ %f the res#ondents should disobey our order& can -e #unish them for contem#tQ
%f -e do& are -e not thereby destroying the inde#endence& and the e8ual im#ortance to -hich
legislative bodies are entitled under the ConstitutionQ
<et us not be overly influenced by the #lea that for every -rong there is are medy& and that the
(udiciary should stand ready to afford relief$ There are undoubtedly many -rongs the (udicature may
not correct& for instance& those involving #olitical 8uestions$ 'umerous decisions are 8uoted and
summariHed under this heading in 1! Cor#us .uris 5ecundum& section 1,$
<et us li*e-ise disabuse our minds from the notion that the (udiciary is the re#ository of remedies for
all #olitical and social ills$ 3e should not forget that the Constitution had (udiciously allocated the
#o-ers of government to three distinct and se#arate com#artmentsG and that (udicial inter#retation has
tended to the #reservation of the de#endence of the three& and a Healous regard of the #rerogatives of
each& *no-ing full -ell that one is not the guardian of the others and that& for official -rong=doing&
each may be brought to account& either by im#eachment& trial or by the ballot bo2$
The e2treme case has been described -herein a legislative chamber& -ithout any reason -hatsoever&
decrees by resolution the incarceration& for years& of a citiHen$ And the rhetorical 8uestion is confidently
formulated$ 3ill this man be denied relief by the courtsQ
/f course not: 4e may successfully a##ly for habeas cor#us& alleging the nullity of the resolution and
claiming for release$ )ut then& the defendant shall be the officer or #erson& holding him in custody& and
the 8uestion therein -ill be the validity or invalidity of resolution$ That -as done in <o#eH vs$ De los
0eyes& su#ra$ B5ee also Rilbourn vs$ Thom#son& 19> :$5$ 1!LG +! <a-$ ed$& >MM& #$ >91$D Courts -ill
interfere& because the 8uestion is not a #olitical one& the Fliberty of citiHenF being involved BRilbourn
vs$ Thom#son& su#raD and the act -ill clearly beyond the bounds of the legislative #o-er& amounting to
usur#ation of the #rivileges of the courts& the usur#ation being clear& #al#able and o##ressive and the
infringement of the Constitution truly real$ B5ee 1! C$.$5$& #$ $D
'evertheless& su##ose for the moment that -e have (urisdiction:
)$E"0/4%)%T%/' D/E5 '/T <%E
"etitioners #ray for a -rit of #rohibition$ :nder the la-& #rohibition refers only to #roceedings of any
tribunal& cor#oration& board& or #erson& e2ercising functions (udicial or ministerial$ B0ule !M& section +&
0ules of Court$D As the res#ondents do not e2ercise such *ind of functions& theirs being legislative& it is
clear the dis#ute falls beyond the sco#e of such s#ecial remedy$
C$E5E'ATE 4A5 '/T ECCEEDED "/3E05
Again let us su##ose the 8uestion lies -ithin the limits of #rohibition and of our (urisdiction$
)efore the organiHation of the Common-ealth and the #romulgation of the Constitution& each 4ouse of
the "hili##ine <egislature e2ercised the #o-er to defer oath=ta*ing of any member against -hom a
#rotest had been lodged& -henever in its discretion such sus#ension -as necessary& before the final
decision of the contest$ The cases of 5enator Fuentebella and 0e#resentative 0afols are *no-n
instances of such sus#ension$ The discussions in the constitutional Convention sho-ed that instead of
transferring to the Electoral Commission all the #o-ers of the 4ouse or 5enate as Fthe sole (udge of the
election& returns& and 8ualifications of the members of the 'ational Assembly&F it -as given only
(urisdiction over Fall contestsF relating to the election& etc$ BAruego& The Framing of the "hili##ine
Constitution& Vol$ %& #$ +M1$D The #roceedings in the Constitutional Convention on this sub(ect are
illuminating:
%t became gradually a##arent in the course of the debates that the Convention -as evenly divided on
the #ro#osition of creating the Electoral Commission -ith the membershi# and #o-ers set forth in the
draft$ %t -as gro-ing evident& too& that the o##osition to the Electoral Commission -as due to rather
inclusive #o-er of that body to (udge not only of cases contesting the election of the members of the
'ational Assembly& but also of their elections& returns& and 8ualifications$
Many of the delegates -anted to be definitely informed of the sco#e of the #o-ers of the Electoral
Commission as defined in the draft before determining their final decisionG for if the draft meant to
confer u#on the Electoral Commission the inclusive #o-er to #ass u#on the elections& returns& and
8ualifications E contested or not E of the members of the 'ational Assembly& they -ere more
inclined to vote against the Electoral Commission$ %n an attem#t to see* this clarification& the follo-ing
inter#retations too* #lace:
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Delegate <abrador$EDoes not the gentleman from Ca#iH believe that unless this #o-er is granted to
the assembly& the assembly on its o-n motion does not have the right to contest the election and
8ualification of its membersQ
Delegate 0o2as$E% have no doubt that the gentleman is right$ %f this right is retained& as it is& even if
t-o=thirds of the assembly believe that a member has not the 8ualifications #rovided by la-& they
cannot remove him from that reason$
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
%n the course of the heated debates& -ith the gro-ing restlessness on the #art of the Convention&
"resident 0ecto sus#ended the session in order to find out if it -as #ossible to arrive at a com#romise
#lan to meet the ob(ection$
3hen the session -as resumed& a com#romise #lan -as submitted in the form of an amendment
#resented by Delegates Francisco& Ventura& <im& VinHons& 0afols& Mumar& and others& limiting the
#o-er of the Electoral Commission to the (udging of all cases contesting elections& returns& and
8ualifications of members of the 'ational Assembly$ E2#laining the difference bet-een the amendment
thus #ro#osed and the #rovision of the draft& Delegate 0o2as& u#on the re8uest of "resident 0ecto& said:
The difference& Mr$ "resident& consists only in obviating the ob(ection #ointed out by various delegates
to the effect that the first clause of the draft -hich states FThe election& returns& and 8ualifications of
members of the 'ational AssemblyF seems to give to the Electoral commission the #o-er to determine
also the election of the members -ho have not been #rotested$ And in order to obviate that difficulty&
-e believe that the amendment is right in that sense $ $ $ that is& if -e amend the draft so that it should
read as follo-s: FAll cases contesting the election& etc$F& so that the (udges of the Electoral Commission
-ill limit themselves only to cases in -hich there has been a #rotest against the returns$
The limitation to the #o-ers of the Electoral Commission #ro#osed in the com#romise amendment did
much to -in in favor of the Electoral Commission many of its o##onentsG so that -hen the amendment
#resented by Delegate <abrador and others to retain in the Constitution the #o-er of the la-ma*ing
body to be the sole (udge of the elections& returns& and 8ualifications of its members -as #ut to a
nominal vote& it -as defeated by 9L negative votes against ,! affirmative votes$
3ith the defeat of the <abrador amendment& the #rovision of the draft creating the Electoral
Commission& as modified by the com#romise amendment& -as conse8uently a##roved$
FAll cases contesting the elections& returns and 8ualifications of the members of the 'ational Assembly
shall be (udged by an electoral commission& com#osed of three members elected by the #arty having
the largest number of votes in the 'ational Assembly& three elected by the members of the #arty having
the second largest number of votes& and three (ustices of the 5u#reme Court designated by the Chief&
the Commission to be #resided over by one of said (ustices$F
%n the s#ecial committee on style& the #rovision -as amended so that the Chairman of the Commission
should be the senior .ustice in the Commission& and so that the Commission -as to be the sole (udge of
the election& returns& and 8ualifications of the members of the 'ational Assembly$ As it -as then
amended& the #rovision read:
FThere shall be an Electoral Commission com#osed of three .ustices of the 5u#reme court designated
by the Chief .ustice& and of si2 Members chosen by the 'ational Assembly& three of -hom shall be
nominated by the #arty having the largest number of votes& and three by the #arty having the second
largest number of votes therein$ The senior .ustice in the Commission shall be its Chairman$ The
Electoral Commission shall be the sole (udge of the election& returns& and 8ualifications of the Members
of the 'ational Assembly$F
The re#ort of the s#ecial committee on style on the #o-er of the Commission -as o##osed on the floor
of the Convention by Delegate Confesor& -ho insisted that the Electoral Commission should limit itself
to (udging only of all contests relating to the elections& returns& and 8ualifications of the members of the
'ational Assembly$ The draft -as amended accordingly by the Convention$
As it -as finally ado#ted by the Convention& the #rovision read:
There shall be an Electoral Commission $ $ $ The Electoral Commission shall be the sole (udge of all
contests relating to the election& returns& and 8ualifications of the Members of the 'ational Assembly$
BAruego& The Framing of the "hili##ine Constitution& Vol$ %& ##$ +!M& +!9& +M9& +M1 and +M+$D$
Delegate 0o2as rightly o#ined that Fif this draft is retainedF the Assembly -ould have no #o-er over
election and 8ualifications of its membersG because all the #o-ers are by the draft vested in the
Commission$
The Convention& ho-ever& bent on circumscribing the latter@s authority to FcontestsF relating to the
election& etc$ altered the draft$ The Convention did not intend to give it all the functions of the
Assembly on the sub(ect of election and 8ualifications of its members$ The distinction is not -ithout a
difference$ FAs used in constitutional #rovisionsF& election contest Frelates only to statutory contests in
-hich the contestant see*s not only to oust the intruder& but also to have himself inducted into the
office$FB<aurel on Elections& 5econd Edition& #$ +,9G +9 C$.$& ,L$D
/ne concrete e2am#le -ill serve to illustrate the remaining #o-er in either 4ouse of Congress: A man
is elected by a congressional district -ho had #reviously served ten years in )ilibid "rison for estafa$
As he had no o##onent& no #rotest is filed$ And the Electoral Tribunal has no (urisdiction& because there
is no election contest$ B+9 C$.$& ,L& su#ra$D 3hen informed of the fact& may not the 4ouse& motu #ro#io
#ost#one his inductionQ May not the 4ouse sus#end& investigate and thereafter e2clude himQ> %t must
be observed that -hen a member of the 4ouse raises a 8uestion as to the 8ualifications of another& an
Felection contestF does not thereby ensue& because the former does not see* to be substituted for the
latter$
5o that& if not all the #o-ers regarding the election& returns& and 8ualifications of members -as
-ithdra-n by the Constitution from the CongressG and if& as admitted by #etitioners themselves at the
oral argument& the #o-er to defer the oath=ta*ing& until the contests is ad(udged& does not belong to the
corres#onding Electoral Tribunal& then it must be held that the 4ouse or 5enate still retains such
authority& for it has not been transferred to& nor assumed by& the Electoral Tribunal$ And this result
flo-s& -hether -e believe that such #o-er Bto delay inductionD stemmed from the BformerD #rivilege of
either 4ouse to be (udge of the election& returns& and 8ualifications of the members thereof& or -hether
-e hold it to be inherent to every legislative body as a measure of self=#reservation$
%t is customary that -hen a number of #ersons come together to form a legislative body& F$ $ $ the first
organiHation must be tem#orary& and if the la- does not designate the #erson -ho shall #reside over
such tem#orary organiHation& the #ersons assembled and claiming to be members may select one of
their number for that #ur#ose$ The ne2t ste# is to ascertain in some convenient -ay the names of the
#erson -ho are& by reason of holding the #ro#er credentials& #rima facie entitled to seats& and therefore
entitled to ta*e #art in #ermanent organiHation of the body$ %n the absence of any statutory or other
regulation u#on this sub(ect& a committee on credentials is usually a##ointed& to -hom all credentials to
be entitled to seats$ $ $ $ B<aurel on Elections& 5econd Edition& ##$ >,!& >,M& 8uoting McCrary on
Elections$D
Therefore& inde#endently of constitutional or statutory grant& the 5enate has& under #arliamentary
#ractice& the #o-er to in8uire into the credentials of any member and the latter@s right to #artici#ate in
its deliberations$ As -e have seen& the assignment by the constitution of the Electoral Tribunal does not
actually negative that #o-er E #rovided the 5enate does not cross the boundary line& deciding an
election contest against the member$ 3hich the res#ondents at bar never attem#ted to do$ "recisely&
their resolution recogniHed& and did not im#air& the (urisdiction of the Electoral Tribunal to decide the
contest$ To test -hether the resolution trenched on the territory of the last named agency let as* the
8uestion: May the Electoral Tribunal of the 5enate order that )ody to defer the admission of any
member -hose election has been contestedQ /bviously not$ Then it must be conceded that the #assage
of the dis#uted resolution meant no invasion of the former@s realm$
At this (uncture the error -ill be sho-n of the contention that the 5enate has not this #rivilege Fas a
residuary #o-erF$ 5uch contention is #remised on the #ro#osition that the 4ouses of the "hili##ine
Congress #ossess only such #o-ers as are e2#ressly or im#liedly granted by the Constitution$ And an
American decision is 8uoted on the #o-ers of the :nited 5tates Congress$ The mista*e is due to the
failure to differentiate bet-een the nature of legislative #o-er under the Constitution of the :nited
5tates& and legislative #o-er under the 5tate Constitutions and the Constitution of the Common-ealth
Bno- the 0e#ublicD$ %t must be observed that the Constitution of the :nited 5tates contains only a grant
or delegation of legislative #o-ers to the Federal ;overnment& -hereas& the other Constitutions& li*e
the Constitution of the Common-ealth Bno- the 0e#ublicD& are limits u#on the #lenary #o-ers of
legislation of the ;overnment$ The legislative #o-er of the :nited 5tates Congress is confined to the
sub(ect on -hich it is #ermitted to act by the Federal constitution$ BDorr vs$ :nited 5tates& 19, :$ 5$&
19G Martin vs$ 4unter& 1 3heat$& >+!G McCulloc* vs$ Maryland& 3heat$& 9,G :nited 5tates vs$
Crui*shan*& 9+ :$5$& ,,1$D The legislative #o-er of the "hili##ine Congress is #lenary& sub(ect only to
such limitations& as are found in the 0e#ublic@s Constitution$ 5o that any #o-er& deemed to be
legislative by usage and tradition& is necessarily #ossessed by the "hili##ine Congress& unless the
/rganic Act has lodged it else-here$
Another line of a##roach$ The 5enate& as a branch of the legislative de#artment& had the constitutional
#o-er to ado#t rules for its #roceedingsBsection 19 N>O& Article V% of the ConstitutionD& and by
legislative #ractice it is conceded the #o-er to #romulgate such orders as may be necessary to maintain
its #restige and to #reserve its dignity$ 3e are advised by the res#ondents that& after -eighing the
#ro#riety or im#ro#riety of the ste#& the 5enate& in the e2ercise of its authority and discretion and of its
inherent #o-er of self=#reservation& resolved to defer the administration of oath and the sitting of the
#etitioners #ending determination of the contest$ %t is not clear that the measure had no reasonable
connection -ith the ends in vie-& and neither does it #al#ably transcend the #o-ers of the #ublic
deliverative body$ /n the contrary& there are reasons to believe it -as #rom#ted by the dictates of
ordinary caution& or of #ublic #olicy$ For& if& as re#orted by the corres#onding constitutional agency&
concededly -ell=#osted on the matter by reason of its official duties& the elections held in the "rovinces
of "am#anga& )ulacan& Tarlac& and 'ueva Eci(a -ere so tainted -ith acts of violence and intimidation&
that the result -as not the legitimate e2#ression of the voters@ choice& the 5enate made no grievous
mista*e in foreseeing the #robability that& u#on #roof of such -ides#read la-lessness& the Electoral
Tribunal -ould annull the returns in that region Bsee ;ardiner vs$ 0omulo& +! "hil$& ,+1G <aurel&
Elections N+d ed$O& #$ LL et se8$D& and declare herein #etitioners not entitled to seats in the 5enate$
Conse8uently& to avoid the undesirable result flo-ing from the #artici#ation of dis8ualified members in
its deliberations& it -as #rudent for it to defer the sitting of the res#ondents$ True& they may have no
direct connection -ith the acts of intimidationG yet the votes may be annulled (ust the same& and if that
ha##ens& #etitioners -ould not among the si2teen senators elected$ 'or -as it far=fetched for the 5enate
to consider that Fin order to maintain alive the res#ect for democratic institutions among our #eo#le& no
man or grou# of men BshouldD be #ermitted to #rofit from the results of an election held under coercion&
in violation of la- and contrary to the #rinci#le of freedom of choice -hich should underlie all
elections under the Constitution$F BE2hibit A of #etitioners@ com#laint$D
a$ .ustices in the Electoral Tribunals
During our deliberations& it -as remar*ed that several (ustices subscribing the ma(ority o#inion& belong
to the electoral tribunals -herein #rotests connected -ith the Central <uHon #olls a-ait investigation$
Mulling over this& -e e2#erience no 8ualmish feelings about the coincidence$ Their designation to the
electoral tribunals deducted not a -hit from their functions as members of this 5u#reme Court& and did
not dis8ualify them in this litigation$ 'or -ill their deliverances here at on a given 8uestion o#erate to
#revent them from voting in the electoral forum on identical 8uestionsG because the Constitution&
establishing no incom#atibility bet-een the t-o roles& naturally did not contem#late& nor -ant& (ustices
o#ining one -ay here& and thereafter holding other-ise& #ari materia& in the electoral tribunals& or vice=
versa$
Anyho-& these should be no diversity of thought in a democratic country& at least& on the legal effects of
the alleged ram#ant la-lessness& root and basis of the "endatun 0esolution$
4o-ever& it must be observed and em#hasiHed& herein is no definite #ronouncement that terrorism and
violence actually #revailed in the district to such e2tent that the result -as not the e2#ression of the free
-ill of the electorate$ 5uch issue -as not tendered in these #roceedings$ %t hinges u#on #roof to be
#roduced by #rotestants and #rotestees at the hearing of the res#ective contests$
b$ Doubt and #resum#tion$
After all is said or -ritten& the most that may be conceded to the industry of #etitioners@ counsel is that
the 5enate #o-er& or lac* of #o-er& to a##rove the resolution is not entirely clear$ 3e should& therefore&
indulge the #resum#tion that official duty has been #erformed regularly& B0ule 1+>& section !9& 0ule of
CourtD& and in the right manner:
%t is a general #rinci#le to #resume that #ublic officers act correctly until the contrary is sho-n$ :nited
5tates vs$ 3eed& , 3all$& !+$
%t -ill be #resumed& unless the contrary be sho-n& that a #ublic officer acted in accordance -ith the la-
and his instructions$ Moral y ;onHales vs$ 0oss B;onHales vs$ 0ossD& 1+9 :$5$& !9,G M 5u#$ Ct$ 0e#$&
M9,$
/fficers charged -ith the #erformance of a #ublic duty are #resumed to #erform it correctly$ Kuinlan
vs$ ;reene Country& +9, :$5$& 19G +M 5u#$ Ct$ 0e#$& ,9,$ B:nited 5tate 5u#reme Court 0e#orts Digest&
Vol$ ,& #$ >1LL$D
%t is #resumed that the legislature has acted -ithin its constitutional #o-ers$ B5ee cases cited at #$ +,M&
1! C$.$5$& note 1$D
And should there be further doubt& by all the ma2ims of #rudence& left alone comity& -e should heed
the off=limits sign at the Congressional 4all& and chec* the im#ulse to rush in to set matters aright E
firm in the belief that if a #olitical fraud has been accom#lished& as #etitioners aver& the sovereign
#eo#le& ultimately the offended #arty& -ill render the fitting verdict E at the #olling #recints$
c$ Membershi# in the Constitutional Convention
The theory has been #ro#osed E modesty aside E that the dissenting members of this Court -ho -ere
delegates to the Constitutional Convention and -ere Fco=authors of the ConstitutionF Fare in a better
#osition to inter#retF that same Constitution in this #articular litigation$
There is no doubt that their #ro#erly recorded utterances during the debates and #roceedings of the
Convention deserve -eight& li*e those of any other delegate therein$ 'ote& ho-ever& that the
#roceedings of the Convention Fare less conclusive of the #o-er construction of the instrument than are
legislative #roceedings of the #ro#er construction of a statuteG since in the latter case it is the intent of
the legislature -e see*& -hile in the former -e are endeavoring to arrive at the intent of the #eo#le
through the discussions and deliberations of their re#resentatives$ B3illoughby on the Constitution& Vol$
%& ##$ ,& ,,$D
Their -ritings Bof the delegatesD commenting or e2#laining that instrument& #ublished shortly
thereafter& may& li*e those of 4amilton& Madison and .ayin The Federalist E here in the "hili##ines&
the boo* of Delegate Aruego& su#ra& and of others E have #ersuasive force$ B/#$ cit$& #$ ,,$D
)ut their #ersonal o#inion on the matter at issue e2#ressed during our deliberations stand on a different
footing: %f based on a FfactF *no-n to them& but not duly established or (udicially cogniHable& it is
immaterial& and their brethren are not e2#ected to ta*e their -ord for it& to the #re(udice of the #arty
adversely affected& -ho had no chance of rebuttal$ %f on a matter of legal hermeneutics& their
conclusions may not& sim#ly on account of membershi# in the Convention& be a shade better& in the
eyes of the la-$ There is the -ord FdeferenceF to be sure$ )ut deference is a com#liment s#ontaneously
to be #aid E never a tribute to be demanded$
And if -e should B-ithout intending any dis#aragementD com#are the Constitution@s enactment to a
drama on the stage or in actual life& -e -ould realiHe that intelligent s#ectators or readres often *no-
as much& if not more& about the real meanings& effects or tendency is of the event& or incidents thereof&
as some of the actors themselves& -ho sometimes become so absorbed in fulfilling their emotional roles
that they fail to -atch the other scenes or to meditate on the larger as#ects of the -hole #erformance& or
-hat is -orse& become so infatuated -ith their lines as to construe the entire story according to their
#re(udices or frustrations$ "ers#ective and disinterestedness hel# certainly a lot in e2amining actions
and occurrences$
Come to thin* of it& under the theory thus #ro#osed& Marshall and 4olmes Bnames venerated by those
-ho have devoted a siHable #ortion of their #rofessionals lives to analyHing or solving constitutional
#roblems and develo#mentsD -ere not so authoritative after all in e2#ounding the :nited 5tates
Constitution E because they -ere not members of the Federal Convention that framed itS
D$EA<<E;ED D:TP /F 0E5"/'DE'T5
Kuoting section 1+ of Common-ealth Act 'o$ M+,& counsel for #etitioners assert that it -as
res#ondents@ duty legally inesca#able& to #ermit #etitioners to assume office and ta*e #art in the current
regular session$ The section reads #artly:
The candidates for Member of the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives and those for 5enators -ho have been
#roclaimed elected by the res#ective )oard of Canvassers and the Commission on Elections shall
assume office and shall hold regular session for the year nineteen hundred and forty=si2 on May
t-enty=five& nineteen hundred and forty=si2$ B5ection 1+& Common-ealth Act$ 'o$ M+,$D
3e have carefully considered the argument$ 3e o#ine that& as contended by the 5olicitor=;eneral& this
#rovision is addressed to the individual member of Congress& im#osing on him the obligation to come
to Manila& and (oin his colleagues in regular session$ 4o-ever& it does not im#ly that if& for any reason&
he is dis8ualified& the 4ouse is #o-erless to #ost#one his admission$ 5u##ose that after elections a
member is finally convicted of treason$ May not the 4ouse refuse him outright admission& #ending an
investigation Bby it or the Electoral Tribunal as the case may beD as to his #rivilege to sit thereQ
;ranting the right to admission as the counter#art of the duty to assume office by virtue of said section
1+G -e must nevertheless allo- that such rights -ould not be #erem#tory -henever it contacts other
rights of e8ual or su#erior force$ To illustrate: if the la- #rovided that all children& seven years or more
Fshall go to schoolF& it can not reasonably be inferred that school authorities are bound to acce#t every
seven=year boy& even if he refuses to #ay fees& or to #resent the certificates re8uired by school
regulations$
Furthermore& it -ould not be erroneous to maintain that any right s#elled out of section 1+ must
logically be limited to those candidates -hose #roclamation is clear& unconditional and unclouded& and
that such standard is not met by the #etitioners& because in the very document attesting to their election
one member of the Commission on Elections demurred to the non=e2clusion of the votes in Central
<uHon& calling attention to the re#orted reign of terror and violence in that region& and virtually
ob(ecting to the certification of herein #etitioners$ To be sure& it -as the beclouded condition of
#etitioner@s credential Bcertificate of canvassD that #artly #rom#ted the 5enate to enact the #recautionary
measure herein com#lained of$ And finding no #hrase or sentence in the Constitution e2#ressly or
im#liedly outla-ing the ste# ta*en by that legislative body& -e should be& and -e are& reluctant to
intervene$
%ndeed& had the 5enate been officially informed that the inclusion of #etitioners@ name in the
Commission@s certificate had been made at the #oint of a gangster@s automatic& none -ill deny the
a##ositeness of the #ost#onement of their induction& #ending an in8uiry by the corres#onding
authorities$ Pet the difference bet-een such situation and the instant litigation is one of degree& broad
and -ide #erha#s& but not altering the dominant legal #rinci#le$
%n ans-er to the suggestions as to abuse of the #o-er it should be stated that the mere #ossibility of
abuse is no conclusive argument against the e2istence of the #o-er& of the #o-er& for the sim#le reason
that every official authority is susce#tible of misuse$ And everybody *no-s that -hen any #eo#le -ill
discover the methods to curb it$
"erha#s it is necessary to e2#lain that this decision goes no further than to recogniHe the e2istence of
Congressional #o-er$ %t is settled that the #oint -hether such #o-er has been -isely or correctly
e2ercised& is usually beyond the *en of (udicial determination$
E$E"A0<%AME'TA0P "0%V%<E;E5
/ne final consideration$
The Constitution #rovides BArticle V%& section 1,D that Ffor any s#eech or debateF in congress& 5enators
and congressmen Fshall not be 8uestioned in any other #lace$F The 5u#reme Court of the :nited 5tates
has inter#reted this #rivilege to include the giving of a vote or the #resentation of a resolution$
$ $ $ %t -ould be a narro- vie- of the constitutional #rovision to limit it to-ards s#o*en in debate$ The
reason of the rule is as forcible in its a##lication to -ritten re#orts #resented in that body by its
committees& to resolutions offered& -hich& though in -riting& must be re#roduced in s#eech& and to the
act of voting& $ $ $ BRilbourn vs$ thom#son& 19> :$5$& +9G +! <a-$ ed$& >MM& #$ >91$D
%n the above case& Rilbourn& for refusing to ans-er 8uestions #ut to him by the 4ouse of
0e#resentatives of the :nited 5tates Congress& concerning the business of a real estate #artnershi#& -as
im#risoned for contem#t by resolution of the house$ 4e sued to recover damages from the sergeant at
arms and the congressional members of the committee& -ho had caused him to be brought before the
house& -here he -as ad(udged to be in contem#t$ The 5u#reme Court of the :nited 5tates found that
the resolution of the 4ouse -as void for -ant of (urisdiction in that body& but the action -as dismissed
as to the members of the committee u#on the strength of the herein above=mentioned congressional
immunity$ The court cited -ith a##roval the follo-ing e2cer#ts from an earlier decision of the 5u#reme
Court of Massachusetts:
These #rivileges are thus secured& not -ith the intention of #rotecting the members against #rosecutions
for their o-n benefit& but to su##ort the rights of the #eo#le& by enabling their re#resentatives to
e2ecute the functions of their office -ithout fear of #rosecutions& civil or criminal$ %& therefore& thin*
that the article ought not to be construed strictly& but liberally& that the full design of it may be
ans-ered$ $ $ B19> :$5$& +9>$D BEm#hasis ours$D
Commenting on this Congressional #rivilege& 3illoughby relates a##arently as controlling& the
follo-ing incident:
%n 1919& several Members of Congress having been served -ith a -rit of mandamus in a civil action
brought against them as members of the .oint Committee on "rinting and gro-ing out a refusal of a bid
of the Valley "a#er Com#any& for the furnishing of #a#er& the 5enate resolved that the .ustice issuing
the -rit had Funla-fully invaded the constitutional #rivileges and #rerogatives of the 5enate of the
:nited 5tates and of three 5enatorsG and -as -ithout (urisdiction to grant the rule& and 5enators are
directed to ma*e no a##earance in res#onse thereto$F B3illoughby on the Constitution of the :nited
5tates& Vol$ %& 5econd Edition& #$ !1!$D
0es#ondents are& by this #roceeding& called to account for their votes in a##roving the "endatum
0esolution$ 4aving s-orn to u#hold the Constitution& -e must enforce the constitutional directive$ 3e
must not 8uestion& nor #ermit res#ondents to be 8uestioned here in connection -ith their votes$
BRilbourn vs$ Thom#son& su#ra$D
Case dismissed$ 'o costs$
Moran& C .$& "aras& "ablo& and "adilla& ..$& concur$
5e#arate /#inions
4%<AD/& .$& concurring:
% concur$
"etitioners& alleging that they have been elected 5enators in the last national elections& have filed this
#roceeding against res#ondents -ho& according to the com#laint& have been li*e-ise elected 5enators
in the same elections$ %n #aragra#h %%% of the com#laint it is alleged that res#ondent 4on$ .ose A$
Avelino is (oined in this #roceeding as member and "resident of the 5enate$ T-o *inds of remedies are
sought by #etitioners& one ancillary and the other #rinci#al$ The ancillary they -ould have consist in a
#reliminary in(unction addressed to Fres#ondents& their officials& em#loyees& agents and other #ersons
acting under them& ordering themF& until the order is remanded by the court& Fto desist and to abstain
from carrying outF the so=called "endatun 0esolution com#lained of$ BE2hibit A attached to com#laint$D
The #rinci#al remedy& if the suit is to #ros#er& -ould be as follo-s: a (udicial declaration that the said
resolution is entirely null and void& a definite order of this court #rohibiting res#ondents& and each of
them& from #reventing #etitioners from Fcontinuing in their seats in the 5enate of the "hili##ines and
freely e2ercising their office as 5enators& and li*e-ise #rohibiting them from ado#ting any other
ulterior #rocedure to e2ecute the said resolution$F
1$ 4as this court #o-er to issue the -rit of #reliminary in(unction sought by #etitioners under the facts
alleged in their com#laintQ
The #o-er of this court to issue au2iliary -rits and #rocess is defined in& and conferred by& section 19
of Act 'o$ 1>!& as follo-s:
5ec$ 19$ "o-er to issue all necessary au2iliary -rits$EThe 5u#reme Court shall have #o-er to issue
-rits of certiorari and all other au2iliary -rits and #rocess necessary to the com#lete e2ercise of its
original or a##ellate (urisdiction$
:nder this #rovision& such au2iliary -rit or #rocess as the -rit of #reliminary in(unction #rayed for by
#etitioners in the instant case& is only issuable by this court is engaged in the e2ercise of its original Bor
a##ellateD (urisdiction in a main case& and secondly& -hen such -rit or #rocess is necessary to a
com#lete e2ercise of that (urisdiction$ This #rinci#le is ingrained in and underlies the #ertinent
#rovisions of the #resent 0ules of Court B0ule !9D$ %ndeed& it is elementary that an inde#endent action
cannot be maintained merely to #rocure a #reliminary in(unction as its sole ob(ective$ B"anay Munici#al
Cadastre vs$ ;ardu?o and 5oncuya& ,, "hil$& ,M$D
)esides& there are other grounds for holding that this court lac*s (urisdiction to issue the -rit of
#reliminary in(unction #rayed for by #etitioners$ %t is clear that the rights sought to be e2ercised or
#rotected by #etitioner through this #roceeding are #olitical rights and the 8uestions raised are #olitical
8uestions& and it is -ell settled that the e8uitable remedy of in(unction is not available for such a
#ur#ose$ The #rinci#le has also been incor#orated in the rule that a court of chancery -ill not entertain
a suit calling for a (udgement u#on a #olitical 8uestion& and of course this court has been resorted to in
the instant case as a court of e8uity in so far as in(unctive relief is being sought$ %n the case of Flethcer
vs$ Tuttle B1,1 %ll$& 1G +, <$0$A$& 1>&1!D& the definitions of a #olitical right by Anderson defines a
#olitical right as a Fright e2ercisable in the administration of governmentF BAnderson <a- Dictionary&
99,D$ And )ouvier says: F"olitical rights consist in the #o-er to #artici#ate& directly or indirectly& in the
establishment or management of the government$F B+ )ouvier@s <a- Dictionary& ,9M$D
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
$ $ $ The #rayer of the bill is that& u#on the hearing of the cause& both acts be declared unconstitutional
and void& and held to be of no effectG and that a -rit of in(unction issue to 3alter C$ Tuttle& county cler*
of Vermilion county& restraining him from issuing& or causing to be #osted& notices of election calling an
election for the house of re#resentatives for the eighteenth senatorial districtG and that such in(unction
be made #er#etualG and that the court grant to the #etitioner and to the #eo#le all such other and further
relief as the case demands$
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
From the foregoing statement of these t-o bills& it seems to be #erfectly #lain that the entire sco#e and
ob(ect of both is the assertion and #rotection of #olitical& as contradistinguished from civil& #ersonal or
#ro#erty rights$ %n both the com#lainant is a legal voter& and a candidate for a #articular elective officeG
and by his bill he is see*ing the #rotection and enforcement of his right to cast his o-n ballot in a legal
and effective manner& and also his right to be such candidate& to have the election called and held under
the #rovisions of a valid la-& and to have his name #rinted u#on the ballots to be used at such election&
so that he may be voted for in a legal manner$ The rights thus asserted are all #urely #oliticalG nor& so
far as this 8uestion is concerned& is the matter aided in the least by the attem#t made by the com#lainant
in each bill to litigate on behalf of other voters or of the #eo#le of the state generally$ The claims thus
attem#ted to be set u# are all of the same nature& and are none the less #olitical$
As defined by Anderson& a civil right is Fa right accorded to every member of a district community& or
nation&F -hile a #olitical right is a Fright e2ercible in the administration of government$F Anderson&
<a- Dictionary& 99,$ 5ays bouvier: F"olitical rights consist in the #o-er to #artici#ate& directly or
indirectly& in the establishment or management of the government$ These #olitical rights are fi2ed by
the constitution$ Every citiHen has the right of voting for #ublic officers& and of being elected$ These are
the #olitical rights -hich the humblest citiHen #ossesses$ Civil rights are those -hich have no relation
to the establishment& su##ort& or management of the government$ They consist in the #o-er of
ac8uiring and en(oying #ro#erty& or e2ercising the #aternal or marital #o-ers& and the li*e$ %t -ill be
observed that every one& unless de#rived of them by sentence of civil death& is in the en(oyment of the
civil rights& -hich is not the case -ith #olitical rightsG for an alien& for e2am#le& has no #olitical&
although in full en(oyment of the civil rights$F B+ )ouvier <a- Dict$& ,9M$D
$ $ $ A #reliminary in(unction having been a-arded& it -as disregarded by the city officers& -ho
#roceeded& not-ithstanding& to canvass the vote and declare the result$ Various of the city officers and
their advisers -ere attached and fined for contem#t& it -as held that the matter #resented by the bill
-as a matter over -hich a court of chancery had no (urisdiction& and that the in(unction -as void& so
that it violation -as not an act -hich sub(ected the violators to #roceedings for contem#t$
$ $ $ %n ;eorgia vs$ 5tanton BM> :$ 5$& ! 3all$& ,9G 1L <a-$ ed$& M+1D& a bill -as filed by the state of
;eorgia against the secretary of -ar and other officers re#resenting the e2ecutive authority of the
:nited 5tates& to restrain them in the e2ecution of the acts of congress *no-n as the F0econstruction
Acts&F on the ground that the enforcement of those acts -ould annul and totally abolish the e2isting
state government of the state& and establish another and different one in its #lace& and -ould& in effect&
ove-rthro- and destroy the cor#orate e2istence of the state& by de#riving it of all means and
instrumentalities -hereby its e2istence might and other-ise -ould be maintainedG and it -as held that
the bill called for a (udgement u#on a #olitical 8uestion& and that it -ould not therefore be entertained
by a court of chanceryG and it -as further held that the character of the bill -as not changed by the fact
that& in setting forth the #olitical rights sought to be #rotected& it averred that the state had real and
#ersonal #ro#erty& such& for e2am#le& as #ublic buildings& etc$& of the en(oyment of -hich& by the
destruction of its cor#orate e2istence& the state -ould be de#rived& such averment not being the
substantial ground of the relief sought$ BFlethcer vs$ Tuttle& 1,1 %ll$& 1G +, <$0$A$& 1>& 1,=1MG
Bem#hasis su##lied$D
5ection >L1$ >$ "olitical Kuestions$Ea$ in ;eneral$E%t is -ell=settled doctrine that #olitical 8uestions
are not -ithin the #rovince of the (udiciary& e2ce#t to the e2tent that #o-er to deal -ith such 8uestions
has been conferred on the courts by e2#ress constitutional or statutory #rovisions$ %t is not easy&
ho-ever& to define the #hrase F#olitical 8uestion&F nor to determine -hat matters fall -ithin its sco#e of
the (udicial #o-er$ More #ro#erly& ho-ever& it means those 8uestions -hich& under the constitution& are
to be decided by the #eo#le in their sovereign ca#acity& or in regard to -hich full discretionary
authority has been delegated to the legislative or e2ecutive branch of the government$ Among the
8uestions that have been held to be #olitical& and therefore beyond the #rovince of the (udiciary to
decide& are: Kuestions relating to the e2istence or legality of the government under -hich the court is
actingG -hat #ersons or organiHations constitute the la-ful government of a state of the :nion& or of a
foreign countryG $ $ $ the canvass of an election$ B1+ C$.$& LML& LM9G em#hasis su##lied$D
5ECT%/' +9$ $ /nly Civil 0ights "rotected$EThe sub(ect matter of e8uitable (urisdiction being civil
#ro#erty and the maintenance of civil rights& in(unction -ill issue only in cases -here com#lainant@s
civil rights have been invaded$ %n(unctions do not issue to #revent acts merely because they are
immoral& illegal& or criminal$ Courts of e8uity have no (urisdiction over matters or 8uestions of a
#olitical nature unless civil #ro#erty rights are involved and -ill not interfere to enforce or #rotect
#urely #olitical rights& $ $ $ B>+ C$ .$& 1G em#hasis su##lied$D
)ut #etitioners seem to #roceed u#on the theory that there is a main case here to -hich the #reliminary
in(unction -ould be merely au2iliary E one of #rohibition& #resumably under 0ule !M& sections +& &
and M$ 0ule !M& section +& omitting im#ertinent #arts& says:
5ec$ +$ "etition for #rohibition$E3hen the #roceedings of any tribunal& cor#oration& board& or #erson&
-hether e2ercising functions (udicial or ministerial $ $ $
To begin -ith& res#ondents herein cannot in any rational sense be said to constitute a Ftribunal&
cor#oration& board& or #erson $ $ $ e2ercising functions (udicial or ministerial$F To be sure& the functions
of the 5enate and of its members in the #remises are not (udicial$ %t is no less certain& in my o#inion&
that they are not ministerial$ %ndeed& they are not only legislative but discretionary in the highest sense&
as more at length demonstrated hereafter$
%t is insisted& ho-ever& that the #rovisions of section 1+ of Common-ealth Act 'o$ M+, im#osed u#on
res#ondents the ministerial duty of letting #etitioners assume office and #artici#ate in the regular
session for the year 19! on May +,& 19!$ )ut& as in my o#inion correctly contended by the 5olicitor
;eneral at the argument& this #rovision is addressed to the members of both 4ouses of Congress -ho
are to assume office and hold regular session$ Altho to this& some -ho o#ine differently from us& may
counter -ith the 8uestion: 3hat is the use of im#osing u#on said members the ministerial duty to
assume office and hold the session if either 4ouse or other members thereof could #revent them from
doing soQ %n the first #lace& % -ould not say that& considering together& as -e should& the re#ort of the
Commission on Elections to the "resident of the 5enate of May +>& 19! BE2hibit )D& and the
certificate of canvass of the same date BE2hibit CD& said Commission F#roclaimed electedF those
candidates -hose election may be adversely affected by the Commission@s o-n e2#ress reservation as
to the validity or invalidity of the votes cast in the "rovinces of "am#anga& )ulacan& Tarlac& and 'ueva
Eci(a& in the same sense that they #roclaimed elected those not so affected E it -ould seem that the
#roclamation made in E2hibit C -as based merely u#on a numerical canvass or count of the votes cast&
the Commission considering itself -ithout authority to discount the votes cast in said four #rovinces&
leaving that 8uestion to the Electoral Tribunal for the 5enateG and it -ould seem further& that -ithin the
meaning and intent of section 1+ of Common-ealth Act 'o$ M+, the #hrase Fcandidates $ $ $ #roclaimed
elected&F rationally construed& is e2clusive of those of -hose valid election the Commission is the first&
in effect& to e2#ress very grave doubts$ As to these& considering the Commission@s re#ort and certificate
of canvass together& the Commission& in final effect& far from #roclaiming them elected& confesses that
it does not really *no- -hether they have been or not$ %n the second #lace& %do not admit that any such
ministerial duty is im#osed u#on the members of Congress in the sense that its fulfillment may be
com#elled by mandamus issuing from the (udiciary$ %n the third #lace& if -e -ere to concede that the
intention of the la- is as #etitioners contend it to be& that is& that it im#oses u#on both 4ouses of
Congress and u#on the members thereof -ho legitimately act for them& the ministerial duty of letting
even those members& as to -hom there e2ist grounds for sus#ension& assume office and #artici#ate in
the 4ouses@ deliberations& % am of the considered o#inion that the #rovisions -ould be null and void for
the sim#le reason that it -ould be destructive of& and re#ugnant to& the inherent #o-er of both 4ouses
to sus#end members for reasons of self=#reservation or decorum$ % say null and void& because the
#rinci#le underlying said inherent #o-er is ingrained in the very genius of a re#ublican and democratic
government& such as ours& -hich has been #atterned after that of the :nited 5tates& and therefore lies at
the very foundation of our constitutional system$ %t -as admitted at the argument that -hen both
legislative chambers -ere the sole (udges of the election& returns and 8ualifications of its members&
each chamber #ossessed such inherent #o-er of sus#ension& #articularly as against members -hose
election -as the sub(ect of contest$ 3hen the Common-ealth Constitution transferred to the Electoral
Tribunal for each chamber the (urisdiction as sole (udge of all contests relating to the elections& returns
and 8ualifications of its members& -ithout any #rovision as to said #o-er of sus#ension& the clear
inference is that the same -as left intact& to remain -here it -as inherent$ And certainly the framers
should not be #resumed to have silently intended to abrogate and ta*e a-ay a #o-er so vital and so
essential$
Coming no- more fundamentally to the alleged main case #resented by the com#laint$ As stated at the
outset& the #rinci#le remedy #ursued by #etitioners& if this suit is to #ros#er& and therefore the main case
-hich they seem to allege as (ustifying the ancillary remedy of #reliminary in(unction& -ould be
concerned -ith a (udicial declaration by this court that the so=called "endatun 0esolution is entirely
null and void& -ith a definite order of this court #rohibiting res#ondents& and each of them& from
#reventing #etitioners Ffrom continuing in their seats in the 5enate of the "hili##ines and freely
e2ercising their functions as 5enators& and li*e-ise #rohibiting them form ado#ting any other ulterior
#rocedure to e2ecute the said resolution$F
This immediately brings to the fore the vital and serious 8uestion of -hether this court has (urisdiction
to grant the remedy thus #rayed for by giving final (udgment ma*ing the said (udicial declaration of
nullity and granting the -rit #rohibition definitely #rohibiting the res#ondent "resident of the 5enate
and res#ondent senators from e2ecuting the above s#ecified acts$ 5uch fundamental #rinci#le as the
se#aration of #o-ers& as -ell as the e2clusive (urisdiction of the Electoral Tribunal for the 5enate of all
contests relating to the election& returns and 8ualifications of its members& are involved$
/ur Constitution and la-s -ill be scanned and searched in vain for the slightest hint of an intention to
confer u#on the courts& including the 5u#reme Court& the #o-er to issue coercive #rocess addressed to&
or calculated to control the action of& either of the other t-o coordinate de#artments of the government
E the legislative -hose #o-er is vested in the Congress& consisting of the 5enate and the 4ouse of
0e#resentatives BConstitution& Article V%%& section 1D& concerning matters -ithin the s#here of their
res#ective functions$ )esides& if -e had (urisdiction to issue the -rit of #reliminary in(unction& it must
be u#on the ground that #rima facie the facts alleged in the com#laint are sufficient to (ustify the -rit$
%n that case& -e must have the #o-er to ma*e said in(unction final if u#on a trial on the merits -e find
those facts #roven$ B0ule !9& section 19$D)ut since such a #ermanent or #er#etual -rit -ould have to be
#remised u#on the determination that #etitioners have been legally and validly elected& -hich 8uestion
is beyond our #o-er to decide& it is clear that -e lac* (urisdiction to issue even the #reliminary #rocess$
And be it not contended that our #reliminary -rit is sim#ly to serve -hile the contest has not been
decided by the Electoral Tribunal& because under Act 'o$ 1>!& section 19& and 0ule !9& sections + and
>& this court can issue such a #rocess in aid only of its o-n (urisdiction of another tribunal E and it is
unthin*able that the 5u#reme Court should be made to serve as a sort of au2iliary court to the Electoral
tribunal$
+$ 4as this court (urisdiction of the sub(ect matter of the alleged main case and& conse8uently& to grant
the alleged #rinci#al remedyQ
The (udicial declaration of nullity sought by #etitioners& severed from the -rit of #rohibition #rayed for
by them& -ould become& if at all& nothing more nor less than a declaratory relief$ Thus divorced from a
remedy of #rohibition& it -ill be a mere abstract #ronouncement of an o#inion of this court regarding
the constitutionality or unconstitutionality of the "endatun 0esolution& giving rise to no substantial
relief or #ositive remedy of any *ind$ %t -ill order nothing and -ill #rohibit nothing to be done by one
#arty or the other$ )ut not even as such declaratory relief can said (udicial declaration be considered
under 0ule !!& nor its antecedents& Act 'o$ >M>! Common-ealth Act 'o$ ,,& since the "endatun
0esolution is neither a Fdeed& -ill& contract or other -ritten instrument $ or a statue or ordinance&F
-ithin the #lain and natural meaning of said rule and said acts& aside from the reason that #ursuant to
the same acts the action for a declaratory (udgment should be brought in a Court of First %nstance&
-ithout any e2#ress #rovision conferring original (urisdiction u#on this court in such cases& -hich
#rovision is necessary before this court can #ossess such original (urisdiction BAct 'o$ 1>!& section 1MD&
and the final consideration that ali*e under said Act 'o$ >M>! and 0ule !!& section !& the court has a
discretion to refuse to e2ercise the #o-er to construe instruments& among other cases& -here the
construction is not necessary and #ro#er at the time under all circumstances$ %n the case of Ale(andrino
vs$ KueHon B! "hil$& L>&9,D& this court& referring to a case of mandamus& said:
$ $ $ /n the one hand& no consideration of #olicy or convenience should induce this court to e2ercise a
#o-er that does not belong to it$ /n the other hand& no consideration of #olicy or convenience should
induce this court to surrender a #o-er -hich it is its duty to e2ercise$ )ut certainly mandamus should
never issue from this court -here it -ill not #rove to be effectual and beneficial$ %t should not be
a-arded -here it -ill create discord and confusion$ %t should not be a-arded -here mischievous
conse8uences are li*ely to follo-$ .udgment should not be #ronounced -hich might #ossibly lead to
unseemly conflicts or -hich might be disregarded -ith im#unity$ This court offer no means by a
decision for any #ossible collision bet-een it as the highest court in the "hili##ines and the "hili##ine
5enate as a branch of coordinate de#artment& or bet-een the court and the Chief E2ecutive or the Chief
E2ecutive <egislature$ BEm#hasis su##lied$D
%t is true that the Ale(andrino case -as one of mandamus$ )ut under the #rinci#le of se#aration of
#o-ers& the rule is e8ually a##licable to cases of in(unction==in fact& to all cases -here it is desired to
have the (udiciary directly control the action of either the e2ecutive or legislative de#artment& or either
branch of the latter& concerning matters -ithin their res#ective #rovince$ Moreover& not much scrutiny
is re8uired to see that -hat is here #ursued is& in #ractical effect& an order of this tribunal commanding
the 5enate or res#ondents& -ho re#resent it& to allo- the #etitioners to remain seated in the 5enate and
freely e2ercise their alleged functions and rights as 5enators: for no other is the effect of an order
#rohibiting the 5enate or said res#ondents from #reventing #etitioner@s from remaining thus seated and
e2ercising said functions and rights$ <oo*ing thru the form to the substance& the #etition is really one of
mandamus$
As the -rit of #rohibition& the com#laint as*s this court& after trial on the merits& to en(oin res#ondents
and each of them from #reventing #etitioners from continuing seated in the 5enate and freely
e2ercising the functions of 5enators& and li*e-ise& from ado#ting any other ulterior #roceeding in
e2ecution of the resolution in 8uestion$ The -rit thus sought -ould& if granted& be definite and final in
its effects$ B0ule !M& sections +& L& and 9$D 5uch a -rit of #rohibition -ould necessarily be #er#etual or
#ermanent in character and o#eration& in the same -ay that a final in(unction under 0ule !9& section 19&
-ould #ermanently en(oin the act com#lained of and #er#etually restrain the defendant from the
commission or continuance of such act$ %t -ould en(oin res#ondents from #reventing #etitioners from
acting as members of the 5enate in e2actly the same -ay and -ith e2actly the same rights and
#rivileges as the other members -hose election is unchallenged and uncontested& not only tem#orarily
but for the entire term of the office$ )ut for this court to so order& it -ould necessarily have to base its
(udgment and decree u#on the #remise that #etitioners have been duly and validly elected as members
of the 5enate$ This -ould inevitably involve a determination of #recisely the 8uestion& #resently
contested before the Electoral Tribunal for the 5enate& as sole (udge under the Constitution& of -hether
or not said #etitioners have been duly and validly elected as 5enators$ This clearly -ould be an
unconstitutional invasion of the s#here allotted by the fundamental la- to said Electoral Tribunal as the
sole (udge of all contests relating to the election& returns and 8ualifications of the members of the
5enate$ All of -hich means that this court cannot constitutionally #ossess (urisdiction over the alleged
main case of #rohibition$ This is another -ay of saying that #etitioners are not entitled to the #rinci#al
remedy thus sought by them from this Court$
5ec$ 1M B+D$ "rima Facie Case$E3hile it is not a ground for refusing a #reliminary in(unction that is
not absolutely certain that com#lainant has the right to relief& yet to authoriHe a tem#orary in(unction&
com#lain must ma*e out at least a #rima facie sho-ing the right to the final relief$ B>+ C$ .$&>L G
em#hasis su##lied$D
0eason for rule$EThe in(unction #endente lite can be (ustified only u#on theory that it is necessary
incident to the granting of such final relief as com#lainants a##ear to be entitled to$ The right to such
final relief must a##earG if not& the allo-ance of an in(unction is erroneous$ Amelia Milling Co$ vs$
Tennessee Coal& etc$& 0$ Co$ B1+> Fed$& L11& and other cases cited$D B>+ C$ .$& >9 under note M!
beginning on #$ >LG em#hasis su##lied$D
Finally& -e come to the great #rinci#le of se#aration of #o-ers$ %n the case of Ale(andrino vs$ KueHon&
su#ra& this court said B##$ LL& L9D:
There are certain basic #rinci#les -hich lie at the foundation of the ;overnment of the "hili##ine
%slands& -hich are familiar to students of #ublic la-$ %t is here only necessary to recall that under our
system of government& each of the three de#artments is distinct and not directly sub(ect to the control of
another de#artment$ The #o-er to control is the #o-er to abrogate and the #o-er to abrogate is the
#o-er to usur#$ $ $
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
$ $ $ Mandamus -ill not lie against the legislative body& its members& or its officers& to com#el the
#erfromance of duties #urely legislative in their character -hich therefore #ertain to their legislative
functions And over -hich they have e2clusive control$ The courts cannot dictate action in this res#ect
-ithout a gross usur#ation of #o-er$ 5o it has been held that -here a member has been e2#elled by the
legislative body& the courts have no #o-er& irres#ective of -hether the e2#ulsion -as right or -rong& to
issue a mandate to com#el his reinstatement$
%f mandamus -ill not lie to com#el the #erformance of #urely legislative duties by the legislature& its
members& or its officers& ho- can& under the same #rinci#le& in(unction or #rohibition lie to en(oin or
#rohibit action of the <egislature& its members& or its officers& in regard to matters #ertaining to their
legislative functions and over -hich they have e2clusive controlQ And if the courts are #o-erless to
com#el reinstatement of an e2#elled member of the legislative body& it seems inconceivable that under
the same system of government the courts should #ossess (urisdiction to #rohibit the e2#ulsion in the
first instance$ And if the courts cannot interfere to #revent such e2#ulsion& a fortiori they should lac*
authority to intervene to #revent a mere sus#ension& -hich is a less drastic measure against the member$
%f the e2#ulsion of a member of the 5enate is #urely a legislative 8uestion& as clearly decided in the
Ale(andrino case& the su#ension of a member of the same body must e8ually be of the same nature$
%n the same case this court& in remar*ing that some of the cases cited therein related to the chief
e2ecutive rather than to the legislature& said that the rules -hich govern the relations of the courts to the
chief e2ecutive li*e-ise govern the relations of the courts to the legislature$
%n Mississi##i vs$ .ohnson and /rd B 3all$& M,D& a bill -as filed #raying the :nited 5tates 5u#reme
Court to en(oin Andre- .ohnson& "resident of the :nited 5tates& and E$ /$ C$ /rd& ;eneral
Commanding in the District of Mississi#i and Ar*ansas from e2ecuting certain acts of Congress$ The
court& #er chief Chief .ustice Chase& said that the single #oint for consideration -as: Can the "resident
be restrained by in(unction from carrying into effect an Act of Congress alleged to the be
unconstitutionalQ %t continued:
The Congress is the <egislative De#artment of the governmentG the "resident is the E2ecutive
De#artment$ 'either can be restrained in its action by the .udicial De#artmentG though the acts of both&
-hen #erformed& are& in #ro#er cases& sub(ect to its cogniHance$
The im#ro#riety of such interference -ill be clearly seen u#on consideration of its #ossible
conse8uences$
5u##ose the bill filed and the in(unction #rayed for allo-ed$ %f the "resident refuse obedience& it is
needless to observe that the court is -ithout #o-er to enforce its #rocess$ %f& on the other hand& the
"resident com#lies -ith the order of the court and refuses to e2ecute the acts of the Congress& is it not
clear that a collision may occur bet-een the E2ecutive and <egislative De#artments of the
;overnmentQ May not the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives im#each the "resident for such refusalQ And in
that case could this court interfere in behalf of the "resident& thus endangered by com#liance -ith its
mandate& and restrain by in(unction the 5enate of the :nited 5tates from sitting as a court of
im#eachmentQ 3ould the strange s#ectacle be offered to the #ublic -onder of an attem#t by this court
to arrest #roceedings in that courtQ
These 8uestions ans-er themselves$
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
$ $ $ -e are fully satisfied that this court has no (urisdiction of a bill to en(oin the "resident in the
#erformance of his official dutiesG and that such bill ought to be received by us$
%t has been suggested that the bill contains a #rayer that& if the relief sought cannot be had against
Andre- .ohnson& as "resident& as "resident& it may be granted against Andre- .ohnson as a citiHen of
Tennessee$ )ut it is #lain that relief as against the e2ecution of an act of Congress by Andre- .ohnson&
if relief against its e2ecution by the "resident$ $ $
%n the case of 5utherland vs$ ;overnor of Michigan B+9 Mich$& >+9D& .ustice Cooley& s#ea*ing for the
5u#reme Court of Michigan& had the follo-ing to say:
$ $ $ /ur government is one -hose #o-ers have been carefully a##ortioned bet-een three distinct
de#artments& -hich emanate ali*e from the #eo#le& have their #o-ers ali*e limited and defined by the
constitution& are of e8ual dignity& and -ithin their res#ective s#heres of action e8ually inde#endent$
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
%t is true that neither of the de#artments can o#erate in all res#ects inde#endently of the others& and that
-hat are called the chec*s and balances of government constitute each a restraint u#on the rest$ $ $ $ )ut
in each of these cases the action of the de#artment -hich controls& modifies& or in any manner
influences that of another& is had strictly -ithin its o-n s#here& and for that reason gives no occassion
for conflict& controversy or (ealousy$ The <egislative in #rescribing rules for the courts& is acting -ithin
its #ro#er #rovince in ma*ing la-s& -hile the courts& in declining to enforce an unconstitutional la-&
are in li*e manner acting -ithin their #ro#er #rovince& because they are only a##lying that -hich is la-
to the controversies in -hich they are called u#on to give (udgment$ %t is mainly by means of these
chec*s and balances that the officers of the several de#artments are *e#t -ithin their (urisdiction& and if
they are disregarded in any case& and #o-er is usur#ed or abused& the remedy is by im#eachment& and
not by another de#artment of the government attem#ting to correct the -rong by asserting a su#erior
authority over that -hich by the constitution is its e8ual$
%t has long been a ma2im in this country that the <egislature cannot dictate to the courts -hat their
(udgments shall be& or set aside or alter such (udgments after they have been rendered$ %f it could&
constitutional liberty -ould cease to e2istG and if the <egislature could in li*e manner override
e2ecutive action also& the government -ould become only a des#otism under #o#ular forms$ /n the
other hand it -ould be readily conceded that no court can com#el the <egislature to ma*e or to refrain
from ma*ing la-s& or to meet or ad(ourn at its command& or to ta*e any action -hatsoever& though the
duty to ta*e it be made ever so clear by the constitution or the la-s$ %n these cases the e2em#tion of the
one de#artment from the control of the other is not only im#lied in the frame-or* of government& but is
indis#ensably necessary if any useful a##ortionment of #o-er is to e2ist$
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
%t is not attem#ted to be disguised on the #art of the relators that any other course than that -hich
leaves the head of the e2ecutive de#artment to act inde#endently in the discharge of his duties might
#ossibly lead to unseemly conflicts& if not something -orse& should the courts underta*e to enforce
their mandates and the e2ecutive refuse to obey$ $ $ $ And -hile -e should concede& if (urisdiction -as
#lainly vested in us& the inability to enforce our (udgment -ould be no sufficient reason for failing to
#ronounce it& es#ecially against an officer -ho -ould be #resumed ready and an2ious in all cases to
render obedience to the la-& yet in a case -here (urisdiction is involved in doubt it is not consistent
-ith the dignity of the court to #ronounce (udgments -hich may be disregarded -ith im#unity& nor
-ith that of the e2ecutive to #lace him in #osition -here& in a matter -ithin his o-n #rovince& he must
act contrary to his (udgment& or stand convicted of a disregard of the la-s$
%n the same case of Ale(andrino vs$ KueHon Bsu#raD& -e find the follo-ing 8uotation from French vs$
5enate of the 5tate of California B1! Cal$& !9D:
Even if -e should give these allegations their fullest force in favor of the #leader& they do not ma*e a
case (ustifying the inter#osition of the court$ :nder our form of government the (udicial de#artment has
no #o-er to revise even the most arbitrary and unfair action of the legislative de#artment& or of either
house thereof& ta*en in #ursuance of the #o-er committed e2clusively to that de#artment by the
constitution$ $ $ $
From the case of Masachusetts vs$ Mellon B+!+ :$5$& MG !M <a-$ ed$& 19ML& 19LD& -e 8uote the
follo-ing #assage:
$ $ $ %f an alleged attem#t by congressional action to annul and abolish an e2isting state government&
F-ith all its constitutional #o-ers and #rivileges&F #resents no (ustifiable issue& as -as ruled in ;eogia
vs$ 5tanton& su#ra& no reason can be suggested -hy it should be other-ise -here the attem#t goes
farther& as it is here alleged& than to #ro#ose to share -ith the state the field of state #o-er$
%n our case the 5enate action through the "endatun 0esolution and the acts alleged to have been
#erformed thereunder& are still less transcendental in com#arison to those involved in ;eorgia vs$
5tanton Bsu#raD& and Massachusetts vs$ Mellon Bsu#raD& as should be obvious to every one$
%n the case of )arry vs$ :nited 5tates e2 rel$ Cunningham B+M9 :$5$& ,9MG M> <a- ed$& L!M& LM+D& the
Federal 5u#reme Court -as concerned -ith a case -here the :nited 5tates 5enate& #ending the
ad(udication of the validity or nullity of the election of 3illiam 5$ Vare as 5enator& refused acce#tance
of his credentials consisting of the returns& u#on the face of -hich he had been elected& and a certificate
form the ;overnor of the 5tate to that effect& and refused to administer the oath of office to him& and to
accord the full right to #artici#ate in the business of the 5enate$ %t -as held that all this F-as a matter
-ithin the discretion of the 5enate$F This is stri*ingly similar to the instant case -here the 5enate of the
"hili##ines& -hich % maintain retained it inherent #o-er of sus#ension after the transfer to the Electoral
Tribunal for the 5enate for its e2clusive (urisdiction to (udge contests relating to the election& returns
and 8ualifications of its members& deemed it to be necessary or convenient to sus#end the
administration of oath to #etitioners& their seating in the 5enate and their #artici#ation in its
deliberations& #ending final decision by said Electoral Tribunal of the contest concerning their election&
-hich matters -ere in my o#inion -ithin the discretion of said 5enate$
%n the case of Masachusetts vs$ Mellon Bsu#raD& the 5u#reme Court of the :nited 5tates concluded its
decision in these -ords:
$ $ $ <oo*ing through forms of -ords to the substance of their com#laint& it is merely that officials of the
e2ecutive de#artment of the government are e2ecuting and -ill e2ecute an act of Congress asserted to
be unconstitutionalG and this -e are as*ed to #revent$ To do so -ould be not to decide a (udicial
controversy& but to assume a #osition of authority over the governmental acts of another and co=e8ual
de#artment E an authority -hich #lainly -e do not #ossess$
5tri*ingly similar& our case is one -herein the substance of the com#laint is merely that res#ondents
"resident and Members of the "hili##ine 5enate have e2ecuted and -ill e2ecute a resolution of the
body asserted to be unconstitutionalG and this -e are as*ed to #revent& to #ara#hrase the Federal
5u#reme Court$ % could not do better than ma*e mine the conclusion of that 4igh Tribunal that rather
than a (udicial controversy -hich -e are as*ed to decide& it is a #osition of authority over the
governmental acts of another and co=e8ual de#artment -hich -e are as*ed to assume E an authority
-hich #lainly -e do not #ossess$
%n the ad(udicated cases& it has often been said that in actual and a##ro#riate controversies submitted to
the courts the (udiciary has the constitutional #o-er to declare unconstitutional any legislative or
e2ecutive act -hich violates the ConstitutionG thus& in the case of Angara vs$ Electoral Commission B!>
"hil$& 1>9& 1L+D& the fourth conclusion established by this court -as as follo-s:
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
BdD That (udicial su#remacy is but the #o-er of (udicial revie- in actual and a##ro#riate cases and
controversies& and is the #o-er and duty to see that no one branch or agency of the government
transcends the Constitution& -hich is the source of all authority$ BEm#hasis su##lied$D
)ut % am of the considered o#inion that& aside from such -rits& as that of habeas cor#us& as may be
guaranteed in the Constitution& all others of a #urely statutory origin and coersive in their o#eration are
not issuable by the (udiciary against either of the other coordinate and co=e8ual de#artments$ %n the
latter cases& % thin* the function of the (udiciary& -ith the 5u#reme Court as the final arbiter& does not go
beyond the declaration of constitutionality or unconstitutionality of the legislative or e2ecutive act
assailed$ )ut some -ould as* ho- such a (udgment could be enforced as against the other t-o
de#artments or either of them$ % believe that in a democratic system of government& built as it is u#on
the #rinci#le of se#aration of #o-ers& -ith the conse8uent freedom of each de#artment from direct
control by the others& the effectiveness of the ad(udications of the courts& in cases #ro#erly coming
under their (urisdiction& has #erforce to de#end u#on the conscience of those at the head of& or
re#resenting& the other t-o de#artments& and their loyalty to the Constitution$ % for one am #ersuaded
that -hen the officers in -hom at the time are vested the e2ecutive and legislative #o-er should see
that the highest court of the land& at the head of the (udicial #o-er& as& in a case #ro#erly brought before
it and -ithin its legitimate (urisdiction& decided that an act of the e2ecutive or legislative de#artment is
unconstitutional& their conscience and loyalty to the Constitution can safely be relied u#on to ma*e
them& -ith good grace& res#ect such final ad(udication$ As -as said in Angara vs$ Electoral
Commission Bsu#raD& our Constitution is& of course& lac*ing #erfection and #erfectibilityG but it has been
deemed by the framers of this and similar antecedent organic la-s #referable to leave the three
coordinate de#artments -ithout #o-er of coercion& one against the other& -ith the e2ce#tions -hich
may have been therein established& to o#en the door to mutual invasion of (urisdiction& -ith the
conse8uent usur#ation of #o-ers of the invaded de#artment$ And it is here -here a##eal -ill have to be
made to the conscience of the de#artment concerned$ %f the e2ecutive or legislative de#artment& in such
cases& should abuse its #o-ers against good conscience& or in a manner disloyal to the Constitution&
ignoring the (udgment of the courts& the aggrieved #arty -ill have to see* his remedy through the
ordinary #rocesses of democracy$
During our consideration of this case reference has been made to the decision of the 5u#reme Court of
the :nited 5tates in )arry vs$ :nited 5tates e2 rel$ Cunningham B+M9 :$5$ ,9MG M> <a-$ ed$ L!MD$ )ut
an e2amination of the facts of that case -ill readily reveal that the 8uestion of -hether or not
Cunningham should have been released on habeas cor#us arose from his arrest by order of the :nited
5tates 5enate in the course of certain #roceedings before that body& sitting as a tribunal to (udge of the
election& returns and 8ualifications of 3illiam 5$ Vare for 5enator$ %t -as held that:
%n e2ercising the #o-er to (udge the elections& returns and 8ualifications of its members& the 5enate acts
as a (udicial tribunal& and the authority to re8uire the attendance of -itnesses is a necessary incident of
the #o-er to ad(udge& in no -ise inferior under li*e circumstances to that e2ercised by a court of
(ustice$ B"$ LM>$D
%n the last sentence of the same #aragra#h the court s#ea*s of the #o-er of the 5enate Fto com#el a
-itness to a##ear to give testimony necessary to enable that body efficiently to e2ercise a legislative
functionG Fand the court #roceeds: Fbut the #rinci#le is e8ually& if not a fortiori a##licable -here the
5enate is e2ercising a (udicial function$F BEm#hasis su##lied$D%t -ill thus a##ear that the #o-ers of the
5enate there involved -ere not legislative but (udicial in character -hich fact differentiates the case
from those here cited& -herein #urely legislative #o-ers or functions of the <egislature or any branch
thereof -ere in 8uestion$ There is no -onder& therefore& that the Federal 5u#reme Court& in the )arry
case& by -hat really amounts to an obiter& made the remar* at the conclusion of its o#inion that Fif
(udicial interference can be successfully invo*ed it can only be u#on a clear sho-ing of such arbitrary
and im#rovident use of the #o-er as -ill constitute a denial of due #rocess of la-&F the #o-er referred
to being the (udicial #o-er to -hich the court refers in the #aragra#h -hich % have 8uoted above$ %n
such a case& the 5enate being #ermitted by the Constitution to e2ercise& for a s#ecial #ur#ose& a #ortion
of the #o-ers -hich #rimarily belong to the (udiciary& it is but #ro#er that any abuse of such limited
and s#ecial #o-er& constituting a denial of the due #rocess of la-& should have its redress in the (udicial
de#artment& -ith the 5u#reme Court as the final arbiterG not so in cases -here any branch of the
legislative de#artment is e2ercising #o-ers or functions #urely legislative in nature and& therefore&
-ithin its alloted #rovince under the Constitution& as in the case at the bar$ The Federal 5u#reme Court
s#ea*s of F(udicial interferenceF -ithout s#ecifying its *ind or nature$ Much less does it say that such
interference -ill necessarily be coercive in character$ )ut even if it had in mind the -rit of habeas
cor#us there a##lied for& this being a high #rerogative -rit B+9 C$ .$& !& MD the #rivilege of -hich is
guaranteed by the )ill of 0ights in our Constitution BArticle %%%& section 1& #aragra#h N1OD& it is in a
class a#art from the coercive -rits or #rocess s#o*en of else-here in this o#inion E it is not merely a
statutory remedy& such as in(unction& #rohibition& etc$& but a constitutional remedy -hich by its very
nature should be binding& in #ro#er cases& u#on any de#artment or agency of the ;overnment to -hich
it may be la-fully addressed$
T:A5/'& .$& concurring and dissenting:
% concur in the result$ /n the authority of Ale(andrino vs$ KueHon B! "hil$& L>D& Fthe -rit #rayed for
cannot issue for the -hole sim#le reason that the 5u#reme Court does not #ossess the #o-er of
coercion to ma*e the "hili##ine 5enate ta*e any #articular action$F
3ith regret % have to dissent from the ma(ority o#inion u#holding the constitutionality of the "endatum
0esolution$
That the 'ational Assembly& no- Congress& retains the #o-er it #ossessed #rior to the a##roval of the
Constitution over the uncontested election& returns and 8ualifications of its members& cannot
successfully be dis#uted$ This #o-er remains intact& unaffected by section 11& Article V% of the
Constitution& -hich limits the (urisdiction of the Electoral Tribunal to election& returns and
8ualifications of members of Congress that are the sub(ect of #rotest$
)ut -ithin this limited s#here of its (urisdiction& the authority of the Electoral Tribunal is su#reme&
absolute& e2clusive$ %n the language of section 11& Article V% of the Constitution Bsu#raD& Fthe Electoral
Tribunal shall be the sole (udge of all contests relating to the elections& returns and 8ualifications of
their res#ective members$F
%n Angara vs$ Electoral Commission B!> "hil$& 1>9D& it -as held& in the light of the deliberations of the
Constitutional Convention& that the #ur#ose of the creation of the Electoral Commission F-as to
transfer in its totality all the #o-er #reviously e2ercised by the legislature in matters #ertaining to
contested elections of its members& to an inde#endent and im#artial tribunal&F -hich& though
constituted by ma(ority members of the legislature& Fis a body se#arate from and inde#endent of the
legislature$F %t -as said that Fthe grant of #o-er to the Electoral Commission to (udge all contests
relating to the election& returns and 8ualifications of members of the 'ational Assembly& is intended to
be as com#lete and unim#aired as if it had remained originally in the legislatureFG that Fthe e2#ress
lodging of that #o-er by the 'ational Assembly&F and that Fthis is as effective a restriction u#on the
legislative #o-er as an e2#ress #rohibition in the Constitution$F %n other #arts of the decision& this court
characteriHed as e2clusive the (urisdiction of the Electoral Commission over #rotests against the
election of members of the 'ational Assembly and Fdetermination thereof$F
'o stronger language than this can be found to em#hasiHe the com#leteness of the inhibition of the
'ational Assembly from interference in any matter #ertaining to an election #rotest filed -ith the
Electoral Commission$
The resolution in 8uestion destroys the e2clusive character of the Electoral Tribunal@s #o-er$ %t
encroaches u#on the Electoral Tribunal@s #rerogative as the sole (udge of all contests relating to the
election& returns and 8ualifications of the members of the Congress$ %n see*ing the sus#ension of the
#etitioners on the strenght of the re#orted election irregularities in Central <uHon& irregularities -hich
constitute the sole basis of the main #rotest& to that e2tent the resolution #assed (udgment on the truth
or #robabilities of the charges& although the (udgment may not have been intended as final$ At the very
least& the resolution touches directly on a matter -hich involves a senatorial election contest$ From
-hatever stand #ointone may loo* at the "endatun 0esolution& it is hard to esca#e the conclusion that it
overste#s the bounds of the 5enate@s authority and tres#asses on a territory entirely reserved for the
Electoral Tribunal$
Vie-ed from another angle& the legality of #etitioners@ sus#ension is o#en to attac*$ This sus#ension
-as resorted to as an au2iliary and interlocutory ste# subordinated to the final outcome of the election
#rotest filed against them$ /nly a fe- -ill disagree -ith the #ro#osition that the #o-er of the 5enate or
the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives to sus#end its members as a subsidiary measure for causes connected
-ith their election& returns and 8ualifications& is& if such #o-er e2ists& an im#lied #o-er derived from
the #o-er to remove or e2clude& or -hat is the same thing in this connection& the #o-er to invalidate an
election$ %t follo-s that -here the #olitical #o-er has been ta*en a-ay& as in the case of #rotested
elections& the accessory #o-er to sus#end vanishes$ The fact that the #o-er to sus#end may not have
been transferred& as is contended& to the Electoral Commission does not argue in favor of the contention
that it still resides in the Congress$
"E0FECT/& .$& dissenting:
%$ET/ MEET /0 '/T T/ MEET T4E C4A<<E';E
The challenge has been flung$ 5hall -e evade it by an unmanly and shameful retreatQ
)y this case the highest tribunal of the land in undergoing a crucial test$ 5hall it do honor to its
constitutional role as the last bastion of the Fregime of (usticeF #roclaimed by the Constitution in its
#reamble& as one of the fundamental goals of the government establishedQ
The Constitution itself is on the balance$ Fundamental #rinci#les of good government& basic human
rights& #rime rules for the e2istence of an orderly society have been tram#led u#on$ The victims come
to the 5u#reme Court -here the last line of democracy lies$ 5hall -e allo- that line to give under the
onslaughtQ 5hall -e betray the faith of our #eo#leQ
5hall -e refuse to do our #art& our duty& our mission& to maintain in our country a government of la-s&
only because -e have to face a #o-erful grou# of senatorsQ
Three senators of the "hili##ines& duly #roclaimed as elected by 1&M>!&9M combined votes cast by
8ualified Fili#ino electors& immediately after assuming their res#ective #ositions& -ere de#rived of their
seats in the 5enate through the unscru#ulous& irres#onsible& and subversive action of a tyrannical and
ruthless ma(ority -ho -ould not sto# even to a do-nright tram#ling of the fundamental la-$ The
victims come to us clamoring for relief and (ustice$ 5hall -e meet the clamor -ith deaf earsQ 5hall -e
remain aloof -ith callous indifference to a flagrant violation of the ConstitutionQ 5hall -e leave the
victims at the mercy of a des#otic oligarchy and allo- the latter to su##lant democracyQ 5hall -e leave
them instead to #in their ho#es on #o#ular (ustice& if they be #atient enough not to see* (ustice by their
hands or by the #eo#le -ho e2alted them by suffrage to be their s#o*esmen in the 5enate and in
CongressQ
3ithin the remaining s#an of our life& never shall -e be more conscious of the great #rivilege of
#erforming our duties as the ultimate guardians of the fundamental source of vitality of our nation as an
organic -hole& -hether normality #revails or the #eo#le boil in the cauldron of e2 surging #artisan
#assions$ The very essence of constitutional government is under our trust and the momentous 8uestion
is -hether -e shall betray that trust and *ee# unblemished our (udicial escutcheon$ The blinding
grandeur of the un#recedented o##ortunity challenging us cannot fail to move our -hole being& from
ender on to the inner recesses of heart and brains& in the effort to be e8ual to the high duty$
%%$EC/'F<%CT /F "4%</5/"4%E5
:nder the admitted lac* of #erfection and #erfectability of our Constitution& it being the -or* of men&
still -e can not subscribe to the nihilistic theory that there are flagrant violations of its #rovisions&
committed in utter o##ression of a minority& to -hom our government is inca#able of giving redress&
and -hen a (udicial controversy arising from them is submitted for our decision -e must allo-
ourselves to be #etrified in buddhistic nirvana and declare ourselves im#otent& li*e the bystander -ho
can not lift a finger to save #eo#le crying for hel# inside a burning house or a little child inclosed in a
cage full of hungry tigers$
4ere& three senators of the "hili##ines are -antonly de#rived of their seats in the 5enate as
constitutional re#resentatives of the #eo#le$ 4ere& chosen& s#o*esmen of many hundreds of thousands
of 8ualified voters& are silenced and muHHled& and their constitutional rights tram#led u#on$ The
transgression of the fundamental la- is evident$ )ut it is alleged that the 5u#reme Court is #o-erless to
#rotect the victims& to revindicate their constitutional rights and those of the 8ualified voters -ho
elevated them to office& and to restore la-$ %t is alleged that -ithin our system of government there is
absolutely no remedy for such an o##ression$ The theory is an unmista*able u#shot of a #hiloso#hy of
frustration& defeatism& and des#air$ 3e can not subscribe to such an effete #hiloso#hy& afflicted -ith
moral asthenia& unable to see but an horiHon of failure$ 3e refuse to ado#t the des#airing and fatalistic
attitude of decre#it and im#otent senility$ "hiloso#hical eunuchry is incom#atible -ith enemy$ ;elded
intellectual virility or a dynamic moral effeminacy has no #lace -ithin the system of "hili##ine
constitutional democracy$
The framing of our Constitution is based on a #hiloso#hy of faith and ho#e& the #hiloso#hy of healthy&
vigorous and courageous youth& full of the Hest of life& brimming -ith sturdy and e2alted ideas& drun*
-ith the -ine of ins#ired ambition and filled -ith enthusiasm for all good and beautiful things& al-ays
dreaming of a nobler and more glorious future$ 3ithin that strenuous #hiloso#hy there is no #lace for
the theory of im#otency of our system of government in redressing constitutional transgressions and of
the inca#ability of the courts of (ustice in giving #rotection and redress to the victims$
%%%$EK:A<%T%E5 0EK:%0ED %' .:D%C%A< F:'CT%/'
3e cannot acce#t the invitation to bury our heads in ostrich=li*e fashion in the sands of indifference
and inaction because& in having to e2ercise the constitutional function of administering (ustice& -e -ill
be constrained to face and ta*e action against #o-erful& defiant or arrogant #arties$ %t is #recisely in
cases li*e this -here -e should never sho- the least hesitancy in the #erformance of our official duties
and in the e2ercise of the loftiest function of humanity: the administration of (ustice$
The (udicial function calls for those 8ualities -hich& for lac* of better -ords& are described as
manliness& moral courage& intellectual decision& firmness of character& and steadfastness of convictions$
3e acce#ted our #osition in this court fully cogniHant of the grave res#onsibilities it entails and a-are
that it -ill e2act from us all the best that nature has besto-ed on us$ 3e must not give less$ 3e must
not betray #o#ular trust$ 3e should not disa##oint the #eo#le$
%V$EFACT5 %' T4E CA5E
The Commission on Elections& #ursuant to the #rovisions of section 11 of Common-ealth Act 'o$ M+,&
made the canvass of the votes cast for senators in the election held on A#ril +>& 19!& and on May +>&
19!& #roclaimed #etitioners as elected$ B5ee accom#anying A##endi2 A$D
/f the 1! senators #roclaimed elected& 9 belong to the <iberal "arty& res#ondents .ose A$ Avelino&
Vicente Francisco& Vicente 5otto& Melecio ArranH& 0amon Torres& Mariano .$ Cuenco& /legario Clarin&
Enri8ue Magalona& and 5ali#ada "endatunG and M to the 'acionalista "arty& the > #etitioners and Tomas
Confesor& Carlos "$ ;arcia& Tomas Cabili& and Ale(o Mabanag$
/f the senators elected in 191& L remain in office& belonging to the <iberal "arty& Domingo %m#erial&
"roceso 5ebastian& 5a 0amain Alonto& and Emiliano Tria TironaG and to the 'acionalista "arty&
Eulogio 0odrigueH& 'icolas )uendia& "edro 4ernaeH& and Vicente 0ama$
The 5enate therefore& is actually com#osed of 1> <iberals& -ith a #recarious ma(ority of +& and a
minority of 11 'acionalistas$
/n May +,& 19!& in accordance -ith the Common-ealth Act 'o$ M+,& the 5enate convened to
inaugurate the regular legislative session for this year$
The session& -ith all senators #resent& e2ce#t 5enators 5a 0amain Alonto and Vicente 0ama& began by
the reading of the #roclamation made by the Commission on Elections& as co#ied in the accom#anying
A##endi2 A$ 'o ob(ection having been raised against the #roclamation& there being no 8uestion as to its
legality and regularity& -ith all the ++ members #resent& including #etitioners& recogniHed and acce#ted
as full=fledged senators of the "hili##ines& the 5enate #roceeded to elect its "resident& a vacant #osition
#reviously held by "resident Manuel A$ 0o2as$ The result -as: > absentG + abstainedG for res#ondent
5enator .ose A$ Avelino& 19 votes& including his o-nG for #etitioner 5enator .ose /$ Vera& L votesG and
for 5enator Carlos "$ ;arcia& 1 vote$
After res#ondent 5enator Avelino assumed his office as "resident of the 5enate& it -as moved that he
receive the collective oath of office of the ne-ly elected senators& and& at that (uncture& 5enator
5ali#ada "endatun #ro#osed the ado#tion of a resolution herein attached as A##endi2 )& as a historical
e2hibit of the scurviest dealing a minority has ever endured& the dis#ositive #art of -hich reads as
follo-s:
'/3& T4E0EF/0E& be it resolved by the 5enate of the "hili##ines& in session assembled& as it hereby
resolves& to defer the administration of oath and the sitting of ./5E /$ VE0A& 0AM/' D%/R'/& and
./5E 0/ME0/& #ending the hearing and decision on the #rotests lodged against their elections&
-herein the terrorism averred in the re#ort of the Commission on Elections and in the re#ort of the
"rovost Marshall constitute the ground of said #rotests and -ill therefore be the sub(ect of investigation
and determination$
Debate began u#on the ado#tion of the #ro#osed resolution$ After-ards it -as unanimously agreed
u#on to #ost#one further debate on the 8uestion for Monday& May +M& 19!$
The 5enate #roceeded thereafter to consider another matter during -hich& in #rotest against the action
ta*en by the ma(ority on the said matter& all the minority senators -al*ed out from the session hall&
leaving therein only 1+ ma(ority senators& including the "resident of the 5enate$ Ta*ing advantage of
the absence of all the minority senators& the 1+ ma(ority senators remaining in the session hall a##roved
and ado#ted the "endatun 0esolution& not-ithstanding the fact that the 5enate had already #ost#oned
the further consideration of said resolution to May +M& 19!& and the 1+ ma(ority senators& for lac* of
8uorum& could not& under the Constitution& #roceed -ith the business of the same and& therefore& had
not the authority either to reconsider the resolution ta*en by the 5enate& #ost#oning the continuation of
the debate on the "endatun 0esolution to May +M& 19!& or to consider and a##rove said resolution$
At the time the #etition has been filed& May +M& 19!& res#ondent 5enator .ose Avelino& "resident of the
5enate& had already begun to #ut into effect the "endatun 0esolution by ordering the 5ecretary of the
5enate to erase from the roll of the same the names of the three #etitioners$
Among the three #etitioners -ho are com#laining of being de#rived of their constitutional and legal
right to continue sitting in the 5enate of the "hili##ines is the minority Floor <eader .ose /$ Vera& -ho
lost the election for "resident of the 5enate by the bare difference of t-o votes$ All the three #etitioners&
by the high #ositions they formerly occu#ied in the ;overnment of -hich -e may ta*e (udicial notice&
are recogniHed as #olitical leaders of national stature& -hose #resence -ill do honor to any legislative
chamber of any country in the -orld$
V$E"0E<%M%'A0P %'.:'CT%/'
:#on the facts above related and the allegations made in the #etition under oath& including the one to
the effect that the res#ondents of the ma(ority #arty are determined to #ut into effect immediately the
"endatun resolution& to de#rive the #etitioners of their right to sit in the 5enate& the Fsinister #ur#oseF
of -hich -as the a##roval& -ithout the intervention and #artici#ation of #etitioners& of im#ortant
measures& including an alleged terroristic one for (udicial reorganiHation and the highly controversial
)ell )ill& as soon as the #etition -as submitted in the night of May +M& 19!& the undersigned issued the
#reliminary in(unction #rayed for in the #etition u#on #etitioners@ filing a cash bond in the amount of
"1&999$ BCo#y of the order is attached as A##endi2 D$D
/n May +9& 19!& the 5u#reme Court in banc -as s#ecially called to session -ith the s#ecific #ur#ose
of considering the issuance of a -rit of #reliminary in(unction$ As the court functioning is a s#ecial
division of si2& and the 5u#reme Court in banc -as then in vacation& the session had to be called u#on
the initiative of the Chief .ustice$ %n the meantime& the service of the -rit -as sus#ended$
The 5u#reme Court in banc ado#ted then the follo-ing resolution:
The court in banc& having been informed that a -rit of #reliminary in(unction has been issued in ;$0$
'o$ <=,>& .ose /$ Vera vs$ .ose Avelino by .ustice "erfecto under sections + and , of 0ule !9&
0esolved to set for hearing the #etition for #reliminary in(unction on 5aturday& .une 1st& 19!& at 19
o@cloc* a$m$& for the #ur#ose of determining -hether or not the issuance of said -rit -as (ustified$ <et
notice be given to all the #arties$
The Chief .ustice and Associate .ustices "aras& 4ilado and )engHon voted to dissolve the #reliminary
in(unction in the meantime$
:#on the ado#tion of the above resolution& the undersigned instructed the Cler* to #roceed -ith the
service of the -rit of #reliminary in(unction& -hich -as immediately served to res#ondents$
/n .une >& 19!& a ma(ority ado#ted the follo-ing resolution& dissolving the -rit of #reliminary
in(unction:
Considering that the #reliminary in(unction -as issued in the case of .ose /$ Vera& #etitioners& vs$ .ose
A$ Avelino& res#ondents& ;$0$ 'o$ <=,>& to #reserve the status 8uo and thus #revent the e2ecution of
the acts alleged under oath in the last #art of #aragra#h C of the #etition& -ithout the intervention of the
#etitionersG and ta*ing into consideration that this court& after hearing both #arties& at any rate believes
and trusts that the res#ondents -ill not carry out said acts during the #endency of this #roceeding& this
court& -ithout deciding -hether or not the said in(unction -as (ustified& hereby resolves to dissolve it in
the meantime& -ithout #re(udice to -hatever action or decision this court may ta*e or render on the
8uestion involved in this case including that of (urisdiction$
.ustice "aras concurs in the result$
.ustice .aranilla absent$
.ustice "erfecto dissents as follo-s:
The facts alleged in the #etition sho- that #etitioners@ fundamental rights have been tram#led u#on in
o#en defiance of the la- and the ConstitutionG that res#ondents& in ado#ting the "endatun 0esolution
and trying to enforce it& usur#ed constitutional functions e2clusively entrusted by the #eo#le to the
Electoral Tribunal of the 5enate& as an inde#endent and se#arate de#artment of the governmentG that the
#eo#le at large& -ho voted for and of -hom #etitioners are legal re#resentatives& are intended to be
de#rived of their voice and vote on matters of transcendental im#ortance to the -elfare and future of
this nation& that are and to be under consideration of the 5enate$ 0es#ondents did not deny these facts$
They reduced themselves to im#ugn the inherent and undis#utable (urisdiction of this 5u#reme Court to
#ass u#on the above mentioned flagrant violations of the Constitution and to afford coercive relief to
the victims thereof$ 3e cannot agree -ith an action -hich history may give a damaging inter#retation$
3e must have #ro#er res#ect to the (udgement of #osterity$ 3e have a #lain duty to u#hold the
Constitution$ 3e must not shir* that sacred duty$ 3e are called u#on to #rotect the constitutional
#rerogatives of the re#resentatives of the #eo#le$ /ur loyalty to the #eo#le does not #ermit any
alternative action to that of e2tending the cloa* of our authority so that the re#resentatives of the #eo#le
may continue #erforming unham#ered their fundamental #rerogatives and functions$ 3e cannot agree
-ith any sus#ension of their e2ercise in utter violation of the fundamental la- of land$ The sovereignty
of the #eo#le itself is involved in this case$ 3e cannot suffer the idea that in one of the crucial moments
in the #erformance of our functions and in the com#liance of our duty as is #ointed out by our
conscience& -e have faltered$ The #reliminary in(unction must not be dissolved$
Although the belief e2#ressed in the ma(ority resolution is& in effect& a moral in(unction& addressed
solely to the sense of res#onsibility& fairness& decency& and #atriotism of res#ondents& -ithout any
enforceable legal sanction& the ma(ority being sure that res#ondents -ill not betray the trust re#osed on
them& yet -e felt it our duty to dissent because in 8uestions so im#ortant as those raised in this case -e
do not agree -ith indirect and di#lomatic #rocedures& -ith -avering& innocious and hesitating action&
-ith laodicean measures and resolutions& -ith e8uivocal& furtive& and not forth #utting attitude$ %n
(udicial matters& the best #olicy is forthrightness& not ambiguity$ The -ay of Themis is al-ays
rectilinear$ 4er #ath is never tortuous& labyrinthine& or misleading$
3ithout any attem#t at #ro#hecy& not long after the resolution dissolving the -rit of #reliminary
in(unction& events have sho-n the moral& indirect& or admonitory in(unctions by courts of (ustice are
mere sounds transcribed on scra#s of #a#er& not -orthier than the sheets on -hich they are -ritten$
4oc*ing at the credulity& ingenuousness& and com#liance of the ma(ority of this court& -ith the
e2clusion of #etitioners& res#ondents #roceeded to carryout the acts alleged in the last #art of #aragra#h
C of the #etition& such as the a##roval of the )ell bill& the revam#ing of the (udiciary system of the
"hili##ines& including the unconstitutional reduction of the membershi# of the 5u#reme Court from the
eleven to seven& and the measure -hich -ould -i#e out the time=honored #rinci#le of stability in the
"hili##ine civil service system& by #lacing many thousands of #ublic officers and em#loyees in
ini8uitous insecurity in the #ositions in -hich they have invested the be stenergies in years of #ublic
service$
For the nonce& it -ill be hard to gauge and a##raise the full conse8uences of the resolution of .une ,&
19!& dissolving the -rit of #reliminary in(unction based on the ma(ority@s belief and trust that events
have sho-n to be com#letely haHy and groundless$ %t is only our fervent ho#e that the conse8uences&
-hatever they may be& may not dam#en the enthusiasm of those -ho have re#osed so much faith in the
success of our sovereign 0e#ublic as the #ursuivant heralding a ne- era to all sub(ected #eo#les$
/n .une L& 19!& #etitioners filed a motion #raying that the above ma(ority@s resolution of .une >& 19!&
be reconsidered and that the -rit of #reliminary in(unction be restored$ %t remained de#lorably unacted
u#on for -ee*s until res#ondents -ere able to consummate the acts above mentioned$
That action continues no- to be #ending before us for decision& the same as res#ondents@ motion to
dismiss$
V%$E:'C/'5T%T:T%/'A< :5:0"AT%/'
5ection 11 of Article V% of the Constitution reads as follo-s:
The 5enate and the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives shall each have an Electoral Tribunal -hich shall be the
sole (udge of all contests relating to the election& returns& and 8ualifications of their res#ective
members$ Each Electoral Tribunal shall be com#osed of nine members& three of -hom shall be .ustices
of the 5u#reme Court to be designated by the Chief .ustice& and the remaining si2 shall be members of
the 5enate or of the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives& as the case may be& -ho shall be chosen by each 4ouse&
three u#on nomination of the #arty having the largest number of votes and three of the #arty having the
second largest number of votes therein$ The senior .ustice in each Electoral Tribunal shall be its
Chairman$
The constitution of the Electoral Tribunals is #rovided in section 1> of Article V% of the Constitution&
-herein it is re8uired that they shall be constituted F-ithin thirty days after the 5enate and the 4ouse of
0e#resentatives shall have been organiHed -ith the election of their "resident and 5#ea*er&
res#ectively$F
From the foregoing& it is evident that the #o-er to (udge Fall contests relating to the election& returns
and 8ualificationsF of senators and re#resentatives& is e2clusively lodged in the res#ective Electoral
Tribunal& the e2clusivity being em#hasiHed by the use of the -ord FsoleF by the drafters of the
Constitution$
)y the "edatun 0esolution& res#ondents e2ercised& in effect& the #o-er to (udge Fthe election& returns&
and 8ualificationsF of #etitioners as senators of the "hili##ines& duly #roclaimed as elected on A#ril +>&
19!$
From the very -ords of res#ondents themselves there can be no #ossible mista*es as to the fact that& in
ado#ting the "endatun 0esolution& they e2ercised the (udicial #o-er to (udge a controversy concerning
the election of #etitioners as senators of the "hili##ines$
From their motion to dismiss dated .une !& 19!& through 5olicitor ;eneral <orenHo Ta?ada and Atty$
Vicente .$ Francisco& himself one of the 5enate& referring to the reasons behind the ado#tion of the
"endatun 0esolution& -e read:
The 5enate considers it against its dignity and inimical to its -elfare and integrity to allo- #etitioners
to sit as members #ending the final determination of the 8uestion -hether or not they -ere duly elected
$ $ $ it -as an e2#ression of the legislative BQD #olicy& a desire on the #art of the 5enate to recogniHe only
members -hom it believes -ere legally elected$ BEm#hasis su##lied$D
The res#ondents do not constitute the 5enate Electoral Tribunal -hich has the e2clusive (urisdiction to
e2ercise said #o-er$ The fact that latter three among the res#ondent 5enators -ere chosen to be
members of said Tribunal does not change the situation& nor cures the constitution inroad$ They&
therefore& in ado#ting the "endatun 0esolution& usur#ed a #o-er& a (urisdiction& and an authority
e2clusively belonging to the 5enate Electoral Tribunal$ The usur#ation has been #er#etrated in flagrant
violation of the Constitution$ The "endatun 0esolution& being unconstitutional& is null and void #er se$
Among the .ustices -ho voted to declare it invalid& because it -imbles the fundamental la-& are t-o
former members of the constitutional convention and of its committee on style& -ho too* active #art in
the creation of the Electoral Commission& and a former member of the 5econd 'ational Assembly
-hich& by constitutional amendment& created the #resent 5enate and the t-o Electoral Tribunals$ .ustice
4ontiveros& one of the #resent three .ustices -ho too* #art in the framing of the original Constitution&
did not #artici#ate in the voting$
3e have to bring out these facts because it is only logical that the co=authors of the Constitution and of
its amendments must be in a better #osition to inter#ret their o-n -ill& intention& and #ur#oses as they
e2#ressed them in their o-n -ords in the fundamental la-$
V%$=A$ET4E %'TE'T /F T4E "E/"<E %' T4E C/'5T%T:T%/' %5 %DE'T%CA< 3%T4 T4E
%'TE'T /F T4E%0 DE<E;ATE5
Even the ma(ority themselves admit that& in construing the Constitution of the :nited 5tates& the
-ritings in FThe FederalistF of the delegates of the constitutional convention& such as 4amilton&
Madison& and .ay& have #ersuasive force& the same as the boo* of Delegate Aruego and of other
members of our o-n constitutional convention concerning the Constitution of the "hili##ines$ %t is only
logical that the authors themselves should be in the advantageous situation of construing more e2actly
the #roduct of their o-n minds$
)ut& as if re#enting for ma*ing the admission& foreseeing the damaging conse8uences thereof for the
ma(ority@s #osition& they tried to neutraliHe it or subtract its validity by seconding the so#histic
distinction made by 3illoughby as to the conclusiveness of the #arliamentary #roceedings as means by
#ro#er construction of the Constitution& on one side& and of the statutes& on the other& since in the
legislative #roceedings Fit is the intent of the legislature -e see*& F -hile in the #receedings of the
constitution convention F-e are endeavoring to arrive at the intent of the #eo#le through the
discussions and the liberations of their re#resentative$F The distinction is absolutely groundless$ %n
either the constitutional convention are in the legislature& it is the #eo#le -ho s#ea* through their
delegates and re#resentatives& and the intent of the #eo#le may only be gathered from the utterances of
said delegates and re#resentatives$ The Fintent of the legislatureF in ordinary la-s is the Fintent of the
#eo#le&F both and being undistinguishable for all #ractical #ur#oses$ And the Fintent of the #eo#leF in a
constitutional convention is identified -ith the FintentF of their delegates thereof$ %t is absurd& in
#ractical& and against the realities of all e2#erience to mention Fintent of the #eo#leF as something
different from and in o##osition to the intent of their o-n re#resentatives$ The delegates and
re#resentatives are the mouth#iece of the #eo#le$ %n the system of the re#resentative democracy
#revailing in the :nited 5tates of America and in the "hili##ines& the #eo#le never s#ea* by
themselves& but by their chosen mouth#ieces E the voters in the matter of selection of government
officers& and the officers in the matter of e2#ressing the #eo#le@s -ill in government or state matters$
There is no essential difference bet-een the #arliamentary role of the delegates to a constitutional
convention and that of the members of a legislature$ The fact that the former are charged -ith the
drafting of the fundamental la- and the latter -ith the enactment of ordinary la-s does not change
their common character as re#resentatives and mouth#ieces of the #eo#le$ %n either the Constitution or
in the ordinary statutes& it is the thought and the -ill of the #eo#le -hich are e2#ressed$ 3hat that
thought and that -ill are can only be gathered from the -ay they are e2#ressed by the re#resentatives$
The thought and the -ill of the #eo#le are inter#reted and e2#ressed by the re#resentatives and
crystalliHed in the -ords uttered and -ritten by them$ 'o one may #retend to *no- the meaning of the
e2#ressions uttered of the #rovisions -ritten better than the very #ersons -ho #oured on them their
o-n thoughts and decisions$ The thought and the -ill of the #eo#le remain in the abstract& are inca#able
of ca#tion& are more ideological entities& and do not form and cannot be #ointed out or determined until
and unless their re#resentatives in the constitutional convention are in the legislature e2#ress them in
concrete and s#ecific -ords of their o-n$ The collective entity of the #eo#le is& by its very in being&
inarticulate$ %t becomes articulate only through its chosen re#resentatives$ %ts -ill is an a#hlogistic
amber that becomes aflame only in the #arliamentary actuations of its delegates$
And if -e are not dreaming& -e must acce#t the fact that -hat the re#resentatives of the #eo#le
stereoty#e either in a constitution or in ordinary la-s are their o-n #ersonal o#inions and convictions&
their o-n individual and #ersonal thoughts and -ills& although in doing so they act in their
re#resentative ca#acity$ 3e& the members of the 5u#reme Court& are also re#resentatives of the #eo#le
and are #erforming our official functions in are #resentative ca#acity& but the o#inions -e e2#ress and
-rite flo-& not from any e2trinsic or ind-elling reservoir of (ustice& reserved to us by the sovereign
#eo#le& but from the s#iritual fountain of our o-n #ersonal consciousness$
3e -ill not dare to dis#ute any one@s claim to -ield& in inter#reting the fundamental la-& the same
authority of such (udicial giants as Marshall and 4olmes& but -e consider it com#letely out of #lace to
conclude that& because in the #resent constitutional controversy -e maintain that the co=authors of our
fundamental la- are in better #osition to construe the very document in -hich they have infused the
ideas -hich boiled in their minds& and gave a definite form to their o-n convictions and decisions& said
great (ustices shall not be so authoritative in e2#ounding the :nited 5tates Constitution& because they
-ere not members of the federal convention that framed it& eventhough& it should be recalled& Chief
.ustice Marshall -as one of the outstanding figures in the Virginia convention that ratified said
Constitution$ The mention is out of #lace& because it has not been& and can not be& sho-n that the
constitutional o#inions of Marshall and 4olmes& for -hich they -ere hailed as authorities& are in
conflict -ith -hat Madison& 4amilton& .ay& and other delegates to the federal convention had said or
-ritten as to the intent e2#ressed in said fundamental la-G -hile in the #resent controversy& there is an
actual conflict of inter#retation bet-een former delegates and those -ho never have been& and it
ha##ens that the former members of the constitutional convention ta*ing #art in the dis#osal of this
case& are unanimous in construing the document in the drafting of -hich they too* #ersonal and active
#art$
/f course& in our atmos#here of freedom of o#inion& outsiders may #erfectly claim and #retend to *no-
-hat the delegates to our constitutional convention intended to e2#ress in the Constitution better than
the delegates themselves& as it is #ossible for some anthro#ologists to claim that they are in a #osition
to recogniHe the children of some #arents better than the #arents themselves$ )ut everybody must also
agree that such feats of clairvoyance are not -ithin the range of normal e2#erience and& therefore& must
not ordinarily be acce#ted at their face value$
V%%$E:'C/'5T%T:T%/'A< "0/CED:0E
The "endatun 0esolution has been ado#ted -hen there -as no 8uorum in the 5enate$ Those #resent
-ere only 1+& all res#ondent senators$
3hen res#ondents ado#ted the resolution& they #ur#ortedly ado#ted it as a resolution of the 5enate$
5ection 19 B+D of Article V% of the Constitution #rovides that Fa ma(ority of each 4ouse shall constitute
a 8uorum to do business& but a smaller number may ad(ourn from day to day and may com#el the
attendance of absent members in such manner and under such #enalties as such 4ouse may #rovide$F
%t is evident& therefore& that& to do business& the 5enate& being com#osed of + members& needs the
#resence of at least 1> senators$ FA smaller number may ad(ourn from day to day and may com#el the
attendance of absent members&F but not in e2ercising any other #o-er& such as the ado#tion of the
"endatun 0esolution$
The #rocedure used by res#ondents in ado#ting the "endatun 0esolution is& therefore& conclusively
unconstitutional$
V%%%$EC0%M%'A< /FFE'5E5
"etitioners are among the senators -ho& having been #roclaimed elected by the Commission on
Elections& are duty bound to assume office from May +>& 19!& under the follo-ing mandatory
#rovision of section 1+ of Common-ealth Act 'o$ M+,:
5EC$ 1+$ The candidates for member of the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives and those for 5enator -ho have
been #roclaimed elected by the res#ective )oard of Canvassers and the Commission on Elections shall
assume office and shall hold regular session for the year nineteen hundred and forty=si2 on May
t-enty=five& nineteen hundred and forty=si2$ 3ithin thirty=five days after the election has been held&
both 4ouses of Congress shall meet in session and shall #ublicly count the votes cast for the offices of
"resident and Vice="resident& in accordance -ith Article V%%& section t-o of the Constitution$ The
#ersons res#ectively having the largest number of votes for "resident and Vice="resident shall be
declared electedG but in case t-o or more candidates shall have an e8ual and largest number of votes for
either office& one of them shall be chosen "resident or Vice="resident& as the case may be& by a ma(ority
vote of the members of Congress in (oint session assembled$
%f #etitioners should fail to discharge the duties of their res#ective offices& they -ill incur criminal
res#onsibility and may be #unished& according to the "enal Code& -ith arresto mayor or a fine not
e2ceeding 1&999 #esos& or both$
Art$ +>$ 0efusal to discharge elective office$EThe #enalty of arresto mayor or a fine not e2ceeding
1&999 #esos& or both& shall be im#osed u#on any #erson -ho& having been elected by #o#ular election
to a #ublic office& shall refuse -ithout legal motive to be s-orn in or to discharge the duties of said
office$
'o one may #revent them from #erforming the duties of their office& such as attending the meetings of
the 5enate or of any of its committees or subcommittees& or from e2#ressing their o#inions or casting
their votes& -ithout being criminally guilty of a violation of #arliamentary immunity& a criminal offense
#unished by the "enal Code -ith #rision mayor$
A0T$ 1,$ Violation of #arliamentary immunity$EThe #enalty of #rision mayor shall be im#osed u#on
any #erson -ho shall use force& intimidation& threats& or fraud to #revent any member of the 'ational
Assembly BCongressDfrom attending the meetings of the Assembly BCongressD or of any of its
committees or subcommittees& constitutional commissions or committees or divisions thereof& from
e2#ressing his o#inions or casting his voteG and the #enalty of #rision correccional shall be im#osed
u#on any #ublic officer or em#loyee -ho shall& -hile the Assembly BCongressD is in regular or s#ecial
session& arrest or search any member thereof& e2ce#t this Code by a #enalty higher than #rision mayor$
B3ords in #arenthesis su##lied$D
From the foregoing& it is evident that res#ondents have the ine2cusable duty of recogniHing #etitioners
as legal members of the 5enate& other-ise they may be liable to criminal #rosecution for an offense
defined and #unished by the "enal Code -ith im#risonment ranging from ! years to 1+ years$
%C$E"ET%T%/'E05@ C0EDE'T%A<5 C/'C<:5%VE A5 T/ T4E%0 0%;4T T/ T4E%0 5EAT5 %'
T4E 5E'ATE
%t is a duty from -hich res#ondents can not legally esca#e$ /ther-ise they -ill invite the s-ord of
Damocles of criminal #rosecution to be hanging on their heads$ As the 5u#reme Court of Ransas said
in 0e ;unn$ 19 <$0$A$& ,19:
)ut& again -e have -hat is *no-n as a Fstandard -or*F on #arliamentary or legislative #ractice$ %t is
found in almost every #ublic library& is e2amined and referred to by every legislative assembly and
every congressional body& and its title is FCushing@s <a- and "ractice of <egislative Assemblies$F $ $ $
%n section +9 it is said: Fthe #rinci#le of #arliamentary la- a##licable to the 8uestion are #erfectly
sim#le and #lain& founded in the very nature of things& established by the uniform #ractice and authority
of #arliament& confirmed by reason and analogy$ These #rinci#les are as follo-s: First& that every
#erson duly returned is a member& -hether legally elected or not& until his election is set asideG second&
that no #erson -ho is not duly returned& is a member& although legally elected& until his election is
establishedG third& that conflicting claimants& both in form legally returned Bthat -ould be -here t-o
#ersons had certificatesD& are neither of them entitled to be considered as members until the 8uestion
bet-een them has been settledG fourth& that those members -ho are duly returned& and they alone E the
members -hose rights are to determined being e2cluded E constitute the (udicial tribunal for the
decision of all 8uestions of this nature$F :#on this 8uestion of certificates& -e also cite the contest in
the :nited 5tates 5enate from Montana& -hich is the latest utterance of the highest legislative body in
this land$ %n the re#ort of the ma(ority of the committee it is said: FThe ma(ority of the committee are of
the o#inion that& if this body of #ersons had la-ful and constitutional certificates of their election& that
title is a good title against all the -orld& governing their associates in that body& governing the senate&
governing everybody -ho had a la-ful duty to determine -ho are la-fully elected re#resentatives&
until there can be an ad(udication by the 4ouse itself to the contraryG and that nobody can be heard to
say& and that no authority can be #ermitted to in8uire into or determine& the actual facts of the election
as against the title$F B,1st Congress& 1st 5ession N+1 Cong$ 0ecord& #t$ >& ##$ +99!=+L19O& #$ ,+1$D
The court also 8uoted from the American and English Encyclo#edia& saying:
The American and English Encyclo#edia summariHes the la- of the -orth of a certificate of election as
follo-s: F%t is settled that -hen it is made the duty of certain officers to canvass the votes& and issue a
certificate of election in favor of the successful candidate& a certificate of such officers& regular u#on its
face& is sufficient to entitle the #erson holding it to the #ossession of the office during an action to
contest the right$F Volume !& #$ >M>G >> <a-$ ed$& 9LG 5tate vs$ )uc*land B+> Ran$& >!9D$
The court might -ell have added that 0uling Case <a- -holly confirms its stand:
$ $ $ The certificate entitles the reci#ient to e2ercise the office until the regular constitutional authority
shall determine -ho is legally elected officer& and it is duty of the incumbent of an office at the
e2#iration of his term to surrender it to one -ho has received a certificate of election and has 8ualified
thereunder$ %f it is desired to contest the election or 8ualification of such #erson& this may be done in the
manner #rescribed by la- for determining claims to an office$ Disbursing officers& charges -ith the
#ayment of salaries& have a right to rely on the a##arent title& and treat the officer -ho is clothed -ith it
as the officer de (ure& -ithout in8uiring -hether another has the better right$ 3hile a certificate of
election may be su#erseded by a decree in #roceedings to contest the election& it cannot be sub(ected to
attac* in a collateral #roceeding in -hich the title may be in 8uestionG and if the time should #ass
-ithin -hich such #roceeding may be instituted the title may become absolute and indefeasible in
default of any contest$ 4ence it has been said that the holder of a certificate of election -ho has duly
8ualified is #rima facie entitled to the office -hen his term begins& as against everyone e2ce#t a de
facto officer in #ossession under color of authority$ 4e is entitled to retain #ossession and to #erform
the duties of the office -ithout interference until such certificate is set aside by some a##ro#riate
#roceeding$F B++ 0$ C$ <$& >!& >M$D
This 5u#reme Court laid do-n the same doctrine by stating the follo-ing:
$ $ $ As a matter of fact& certification by the #ro#er #rovincial board of canvassers is sufficient to entitle
a member=elect to a seat in the 'ational Assembly and to render him eligible to any office in said body
B'o$ 1& #ar$ 1& 0ules of the 'ational Assembly& ado#ted December !& 19>,D
:nder the #ractice #revailing both in the English 4ouse of Commons and in the Congress of the :nited
5tates& confirmation is neither necessary in order to entitle a member=elect to ta*e his seat$ The return
of the #ro#er election officers is sufficient& and the member=elect #resenting such return begins to en(oy
the #rivileges of a member from the time that he ta*es his oath of office B<a-s of England& vol$ 1+& ##$
>>1& >>+G vol$ +1& ##$ !9& !9,G:$ 5$ C$ A$& Title +& secs$ +1& +,& +!D$ Confirmation is in order only in
cases of contested elections -here the decision is adverse to the claims of the #rotestant$ %n England&
the (udges@ decision or re#ort in controverted election is certified to the 5#ea*er of the 4ouse of
Commons& and the 4ouse& u#on being informed of such certificate or re#ort by the 5#ea*er& is re8uired
to enter the same u#on the .ournals& and to give such directions for confirming or altering the return& or
for the issue of a -rit for a ne- election& or for carrying into e2ecution the determination as
circumstances may re8uire B>1 T >+ Vict$& c$ 1+,& sec$ 1>D$ %n the :nited 5tates& it is believed& the order
or decision of the #articular house itself is generally regarded as sufficient& -ithout any actual alteration
or amendment of the return BCushing& <a- and "ractice of <egislative Assemblies& 9th ed$& sec$ 1!!D$
BAngara vs$ Electoral Commission& !> "hil$& 1>9& 1L9& 1L1$D
As a matter of fact& in the ;unn case& the 5u#reme Court of Ransas had occasion to comment on the
e2clusion of ten duly #roclaimed members from the roll of the 4ouse& and unhesitatingly condemned it
in these -ords:
%t seems that -hile 19 contestants are mar*ed in the Dunsmore .ournal as #resent& but not voting& 19
names on the certified roll are -holly omitted$ Any rightful reason for such omission does not a##ear$
3e cannot #erceive any valid reason for such omission& even if 19 certified members had their seats
contested$ Every #erson duly returned too a house of re#resentatives& and having a certificate& is a
member thereof& -hether elected or not& -hether eligible or not& until his election is set aside$ And this
must be set aside by the 4ouse& not by the individual members before organiHation& not by anyone
member& not by any contestant& not by any mob$ )efore organiHation& a fe- members #ro#erly elected&
meeting in causus or other-ise& cannot #ass u#on the Felections& returns& and 8ualification of a
members of the 4ouse to be thereafter organiHed$F %f one member& before organiHation can ob(ect to
any other member duly returned and having a certificate& then all members can be ob(ected to& and
there could be no one left to organiHe any house$ %n McCraryon Election B+d ed$& s$ +9D the #ractice is
thus statedG F3here t-o or more #ersons claim the same office& and -here a (udicial investigation is
re8uired to settle the contest u#on the merits& it is often necessary to determine -hich of the claimants
shall be #ermitted to 8ualify and to e2ercise the functions of the office #ending such investigation$ %f
the office -ere to remain vacant #ending the contest& it might fre8uently ha##en that the greater #art of
the term -ould e2#ire before it could be filledG and thus the interests of the #eo#le might suffer for the
-ant of a #ublic officer$ )esides& if the mere institution of a contest -ere deemed sufficient to #revent
the s-earing in of the #erson holding the usual credentials& it is easy to see that every great and serious
in(ustice might be done$ %f this -ere the rule& it -ould only be necessary for an evil=dis#osed #erson to
contest the right of his successful rival& and to #rotract the contest as long as #ossible& in order to
de#rive the latter of his office for at least a #art of the termG and this might be done by a contest having
little or no merit on his side for it -ould be im#ossible to discover in advance of an investigation the
absence of merit$ And& again& if the #arty holding the ordinary credentials to an office could be *e#t out
of the office by the mere institution of a contest& the organiHation of a legislative body=such& for
e2am#le& as the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives of the :nited 5tates=might be altogether #revented by
instituting contest against a ma(ority of the membersG or -hat is more to be a##rehended& the relative
strength of #olitical #arties against members of one or the other of such #arties$ These considerations
have made it necessary to ado#t and to adhere to the rule that the #erson holding the ordinary credential
shall be 8ualified and allo-ed to act #ending a contest and until a decision can be had on the merits$
'o-& -hy should not this #rinci#le be follo-edQ 3hy should not this rule& -hich is universal
throughout the states of this :nion& and -hich is acce#ted and ado#ted by Congress& be follo-ed in the
state of RansasQ %t has history to sustain it$ %t has reason to sustain it$ And let us here remar* that in
every state of this :nion -here& through #olitical e2citement or #ersonal contests& a different rule has
been ado#ted& disturbance& violence& and almost bloodshed have al-ays occurred$ B"#$ ,++=,+>$D
C$EE<ECT/0A< C/'TE5T5 /' <E;%5<AT%VE "/5%T%/'5
Much reliance has been #laced by res#ondents on the 0afols case in su##ort of their authority to
sus#end the seatings of #etitioners through the "endatun 0esolution$
3e agree that not enough em#hasis may be #laced on said case& although not as an isolated one but as
the initial lin* of a chain of historical events handing -ith the leading and e#och=ma*ing& although not
enough of the #ubliciHed case of Angara vs$ Electoral Commission& decided on .uly 1,& 19>!& -hich
reversed the #usillanimous& vacillating& and self=contradictory ma(ority #osition ta*en in Ale(andrino
vs$ KueHon& decided on 5e#tember 11& 19+$
A little #iece of history -ill be hel#ing$
%n 19+,& 'icolas A$ 0afols -as reelected as re#resentative from one district of Cebu$ The 4ouse of
0e#resentatives of the Mth "hili##ine <egislature sus#ended his seating$ The resolution for sus#ension
-as #assed after a bitter #arliamentary debate bet-een members of the ma(ority belonging to the
'acionalista "arty and the members of the minority belonging to the Democrata "arty$ The 4ouse -as
then #resided over by 5#ea*er Manuel A$ 0o2as& no- "resident of the "hili##ines& and among those
-ho -ith us o##osed the resolution for sus#ension -ere 0e#resentative .ose Avelino from 5amar& no-
"resident of the 5enate& and the minority floor leader& Claro M$ 0ecto& -ho later became "resident of
the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives$ The arbitrariness and in(ustice committed against 0e#resentative 0afols
-ere bitterly resented and ran*led dee# in the hearts of the minority -ho felt they -ere des#otically
tram#led u#on by a bulldoHing ma(ority$
The "ro=Anti #olitical struggle in 19> resulted in ne- alignments$ Former Democratas Avelino and
0ecto ha##ened to align -ith the Anti ma(ority& the same as .ustice 4ontiveros& -ho also became a
Delegate to the constitutional conventionG and former 'acionalistas Manuel A$ 0o2as and Manuel C$
)riones ha##ened to align -ith the "ro minority$
%n 19>& the constitutional convention -as #resided over by Claro M$ 0ecto& as "resident& 0u#erto
Montinola& as First Vice "resident& and Teodoro 5andico& as 5econd Vice "resident$ All of them
belonged to the Democrata "arty -hen in 19+, in(ustice -as committed against 0e#resentative 0afols$
0ecto and 5andico -ere aligned -ith the Anti ma(ority and Montinola -ith the "ro minority$
Although the "ro delegates of the convention -ere only about one=fifth of all the members& some of
them -ere elected to #reside over im#ortant committees==0afael "alma& on #rinci#lesG .ose "$ <aurel&
on the bill of rightsG Manuel C$ )riones& on legislative #o-erG and ourselves on citiHenshi#$ )y his
leading and influential role in the drafting of the Constitution& Manuel A$ 0o2as -as #ointed out as the
4amilton of our convention$
3ith such men and -ith their bac*ground& the convention introduced the innovation of creating the
Electoral Commission of the 'ational Assembly& to -hich the #o-er to (udge u#on the election&
returns& and 8ualifications of legislators& formerly e2ercised by legislative bodies& -as transferred$ The
innovation -as introduced #recisely -ith the #ur#ose of avoiding the re#etition of such abuses and
in(ustices as those committed against 0afols& by lodging the (udicial #o-er of deciding electoral
contests for legislative #ositions to -here it should logically belong==to a (udicial body& -hich is
e2#ected to do (ustice and not to serve #artisan #olitical interests -ithout com#unctions and scru#les$
Although the initiative came from the minority& "ros& it -as -hole heartedly su##orted by the ma(ority
Anti leaders$ The members of the constitutional convention& -ith the most #rominent leaders thereof&
-ere fully a-are of ho- changeable the #olitical fortunes of men are& and it -as in the interest of
everybody that the rights of the minority be e8ually #rotected as those of the ma(ority$
Through .ustice <aurel& a former member of the constitutional convention& this 5u#reme Court said:
The members of the Constitutional Convention -ho framed our fundamental la- -ere in their ma(ority
men mature in years and e2#erience$ To be sure& many of them -ere familiar -ith the history and
#olitical develo#ment of other countries of the -orld$ 3hen& therefore& they deemed it -ise to create an
Electoral Commission as a constitutional organ and invested it -ith the e2clusive function of #assing
u#on and determining the election& returns& and 8ualifications of the members of the 'ational
Assembly& they must have done so not only in the light of their o-n e2#erience of other enlightened
#eo#les of the -orld$ The creation of the Electoral Commission -as designed to remedy certain evils of
-hich the framers of our Constitution -ere cogniHant$ 'oth-ithstanding the vigorous o##osition of
some members of the convention to its creation& the #lan& as hereinabove stated& -as a##roved by that
body by a vote of 9L against ,L$ All that can be said no- is that& u#on the a##roval of the Constitution&
the creation of the Electoral Commission is the e2#ression of the -isdom and Fultimate (ustice of the
#eo#le$F BAbraham <incoln& First %naugural Address& March & 1L!1$D
From the deliberations of our constitutional convention it is evident that the #ur#ose -as to transfer in
its totality all the #o-ers #reviously e2ercised by the legislature in matter #ertaining to contested
elections of its members& to an indefendent and im#artial tribunal$ %t -as not so much the *no-ledge
and a##reciation of contem#orary constitutional #recedents& ho-ever& as the long=felt need of
determining legislative contests devoid of #artisan considerations -hich #rom#ted the #eo#le& acting
through their delegates to the Convention& to #rovide for this body *no-n as the Electoral Commission$
3ith this end in vie-& a com#osite body in -hich both the ma(ority and minority #arties are e8ually
re#resented to off=set #artisan influence in its deliberations -as created& and further endo-ed -ith
(udicial tem#er by including in its membershi# three (ustices of the 5u#reme Court$
The Electoral commission is a constitutional creation& invested -ith the necessary authority in the
#erformance and e2ecution of the limited and s#ecific function assigned to it by the Constitution$
The grant of #o-er to the Electoral Commission to (udge all contests relating to the election& returns
and 8ualifications of members of the 'ational Assembly& is intended to be as com#lete and unim#aired
as if it had remained originally in the legislature$ The e2#ress lodging of that #o-er in the Electoral
Commission is an im#lied denial of the e2ercise of that #o-er by the 'ational Assembly$ And this is as
effective a restriction u#on the legislative #o-er as an e2#ress #rohibition in the Constitution BE2 #arte
<e-is& , Te2$ Crim$ 0e#$& 1G 5tate vs$ 3hisman& >! 5$ D$& +!9G <$ 0$ A$& 191M)& 1D$ BAngara vs$
Electoral commission& !> "hil$& 1>9& 1M=1M!$D
C%$E5E"A0AT%/' /F "/3E05
There is much misunderstanding as to the real im#ort meaning& and sco#e of the much vaunted
#rinci#le of se#aration of #o-er due to the confusion in many minds bet-een t-o conce#tions: one&
naive and vulgarG and the other& constitutional and strictly (uridical$ The trouble lies in the fact that& for
lac* of more a##ro#riate term& the -ord se#aration has been used to convey a grou# of conce#ts and
ideas& -hen the -ord only e2#resses (ust one of #artial as#ect of one of said conce#ts and ideas$ Thus a
misconce#tion results by confounding a #art -ith the -hole or the -hole -ith the #art$
The vulgar notion of se#aration of #o-ers a##ears to be sim#le& rudimentary& and clear=cut$ As a
conse8uence& the #rinci#le of se#aration of #o-ers creates in the mind of the ignorant or uninitiated the
images of the different de#artments of government as individual units& each one e2isting inde#endently&
all alone by itself& com#letely disconnected from the remaining all others$ The #icture in their mental
#anorama offers& in effect& the a##earance of each de#artment as a com#lete government by itself$ Each
governmental de#artment a##ears to be a veritable state in the general set u# of the "hili##ine state&
li*e the autonomous *ingdoms and #rincedoms of them a hara(ahs of %ndia$ 5uch undiscerning and
rudimentary notion can not fit in the #attern framed by the Fili#ino #eo#le through their re#resentatives
in the constitutional convention$ The true conce#t of the #rinci#le of se#aration of #o-ers may not be
obtained but in con(unction -ith the #olitical structure set u# by the Constitution and only in
accordance -ith the s#ecific #rovisions thereof$
The drafters of the constitution -ere fully ac8uainted -ith the then #revailing confusions and
misconce#tions as to the meaning of the #rinci#le of se#aration of #o-ers$ /ne outstanding instance is
sho-n in the self=contradicting& courageless decision in Ale(andrino vs$ KueHon B! "hil$& L>D& -here
the ma(ority deflected from the natural and logical conse8uences of the #remises unanimously agreed
u#on by all the members of the court using as a subterfuge an erroneous& disru#ting& and subversive
inter#retation and a##lication of the #rinci#le of se#aration of #o-ers& becoming since a fetish of a
class of unanalytical constitutional doctrinaires& distressingly unmindful of its dangerous im#lications&
eager to emulate& in #roclaiming it as a legal dogma& the #langent e2ertions of houseto# ba-lers
#reaching the virtues of a ne- #anacea$
Fully *no-ing the #revailing misconce#tions regarding said #rinci#le& although there -as an im#licit
agreement that it is one of those underlying #rinci#les of government ordered by the Constitution to be
established& the delegates to the constitutional convention #ur#osely avoided its inclusion in the
Declaration of "rinci#les inserted as Article %% of the fundamental la-$ They even -ent to the e2tent of
avoiding to mention it by the #hrase it is designated$
C%%$EC/'5T%T:T%/'A< C/'CE"T%/'ET4E /'<P /'E ACCE"TA)<E
The only acce#table conce#tion of the #rinci#le of se#aration of #o-ers -ithin our democracy in the
constitutional one$ 3e must re(ect any idea of it as something e2isting by itself& inde#endent of the
Constitution and& as some misguided (urist -ould have it& even su#erior to the fundamental la- of the
land$
The se#aration of #o-ers is a fundamental #rinci#le in our system of government$ %t obtains not
through e2#ress #rovision but by actual division in our Constitution$ Each de#artment of the
government has e2clusive cogniHance of matters -ithin its (urisdiction& and is su#reme -ithin its o-n
s#here$ $ $ $ The Constitution has #rovided for an elaborate system of chec*s and balances to secure
coordination in the -or*ings of the various de#artments of the government$ For e2am#le& the Chief
E2ecutive under our Constitution is so far made a chec* on the legislative #o-er that this assent is
re8uired in the enactment of la-s$ This& ho-ever& is sub(ect to the further chec* that a bill may become
a la- not-ithstanding the refusal of the "resident to a##rove it& by a vote of t-o=thirds or three=fourths&
as the case may be& of the 'ational Assembly$ The "resident has also the right to convene the Assembly
in s#ecial session -henever he chooses$ /n the other hand& the 'ational Assembly o#erates as chec* on
the E2ecutive in the sense that its consent through its Commission on A##ointments is necessary in the
a##ointment of certain officersG and the concurrence of a ma(ority of all its members is essential to the
conclusion of treaties$ Furthermore& in its #o-er to determine -hat courts other than the 5u#reme Court
shall be established& to define their (urisdiction and to a##ro#riate funds for their su##ort& the 'ational
Assembly controls the (udicial de#artment to a certain e2tent$ The Assembly also e2ercises the (udicial
#o-er of trying im#eachments$ And the (udiciary in turn& -ith the 5u#reme Court as the final arbiter&
effectively chec*s the other de#artments in the e2ercise of its #o-er to determine the la-& and hence to
declare e2ecutive and legislative acts void if violative of the Constitution$ BAngara vs$ Electoral
Commission& !> "hil$& 1>9& 1,!& 1,M$D
The framers of the Constitution had never intended to create or allo- the e2istence of governmental
de#artments as autonomous states -ithin the re#ublican state of the "hili##ines$ The three de#artments
mentioned in the Constitution -ere created& not as com#lete inde#endent units& but as limbs and organs
of the organic unit of the de#artment is inde#endent and se#arate from the others in the sense that it is
an organ s#ecifically entrusted -ith the #erformance of s#ecific functions& not only for the sa*e of
efficiency resulting from division of labor& but to avoid tyranny& des#otism& and dictatorshi# -hich& as
e2#erience and history have taught& result from the concentration of government #o-ers in one #erson
or in an oligarchical grou#$
C%%%$EF:'DAME'TA< %DEA /F :'%TP
The idea of unity is fundamental in our Constitution$
The Fili#ino #eo#le ordained and #romulgated the Constitution Fin order to establish a government that
shall embody their ideals& conserve and develo# the #atrimony of the nation& #romote the general
-elfare& and secure to themselves and their #osterity the blessings of inde#endence under a regime of
(ustice& liberty and democracyF B"reamble of the ConstitutionD$ FThe "hili##ines is a re#ublic state$
5overeignty resides in the #eo#le and all government authority emanates from themF Bsection 1& Article
11& ConstitutionD$ :nder this #rinci#le -e must vie- the -hole government as a unit& and all
de#artments and other government organs& agencies and instrumentalities as #arts of that unit in the
same -as as the head& the hands& and the heart are #arts of a human body$
)y e2amining the #rovisions of the Constitution& the vulgar notion of the #rinci#le of se#aration of
#o-ers can be sho-n to be -rong& as there is neither an office nor a de#artment& created or allo-ed to
be created under the Constitution& that may be considered as effectively se#arate from the others& as the
misinformed #eo#le -ould have it$ As a matter of fact& there is no government #o-er vested
e2clusively in any authority& office& or government agency$ 5ection 1 of Article V% vests the legislative
#o-er in a Congress of the "hili##ines& but this #rovision does not #reclude the "resident of the
"hili##ines and the 5u#reme Court from #arta*ing in the e2ercise of legislative #o-er$ The "resident
has the initiative in the ma*ing of a##ro#riations -hich may not be increased by Congress e2ce#t those
#ertaining to Congress itself and the (udicial de#artment& and the "resident may veto any bill enacted
by Congress Bsections 19 and +9& Article V%& of the ConstitutionD$ The 5u#reme Court may declare
unconstitutional and& therefore& nullify a la- enacted by Congress and a##roved by the "resident of the
"hili##ines Bsections + and 19& Article V%%%& of the ConstitutionD$ The 5u#reme Court e2ercises& besides&
legislative #o-er in #romulgating rules concerning #leading& #ractice& and #rocedure in all courts
Bsection 1>& Article V%%%& of the ConstitutionD
The e2ecutive #o-er is vested in a "resident of the "hili##ines Bsection 1& Article V%%& Constitution of
the "hili##inesD& but the 5enate and 4ouse of 0e#resentatives& through the Commission on
A##ointments& ta*e #art in the e2ercise of the e2ecutive #o-er of a##ointment Bsection 1+& Article V%&
and section 19 N>O& Article V%%& of the ConstitutionD& and in the granting of amnesty and in ma*ing
treaties Bsection 19 N!O and 19 NMO& Article V%%& of theConstitutionD$ The 5u#reme Court e2ercises
e2ecutive #o-er regarding the transfer of (udges from their districts to another$ B5ection M& Article V%%%&
of the Constitution$D Tribunals@ #o-er to order the e2ecution of their decisions and mandates is of
e2ecutive character$
The (udicial #o-er is vested in one 5u#reme Court and in such inferior court as may be established by
la- Bsection 1& Article V%%%& of the ConstitutionD$)ut there are many instances -herein the "resident of
the "hili##ines must administer (ustice& so it is re8uired from him by the Constitution to s-ear to Fdo
(ustice to every manF Bsection M& Article V%%& of the ConstitutionD$ And by im#eachment #roceedings&
the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives and the 5enate e2ercise (udicial function BArticle %C& of the ConstitutionD$
Their #o-er to construe and a##ly their o-n rules and their disci#linary #o-er to #unish their o-n
members for disorderly conduct are of (udicial nature$
Furthermore& there are s#ecific functions of government entrusted to agencies other than the three great
de#artments of government& the legislative& the e2ecutive& and the (udicial$ The (udicial function of
(udging contests as to election& returns& and 8ualifications of senators in entrusted to the Electoral
Tribunal of the 5enateG and that of (udging contests as to election& returns& and 8ualifications of
re#resentatives& to the Electoral Tribunal of the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives Bsection 11& Article V%& of the
ConstitutionD$The e2ecutive function of auditing the government accounts is entrusted to a
constitutional officer& the Auditor ;eneral BArticle C%& of the ConstitutionD& and the administrative
function of su#ervising elections is entrusted to the Commission on Elections BArticle C& of the
ConstitutionD$
To understand -ell the true meaning of the #rinci#le of se#aration of #o-ers& it is necessary to
remember and #ay s#ecial attention to the fact that the idea of se#aration refers& not to de#artments&
organs& or other government agencies& but to #o-ers e2ercised$ The things se#arated are not the sub(ect
of the #o-ers& but the functions to be #erformed$ %t means division of functions& but not of officials or
organs -hich -ill #erform them$ %t is analogous to the economic #rinci#le of division of labor #racticed
in a factory -here multi#le manufacturing #rocesses are #erformed to #roduce a finished article$
C%V$EA""<%CAT%/' /F T4E "0%'C%"<E /F 5E"A0AT%/' /F "/3E05
%n the discussion of the 8uestion ho- the #rinci#le of se#aration of #o-ers must be a##lied&
misunderstood ideas have been asserted as s#ringboard to (um# to rash and unfounded conclusions$
Among such assertions is the one -hich -ould have three great de#artments of government& not only
co=e8ual in dignity& but& not-ithstanding their admitted coordination& as actual sovereigns E as if
-ithin the s#here of the sovereigns can be admitted E each one -ith full #o-ers to destroy and
tram#le u#on the Constitution& -ith the victims absolutely inca#able and #o-erless to obtain redress
against the offense$ 5uch an assertion -ould ma*e of said de#artments as states -ithin a state$ The
fundamental error of the assertion lies in the failure to consider the follo-ing #rinci#le of the
Constitution:
5overeignty resides in the #eo#le and all government authority emanates from them$ B5ection 1& Article
%%$D
Each de#artment of government is nothing but a mere agency by -hich the #eo#le e2ercise its su#reme
sovereignty$ 3ithin the frame-or* of the Constitution& our government may be com#ared to a human
being: the legislative de#artment is the brain that formulates #olicies and rule through the la-s it
enactsG the e2ecutive de#artment is the hand that e2ecutes such #olicies and rulesG the (udicial
de#artment is the conscience that declares -hat is -rong and -hat is right& and determines -hat acts
are in consonance -ith or inimical to the constitutional unity as the very condition of life and survival$
The brain that defines #olicies and the hand that e2ecutes them may go astray and disregard& by their
#hysical #o-er& the infallible #ronouncements and admonitions of conscienceG but nothing can and
should sto# conscience in its great ethical mission as a condition indes#ensable to e2istence itself$ )y
the same to*en& nothing can and should silence tribunals as the organs& in the government set u# by the
Constitution& of the collective conscience of the #eo#le$ %n the long tri# of destiny& that collective
conscience shall ever be the guiding star& unerring even in the gloomiest confusions$
A##lying to the case at bar the #rinci#le of se#aration of #o-ers in its true meaning& the logical result
-ill be #recisely the o##osite of the #osition ta*en by res#ondents -ho& un-ittingly& are insistently
invo*ing it to challenge the #o-er& authority& and (urisdiction of this 5u#reme Court to entertain the
#etition and to grant #etitioners coercive relief$
From the facts of the case& it is evident that res#ondents encroached u#on& invaded& and usur#ed the
ancillary #o-ers to sus#end #etitioners in relation to the #o-er to (udge electoral contests concerning
senators& a #o-er -hich the Constitution s#ecifically assigns to the 5enate Electoral Tribunal& e2clusive
of all other de#artments& agencies or organs of government$ That #o-er of sus#ension is accessory&
ad(ective& com#lementary& and ancillary to the substantial #o-er to (udge said electoral contests$ The
accessory must follo- the #rinci#alG the ad(ective& the substantiveG the com#lementary& the
com#lemented$
%t is a settled rule of construction that -here a general #o-er is conferred or duty en(oined& every
#articular #o-er necessary for the e2ercise of the one or the #erformance of the other is also conferred
BCooley& Constitutional <imitations& eighth ed$& vol$ %& ##$ 1>L& 1>9D$ BAngara vs$ Electoral
Commission& !> "hil$& 1>9& 1MM$D
That #o-er of sus#ension may& in the interest of reason and (ustice& be e2ercised by the 5enate
Electoral Tribunal in relation too an electoral contest& among other #ossible cases that can be
surmissed& -here t-o or more allegedly elected senators are in #ossession of a##arently valid
credentials of having been #roclaimed as duly elected$ %n such a case& as the Constitution does not
allo- more than t-enty=four senators to sit in the 5enate and there is& in the meantime& no #ossibility of
determining -ho among the contestants have been duly elected E all the claimants being in #ossession
of incom#atible& self=denying and self=destroying credentials E reason counsels that all of them be
sus#ended by the Electoral Tribunal #ending the #resentation of the necessary evidence to allo- one of
them to ta*e his seat in the 5enate until the contest is finally decided$
The usur#ation #er#etrated by res#ondents is a flagrant violation of the #rinci#le of se#aration of
#o-ers& they having invaded a ground belonging e2clusively to the 5enate Electoral Tribunal$
CV$ET4E 5E'ATE 3%T4/:T "/3E0 T/ 5:5"E'D %T5 MEM)E05
0es#ondents lac* the #o-er of sus#ension& not only as ancillary remedy in senatorial election contests&
but even in the e2ercise of the 5enate (udicial #o-er to #unish its members for disorderly conduct$ The
ma(ority and the minority of the 5u#reme Court in the case of Ale(andrino vs$ KueHon B! "hil$& L>D&
agreed unanimously -ith res#ect to said 5enate Malcolm& s#ea*ing for the Court in said case& stated:
As to -hether the #o-er to Fsus#endF is included in the #o-er to F#unish&F a #o-er granted to the
4ouses of the <egislature by the Constitution& or in the #o-er to FremoveF a #o-er granted to the
;overnor=;eneral by the Constitution& it -ould a##ear that neither is the correct hy#othesis$ The
Constitution has #ur#osely -ithheld from the t-o 4ouses of the <egislature and the ;overnor=;eneral
ali*e the #o-er to sus#end an a##ointive member of the <egislature$
%t is note-orthy that the Congress of the :nited 5tates has not in all its long history sus#ended a
member$ And the reason is obvious$ "unishment by -ay of re#rimand or fine vindicates the outraged
dignity of the 4ouse -ithout de#riving the construency of re#resentationG e2#ulsion& -hen #ermissible&
li*e-ise vindicates the honor of the legislative body -hile giving to the constituency an o##ortunity to
elect ane-G but sus#ension de#rives the electoral district of re#resentation -ithout the district being
afforded any means by -hich to fill the vacancy$ )y sus#ension& the seat remains filled but the
occu#ant is silenced$ 5us#ension for one year is e8uivalent to 8ualified e2#ulsion or removal$ B"$ 9!$D
And .ustice .ohnson& -ho dissented on another ground& e2#lained the ruling in greater detail as
follo-s:
The #o-er to #unish for misbehavior -as intended #urely as a disci#linary measure$ 3hen a member
of the <egislature is removed either by the ;overnor=;eneral or by the <egislature& a vacancy e2ists&
and the la- gives the ;overnor=;eneral the right to a##oint& and the #eo#le of the district the right to
fill the vacancy by election& so that the #eo#le may again& under either case& be re#resented$ A
Fsus#ensionF of a member& ho-ever& does not create a vacancy& and the #eo#le of the district are
-ithout a re#resentative and the ;overnor=;eneral cannot a##oint one and the #eo#le cannot elect one
during the #eriod of sus#ension$ They are -ithout re#resentation during that #eriod$ They are& for the
#eriod of sus#ension& ta2ed -ithout re#resentation$ %f a member& under the #o-er to #unish& can be
sus#ended for ten or more years& thus de#riving the ;overnor=;eneral of his right under the la-& and
the #eo#le of the district& of a re#resentative& and -ithout a remedy in the #remises$
%f the #o-er Fto #unish for disorderly behaviorF includes the #o-er to sus#end or to de#rive a member
of all his rights& and if the sus#ension is in effect a removal& then an a##ointed member many be
removed& under the #o-er to #unish& by a mere ma(ority& -hile the la- re8uires a t-o=thirds ma(ority to
remove an elective member$ %n other -ords& if under the #o-er to F#unish&F any member of the
legislature& including an a##ointive member& may be in effect removed& then an elective member may
be removed by a ma(ority vote only& thus encroaching u#on the #o-er of the e2ecutive de#artment of
the government& as -ell as violating the #o-ers conferred u#on the <egislature& because the <egislature
cannot remove an elective member e2ce#t by t-o=thirds ma(ority$
%t is strenuously argued by the res#ondents that the resolution de#riving the #etitioner Fof all his
#rerogatives& #rivileges& and emoluments for the #eriod of one yearF is not a removal from his office
but a mere sus#ension$ The resolution does not use the -ord Fsus#endF but does not use the -ord
Fde#rive$F %t #rovides that the #etitioner is Fde#rivedF of all his #rerogatives& etc$& for a #eriod of one
year$ %f that -ord means anything it means that all of the #rerogatives& #rivileges& and emoluments of
the #etitioner and the citiHens -hom he re#resents have been ta*en from him and them$ 4is
#rerogatives& #rivileges& and emoluments constitute his right to re#resent the #eo#le of his district& and
his right to e2ercise all the duties and to assume all the res#onsibilities #ertaining to his office$ 4is
emoluments constitute his right to receive his salary and the benefits #ertaining to his office as a
senator$ %f a value can be #laced u#on his #rerogatives& #rivileges and emoluments& and if he has been
de#rived of them& then it must follo- that they have been removed from him& or that he has been
removed from them$ At any rate& the resolution has se#arated the #etitioner and the #eo#le -hom he
re#resents and de#rived them of all of one yearG and& for all intents and #ur#oses& he and the #eo#le
-hom he re#resents& have been de#rived of their #rerogatives& #rivileges& and emoluments& and in
effect& has been removed from any #artici#ation in the legislative affairs of the government$
A great many cases have been studied on the 8uestion of removal and sus#ension& and -e are
confindent in the assertion that the #o-er to #unish does not include the #o-er to remove or sus#end$ A
sus#ension from an office or a de#rivation of the rights of an officer of all his #rerogatives& #rivileges&
and emoluments& is in effect a de#rivation or a removal from office for the time mentioned in the order
of sus#ension$ %t has been held that a sus#ension from office for an indefinite time and lasting for a
#eriod of si2 months& lost its tem#orary character& ceased to be a sus#ension& and in effect became a
removal from such office$ %t -as held& in the case of the 5tate vs$ Chamber of Commerce& that the
sus#ension of a member -as a 8ualified e2#ulsion& and that -hether it -as called a sus#ension or
e2#ulsion or removal& it in effect disfrachised the #erson sus#ended$ %n the case of Mets*er vs$ 'elly& it
-as held that a sus#ension or a de#rivation for either a definite #eriod is in effect a removal$ %n the case
of ;regory vs$ 'e- Por*& it -as held that the #o-er to remove an officer or #unish him does not
include the #o-er to sus#end him tem#orarily from his office$ A mere sus#ension -ould not create a
vacancy& and the anomalous and unfortunate condition -ould e2ist of an office& E an officer& E but no
vacancy& and of no one -hose right and duty it -as to e2ecute the office$ B"#$ 199=19+$D
CV%$E"/3E0 /F .:D%C%A< 'AT:0E
The #rinci#le of se#aration of #o-ers can not be invo*ed to deny the 5u#reme Court (urisdiction in this
case& because to decide the 8uestion of validity or nullity of the "endatun 0esolution& of -hether
#etitioners are illegally de#rived of their constitutional rights and #rivileges as senators of the
"hili##ines& of -hether res#ondents must or must not be en(oined by in(unction or #rohibition from
illegally and unconstitutionally tram#ling u#on the constitutional and legal rights of #etitioners& is a
function (udicial in nature and& not having been assigned by the Constitutional to other de#artment of
government& is logically -ithin the #rovince of courts of (ustice& including the 5u#reme Court$
The #o-er& authority& and (urisdiction to decide any 8uestion as to the allocation of #o-ers by the
Constitution are of (udicial nature and belong to court of (ustice$ %n denying that #o-er to the 5u#reme
Court& res#ondents only add insult to in(ury by maintaining that there is no remedy for any usur#ation
being committed in ado#ting the "endatun 0esolution$
)ut in the main& the Constitution has bloc*ed out -ith deft stro*es and in bold lines& allotment of #o-er
to the e2ecutive& the legislative and the (udicial de#artments of the government$ The overla##ing and
interlacing of functions and duties bet-een the several de#artments& ho-ever& sometimes ma*es it hard
to say (ust -here the one leaves off and the other begins$ %n times of social dis8uietude or #olitical
e2citement& the great landmar*s of the Constitution are a#t to be forgotten or marred& if not entirely
obliterated$ %n cases of conflict& the (udicial de#artment is the only constitutional organ -hich can be
called u#on to determine the #ro#er allocation of #o-er bet-een the several de#artments and among
the integral or constituent units thereof$
As any human #roduction& our Constitution is of course lac*ing #erfection and #erfectibility& but as
much as it -as -ithin the #o-er of our #eo#le& acting through their delegates to so #rovide& that
instrument -hich is the e2#ression of their sovereignty ho-ever limited& has established a re#ublican
government intended to o#erate and function as a harmonious -hole& under a system of chec*s and
balances& and sub(ect to s#ecific limitations and restrictions #rovided in the said instrument$ The
Constitution sets forth in no uncertain language the restrictions and limitations u#on governmental
#o-ers and agencies$ %f these restrictions and limitations are transcended it -ould be inconceivable if
the Constitution had not #rovided for a mechanism by -hich to direct the course of government along
constitutional channels& for then distribution of #o-ers -ould be mere verbiage& the bill of rights mere
e2#ressions of sentiment& and the #rinci#les of good government mere #olitical a#othegms$ Certainly&
the limitations and restrictions embodied in our Constitution are real as they should be in any living
constitution$ %n the :nited 5tates -here no e2#ress constitutional grant is found in their constitution&
the #ossession of this moderating #o-er of the courts& not to s#ea* of its historical origin and
develo#ment there& has been set at rest by #o#ular ac8uiescense for a #eriod of more than one and a
half centuries$ %n our case& this moderating #o-er is granted& if not e2#ressly& by clear im#lication from
section + of article V%%% of our Constitution$
The Constitution is a definition of the #o-ers of government$ 3ho is to determine the nature& sco#e
and e2tent of such #o-ersQ The Constitution itself has #rovided for the instrumentality of the (udiciary
as the rational -ay$ And -hen the (udiciary mediates to allocate constitutional boundaries& it does not
assert any su#eriority over the other de#artmentsG it does not in reality nullify or invalidate an act of the
legislature& but only asserts the solemn and sacred obligation assigned to it by the Constitution to
determine conflicting claims of authority under the Constitution and to establish for the #arties in an
actual controversy the rights -hich that instrument secures and guarantees to them$ This is in truth all
that is involved in -hat is termed F(udicial su#remacyF -hich #ro#erly is the #o-er of (udicial revie-
under the Constitution$ Even this& this #o-er of (udicial revie- is limited to actual cases and
controversies to be e2ercised after full o##ortunity of argument by the #arties& and limited further to the
constitutional 8uestion raised or the very lis mota #resented$ Any attem#t at abstraction could only lead
to dialectics and barren legal 8uestions and to sterile conclusions unrelated to actualities$ 'arro-ed as
its function is in this manner& the (udiciary does not #ass u#on the 8uestions of -isdom& (ustice or
e2#ediency of legislation$ More than that& courts accord the #resum#tion of constitutionality to
legislative enactments& not only because the legislature is #resumed to abide by the Constitution but
also because the (udiciary in the determination of actual cases and controversies must reflect the
-isdom and (ustice of the #eo#le as e2#ressed through their re#resentatives in the e2ecutive and
legislative de#artments of the government$ BAngara vs$ Election Commission& !> "hil$& 1>9& 1,M=1,9$D
CV%%$E5E'AT/0%A< TE00/0%5M
There is much loose tal* as to the inherent #o-er of the 5enate to ado#t the unsconstitutional "endatun
0esolution for the self=#reservation of the 5enate& for its dignity and decorum$ 3e are afraid that& by
the facts #ublicly *no-n to everybody& such tal*s serve only to reveal sheer hy#ocrisy$ There is
absolutely no sho-ing that they are guilty of any disorderly conduct or of any action by -hich they
may be sub(ect to criminal #rosecution& or that by their conduct they have become un-orthy to have a
seat in Congress$ /n the other hand& there are three senators -ho are under indictment for the heinous
crime of treason before the "eo#le@s Court& not for acts committed before their election& but for acts
committed -hile they -ere already holding office as such senators$ 0es#ondents have not ta*en any
action loo*ing to-ard the sus#ension of said three senators$ Although -e do not #ro#ose to criticiHe
res#ondents for this inaction& as the three senators undicted for treason must be #resumed innocent
unless and until they are finally convicted by the #ro#er court& such inaction serves to em#hasiHe the
ini8uitous discrimination committed against #etitioners& -ho have not even been indicted before any
court of (ustice for the slightest violation of la-$
The "endatun 0esolution invo*es the re#ort of the Commission on Elections as to alleged electoral
irregularities in four Central <uHon #rovincesG but there is absolutely nothing in the resolution to sho-
that #etitioners had anything to do -ith said irregularities& and res#ondents themselves& in the canvass
of votes for "resident and Vice "resident& had counted as valid all the votes cast in said Central <uHon
#rovinces and had acce#ted as good ones the votes they themselves obtained therein$ %n fact& one of
them occu#ied the first #lace in one of said #rovinces$ This self=contradicting attitude has absolutely no
defense in the (udgement of any decent #erson$ To this -e must add that the "endatun 0esolution& in
fact& mis8uotes the re#ort of the Commission on elections in the sense that it tries to convey an
im#ression contrary to said re#ort by 8uoting #arts thereof based on unverified and uncorroborated
hearsay evidence& and ignoring its main conclusion in -hich it is stated that the alleged irregularities
did not affect the orderly election in said #rovinces$
There is much tal* as to the alleged terrorism #revailing in the #rovinces in 8uestion during election&
but there is absolutely no reliable evidence as to such terrorism that can be found either in the re#ort of
the Commission on Elections or in the "endatun 0esolution$ Even in the case that such terrorism really
ha##ened& there is no reason to ma*e any #ronouncement based on it -ithout #ro#er investigation by
#ro#er authorities& and in the #resent case the #ro#er authority that must determine& if such terrorism
did really ta*e #lace and affect the election on A#ril +>& 19!& concerning senators& is the 5enate
Electoral Tribunal$ And until then there is no reason -hy res#ondents must themselves resort to
senatorial terrorism in order to o##ress& muHHle& and crush minority senators& such as #etitioners$
Congressional terrorism is no better than la-less terrorism$ )ecause it is #ractised by des#otice
government officials does not ma*e it holy and sacrosanct$
CV%%%$E'/)/DP %5 A)/VE T4E <A3
There are assertions to the effect that -e may e2ercise (urisdiction against individual officers of the
5enate& but not against the 5enate or against res#ondents$ 3e do not agree -ith such an unmanly
attitude$ 3e do not agree -ith the theory that the 5u#reme Court must e2ercise its (udicial #o-er to
give redress to the victims of a usur#ation only -hen its decision is addressed to minor officers of
government& but not -hen it is addressed to minor officers of government& but not -hen it is addressed
to #o-erful ones$ 3e -ill incur a grave dereliction of duty if -e should refuse to grant the redress that
(ustice demands only and because -e have to reverse an illegal and unconstitutional act committed by a
legislative chamber& or a grou# of its members& s#ecially if the grou# forms the ma(ority& or by
Congress itself$ To sho- that under the Constitution nobody is above the la-& -e have only to refer to
its #rovision -hich recogniHes in the 5u#reme Court the #o-er to nullify the declare unconstitutional
an act enacted by Congress and a##roved by the "resident of the "hili##ines$ A la- #assed by Congress
is enacted -ith the direct #artici#ation of the t-o great de#artments of our government& the legislative
and the e2ecutive$ 'evertheless& if the la- enacted is unconstitutional& the 5u#reme Court has the
#o-er to declare it so and deny effect to the same$
The 8uestion& -hether an act& re#ugnant to the constitution& can become the la- of the land& is a
8uestion dee#ly interesting to the :nited 5tatesG but& ha##ily& not of an intricacy #ro#ortioned to its
interest$ %t seems only necessary to recogniHe certain #rinci#les& su##osed to have been long and -ell
established& to decide it$
That the #eo#le have an original right to establish& for their future government& such #rinci#les& as& in
their o#inion& shall most conduce to their o-n ha##iness is the basis on -hich the -hole American
fabric has been erected$ The e2ercise of this original right is a very great e2ertionG nor can it& nor ought
it& to be fre8uently re#eated$ The #rinci#les& therefore& so established& are deemed fundamental$ And as
the authority from -hich they #roceed is su#reme& and can seldom act& they are designed to be
#ermanent$
This original and su#reme -ill organiHes the government& and assigns to different de#artments their
res#ective #o-ers$ %t may either sto# here& or establish certain limits not to be transcended by those
de#artments$
The government of the :nited 5tates is of the latter descri#tion$ The #o-ers of the legislature are
defined and limitedG and that those limits may not be mista*en& or forgotten& the constitution is -ritten$
To -hat #ur#ose are #o-ers limited& and to -hat #ur#ose is that limitation committed to -riting& if
these limits may& at any time& be #assed by those intended to be restrainedQ The distinction bet-een a
government -ith limited and unlimited #o-ers is abolished& if those limits do not confine the #ersons
on -hom they are im#osed& and if act #rohibited and acts allo-ed& are of e8ual obligation$ %t is a
#ro#osition too #lain to be contested& that the constitution controls any legislative act re#ugnant to itG
or& that the legislature may alter the Constitution by an ordinary act$
)et-een these alternatives there is no middle ground$ The constitution is either a su#erior #aramount
la-& unchangeable by ordinary means& or it is /n a level -ith ordinary legislative acts& and& li*e other
acts& is alterable -hen the legislature shall #lease to alter it$
%f the former #art of the alternative be true& then a legislative act contrary to the constitution is not la-G
if the latter #art be true& then -ritten constitutions are absurd attem#ts& on the #art of the #eo#le& to limit
a #o-er in its o-n nature illimitable$
Certainly all those -ho have framed -ritten constitutions contem#late them as forming the
fundamental and #aramount la- of the nation& and& conse8uently& the theory of every such government
must be& that an act of the legislature& re#ugnant to the constitution& is void$
This theory is essentially attached to a -ritten constitution& and& is conse8uently& to be considered& by
this court& as one of the fundamental #rinci#les of our society$
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
%t is em#hatically the #rovince and duty of the (udicial de#artment to say -hat the la- is$ Those -ho
a##ly the rule to #articular cases& must of necessity e2#ound and inter#ret that rule$ %f t-o la-s conflict
-ith each other& the courts must decide on the o#eration of each$
5o if a la- be in o##osition to the constitutionG if both the la- and the constitution a##ly to a #articular
case& so that the court must either decide that case conformably to the la-& disregarding the
constitutionG or conformably to the constitution& disregarding the la-G the court must determine -hich
of these conflicting rules governs the case$ This is of the very essence of (udicial duty$
%f& then& the courts are to regard the constitution& and the constitution is su#erior to any ordinary act of
the legislature& the constitution& and not such ordinary act& must govern the case to -hich they both
a##ly$
Those& then& -ho controvert the #rinci#le that the constitution is to be considered& in court& as a
#aramount la-& are reduced to the necessity of maintaining that courts must close their eyes on the
constitution& and see only the la-$
This doctrine -ould subvert the very foundation of all -ritten constitutions$ %t -ould declare that an act
-hich& according to the #rinci#les and theory of our government& is entirely void& is yet& in #ractice&
com#letely obligatory$ %t -ould declare that if the legislature shall do -hat is e2#ressly forbidden& such
act& not-ithstanding the e2#ress #rohibition& is in reality effectual$ %t -ould be given to the legislature a
#ractical and real omni#otence& -ith the same breath -hich #rofesses to restrict their #o-ers -ithin
narro- limits$ %t is #rescribing limits& and declaring that those limits may be #assed at #leasure$
Manbury vs$ Madison B1 Cr$& 1>MG + <a-$ ed$& ##$ !9& M>& MD
)ut -e have found no better e2#ression of the true #rinci#le on this sub(ect than the language of .ustice
4oar& in the 5u#reme Court of Massachusetts re#orted in 1 ;ray& ++!& in the case of )urnham vs$
Morrissey$ That -as a case in -hich the #laintiff -as im#risoned under an order of the 4ouse of
0e#resentatives of the Massachusetts <egislature for refusing to ans-er certain 8uestions as a -itness
and to #roduce certain boo*s and #a#ers$ The o#inion& or statement rather& -as concurred in by all the
court& including the venerable Chief .ustice 5ha-G
FThe 4ouse of 0e#resentatives Bsays the courtD is not the final (udge of its o-n #o-er and #rivileges in
cases in -hich the rights and liberties of the sub(ect are concerned& but the legality of its action may be
e2amined and determined by this court$ That 4ouse is not the <egislature& but only a #art of it& and is
therefore sub(ect in its action to the la- in common -ith all other bodies& officers and tribunals -ithin
the Common-ealth$ Es#ecially is it com#etent and #ro#er for this court to consider -hether its
#roceedings are in conformity -ith the Constitution and la-s& because living under a -ritten
Constitution& no branch or de#artment of the government is su#reme& and it is the #rovince and duty of
the (udicial de#artment to determine in cases regularly brought before them& -hether the #o-ers of any
branch of the government& and even those of the <egislature in the enactment of la-s& have been
e2ercised in conformity to the ConstitutionG and if they have not& to treat their acts as null and
void$ $ $ $F
%n this statement of the la-& and in the #rinci#les there laid do-n& -e fully concur$ BRilbourn vs$
Thom#son& +! <a-$ ed$& >MM& >99$D
"rofessor Ed-ard 5$ Cor-in& in this boo* FThe T-ilight of the 5u#reme Court&F says:
The #ivotal #ro#osition -as set u# that bet-een the ma*ing of la- and its construction -as an intrinsic
difference of the most vital natureG and that since the latter function -as demonstrably a daily concern
of courts& it follo-ed necessarily that the legislature might not #erform it in a -ay to #roduce finally
binding results$
A##lied to the Constitution& this reasoning automatically #roduces (udicial revie-$ As Marshall insists
in Marbury vs$ Madison& the Constitution& a solemn act of the #eo#le themselves& -as made to be
#reserved& and no organ of government may alter its terms$ )ut inter#retation& -hich belongs to the
courts e2clusively and is Ftheir #eculiar and #ro#er #rovince&F does not change the la-& it conserves it$
)y the same to*en& (udicial inter#retation of the Constitution is vested -ith the authority of the
Constitution itself$ B"$ 119$D
A #assage in Cicero@s De <egibus& the substance of -hich -as later recalled by Co*e& describes the la-
as Fthe silent magistrateF and the magistrate as Fthe la- s#ea*ing$F Des#ite the a##arent im#lication of
these -ords& the 0oman <a- -ould seem to have regarded inter#retation as #rimarily an e2tension and
condition of the #rocess of la- ma*ing& as the ma2im Fcurius est cendere est inter#retariF a##ears to
bear -itness$ 0eci#rocally& the official attitude of the common la- has not al-ays esca#ed s*e#tical
comment$ A yearboo* of the fourteenth century records a dis#ute among the (udges over -hether they
-ere enforcing reason or only their o-n -ill& and t-o hundred years later -e find an EliHabethan
bisho# asserting flatly: F3hoever that an absolute authority to inter#ret any -ritten or s#o*en la-s& it is
he -ho is truly the la-=giver to all intents and #ur#oses& and not the #erson -ho first -rote or s#o*e
them$F 5u##ose the good bisho# had *no-n of the Constitution of the :nited 5tates& a la- first s#o*en
in 1ML9 and sub(ect 1,9 years later to the Fabsolute authorityF of the 5u#reme Court to inter#ret itS B"#$
11+=11>$D
3hat gives the cou# de grace to the idea that E in the -ords of Chief .ustice Marshall E Fcourts are
the mere instruments of the la- and can -ill nothing&F is the sim#le fact that most so=called Fdoubtful
casesF could very evidently have been decided (ust the o##osite -ay to -hich they -ere decided
-ithout the least infraction of the rules of logical discourse or the least attenuation of the #rinci#le of
stare decisis$ B"$ 11$D
%n short& decision is choiceG the very circumstance -hich #roduces doubtful cases guarantees the Court
-hat .ustice 4olmes has termed Fthe sovereign #rerogative of choiceF in deciding them$ This
circumstance may be described as a factual situation -hich forth-ith divides& as it -ere& the
ac*no-leged body of established la- as far as it bears u#on the said facts into t-o o##osed E t-o
antinomous E cam#s$ B"$ 11,$D
5hould the Constitution be construed FstrictlyF or FliberallyFQ That de#ends logically on -hether it
came from the #eo#le at large or from state sovereignties$ Then there is the antimony of FinclusiveF
versus Fe2clusiveF construction E in Marbury vs$ Madison Chief .ustice Marshall invo*ed the latter
#rinci#le& in McCulloch vs$ Maryland he invo*ed the former$ Again there is the issue -hether the
Court@s mandate to inter#ret the Constitution embraces the #o-er and duty of ado#ting it to change
circumstances$ Marshall thought that it did& -hile Taney re#udiated any such mission for the CourtG and
in the recent Minnesota Moratorium Case the Chief .ustice ta*es as his #oint of de#arture Marshall@s
doctrine& -hile .ustice 5utherland& dissenting& builds u#on Taney@s doctrine$ Furthermore& there are
those diverse attitudes of a shifting ma(ority of the )ench -hich& though they may never have found
clear=cut e2#ression in antithetical #rinci#les of constitutional construction& have given rise none the
less to conflicting courses of decision& the #otential bases of future o##osed arguments -hich either
counsel or the Court may ado#t -ithout incurring #rofessional re#roach$ %n brief& alternative #rinci#les
of construction and alternative lines of #recedent constantly vest the Court -ith a freedom virtually
legislative in sco#e in choosing the values -hich it shall #romote through its reading of the
Constitution$ B"$ 11M$D
The conce#t of a Fgovernment of la-sF simmers do-n& therefore& under the Constitution to a #o-er in
the 5u#reme Court -hich is -ithout statable limits to set the metes and bounds of #olitical authority in
both the nation and the states$ )ut the dominating characteristic of (udicial revie-& -ide=ranging though
it be& is that it is ordinarily or negative #o-er only E a #o-er of refusal$ The Court can forbid
somebody else to act but cannot& usually& act itselfG in the -ords of "rofessor "o-ell& it Fcan unma*e
the la-s of Congress& but cannot fill the ga#$F B"$1++$D
To summariHe: From legal history emerge t-o conce#tions of la- E that of a code of intrinsic (ustice&
not of human creation but discoverable by human reason& and that of a body of ordinances assertive of
human -ill and o-ing its binding force thereto$ The idea of a Fgovernment of la-s and not of menF
originally #redicated the s-ay of the former *ind of la- and a Flegislative #o-erF -hich -as merely a
#o-er to declare such la-& and hence -as indistinguishable in #rinci#le from F(udicial #o-er$F )ut as
-e sa- in the #revious cha#ter& the very essence of the American conce#tion of the se#aration of #o-er
is its insistence u#on the inherent distinction bet-een la-=ma*ing and la-=inter#reting& and its
assignment of the latter to the (udiciary& a notion -hich& -hen brought to bear u#on the constitution&
yields (udicial revie-$ For all that& the idea that legislative #o-er embraces an element of la-=declaring
#o-er has never been entirely e2#elled from our inherited legal traditions& -hile& conversely& modern
analysis of the inter#retative function e2ercised by courts #lainly discloses that it involves unavoidably
an e2ercise of choice substantially legislative in characterG and es#ecially is this so as the 5u#reme
Court@s inter#retations of the national Constitution& on account of the -ealth of alternative doctrines
from -hich the Court may at any time a##roach its tas* of inter#retation$ %n short& the meaning of Fa
government of la-sF in our constitutional la- and theory is government sub(ect to (udicial
disallo-ance$ B"#$ 1!& 1M$D
C%C$E"A0A<<E<%5M 3%T4 T4E A';A0A CA5E
'o better #recedent may be invo*ed to decide several im#ortant 8uestions raised in this case than the
decision rendered by this very 5u#reme Court in Angara vs$ Electoral Commission& su#ra& -hich may
be considered as an outstanding milestone in "hili##ine (uris#rudence$
The facts and legal issues in said case are in e2act #arallel -ith the ones in the #resent controversy$
Then& there -as a conflict bet-een t-o inde#endent de#artments or organs of government& the 'ational
Assembly and the Electoral Tribunal$ 'o- the conflict is bet-een t-o e8ually inde#endent
de#artments or organs of government& the 5enate and the 5enate Electoral Tribunal$ The differences
bet-een the contending #arties consist in: BaD that -hile the former 'ational Assembly constituted the
-hole legislative de#artment& the #resent 5enate is but a #art of the legislative de#artmentG BbD that the
'ational Assembly that ado#ted the resolution then in 8uestion and& finally& declared by this 5u#reme
Court as unconstitutional& null& and void& acted as a body& -ith undis#utable 8uorum and regularityG
-hile the "endatun 0esolution -as ado#ted by but 1+ senators or the ma(ority <iberal "arty& -hen
there -as no 8uorum #resent in the 5enate$ There is also an accidental difference in the fact that& in the
Angara case& the Electoral Commission -as the res#ondent and the 'ational Assembly -as not a #arty&
although ! members thereof -ere also #arties in the case& they constituting a ma(ority of t-o=thirds of
the Electoral Commission membershi#G -hile the #resent case& the 5enate Electoral Tribunal is not a
#arty& and the res#ondents are the ma(ority members of the 5enate& -hich is but a branch of Congress$
%n both cases the legislative de#artment u#on -hich the legislative #o-er -as vested by the
Constitution E the 'ational Assembly in 19>! or Congress in 19! E is definitely not a #arty$
Another difference bet-een the t-o cases is the fact that in the Angara case& #etitioner sought to nullify
a resolution of the Electoral commission because it -as in conflict -ith one #reviously ado#ted by the
'ational Assembly$ The 5u#reme Court& is denying the #etition& nullified instead the resolution of the
'ational Assembly as ado#ted -ithout the #o-ers vested in it by the Constituiton$ %n the #resent case&
#etitioners #ray for the annulment of the "endatun 0esolution -hich the res#ondents or the 5enate
could not and cannot ado#t -ithout transgressing the Constitution$
Many of the conclusions and #ronouncements of the 5u#reme Court in the Angara case may a##ear as
if -ritten e2#ressly to decide several of the very legal issues raised in the #resent case$ This -ill readily
a##ear if -e should read F5enateF and F5enate Electoral Tribunal&F res#ectively& in lieu of F'ational
AssemblyF and FElectoral Commission&F in the follo-ing summariHed conclusion in said case:
BaD That the government established by the Constitution follo-s fundamentally the theory of se#aration
of #o-ers into the legislative& the e2ecutive and the (udicial$
BbD That the system of chec*s and balances and the overla##ing of functions and duties often ma*es
difficult the delimitation of the #o-ers granted$
BcD That in case of conflict bet-een the several de#artments and among the agencies thereof& the
(udiciary& -ith the 5u#reme Court as the final arbiter& is the only constitutional mechanism devised
finally to resolve the conflict and allocate constitutional boundaries$
BdD That (udicial su#remacy is but the #o-er of (udicial revie- in actual and a##ro#riate cases and
controversies& and is the #o-er and duty to see that no one branch or agency of the government
transcends the Constitution& -hich is the source of all authority$
BeD That the Electoral Commission is an inde#endent constitutional creation -ith s#ecific #o-ers and
functions to e2ecute and #erform& closer for #ur#oses of classification to the legislative than to any
other t-o de#artments of the government$
BfD That the Electoral Commission is the sole (udge of all contests relating to the election& returns and
8ualifications of members of the 'ational Assembly$
BgD That under the organic la- #revailing before the #resent Constitution -ent into effect& each house
of the legislature -as res#ectively the sole (udge of the election& returns& and 8ualifications of their
elective members$
BhD That the #resent Constitution has transferred all the #o-ers #reviously e2ercised by the legislature
-ith res#ect to contests relating to the election& returns and 8ualifications of its members& to the
Electoral Commission$
BiD That such transfer of #o-er from the legislature to the Electoral Commission -as full& clear and
com#lete& and carried -ith it e2 necessitate rei the im#lied #o-er inter alia to #rescribe the rules and
regulations as to the time and manner of filing #rotests$
B(D That the avo-ed #ur#ose in creating the Electoral Commission -as to have an inde#endent
constitutional organ #ass u#on all contests relating to the election& returns and 8ualifications of
members of the 'ational Assembly& devoid of #artisan influence or consideration& -hich ob(ect -ould
be frustrated if the 'ational Assembly -ere to retain the #o-er to #rescribe rules and regulations
regarding the manner of conducting said contests$
B*D That section of article V% of the Constitution re#ealed not only section 1L of the .ones <a-
ma*ing each house of the "hili##ine <egislature res#ectively the sole (udge of the elections& returns and
8ualifications of its elective members& but also section ML of Act 'o$ >>LM em#o-ering each house to
#rescribe by resolution the time and manner of filing contests against the election of its members& the
time and manner of notifying the adverse #arty& and bond or bonds& to be re8uired& if any& and to fi2 the
costs and e2#enses of contest$
BlD That confirmation by the 'ational Assembly of the election of any member& irres#ective of -hether
his election is contested or not& is not essential before such member=elect may discharge the duties and
en(oy the #rivileges of a member of the 'ational Assembly$
BmD That confirmation by the 'ational Assembly of the election of any member against -hom no
#rotest had been filed #rior to said confirmation& does not and cannot de#rive the Electoral Commission
of its incidental #o-er to #rescribe the time -ithin -hich #rotests against the election of any member
of the 'ational Assembly should be filed$ BAngara vs$ Electoral Commission& su#ra$D
3ithout the slightest ambiguity& in #ers#icuous and clear=cut language& the 5u#reme Court stated the
real conflict& grave and transcendental& in said case as follo-s:
4ere is then #resented an actual controversy involving as it does a conflict of a grave constitutional
nature bet-een the 'ational Assembly on the one hand& and the Electoral Commission on the other$
BAngara vs$ Electoral Commission& su#ra$D
The 5u#reme Court then& in the full consciousness of the far=reaching im#ortance of the
#ronouncement it had to ma*e& -ith manly courage stated:
From the very nature of the re#ublican government established in our country in the light of American
e2#erience and of our o-n& u#on the (udicial de#artment is thro-n the solemn and inesca#able
obligation of inter#reting the Constitution and defining constitutional boundaries$ $ $ $ Conflicting
claims of authority under the fundamental la- bet-een de#artmental #o-ers and agencies of the
government are necessarily determined by the (udiciary in(usticiable and a##ro#riate cases$ Discarding
the English ty#e and other Euro#ean ty#es of constitutional government& the framers of our
Constitution ado#ted the American ty#e -here the -ritten constitution is inter#reted and given effect
by the (udicial de#artment$ $ $ $ The nature of the #resent controversy sho-s the necessity of a final
constitutional arbiter to determine the conflict of authority bet-een t-o agencies created by the
Constitution$ 3ere -e to decline to ta*e cogniHance of the controversy& -ho -ill determine the
conflictQ And if the conflict -ere left undecided and undetermined& -ould not a void be thus created in
our constitutional system -hich may in the long run #rove destructive of the entire frame-or*Q To as*
these 8uestions is to ans-er them$ 'atura vacuum abhorret& so must -e avoid e2haustion in our
constitutional system$ :#on #rinci#le& reason and authority& -e are clearly of the o#inion that u#on the
admitted facts of the #resent case& this court has (urisdiction over the Electoral Commission and the
sub(ect matter of the #resent controversy for the #ur#ose of determining the character& sco#e and e2tent
of the constitutional grant to the Electoral Commission as Fthe sole (udge of all contests relating to the
election& returns and 8ualifications of the members of the 'ational Assembly$F BAngara vs$ Electoral
Commission& su#ra$D
3here the 5u#reme Court -rote FElectoral CommissionF in the last #receding lines& -e may also -rite
as -ell F5enate&F F4ouse of 0e#resentatives&F FCongress&F F5enate Electoral Tribunal&F F4ouse
Electoral Tribunal&F or any other constitutional body$
The above #ronouncements of the 5u#reme Court made in the ringing -ords #enned by .ustice .ose "$
<aurel -ho& -ith "resident 0o2as& .ustice )riones& .ustice 4ontiveros& former .ustices 0omualdeH and
0ecto& and several others& -as among the leaders and most #rominent figures in the constitutional
convention& -e believe -ill sound through the ages as the e2#ression of #ermanent truth and
undis#utable -isdom$ 5ince the -ords have been -ritten& the 8uestion as to the 5u#reme Court@s
(urisdiction to ta*e cogniHance and decide controversies such as the #resent one and to grant redress for
or against #arties li*e those included in this litigation& has been unmista*ably definitely and definitely
settled in this (urisdiction$
CC$ET40EE D%FFE0E'T ED%T%/'5 /F A 5E'TE'CE
0egret can not be re#ressed -hen& u#on reading the ma(ority o#inion& one notices that& in the very first
#aragra#h heading it& truth is un-ittingly immolated by& as a counter#art of the "endatun 0esolution
and -ithout the benefit of any ritual& attributing to the Commission on Elections an assertion -hich in
fact it did not ma*e$
The Commission is re#resented to have fathered the statement that in the "rovinces of "am#anga&
'ueva Eci(a& )ulacan and Tarlac& voting Fdid not reflect the true and free e2#ression of the #o#ular
-ill$F
This assertion is the third revised edition of a >=line sentence a##earing in the re#ort of the Commission
on Elections$ For clearness& -e -ill re#roduce the three editions& the original one and the amended
t-o:$
First edition$E%n the re#ort of the Commission on Elections& the sentence reads as follo-s:
%t is believed that the election in the #rovinces aforesaid did not reflect the true and free e2#ression of
the #o#ular -ill$
5econd editionEThe drafter of the "endatun 0esolution& -ho a##ears to be ready to sacrifice truth if it
is necessary to serve or bolster his interests and #ur#oses& in re#roducing said statement& -ithout any
com#unction or scru#le& changed the -ords Fit is believedF to the -ords FThis Commission believesF
as follo-s:
This commission believes that the election in the #rovinces aforesaid did not reflect the true and free
e2#ression of the #o#ular -ill$
Third edition$E%n the ma(ority o#inion the idea of belief by third #ersons& contained in the re#ort of the
Commission& and the idea of belief by the Commission& attributed in the "endatun 0esolution are
eliminated and substituted by a #ositive statement by the Commission on Elections of a categorical and
conclusive nature as follo-s:
The Commission on Elections $ $ $ stated that $ $ $ the voting in said region did not reflect the true and
free e2#ression of the #o#ular -ill$
The discre#ancy is em#hasiHed by reading the follo-ing #aragra#h of the re#ort of the re#ort of the
Commission on Elections:
E2ce#t for alleged su##ression of the #o#ular -ill in the "rovinces of "am#anga& Tarlac& )ulacan and
certain munici#alities of 'ueva Eci(a -herein the voters -ere allegedly intimidated or coerced by the
4u*balaha#s and other la-less elements to such an e2tent that the election in said #rovinces is
considered a farce& not being the free e2#ression of the #o#ular -ill& the elections throughout the
country -ere carried on #eacefully& honestly and in an orderly manner& as a result of -hich the
res#ective re#resentatives=elect for all the #rovinces throughout the country have been duly #roclaimed
by the various boards of #rovincial canvassers& and the Commission on Elections on May +>& 19!&
also #roclaimed those elected senators in accordance -ith section 11 of Common-ealth Act 'o$ M+,$
BEm#hasis su##lied$D
From the foregoing& it is evident: B1D that the alleged su##ression of the #o#ular -ill in "am#anga&
Tarlac& )ulacan& and certain munici#alities of 'ueva Eci(a is mentioned by the Commission only as a
hearsay information that the Commission itself& contrary to the idea -hich the "endatun 0esolution or
the ma(ority o#inion conveys& does not acce#tG B+D that to em#hasiHe the Commission@s refusal to acce#t
the unverified information& it e2#licitly and conclusively manifested that Fthe elections throughout the
country -ere carried on #eacefully& honestly and in an orderly manner& as a result of -hich the
res#ective re#resentatives=elect for all the #rovinces throughout the country have been duly #roclaimed
elected by the various boards of #rovincial canvassers& and the Commission on Elections on May +>&
19!& also #roclaimed those elected senators in accordance -ith section 11 of Common-ealth Act 'o$
M+,$F
An abiding res#ect for truth com#els us to #oint out the above glaring error of fact& -hich is (ust a
fitting #relude and milieu to a long chain of errors of la- s#read over the o#inion of the ma(ority&
resulting in conclusions that -e are sure -ill fail to -ithstand the test of #osterity$
CC=A$E:'.:5T%F%ED A'D 0ECR<E55 "0/'/:'CEME'T5
The error of reading the re#ort of the Commission on Elections assertions contrary to the ones
a##earing therein& induces the ma(ority to ma*e #ronouncements -hich are necessarily groundless and
un(ustified& because #remised on assertions not borne out by the truth$
Thus& in (ustifying the ado#tion of the "endatun 0esolution& the ma(ority assert that Fthere are reasons
to believe it -as #rom#ted by the dictates of ordinary caution& or of #ublic #olicyF for Fif& as re#orted
by the corres#onding constitutional agencyF Bthe Commission on ElectionsD& the elections held in the
#rovinces of "am#anga& )ulacan& Tarlac& and 'ueva Eci(aF -ere so tainted -ith acts of violence and
intimidation& that the result -as not the legitimate e2#ression of the voters@ choice& the 5enate made no
grievous mista*e in foreseeing the #robability that& u#on #roof of such -ides#read la-lessness& the
Electoral Tribunal -ould annul the returns in that region Bsee ;ardiner vs$ 0omulo& +! "hil$& ,+1G
<aurel& ElectionsN+d Ed$O& #$ L et se8$D& and declare herein #etitioners not entitled to seats in the
5enate$F
Ta*ing as #oint or de#arture the false assum#tion& that of attributing to the Commission on Elections a
statement that& u#on the very face of its re#ort& is contrary to -hat it made& the ma(ority& not only
attribute to the res#ondent ma(ority of the 5enate #reternatural #ro#hetic foresight& ta*ing for granted
-hat the 5enate Electoral Tribunal -ill do& but by ma*ing the #ronouncement #retend to assume an
im#ro#er role& the one by -hich& in effect& they #retend to direct and dictate to the 5enate Electoral
Tribunal -hat it should do in the #ending electoral #rotests against #etitioners& thus rec*lessly
#re(udicing the decision and dis#osal of a litigation #ending in an inde#endent tribunal -ith e2clusive
and final constitution (urisdiction over said litigation$
/n second thought& it seems that the ma(ority try& -ith an a#ologetic attitude& to recede from the bold
#osition of #ractically announcing -hat the 5enate Electoral Tribunal& three members of -hich are
.ustices of the 5u#reme Court& -ill do& by beginning to state that Fthere should be no diversity of
thought in a democratic country& at least& on the legal effects of the alleged ram#ant la-lessness& root
and basis of the "endatun 0esolution&F and ending -ith the follo-ing #aragra#h:
4o-ever& it must be observed and em#hasiHed& herein is no definte #ronouncement that terrorism and
violence actually #revailed in a district to such e2tent that the result -as not the e2#ression of the free
-ill of theelectorate$ 5uch issue -as not tendered in these #roceedings$ %t hinges u#on #roof to be
#roduced by #rotestants and #rotestees at the hearing of the res#ective contests$
3e can not but regret that the endeavor is futile& because it can not subtract a scintilla from the
boldness of the #ronouncement em#hasiHed -ith the follo-ing reiteration: FTrue& they may have no
direct connection -ith the acts of intimidationG yet the votes may be annulled (ust the same& and if that
ha##ens& #etitioners -ould not be among the si2teen senators elected$F
Furthermore& the recession seems only to be a##arent& used as a breathing res#ite& #re#aratory to
another onslaught& on less un(ustified& rec*less& and out of reason$
Commenting on section 1+ of Common-ealth Act no$ M+,& the ma(ority restrict the #rovision to those
candidates -hose #roclamation Fis clear& unconditional& unclouded&F adding E and here comes the
aggressive thrust& #re(udging #etitioners on the basis of an unfounded surmise E Fthat such standard is
not only met by the #etitioners& because is the very document attesting to their election one member of
the Commission on Elections demurred to the non=e2clusion of the votes in Central <uHon& calling
attention to the re#orted reign of terror and violence in that region& and virtually ob(ecting to the
certification of herein #etitioners$ To be sure& it -as the be clouded condition of #etitioners@ credential
Bcertificate of canvassD that #artly #rom#ted the 5enate to enact the #recautionary measure herein
com#lained of$F
The attac* does not sto# here$ %t goes even further -hen& adducing as argument by analogy& an
uncharitable e2am#le is used by com#aring the situation imagined -ithout any evidentiary foundation
on fact by the dissenting minority of one in the Commission on Elections -ith the case if Fthe inclusion
of #etitionersF name in the Commission@s certificate had been made at the #oint of a gangster@s
automatic&F although adding that F the difference bet-een such situation and the instant litigation is one
of degree& broad and -ide #erha#s& $ $ $ $
CC%$EF:T%<E EFF/0T T/ 'E:T0A<%AE T4E 53EE"%'; EFFECT /F DEC%5%/' %'
A';A0A CA5E
%n a futile effort to neutraliHe the s-ee#ing effect of the decision of this court in the Angara case& the
ma(ority assume unfoundedly that in said case Fno legislative body or #erson -as a litigant before the
court&F and that Fno directive -as issued against a branch of the <egislature or any member there ofF
the statements being #remised on the error of fact and la- that t-o=thirds of the members of the
Electoral Commission -ere assemblymen$
The fact that this court& in the Angara case& made declarations nullifying a resolution of the 'ational
Assembly is& according to the ma(ority& Fnot decisive&F -hen a better #recedent can hardly be cited to
sho- the #ractical e2ercise by the 5u#reme Court of its #o-er to declare null and void any legislative
resolution violative of the fundamental la-$ The ma(ority recogniHe the #o-er of this court to annul any
unconstitutional legislative enactment& citing as authorities the e#och=ma*ing decision of Chief .ustice
Marshall in Marburry vs$ Madison& and the follo-ing #ronouncement of .ustice 5utherland in the
Minimum 3age Case B+!1 :$ 5$& ,D:
$ $ $ The Constitution& by its o-n terms& is the su#reme la- of the land& emanating from the #eo#le& the
re#ository of ultimate sovereignty under our form of government$ A congressional statute& on the other
hand& is the act of an agency of this sovereign authority& and if it conflicts -ith theConstitution& must
fallG for that -hich is not su#reme must yield to that -hich is$ To hold it invalid Bif it be invalidD is a
#lain e2ercise of the (udicial #o-er E that #o-er vested in courts to enable them to administer (ustice
according to la-$ From the authority to ascertain and determine the la- in a given case there
necessarily results& in case of conflict& the duty to declare and enforce the rule of the su#reme la- and
re(ect that of an inferior act of legislation -hich& transcending the Constitution& is of no effect& and
binding on no one$ This is not the e2ercise of a substantive #o-er to revie- and nullify acts of
Congress& for no such substantive #o-er e2ists$ %t is sim#ly a necessary concomitant of the #o-er to
hear and dis#ose of a case or controversy #ro#erly before the court& to the determination of -hich must
be brought the test and measure of the la-$
%f the above reasoning is acce#ted by the ma(ority -ith res#ect to a la- enacted by t-o 4ouses of
Congress and a##roved by the Chief E2ecutive& there is absolutely no logic in denying its a##licability
to mere resolutions ado#ted by (ust a legislative branch& by the 5enate alone& or by a grou# of senators
acting collectively -hen the 5enate is -ithout 8uorum$ The 5u#reme Court has the #o-er to declare
null and void such resolutions -hen they are in conflict -ith the Constitution& the same as the acts of
the "resident as& according to the decision rendered by this court in "lanas vs$ ;il B!M "hil$& !+& M>& MD&
cited -ith a##roval by the ma(ority& the 5u#reme Court has the #o-er of Fma*ing an in8uiry into the
validity or constitutionality of hisBthe Chief E2ecutive@sD acts -hen these are #ro#erly challenged in an
a##ro#riate legal #roceeding$F
The ma(ority& acce#ting the #ronouncement in the Angara case that this court could not decline to ta*e
cogniHance of the controversy to determine the Fcharacter& sco#e and e2tentF of the res#ective
constitutional s#heres of action of the 'ational Assembly and the Electoral Commission& maintain that
in the #resent case& there is actually no antagonism bet-een the Electoral Tribunal of the 5enate and the
5enate itself& Ffor it is not suggested that the former has ado#ted a rule contradicting the "endatun
0esolution$F This assertion is based on the -rong idea that in order that antagonism may e2ist bet-een
t-o inde#endent bodies& the attac*s should be reci#rocal and bilateral& and it is not enough that one
should rashly invade the #rovince of the other$ The theory is #arallel -ith the .a#anese insistence in
calling -hat they term FChina %ncidentF because China -as not able to invade in her turn the .a#anese
mainland of 4onshu$
CC%%$EFA<<AC%/:5 A0;:ME'T
%t is argued by the ma(ority that conceding that #etitioners@ sus#ension is beyond the #o-er of the
res#ondents& the #etition should be denied& because for this court to order the reinstatement of
#etitioners F-ould be to establish (udicial #redominance& and to u#set the classic #attern of chec*s and
balances -isely -oven into our constitutional setu#$F The argument is utterly fallacious$ There can be
no more (udicial #redominance because the 5u#reme Court& -ithout shir*ing its res#onsibility& should
order that #etitioners be reinstated in the full e2ercise of their constitutional rights& functions and
#rerogatives& of -hich they -ere de#rived& in flagrant violation of the fundamental la-& than there -ill
be legislative #redominance because Congress should refuse to be co-ed into #revarication in the
e2ercise of its legislative #o-ers& or e2ecutive #redominance because the "resident -ould not allo-
denial of his e2ecutive functions$ And the #attern of chec*s and balances is not disru#ted because the
5u#reme Court should #roceed to #erform its (udicial duty by granting #etitioners the legal redress to
-hich they are entitled$
The indictment of volubility flung by <ord )ryce against the 5u#reme Court of the :nited 5tates&
resulting from Fthe #olitical #roclivities of the man -ho com#osed it&F is 8uoted by the ma(ority in
order to su##ort the rule of conduct that Fadherence to established #rinci#le should generally be our
guiding criterion$F 3e underline generally because -e #refer it to the -ord invariably& as& other-ise&
-e -ill e2#ose ourselves to the English author@s indictment& and -ith more reason if -e should reverse
the doctrines and #rinci#les enunciated in the Angara case in order not to dis#lease a controlling
ma(ority in the 5enate$
CC%%%$E'/T DEM%;/D5 /:T5%DE T4E 0EAC4 /F <A3
5hould res#ondents disobey any order -e may issue in this case& the ma(ority as*& can -e #unish them
for contem#tQ /f course$ They are not demigods& duces& fuehrers& or ni##on em#eror divinities& -ho
are outside the reach of la-$ They do not #retend that they are li*e the *ing of France -ho said <@etat
c@est moi$
)ut& -hy should -e render res#ondents the disservice of entertaining the false hy#othesis that they may
disobey any order -e may legally issueQ /ur #eo#le -ere not craHy enough to elect anarchists to our
5enate$
CC%V$E):%<T /' "0ECA0%/:5 F/:'DAT%/'
The ma(ority insist& not-ithstanding& in arguing that if -e should #unish res#ondents for contem#t
because they should have disobeyed an order of ours& -e -ould be destroying the inde#endence and
e8ual im#ortance of legislative bodies& under the Constitution$ 3e -ould never imagine that the
inde#endence and e8ual im#ortance of legislative bodies& under the Constitution& should be
#recariously built u#on the unstable and shifting 8uagmire of immoral immunity to #unishment for
contem#t& an offense #unishable under all modern systems of criminal la-$
DogmatiHing e2 cathedra& the ma(ority #reached that -e must Fdisabuse our minds from the notion that
the (udiciary is the re#ository of remedies for all #olitical and social ills$F 5hooting in the dar* of
fantastic hobglobins& insufflated -ith e2traterrestrial life by su#ercreative imagination& might be an
amusing s#ort& but is misleading in (uridical controversy$ 'o one has ever entertained the false and
laughable notion that the (udiciary may afford remedies Ffor all #olitical and social ills$F 'o one& unless
he be a #aranoiac mogalomaniac& may #retend to be the ha##y #ossessor of any #olitical or social
#anacea$ The argument is irrelevant because& in the case& -e are dealing -ith a constitutional -rong
-hich& under the fundamental la-& can and must be redressed by the (udiciary$
CCV$EF<A;0A'T %'C/'5%5TE'CP
A citiHen& de#rived of liberty by a resolution to incarcerate him for years& illegally and
unconstitutionally ado#ted by a legislative chamber& according to the ma(ority& may not be denied relief
by the courts and Fmay successfully a##ly for habeas cor#us& alleging the nullity of the resolution and
claiming for release&F invo*ing as authorities <o#eH vs$ De los 0eyes B,, "hil$& 1M9D Rilbourn vs$
Thom#son B19> :$ 5$& 1!LG +! <a- ed$& >MMD$ The reason is because the resolution is beyond the
bounds of the legislative #o-er& is a usur#ation of functions belonging to courts& is an infringement of
the Constitution& -hich is #recisely the case of the "endatun 0esolution$ )ut the ma(ority -ould then
have only as defendant the officer or #erson holding the victimiHed citiHen in custody& -hich officer or
#erson might be a senator or a grou# of senators$
The ma(ority@s inconsistency can not be hidden$
CCV%$EE<ECT%/' C/'TE5T5E30/'; DEF%'%T%/'
The ma(ority maintain that not all the #o-ers of the 4ouse or 5enate as Fthe sole (udge of the election&
returns and 8ualifications of the membersF thereof -ere transferred to the Electoral Commission& but
only Fall contestsF relating to said election& returns and 8ualifications$ )ut the use of the -ords Fall
contestsF in the Constitution does not affect or limit the transfer of all #o-ers as Fthe sole (udge of the
election& returns and 8ualificationsF of the legislative members& because these all #o-ers have al-ays
been& from the very beginning& circumscribed by the -ord Fcontests$F The very -ords Fthe sole (udgeF
im#ly necessarily contests& because if there is no contest& there is nothing to be (udged$
The ma(ority adhere to the follo-ing 8uotation: FAs used in the constitutional #rovisions& Uelection
contest@ relates only to statutory contests in -hich the contestants see* not only to oust the intruder& but
also to have himself inducted into office$F B<aurel on Elections& +d ed$& #$ +,9G +9 C$ .$&,L$DThe
assertion is -rong because there are election contests in -hich the contestants do not see* to be
inducted into office& as -hen the contestants do not #retend to have -on in the election and& admitting
that the #rotestee obtained the ma(ority votes& should& ho-ever& be ousted because he is un8ualified$
The e2am#le of a man& dis8ualified for having served a long term of im#risonment& elected to either
4ouse of Congress& is a good one not in su##ort of the ma(ority@s theory that the 4ouse may& u#on its
authority& investigate and e2clude the dis8ualified #erson& but to sho- that the election may be
contested before the corres#onding Electoral Tribunal in a #ro#er contest& -ithout the #rotestant
see*ing to be himself seated$
CCV%%$E:'C/'5T%T:T%/'A< T4E/0P
The ma(ority@s theory that an election contest does not ensue -hen a member of the 4ouse raises a
8uestion as to the 8ualification of another because the former does not see* to be substituted for the
latter& is based on the -rong definition of an election contest& the one limiting it to cases -herein
#rotestants see* also to have themselves inducted into the contested office$ 4aving for its basis a -rong
#remise& the theory can not be correct$ The election contests mentioned in section 11 of Article V% of
the Constitution include contests Frelating to 8ualificationsF of the res#ective members of the 5enate
and of the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives$ To maintain that either 4ouse may investigate and thereafter
e2clude a dis8ualified member& is to maintain a constitutional heresy$ An insistent effort to (ustify and
a##rove an action that violates elemental standards of la- and (ustice& such as the "endatun 0esolution&
may often lead one to advancing un-ittingly the most e2#ected theories$
%nvo*ing as authority the erroneous statement made by one of the attorneys for #etitioners during the
oral argument to the effect that the #o-er to defer the oath ta*ing until the contest is ad(udicated does
not belong to the corres#onding Electoral Tribunals& the ma(ority gleefully (um#s to the conclusion that
Fthen it must be held that the 4ouse or 5enate still retains such authority& -hether -e believe that such
#o-er Bto delay inductionD stemmed from the #rivilege of either 4ouse to be the (udge of the election&
returns& and 8ualifications of the members thereof& or -hether -e hold it to be inherent to every
legislative body as a measure of self=#reservation$
Thus -e see that the ma(ority seem reluctant to acce#t the ne- constitutional setu# by the creation of
the Electoral Commission& later substituted by the Electoral Tribunals$ They -ould rather stic* to the
old order of things -hen the ma(ority of the 5enate and the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives before the
Common-ealth -ere the absolute dictators of the election& returns and 8ualifications of the members of
the res#ective legislative chambers& -hen they boldly assert that either 4ouse has Fthe #rivilege to be
the (udge of the election& returns and 8ualifications of the members thereof$F
CCV%%%ET4E C4A0ACTE0 A'D "4P5%/;'/MP /F T4E C/'5T%T:T%/'
The discussions as to the character of the legislative #o-er vested in Congress gives -ay to a confusion
of ideas due mainly to lac* of discrimination bet-een #reconceived constitutional ideas& ingrained in
the mind during university training& and the actual #rovisions of the Constitution of the "hili##ines&
-hich en(oy outstanding and substantial advantages over older ones& because the delegates to our
constitutional convention embodied in it ne- #rece#ts and #rinci#les based on the lessons of one
century and a half e2#erience of American and Euro#ean countries in constitutional government and
four decades of "hili##ine constitutional history and last (uridical and idealogical discoveries$
3hether the Constitution of the :nited 5tates is only a grant or delegation of legislative #o-ers to the
federal government and the American state constitutions are mere limitations of #lenary #o-ers of
legislation& having nothing to do -ith the true character and #hysiognomy of our o-n Constitution
-hich -e must e2amine& not on the mirror of other constitutions& but on the face of its o-n conce#ts&
#rece#ts and #rovisions& and there -e -ill see at once that our Constitution is both a grant and a
limitation of #o-ers of government decreed by our #eo#le& on -hom sovereignty resides and from
-hom all government authority emanates$ B5ection 1& Article %% of the Constitution$D The sovereign
#eo#le is the re#ository of all #o-ers of government& in fact& also #olitical and social #o-ers$ From
them emanate& not only all government authority& but the #lenary and unlimited #o-er of society -hich
is the foundation of government$ 5ocial order is established and maintained by the -ill of the #eo#le$
The #eo#le is the absolute master of his o-n destiny$ The #eo#le is the holder of the universality and
residuum of all human #o-ers$ This being a natural conviction of humanity since time immemorial
although not al-ays articulate and vocal& to (ustify the absolutism of *ings and em#erors& it had been
necessary to create the fiction of the divine genesis of their authority& im#osed on the ignorance and
religious credulity of su#erstitious masses& so much so that in certain e#ochs of history the #osition of
high #riest and *ing -ere merged in the same individual$ And those -ho -ould attach to a high officers
of government& no matter in -hat de#artment& any *ind of monarchial or oligarchical absolutism&
unlimited because #laced above the la- and not controllable by the #rovisions of the Constitution or
any agency e2isting under its authority& are only trying to #er#etuate the -orn=out tradition of the
divine origin of the des#otic rulers of the #ast$
To our mind& no #o-er of government may be e2ercised by any branch& agency or officer thereof unless
e2#ressly or im#licitly granted by the #eo#le through the Constitution$ 5ub(ect to the limitations
#rovided therein and in accordance -ith e2#ress #rovisions& the residuum of legislative& e2ecutive and
(udicial #o-ers& res#ectively& are vested in Congress& the "resident& and the 5u#reme Court$ %t is -rong
to maintain that any legislative #o-er is vested e2clusively in the 5enate$ The legislative #o-er is
vested in Congress& com#osed of the 5enate and the 4ouse for 0e#resentatives& and not in any of its
branches alone$
CC%C$E0%AA<%A' ADM/'%T%/' /' T/<E0A'CE
Although there is absolutely nothing in the re#ort of the Commission on Elections or in the "endatun
0esolution itself -hich im#utes u#on #etitioners any act of disorderly behavior& it not a##earing that
they have anything todo -ith alleged irregularities and terrorism in the four #rovinces of Central
<uHon& yet had the 5enate elected to de#rive #etitioners of their seat in the 5enate under the #o-er to
#unish and e2#el a member for disorderly behaviour #rovided in section 19 B>D of Article V% of the
Constitution& and the 5enate ado#ted the "endatun 0esolution in #ursuance thereof& the ma(ority of this
court -ould still dismiss the #etition$ %t a##earing that not t-o=thirds of all members of the 5enate
concurred or could concur in the ado#tion of the "endatun 0esolution and& therefore& under the
constitutional #rovision invo*ed& the de#rivation of #etitioners of their seat in the 5enate -ould a##ear
as a flagrant transgression of the fundamental la-& the ma(ority of this court -ould still shield
res#ondents -ith the #alladium of (udicial noli me tangere$ 0es#ondents must be very e2traordinary
beings to en(oy such an immunity from even the most shoc*ing and tyranical violation of
theConstitution$
The ma(ority -ould counsel #rudence and comity and admonish to heed the off=limits sign at the
Congressional hall& firm in the belief that Fif a#olitical fraud has been accom#lished& as #etitioners aver&
the sovereign #eo#le& ultimately the offended #arty& -ill render the fitting verdict E at the #olling
#recint$F
3e are reluctant to -ash our hands so easily$ 3e can not remain comfortably seated in the highest
tribunal of the land nor reconcile -ith our conscience by abstaining to give the relief -e are duty bound
to give the victims of a #olitical fraud -hich constitutes a -anton tram#ling do-n of the rights and
#rivileges guaranteed by the Constitution$ <et us not so easily forget the 0iHalian admonition:
F5ufferance is not al-ays a virtueG it is a crime -hen it encourages tyrannies$F <et us not disguise such
*ind of resignation under the inoffensive name of (udicial #rudence$ )ur*e said: FThere is also a false&
re#tile #rudence& the result not of caution& but of fear$F Fear& as favor& should not have #lace in (udicial
vocabulary$
CCC$EC/'5T%T:T%/'A<%5M
The #resent nuclear #hysics of a far cry from the more than t-enty=five centuries old theory enunciated
by Democritus in the follo-ing -ords: F)y convention s-eet is s-eet& by convention bitter is bitter& by
convention hot is hot& by convention cold is cold& by convention color is color$ )ut in reality there are
atoms and the void$ That is& the ob(ects of sense are su##osed to be real and it is customary to regard
them as such& but in truth they are not$ /nly the atoms and the void are real$F
The heated controversy bet-een "tolemy and Co#ernicus& the discoveries of ;alileo and 'e-ton& are
(ust small incidents in the #erennial struggle in -hich man is engaged to be& through science& fully
ac8uainted -ith the truth about our universe$ %t ta*es 1&!99 years for one=half of a gram of radium to
disintegrate& and it ta*es one second for light to travel 1L!&>99 milesG formerly matter and energy -ere
essentially different things& but no- solid matter is but concentrated energy& and energy has -eightG it is
not yet ans-ered -hether light is -ave of a sho-er of #hotons& but it is *no-n that it can be -eighed$
The theory of relativity& o#ened ne- vistas in the #anorama of science& but ne- riddles meet man in the
great adventure to the un*no-n$ Albert Einstein said:
Pet ne-& still more difficult #roblems arise -hich have not been definitely settled as yet$ 3e shall
mention only some of these unsolved #roblems$ 5cience is not and -ill never be a closed boo*$ Every
im#ortant advance brings ne- 8uestions$ Every develo#ment reveals& in the long run& ne- and dee#er
difficulties$F BThe Evolution of "hysics& #$ >9L$D
All theories -hich& in their day& served useful scientific #ur#oses& had to give -ay to others giving
better e2#lanations of #hysical #henomena$ The #revailing theories may not resist the onslaught of ne-
intellectual discoveries& but because they may eventually be discarded themselves is no reason to
dis#ense -ith them -hen& in the meantime& they are only ones that can satisfy reason$ /ther-ise&
science -ill be cri##led$ "aralysis -ill *ee# her from ne- advances$
)y the same to*en& in the history of la-& man had to stic* in each e#och to the *no-n as the best of
legal institutions$ %n the millenia of human life no more -onderful legal institution -as devised by man
than constitutionalism& the evolution of -hich is one of the most ins#iring cha#ters of history$ A mere
religious conce#t& giving voice to moral la-& in %srael& a #hiloso#hical conce#t& merely normative& in
;reece& it -as in re#ublican 0ome -here it too* a definite legal and #olitical force as the basis of
(urisdiction as distinguished from gobernaculum& the reason of the la- as o##osed to the #o-er of
government$ %n England for the common la- to #revail over the #rerogative of the cro-n it too*
several hundred years of bitter struggle$ )ut fate had it that in America is -here the evolution of
constitutionalism had to reach its highest accom#lishment$ %t became the basis of the government of the
:nited 5tates from its very ince#tion$ 'o- constitutionalism for the -orld is envisaged as the only
ho#e of humanity to attain the goal that -ill insure (uridical order for the -orld& so that men@s
inventions& including those ominous on nuclear energy& may be #laced under ade8uate social control$
The ho#e of the 0e#ublic of the "hili##ines lies also on constitutionalism$ 'ot the one that -ould
merely offer li# service to the Constitution& but that -ould ma*e of that document as one of the living
tissues of our body #olitic& absolutely indis#ensable to its o-n e2istence$
CCC%$ET4E M/5T V%TA< %55:E
The validity of the Constitution of the most vital issue involved in this case$ %f no one must be allo-ed
to be above the la-& -ith greater reason no one should be allo-ed to ignore or to tram#le u#on the
#rovisions and mandates sacred by all #ersons living under the #ale of the 0e#ublic of the "hili##ines&
and not roc*ed of as an insignificant #ush#in to toy -ith$
)urning -ith the thirst of immortality& she#herd Erostratus burned the tem#le of E#hesus to gain a
berth in history$ <et us not ma*e of the Constitution of the "hili##ines another tem#le of E#hesus$ %t is
much better to be buried in the dust of eternal oblivion than to #ermanently live in the memory of
future generations as guilty of arson& as rivals of the barbaric hordes -ho destroyed the great -or*s of
art of ;reece and 0ome& or the contem#orary vandals -ho destroyed -ithout any com#unction
churches and schools& treasures of noble human institutions& or other -or*s -herein the loftiest ideals
and as#irations of man have blossomed -ith im#erishable grandeur and beauty$ <etus s#are the
Constitution from the deleterious effects of our #re(udices and from the ravages of blind #assions$ <et
us *ee# it as an underlying beacon of ho#e& the indestructible foundation of our national e2istence& the
ine2#ugnable citadel of the rights and liberties of our #eo#le& the eternal roc* u#on -hich the 0e#ublic
of the "hili##ines shall forever subsist -ith dignity$
The #am#hlet in -hich it is #rinted may -iHen and shrivel& its #a#er rived into shreds& the shreds
#ulveriHed into dust and ashes& and these reduced into infinitesimal atoms -hich -ill finally scatter in
the -ide universe& to form ne- substances$ )ut the (uridical sense of our #eo#le& crystalliHed in that
#am#hlet and #ermeating that #a#er& embodied in the great document& li*e the mythological #hoeni2 of
Arabia& undergoing the five hundred years cycle of resurrection& shall again and again rise in youthful
freshness from the scattered ashes and atoms& the undying symbol of the s#irit of la-& the flaming
banner of (ustice& the magnificent e2#ression of the undaunted -ill=#o-er to live$
The #etition must be granted& and the #reliminary in(unction of May +9& 19!& must be reissued and
made #er#etual$
)0%/'E5& M$& disidente:
Des#ues de las elecciones generales de +> abril& 19!& en 8ue fueron elegidos el "residente y Vice
"residente de Fili#inas y los miembros del Congreso& el senado y la Camara de 0e#resentantes
inauguraron se #eriodo de sesiones reuniendose #or #rimera veH el +, mayo$ :no de los #rimeros
documentos 8ue seleyeron en el 5enado fue la roclama e2#edida #or la Comision sobre Eleccionescuyo
te2to integro se transcribe a continuacion:
CE0T%F%CATE /F CA'VA55 )P T4E C/MM%55%/' /' E<ECT%/'5 /F 0ET:0'5 /F
V/TE5 F/0 T4E /FF%CE /F 5E'AT/0 A'D "0/C<AMAT%/' /F T4E CA'D%DATE5
E<ECTED %' T4E E<ECT%/'5 4E<D /' A"0%< +>& 19!$
3e& the undersigned& constituting the Commission on Elections& do hereby certify that& #ursuant to the
#rovisions of section 11 of Common-ealth Act 'o$ M+,& -e have made the canvass of the votes cast in
the "hili##ines for the office of 5enator in accordance -ith the statements submitted by the "rovincial
)oard of Canvassers of the different #rovinces and the City )oard of Canvassers of Manila& and that
the result thereof sho-s the follo-ing si2teen B1!D registered candidates to have received the highest
number of votes:
'ame of candidates
Votes received
1$ Vicente .$ Francisco
M>,&!M1
+$ Vicente 5otto
M1M&++,
>$ .ose Avelino
M9L&+9
$ Melencio ArranH
!!!&M99
,$ 0amon Torres
!9&MM
!$ Tomas Confessor
!+M&>,
M$ Mariano .esus Cuenco
!+>&!,9
L$ Carlos "$ ;arcia
!1M&,+
9$ /legario Clarin
!11&++M
19$ Ale(o Mabanag
!9L&99+
11$ Enri8ue )$ Magalona
,91&M9!
1+$ Tomas Cabili
,L9&M!+
1>$ .ose /$ Vera
,LL&99>
1$ 0amon Dio*no
,L>&,9L
1,$ .ose /$ Vera
,!>&L1!
1!$ 5ali#ada E$ 0omero
,,M&1,!
%n vie- of the above result& -e hereby #roclaim that the above=named si2teenB1!D registered candidates
are the duly elected 5enators in the election held on A#ril +>& 19!$
3e further certify that Vicente .$ Francisco& Vicente 5otto& .ose Avelino& Melecio ArranH& 0amon
Torres& Tomas& Confesor& Mariano .esus Cuenco and Carlos "$ ;arcia received the first eight BLD highest
number of votes& and that /legario Clarin& Ale(o Mabanag& Enri8ue )$ Magalona& Tomas Cabili& .ose
/$ Vera& 0amon Dio*no& .ose E$ 0omero and 5ali#ada "endatun received the ne2t eight BLD highest
number of votes$
3e further certify that the attached statement of votes sho-s the number of votes #olled by each
candidate for the /ffice of 5enator in the "hili##ines by #rovinces$
%n -itness -hereof& -e have signed these #resents in the City of Manila& this +>rd day of May& 19!$
B5gd$D ./5E </"EA V%T/
Chairman
B5gd$D F0A'C%5C/ E'A;E
Member
% concur in toto& e2ce#t as regards the #roclamation of the 1! 5enators=elect& on the basis of the
canvassing of all the votes cast in their favor& -ithout e2cluding those of Central <uHon$ B5e#arate
o#inion #re#ared$D
B5gd$D V%CE'TE DE VE0A
Member
Acto seguido #rocediose a la eleccion del "residente del 5enado saliendo elegido como tal el candidato
de la mayoria 4on$ .ose A$ Avelino 8ue obtuvo 19 votos contra el candidato del #artido de la minoria
4on$ .ose /$ Vera 8ue obtuvo L$ Tanto el 5r$ Vera como sus correcurrentes 5res$ Dio*no y 0omero
tomaron #arte en la votacion$
Elegido el "residente se iba a #roceder a la toma del (uramento colectivo de los 5enadores electos& #ero
en esto el 5enador 4on$ 5ali#ada "endatun #resento #ara su a#robacion un #royecto de resolucion cuyo
te2to tambien se transcribe integro a continuacion:
3hereas& the Commission on Elections& charged under the Constitution -ith the duty of insuring free&
orderly& and honest elections& in the "hili##ines& re#orted to the "resident of the "hili##ines on May +>&
19!& that
F/n election day& altho no acts of violence -ere officially re#orted to this Commission in connection
-ith the elections& -e -ere advised by our re#resentative in 'ueva Eci(a that ballot bo2es -ere stolen
by armed bands in the barrios of the munici#alities of )ongabon& ;a#an& 5ta$ 0osa and ;uimba$ These
incidents are still under investigation by the Military "olice Command$ After the election -e cannot fail
to notice the re#orts #ublished in the ne-s#a#ers on the attac*s that have been made by armed bands
u#on #ersons or grou# of #ersons -ho -ere *no-n to have voted for candidates other than the
candidates of those armed elements$ Even the re#ort submitted to this Commission by the "rovost
Marshal ;eneral on May +9& 19!& $ $ $ contains a recital of incidents of terrorism that occured in the
four #rovinces of Central <uHon herein above mentioned -hich disturbed or affected the national
election in an undesirable manner$ 0e#orts also reached this Commission to the effect that in the
#rovinces of )ulacan& "am#anga& Tarlac and 'ueva Eci(a& the secrecy of the ballot -as actually
violatedG that armed bands sa- to it that their candidates -ere voted forG and that the great ma(ority of
the voters& thus coerced or intimidated& suffered from a #aralysis of (udgment in the matter of
e2ercising the right of suffrage$ Considering all those facts of terrorism& violence and intimidation in
connection -ith elections -hich are more or less general in the #rovinces of "am#anga& Tarlac&
)ulacan and 'ueva Eci(a& this Commission believes that the election in the #rovinces aforesaid did not
reflect the true and free e2#ression of the #o#ular -ill$ %t should be stated& ho-ever& that the
Commission is -ithout (urisdiction& to determine -hether or not the votes cast in the said #rovinces
-hich& according to these re#orts have been cast under the influence of threats or violence& are valid or
invalid$ 5uffice to state that in accordance -ith the #rovision of Article 1& section +& of the Constitution&
FThe Commission on Elections shall have e2clusive charge of the enforcement and administration of all
la-s relative to the conduct of elections and shall e2ercise all other functions -hich may be conferred
u#on it by la-$ %t shall decide E save those involving the right to vote E all administrative 8uestions&
affecting elections& including the determination of the number and location of #olling #laces& and the
a##ointment of election ins#ectors and of other election officials $ $ $F and that the 8uestion of -hether
or not a vote has been cast legally or illegally is not for this Commission to determine$ The matter is
therefore being brought to the attention of the "resident and Congress of the "hili##ines for such action
as may be deemed #ro#er #ursuant to the re8uirements of the Constitution that this Commission submit
after every election a re#ort to the said offices on the manner the election -as conducted$F
34E0EA5& the minority re#ort of the 4on$ Vicente de Vera& member of the Commission on Elections&
says among other things& that F-e *no- that as result of this chaotic condition& many residents of the
four #rovinces have voluntarily banished themselves from their home to-ns in order not to be
sub(ected to the #revailing o##ression and to avoid being victimiHed or losing their livesGF and that after
the election dead bodies had been found -ith notes attached to their nec*s& reading: F)umoto *ami *ay
0o2asF B3e voted for 0o2asDG
34E0EA5& the same .udge De Vera says in his minority re#ort that in the four #rovinces of
"am#anga& Tarlac& )ulacan and 'ueva Eci(a& the -orst terrorism reigned during and after the election&
and that if the elections held in the aforesaid #rovinces -ere annulled as demanded by circumstances
mentioned in the re#ort of the Commission& .ose /$ Vera& 0amon Dio*no& and .ose 0omero& -ould not
and could not have been declared electedG
34E0EA5& in his re#ort to the "rovost Marshal& col$ Amando Dumlao& Assistant Chief of 5taff& ;=+&
attached to the re#ort of the Commission on Elections& states among other things& that Fall the members
of the Church of ChristB%glesia ni CristoD -ere intimidated and coerced& some *idna##ed and
murderedF by the 4:R)A<A4A"5 Fbecause they had e2#ressed their o#inion that they -ere going to
vote for "resident=elect Manuel A$ 0o2asFG that because of terrorism and coercion Fa great many barrio
#eo#le have evacuated their res#ective #laces and signified their attention not to voteFG and that ballot
bo2es -ere ta*en a-ay from barrios 5an Miguel& "asong %si#& "a*a#& ;uimba and ;alvan& and that in
some instances election ins#ectors -ere *idna##edG
34E0EA5& the terrorism resorted to by the la-less elements in the four #rovinces mentioned above in
order to insure the election of the candidates of the Conservative 3ing of the 'acionalista "arty is of
#ublic *no-ledge and that such terrorism continues to this dayG that before the elections .ose /$ Vera
himself declared as cam#aign manager of the /sme?a faction that he -as sorry if "residential
Candidate Manuel A$ 0o2as could not cam#aign in 4u* #rovinces because his life -ould be in
endangeredG and that because of the constant murders of his candidates and leaders& "residential
Candidate 0o2as found it necessary to a##eal to American 4igh Commissioner "aul V$ Mcnutt for
#rotection& -hich a##eal American 4igh Commissioner #ersonally referred to "resident 5ergio /sme?a
for a##ro#riate action& and the "resident in turn ordered the 5ecretary of the %nterior to afford the
necessary #rotection& thus im#liedly admitting the e2istence and reign of such terrorismG
34E0EA5& the "hili##ines& a 0e#ublic state& embracing the #rinci#les of democracy& must condemn
all acts that see* to defeat the #o#ular -illG
34E0EA5& it is essential in order to maintain alive the res#ect for democratic institutions among our
#eo#le& that no man or grou# of men be #ermitted to #rofit from the results of election held under
coercion& in violation of la-& and contrary to the #rinci#le of freedom of choice -hich should underlie
all elections under the ConstitutionG
34E0EA5& #rotest against the election of .ose /$ Vera& 0amon Dio*no and .ose 0omero& have been
filed -ith the Electoral Tribunal of the 5enate of the "hili##ines on the basis of the findings of the
Commission on Elections above 8uotedG
'/3 T4E0EF/0E& be it resolved by the 5enate of the "hili##ines in session assembled& as it hereby
resolves& to defer the administration of oath and the sitting of .ose /$ Vera& 0amon Dio*no and .ose
0omero& #ending the hearing and decision of re#orts lodged against their elections& -herein the
terrorism averred in the re#ort of the Commission on Elections and in the re#ort of the "rovost Marshal
constitute the ground of said #rotests and -ill therefore be the sub(ect of investigation and
determination$
"arece 8ue cuando se #uso a debate la resolucion arriba transcrita& el 5enado acordo unanimemente
transferir la discusion #ara la sesion del lunes siguiente& +M de mayo$ Pa se estaba discutiendo otro
asunto cuando surgio unacalorado incidente en virtud del cual los 5enadores de la minoria
salierontodos del salon de sesiones& 8uedandose alli solamente el "residente Avelinocon sus once B11D
com#a?eros de la mayoria$ 5e alega en esta ocasion& ausenteslos 5enadores minoritarios y sin el
necesario 8uorum legal #ara #oder seguir des#achando asuntos& los 5enadores de la mayoria&
revocando el acuerdo anterior de transferencia& decidieron considerar y a#robar la resolucion sinmas
debate$
Tales son& a grandes rasgos& los hechos 8ue han dado lugar a la demanda 8uedirecta y originariamente
#lantean ante este Tribunal 5u#remo los recurrentes .ose /$ Vera& 0amon dio*no y .ose 0omero& y
cuya #arte #etitoria es como sigue:
"/0 </ TA'T/& los recurrentes res#etuosamente #iden a este 4onorable Tribunal y a cual8uier
Magistrado del mismo& tenga a bien e2#edir un interdicto #rohibitorio #reliminar dirigido a los
recurridos& sus funcionarios& em#leados& agentes y demas #ersonas 8ue obran en su ayuda&
ordenandoles 8ue hasta nueva orden del Tribunal& desistan y se abstengan de #oner en e(ecucion la
resolucion arriba mencionada& y im#edir a los recurrentes continuen en sus asientos en el 5enado y
e(erHan libremente sus funciones y derechos como senadores de Fili#inas& deshaciendo todo lo hecho
en contrario hasta esta fechaG 8ue acorte los terminos de contestacionG 8ue una veH contestada esta
demanda& designe un Comisionado #ara recibir las #ruebas& con instrucciones de 8ue la haga sin
dilaciones& y 8ue& #revia la vista corres#ondiente& dicte sentencia declarando enteramente nula y de
ningun valor la citada resolucion& y #rohibiendo consecuentemente a los recurridos y a cada uno de
ellos a im#edir a los recurrentes a continuar en sus cargos como senadores& y #rohibiendoles
igualmente a realiHar cual8uier otro #rocediemiento ulterior #ara e(ecutar la resolucion citada& con las
costas$ <os recurrentes #iden tambien cual8uier otro remedio (usto y e8uitativo$
El magistrado "erfecto concedio el interdicto #reliminar #edido #rinci#almenteen virtud de la alegacion
e2#uesta en el #arrafo 19 de la demanda& en el sentido de 8ue la resolucion cuestionada tenia #or
ob(ecto& entre otras cosas& Fla realiHacion de fines siniestros& tales como la a#robacion& sin la
fiscaliHacion e intervencion de los recurrentes& del )ill )ell& de una medidade reorganiHacion (udicial
terrorista #ara el #ersonal de la (udicatura y deotras seme(antes& y #ara doblegar a los recurrentes& #or
tal hitlerico #rocedimiento a los mane(os de tal mayoria$F 5ometido el interdicto #reliminar a la corte
en #leno& esta lo a#robo en una votacion de seis B!D contra cuatro BD& y al #ro#io tiem#o lo se?alo a
vista #ara la determinacion de la cuestion de si su e2#edicion estaba o no (ustificada$ En dicha vista 8ue
duro ! horas seguidas& desde la ma?ana hasta la tarde Buna de las mas largas si no la mas larga 8ue se
haya celebrado (amas en los anales de esta CorteD& arguyeron e2tensamente tanto la re#resentacion de
los recurrentes como la de los recurridos$ El "rocurador ;eneral Ta?ada com#arecio y arguyo en
nombre de estos ultimos& #ero limitandose en su informe a cuestionar e im#ugnar la (urisdiccion de este
5u#remo Tribunal #ara conocer y en(uiciar el asunto ba(o el #rinci#io de la se#aracion de #oderes 8ue
informa nuestra Constitucion$ "uede decirse sin e2ageracion 8ue el tema se agoto discutiendose con
minuciosidad los #untos constitucionales y (uridicos #lanteados en el asunto$ Des#ues de la vista esta
Corte en #leno& con la sola?ausencia del Magistrado .aranilla& y con la disidencia del Magistrado
"erfecto& acordo disolver el interdicto #rohibitorio #reliminar mediante lasiguente orden:
Considering that the #reliminary in(unction -as issued in the case of .ose /$ Vera et al$& #etitioners& vs$
.ose Avelino& res#ondents& B ;$ 0$ 'o$ <=,>D& to #reserve the status 8uo and thus #revent the e2ecution
of the acts alleged under oath in the last #art of #aragra#h C of the #etition& -ithout the intervention of
the #etitionersG and ta*ing into consideration that this court& after hearing both #arties& at any rate
believes and trusts that the res#ondents -ill not carry out said acts during the #endency of this
#roceeding& this court& -ithout deciding -hether or not the said in(unction -as (ustified& hereby
resolves to dissolve it in the meantime& -ithout #re(udice to -hatever action or decision this court may
ta*e or render on the 8uestions involved in this case including that of (urisdiction$
0esulta evidente de autos 8ue las cuestiones 8ue tenemos 8ue considerar yresolver son las siguientes:
B1D a la luH de nuestra Constitucion y de nuestras Ves legal y sostenible la resolucion ob(ecto de
controversia& en cuanto #or ella se #riva a los recurrentes de sus asientos en el 5enado de Fili#inas& y de
los derechos& #rivilegios y #rerrogativas ane(os a dichos asientosQG B+D a la luH de nuestra constitucion y
de nuestrs leyes Vtiene este Tribunal 5u#remo (urisdiccion y com#etencia #ara conocer& en(uiciar y
decidir el asuntoQ
"rimera cuestion$EA la luH de nuestre Constitucion y de nuestre leyes Veslegal sostenible la resolucion
ob(ecto de controversia& en cuanto #or ella se#riva a los recurrentes de sus asientos en el 5enado de
Fili#inas& y de losderechos& #rivilegios y #rerrogativas ane(os a dichos asientosQ
Antes de la a#robacion de la #rimera Constitucion del Common-ealth de Fili#inas B19>,D& la <egistura
era el (ueH de las elecciones& actas y condiciones de sus #ro#ios miembros$ <a dis#osicion original
relativa a esta materia era la contenida en la <ey Congreso de los Estados :nidos de 1$W de (ulio de
199+ B<ey /rganica& articulo M& #arrafo ,D& la cual #rece#tuaba 8ue F<a Asamblea BFili#inaD decidira de
las elecciones& su resultado y las calificaciones de los re#resentantes$ $ $ $F Cuando se a#robo la <ey del
Congreso de 191! B<ey .ones& de am#lia automania& seccion 1L& #arrafo 1D& la citada dis#osicion se
reincor#oro& con una modificacion 8ue la hacia mas enfatica insertandose la #alabra Funicos&F a saber:
FKue el 5enado y la Camara de 0e#resentantes& res#ectivamente& seran los unicos (ueces de las
elecciones& del resultado& escrutinio y condiciones de sus miembros electivos$ $ $ $F Esta dis#osicion no
era de ningun modo original: no hacia mas 8ue trans#lantar a este #ais la tradicion y el sistema
americano #rovisto en la clausula 1$X de la seccion , del Articulo % de la constitucion de los Estados
:nidos& 8ue dis#one 8ue Fcada Camara sera (ueH de las Elecciones& Actas y Condicciones de sus
#ro#ios miembros$ $ $F
<a Asamblea Constituyente convocada en 19> #ara redactar la Constitucionde nuestro
Common-ealth #udo haber seguido sobre esta materia diferents cursos de accion: reafirmar la
tradicion americana vigente en este #ais desde199+G o seguir el e(em#lo de algunos #aises E
verbigracia& Canada& Australia&4ungria y "olonia E 8ue habian transladado esta facultad de las
Camaras <egislativas al de#artamento (udicial& hablando mas concretamente& al Tribunal5u#remoG o
bien instituir un sistema mi2to& creando un cuer#o constitucional se#arado e inde#endiente& con
(urisdiccion e2clusiva sobre la materia$ <a Asemblea Constituyente o#to #or este ultimo creando Funa
Comision Electoral8ue se com#ondra de tres Magistrados del Tribunal 5u#remo 8ue seran
designados#or su "residente& y de seis di#utados escogidos #or la Asamblea 'acional& tres de los cuales
el mayor numero de votos& y tres #or el #artido 8ue lesiga en el mayor numero de votos$ Esta
Commision Electoral sera #residida #orel Magistrado mas antiguo y conocera e2clusivamente de todas
las controversiasrelativas al resultado de la eleccion y a las calificaciones de los miembrosde la
Asamblea 'acionalF BArticulo %V& Constitucion de Fili#inas& 19>,D$ Cuando la Constitucion se reformo
en 199 restaurandose le legislatura bicameral& la filosofia de la comision electoral se res#ecto y
conservo en la Constitucion reformada y en lugar de una comision se crearon dos& una #ara cada
camara& y ya no se llamaba Comision electoral sino Tribunal Electoral& como #ara recalcar y subrayar
el caracter (udicial del nuevo organismo$ El #rece#to constitucional #ertinente es como sigue:
5ec$ 11$ The 5enate and the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives shall each have an Electoral Tribunal -hich shall
be the sole (udge of all contests relating to the election& returns&and 8ualifications of their res#ective
members$ Each Electoral Tribunal shall be com#osed of nine members& three of -hom shall be .ustice
of the 5u#reme Court to be designated by the Chief .ustice& and the remaining si2 shall be members of
the 5enate or of the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives& as the case may be& -ho shall be chosen by each 4ouse&
three u#on nomination of the #arty having the largest number of votes and three of the #arty having the
second largest number of votes therein$ The senior .ustice in each Electral Tribunal shall be its
Chairman$
De lo e2#uesto resulta evidente 8ue una im#ortante fa cultad (udicial 8ue tenian las camaras legislativas
anteriormente E la facultad de actuar como (ueces sobre las elecciones& actas y calificaciones de sus
miembros E ha 8uedado eliminada com#letamente ba(o la actual Constitucion y tras#asada tambien
com#leta y #lenamente al nuevo organismo constitucional E el Tribunal Electoral$ <a #regunta ahora
en orden es si la resolucion cuestionada 8ue #ara mayor claridad llamaremos 0esolucion "endatun
re#resenta o constituye&#or #arte de los 5enadores recurridos& el e(ercicio de una facultad constitucional
8ue no les #ertenece sino al Tribunal Electoral& y nuestra contestacion es decididamente afirmativa$
Con esa resolucion en la mano es como si los recurridos hubieran dicho a los recurrentes lo
siguiete:F5e?ores& a8ui tenemos un informe de la Comision sobre Elecciones en donde se dice 8ue en
cuatro #rovincias del centro de <uHon no ha habido sufragio libre& sincero y or denado& #or los actos de
intimadacion y violencia de vuestros #artidarios$ 5in los votos de esas #rovincias& vosotros no hubierais
triunfado$ "or tanto& hasta 8ue se decida en vuestro favor las #rotestas formuladas contra vuestras actas
ante el Tribunal Electoral& os negamos el derecho de (urar& de sentarse en estos esca?os& de #artici#ar en
las deliberaciones del 5enado y de goHar de los derechos& #rerrogativas y #rivilegios ane(os al cargo de
5enador$F VKue es esto sino una innegabale susur#acion de la facultad e2clusiva 8ue tiene el Tribunal
Electoral de ser el unico (ueH de las controversias relativas a la eleccion& actas y calificaciones de los
miembros de la camara a 8u corres#onde dicho tribunalQ
5e arguye 8ue inde#endientemente de la cuestion electoral cada camara& #ara #roteger su e2istencia& su
buen nombre y su decoro& tiene el #oder inherente de sus#ender a cual8uier miembro suyoG 8ue la
0esolucion "endatun se ins#iro en estos motivosG 8ue la sus#ension de los recurrentes es un acto
#olitico 8ue nada tiene 8ue ever con la determinacion de sus actas #or el Tribunal Electoral y no se
halla su(eto a revision de #arte del de#artamento (udicial #or cuestionable 8ue fuera el mismo desde el
#unto de vista del derecho o de la moral #ublicaG y 8ue& #or tanto& no hay tal usur#acion de #oderes
constitucionales& no habiendose los recurridos entrometido en la esfera de accion del Tribunal
Electoral$ 5in embargo& no hay mas 8ue leer la resolucion en cuestion #ara convencerse de 8ue su
entera motivacion se deriva de las elecciones de +> de A#ril& dandose en ella #or establecido& en virtud
del informe de la Comision sobre Elecciones& 8ue el triunfo de los recurrentes se debio a un estado de
terror y violencia en las "rovincias de "am#anga& Tarlac& 'ueva Eci(a y )ulacan$ <os F#or cuantosF de
la resolucion hacen referencia a las su#uestas anomalias e irregularidades 8ue viciaron el sufragio en
dichas #rovinciasG hacen ciertas afirmaciones de caracter general como la de 8ue Fili#inas& a fuer de
nacion y estado democratico& debe condenar todo acto tendente a derrotar la voluntad #o#ular& y la de
8ue F#ara mantener vivo entre nosotros el res#eto a las instituciones democraticas& a ningun hombre o
gru#o de hombres se debe #ermitir 8ue re#orten beneficio de los resultados de una eleccion llev ada a
cabo ba(o coercionFG y al final se dice F#or cuanto& sobre la base de los informes arriba citados de la
Comision sobre Elecciones se han formulado #rotestas ante el Tribunal Electoral de 5enado contra la
eleccion de .ose /$ Vera& 0amon Dio*no y .ose E$ 0omeroFG y luego la #arte dis#ositiva en virtud de la
cual se #riva a los recurrentes del (uramento y de sus asientos en el 5enado entre tanto no se resuelvan
las #rotestas formuladas contra sus actos& interregno 8ue #uede durar meses y hasta a?os$ De todo esto
resulta bien claro 8ue los considerandos de la resolucion versan #recisamente sobre los mismos hechos
electorales cuya determinacion incumbe e2clusivamente al Tribunal Electoral& y 8ue la interdiccion& o
me(or dicho& la sus#ension de los derechos& #rerrogativas y #rivilegios de los recurrentes se basa
indudablemente en tales considerandos$ 'o hay en la resolucion ni la mas minima insinuacion de 8ue
se haya a#robado #or altos motivos de dignidad y decoro senatorial E eso 8ue algun tratadista lllama
graficamente medida de #rofila2is E como #ara evitar el roce deshonroso con miembros 8ue fuerean
algo aso com de la casta des#reciable de lost intocables& a8ue(ados de le#ra moral en sus #ersonas$ 'o
hay ni el menor cargo de tor#eHa moral contra los recurrentes& ni si8uiera se insinua 8ue estos fuereon
directa o indirectamente res#onsables del alegado estado de terror y violencia$ <a conclusion
indeclinable& #ues& es 8ue la 0esolucion "endatun en(uicia y resuelve cuestiones o FissuesF #uramente
electorales& ace#tando #rima facie un informe incom#etente sobre terrorismo& violencias y fraudes& y
como tal constituye una intromision en la facultad 8ue ba(o la Constitucion tiene el Tribunal Electoral
del 5enado de ser el unico (ueH de las controversias relativas a la eleccion& actas y calificaciones de los
miembros de dicho alto cuer#o colegislador$
"ero admitamos #or un momento 8ue la 0esolucion "endatun tiene ese caracter #rofilactico 8ue le
atribuyen a ultima horaG 8ue& contra lo 8ue es evidente y claro con claridad meridiana& esa resolucion
nada tiene 8ue ver con la determinacion (udicial de las actas de los recurrentes #or el Tribunal electoral$
<a #regunta otra veH en orden s la siguiente: sometida la 0esolucion "endatum a la #iedra de to8ue de
nuestra Constitucion V#uede resistir con e2ito la #ruebaQ 'uestra contestacion es terminantemente
negativa$ <a Constitucion fili#ina es el #roducto de la sabiduria& e2#eriencia y genio #olitico de nuestro
#ueblo$ 'o es un documento enteramente original: en ciencia #olitica las conce#ciones originales no
abundan$ 4emos volcado en ella no solo el resultado de nuestra e2#eriencia necessariamentelimitada&
sino lo 8ue hemos a#rendido de la sabiduria y e2#eriencia de otros #ueblos mas avanHados 8ue
nosotros& #articularmente del #ueblo Americano& con el cual nos ha ligado una convivencia de cerca de
medio sigolo$ Des#ues de largas y laboriosas deliberaciones nuestra Asamablea Constituyente& elegida
#or el #ueblo B19>=19>,D& ado#to el sistema #residencial de gobierno dividido en tres altos#oderes&
inde#endendientes entre si #ero coordinandos en un mecanismo cuidadosamente elaborado de frenos y
contra#esos$ Esos #oderes son: legislativo& e(ecutivo y (udicial$5us altas facultades y funciones se
hallan es#ecificadas en la Constitucion& en ca#itulos se#arados$ En el uso del lengua(e se ha evitado la
municiosidad& el #ormenorismo caractereistico de las leyesordinarias& a fin de hacer del instrumento
suficientemente am#lio y fle2ible #ara acomodarse y #ara subvenir a las necesidades y condiciones
cambiantes de los tiem#osG #ero& con todo& los traHos& los lineamientos son suficientemente claros&
firmes y seguros& y creemos #uededecirse sin inmodestia 8ue en concision& en claridad y en buen
ordenamiento nuestra Constitucion no cede a ninguna de las constituciones escritas 8ue se conocen$
E2aminemos ahora el de#artamento o #oder legislative 8ue es lo 8ue nos concierne e interesa en el
#resente asunto$ Es un #rinci#io constitucional bien establecido 8ue el #oder de legislar es ilimitado en
tanto en cuanto no #ugna con la Constitucion& la cual o#era como una limitacion$ Todos los demas
#oderes y facultades 8ue no tengan caracter legislativo deben ser conferidos e2#resa o im#licitamente$
'uestro Congreso& actuando concurrentemente #or medio de sus dos camaras& tiene el #oder de legislar$
FEl #oder legislativo 8ueda investido en un Congreso de Fili#inas& com#uesto de un 5enado y de una
Camara de 0e#resentates BArticulo V%& seccion 1& Constitucion de Fili#inas& 199D$ "ero ademas de este
#oder de con(unto& cada camara tiene ciertas facultades& entre ellas algunas de caracter disci#linario& a
saber: BaD la de com#eler la asistencia de miembros ausentes en la forma y ba(o las #enas 8ue dicha
camara #rescribaG BbD la de castigar a sus miembros #or conducta desordenada& y& con la concurrencia
de dos terceras #artes de sus miembros& e2#ulsar a un miembro #or tal motivo BArticulo V%& seccion 19&
a#$ + y >D$ Fuera de estas facultades no hay en nuestra Constitucion ninguna otra 8ue autorice la
im#osicion de un castigo o #ena& o envuelva una #rivacion de derechos& #rerrogativas y #rivilegios&
siguiera sea tem#oral& tal como la 8ue se #rovee en la 0esolucion "endatun$ VEnca(a esta resolucion en
cual8uiera de las facultades arriba enumeradasQ Evidentemente 8ue no$ 'o enca(a en el inciso BaDEla
facultad de com#eler disci#linariamente la asistencia de miembros ausentes E #or8ue es su#erfluo
decir 8ue no se trata ni remotamente de tal caso$ Tam#oco enca(a en el inciso FbF #or8ue se ha admitido
desde el comienHo 8ue el caso 8ue nos ocu#a no es el de conducta desordenada de un miembro$
Tam#oco enca(a en la facultad de determinar y resolver la legalidad y solvencia de las actas y
credenciales de los recurrentes #or8ue ya hemos demostrado hasta la saciedad 8ue habiendose retirado
totalmente de las camaras la substancia& la esencia de esa facultad trasladandola al Tribunal Electoral&
8uedo tambien i#so facto retirada y eliminada la facultad de sus#ender 8ue es nada mas 8ue un
incidente un aleda?o de la substancia$
"ero se dice: el Tribunal Electoral no tiene la facultad de sus#ender& esto se halla admitido #or todo el
mundoG luego esa facultad ha 8uedado& #or lo menos& en las camaras como residuo no afectado #or el
tras#aso de (urisdiccionsobre las credenciales y actas electorales$ 5in embargo&esto no es mass 8ue una
habil sustileHa$ En la Constitucion no hay mas 8ue dos categorias de #oderes: el e2#reso o el im#licito
Beither by e2#ress grant or by fair im#lication from -hat is grantedD$ Como 8uiera 8ue esa reserva& ese
residuo Bla facultad de sus#enderD no esta conferido e2#resamente en la Constitucion& luego hay 8ue
su#onerlo im#licito$ "ero Vim#licito de 8ueQ Tiene 8ue ser de algo de un #oder mas general y mas
am#lio e2#resamente conferido B#arte de un todoD 8ue en este caseo tendria 8ue ser el #oder de conocer
y resolver las controversias electorales sobre las actas de los miembros del Congreso$ Es asi 8ue este
#oder ya no lo tienen las camaras ba(o la ConstitucionG luego tam#oco 8ueda nada im#licito en elias& so
#ena de sostener 8ue lo im#licito& 8ue es nada mas 8ue un incidente& #uede subsistir #or si solo sin la
substancia E el vaso esencial 8ue lo envuelve y entra?a$ El corolario forHoso de todo esto es 8ue los
redactores de la Constitucion fili#ina eliminaron #or com#leto la facultad de sus#ender no solo del
Congreso sino del Tribunal ElectroralG 8ue la voluntad soberana del #ueblo e2#resada en el codigo
fundamental& es 8ue ningun #rotestado seria #rivado de sus asiento ni #or un solo minutoG 8ue ninguna
#resuncion se estableceria en contra de la legitimidad y solvencia de su actaG 8ue solamente una
sentencia final #odira cerrarle las #uertas del Congreso$ 'o tenemos #or8ue averiguar si con esta
decision la Asamblea Constituyente 8uiso erigir un firme valladar a los e2cesos y demasias de la #asion
#olitica creando un clima #ro#icio #ara el desarrollo de las minorias en un #ais en 8ue& como el nuestro&
ciertas causas y circunstancias han retardado el turno #eriodico y saludable de los #artidosG todo lo 8ue
nos incumbe hacer es se?alar y destacar el hecho ine2orable& la volicion constitucional$
5e han citado dos casos de nuestra (uris#rudencia #arlamentaria #ara (ustificar la 0esolucion "endatun:
el caso de .ose Fuentebella en el 5enado de Fili#inas& en 191!& y el caso de 'icolas 0afols en la
Camara de 0e#resentantes& en 19+,$ )a(o la alegacion de haberse cometido graves irregularidades y
fraudes en las #rimeras elecciones senatoriales celebradas en el !$ o distrito B#rovincias bicolanasDal
candidato electo .ose Fuentebella se le nego #rima facie el (uramento y el asiento #endiente la
resolucion de la #rotesta formulada contra su acta$ <o mismo se hiHo en el caso de 'icolas 0afols& #or
alegados fraudes electorales cometidos en el !$W distrito di#utacional de Cebu$ "ero la endebleH e
ina#licabilidad de estos #recedentes salta inmediatamente a la vista si se tiene en cuenta 8ue cuando se
establecieron las camaras legislativas eran constitucionalmente los unicos (ueces de la eleccion& actas y
calificaciones de sus miembrosG asi 8ue la sus#ension #rima facie del (uramento y del asiento no fue
mas 8ue un incidente en el e(ercicio de esa facultadG y& #rescindiendo de si esto era (usto o in(usto&
#rudente o arbitrario& #arecia incuestionable 8ue estaba dentro los #oderes y facultades de las camaras
el hacerlo$
"ero& en realidad& los casos de Fuentebella y 0afols #ueden citarse #ara un efecto com#letamente
o#uesto al #erseguido #or los abogados dee los recurridos cuando se analiHan y discuten am#lia y
ob(etivamente los motivos& circunstancias y designios 8ue indu(eron a nuestra Asamblea Constituyente
a abandonar la bien arraigada tradicion americana de hacer de las camaras legislativas los unicos (ueces
de la eleccion& actas y calificaciones de sus miembros& trasladanddo la (urisdiccion a un organismo
constitucional com#letamente se#arado e inde#endiente$ :n analisis de este genero viene a ser
altamente revelador y e2#resivo$ <o #rimero 8ue embarga la atencion del observador es 8ue cuando se
ado#to esta reforma fundamental y original #or la Asamblea Constituyente dominaba en Fili#inas un
#artido #olitico fuerte& denso& acaudillado #or una #ersonalidad genial& brillante& dinamica y #oderosa$
Ese #artido acababa de ganar en unas elecciones a#asionadisimas y muy reidas una victoria
es#ectacular& abrumadora& 8ue le daba el dominio y control de todos los resortes de la vida #olitica no
solo en la nacion sino hasta en las #rovincias y munici#ios$Ese #artido dominaba naturalmente tambien
la Convencion Constitucional& la Asamblea Constituyente$ VKue hiHo ese #artido en medio de su
omni#otenciaQ V<e emborracho ese #eligroso licor de los dioses E el licor de la victoria& el licor del
#oderQ 'o$ Ese #artido& sus caudillos& resolvieron ser generosos& ser (ustos& ser #rudentes& ser
democraticos& y lo fueronG determinaron #ensar en terminos de humanidad& en terminos de nacion& en
terminos de (ustica #ero (usticia de verad& en terminos de libertad y democracia& y lo hicieron tal como
lo #ensaron$ "odian haber escrito una constitucion a su talante E una constitucion 8ue sirviese sus
#ro#ios fines& 8ue asegurase su #er#etuidad en el #oder$ 'o lo hicieron$ P no solamente no lo hicieron&
sino 8ue hicieronalgo masG algo e2traordinario& inconcebible& (uHgado a la luH y segun la norma usual
del egoismo de los #artidos$ Teniendo en sus manos un #oder enorme& formidable& sumamente tentador&
el #oder de resolver las controversias electorales sobre las actas de los miembros de la <egislatura&
renunciaron a ese #oder #ara alo(arlo en un cuer#o constitucional se#arado e inde#endiente& el cual es
#racticamente un tribunal de (usticia: la Comision Electoral& hoy Tribunal Electoral$ <a determinacion
de hacer este cuer#o lo mas a#olitico #osible se denota en el hecho de 8ue sus miembros legislativos
estan distribuidos en igual numero& >=>& de suerte 8ue los > Magistrados com#onen el factor decisivo$
V"or 8ue los redactores de la Constitucion& y& sobre todo& #or 8ue el #artido #olitico mayoritario #udo
hacer estarenuncia de la 8ue #ocos e(em#los hay en la historia #olitica del mundoQ 'o #arece dificil
imaginarse los motivos& las causas& sobre todo #ara uno 8ue como el autor de esta o#inion tuvo algo
8ue ver& siguera muy modestamente& con las tareas de la Asamblea Constituyente$ El #ueblo fili#ino
estab em#e?ado en una su#rema& altisima tarea E la de estructurar el Estado& la de escribir el codigo
fundamental de la nacion no solo #ara los 19 a?os del Common-ealth sino #ara la 0e#ublica 8ue se
#roclamaria des#ues de dicho #eriodo de tiem#o$ Todo el mundo sabia 8ue la suerte de la democracia
en fili#inas de#endia #rinci#almente de la Constitucion 8ue se escribiera& no solo en su letra sino en su
es#iritu& y& sobre todo& de la forma y manera como ella moldearia& #enetraria e influiria en la vida
cotidiana del #ueblo y del individuo$ Desde luego no eramos unos ilusos& uto#istas& #erfeccionistasG no
as#irabamos ni mucho menos a crear un trasunto de la re#ublica ideal de "latonG #ero deseabamos
hacer lo me(or #osible dadas nuestras circunstancias y limitaciones& dada nuestra historia y tradiciones&
y dado el tem#eramento y genio #olitico y social de nuestro #ueblo$ 5e habia acu?ado y #o#ulariHado
#or a8uel tiem#o la frase F(usticia #oliticaF #ara denotar la clase de (usticia convencional 8ue cabia
es#erar en relacion con las #rotestas electorales #lanteadas ante las camaras legislativas$ 'o solo se
aceleraba o demoraba el des#acho de las mismas a ritmo con los dictados de ciertas conveniencias de
taifa o gru#o& sino 8ue no #ocas veces el com#le(o #olitico o #ersonal era el factor determinante en las
resoluciones y decisiones 8ue se tomaban$ Todo esto lo sabian los delegados a la asamblea
constituyente& lo sabian los liders de los #artidos& lo sabian los escritores y #ensadores dedicados al
estudio de las ciencias #oliticas y sociales$
En la Convencion habi delegados 8ue eran miembros actuales y #asados de la <egislatura& hombres 8ue
sabian #or #ro#ia e2#eriencia como se resolvian las #rotestas electorales en las camaras legislativas y
8ue& ademas& sabian #or sus lecturas lo 8ue sobre el #articular ocurria en otros #aises$ Alli estaba& como
delegado& 'icolas 0afols E actor del drama #olitico 8ue determino uno de los #rocedentes
#arlamentarios 8ue se citan E acaso rumiando todavia en su fuero interno el agravio contra lo 8ue
re#utara arbitrariedad cometida #or la mayoria en su caso$ VKue de e2tra?o habia 8ue en medio de tal
Fbac*groundF& en medio de tal ambiente ideologico se formara una fuerte o#inionen favor de un
cambio de sistema& en favor de unarbitrio constitucional 8ue sustituyera la llamada F(usticia #oliticaF
con una (usticia de verdad& una F(usticia (udicialQFAsi se creo la Comision Electoral$ 'ada me(or 8ue
las siguientes #alabras del malogrado Magistrado Abad 5antos en su luminosa o#inion concurrente en
el celebrado asunto de Angara contra Comision Electoral& #ara definir el caracter del sistema: FEl
ob(eto 8ue se trataba de obtener con la creacion del a Comision Electoral no era crear un cuer#o 8ue
estuviera #or encima de la ley& sino el elevar las elecciones legislativas de la categoria de cuestiones
#oliticas a la de (usticiables$F BAngara contra Comision Electoral& !> .ur$ Fil$& 1,1& +99$D P el #onente
en dicho asunto el Magistrado <aurel se e2#laya mas todavia con los siguientes #ronunciamientos 8ue
no tienen des#erdicio:
<os miembros de la Convencion Constitucional 8ue #lanearon nuestra ley fundamental eran& en su
mayor #arte& hombres de edad madura y de e2#eriencia$ A buen seguro muchos de ellos estaban
familiariHados con la historia y desarrollo #olitico de otros #aises del mundo$ "or tanto& cuando
creyeron conveniente crear una Comision Electoral como un organismo constitucional y lo invistieron
con la e2clusiva funcion de conocer y fallar las controversias electorales& actas y condiciones de los
miembros de la Asamblea 'acional&debieronde haberlo hecho asi& no solamente a la luH de su #ro#ia
e2#eriencia& sino tambien teniendo en cuente la e2#eriencia de otros #ueblos ilustrados del mundo$ <a
creacion de la Comision Electoral fue #laneada #ara remediar ciertos males 8ue conocian los autores de
nuestra Constitucion$ 'o obstante la tenaH o#osicion de algunos miembros de la Convencion a su
creacion& el #royecto como antes se ha dicho& fue a#robado #or ese cuer#o mediante una votacion de 9L
contra ,L$ Todo cuanto se #uede decir ahora sobre la a#robacion de la Constitucion& la creacion de la
Comision Electoral es la e2#resion de la sabiduria y Fla (usticia esencial al #uebloF$ BAbraham <incoln&
First %naugural Address& marHo & 1L!1$D
De las deliberaciones de nuestra Convencion Constitucional resulta evidente 8ue el ob(eto era tras#asar
en su totalidad toda la facultad #reviamente e(ercitada #or la <egislatura en asuntos #ertenecientes a
#rotestas electorales de sus miembros& a un tribunal inde#endiente e im#arcial$ 5in embargo& no fue
tanto el conocimientoy a#reciacion de #recedentes constitucionales contem#oraneos comola ha tiem#o
sentida necesidad de fallar #rotestas legislativas& libres de #re(uicios #artidistas lo 8ue im#ulso al
#ueblo& obrando #or medio de sus delegados a la Convencion& a establecer este Cuer#o 8ue se conoce
#or Comision Electoral$ Con estas miras& se creo un cuer#o en el 8ue tanto el #artido de la mayoria
como el de la minoria estanigualmente re#resentados #ara contrarrestar la influencia #artidista en sus
deliberaciones& y dotado& ademas& de caracter (udicial mediantela inclusion entre sus miembros de tres
magistrados del Tribunal 5u#remo$
<a Comision Electoral es una creacion constitucional& investida de las facultades necesarias #ara el
cum#limiento y e(ecucion de las funciones limitadas y es#ecificas 8ue la ha asignado la Comision$
Aun8ue no es un "oder en nuestro ;obierno tri#artito& es& #ara todos los fines& cuando obra dentro de
los limites de su autoridad& un organismo inde#endiente$ 5e a#ro2ima mas& ciertamente& al
De#artamento <egislativo 8ue a cual8uiera otro$ El lugar 8ue ocu#a la dis#osicion legal Barticulo D 8ue
crea la Comision Electoral en el Titulo V%& titulado FDe#artamento <egislativoF de nuestra
Constitucion&es muy significativo$ 5u com#osicion es tambien significativa #or cuanto etsa constituida
#or una mayoria de miembros de la <egislatura$ "ero es un cuer#o se#arado e inde#endiente de la
<egislatura$
<a concesion de facultades a la Comision Electoral #ara conocer de todas las controversias relativas a
las elecciones& actas y condiciones de los miembros de la Asamblea 'acional& tiene #or ob(eto hacer
8ue esas facultades sean tan com#letas y 8ueden tan incolumes como si hubieran continuado
originalmente en la <egislatura$ El haber e2#resamente investido de esas facultades a la Comision
Electoral& es una negativa tacita del e(ercicio de esas facultades #or la Asamblea 'acional$ P esto es
una restriccion tan eficaH a las facultades legislativas como una #rohibicion e2#resa contenida en la
Constitucion BE2 #arte <e-is& , Te2$ Crim$ 0e#$& 1G 5tate vs$ 3hisman&>! 5$D$& +!9G <$0$A$& 191M)&
1D$ $ $ $F BAngara contra Comision Electoral& !> .ur$ Fil$& 1,1=& 1LL=199$D
Acaso se #ueda decir algo mas todavia acerca de los motivos 8ue indu(eron la creacion de la Comision
ElectoralG acaso se #ueda aventurar la afirmacion de 8ue con este cuer#o los redactores de la
Constitucion& los caudillos de los #artidos se #ro#usieron asegurar #or todos los medios y garantias la
vida y crecimiento de la democracia en Fili#inas$ Democracia es esencialmente libre discusion de los
asuntos #ublicos& de los #roblemas de la comunidadG libree2#resion del #ensamiento y de la o#inion$
De esto se sigue necesariamente un regimen basado en la e2istencia de una mayoria 8ue gobierna y de
una minoria 8ue as#ira a gobernar entretanto 8ue vigila los actos del gobierno en su doble #a#el de
censor y de as#irante al #oder$ <a me(or #iedra de to8ue #ara a#reciar y (uHgar la calidad de un regimen
#olitico es la manera y forma como trata a las minorias y o#osiciones$ :n gobierno totalitario&
des#otico& las li8uida& las ahogaG un gobierno democratico no solo las res#eta& sino 8ue crea #ara ellas
un clima vital #ro#icio$ Mirado en esta sentido el Tribunal electoral es un instrumento de minorias #or
antonomasia: la idea basica de su creacion es el des#oseer a las mayhorias del #oder de destruir& de
ani8uilar a las minorias mediante lo 8ue cinicamente se ha denominado F(usticia #olitica&F e im#artir a
las minorias las ma2imas garantias de una (usticia de verdad E una F(usticia (udicialF de la mayoria en
el 5enado& #ronunciando su discurso a favor de la reforma en la Asamblea Constituyente& di(o entre
otros conce#tos las siguientes significativas #alabras: FMany have criticiHed& many have com#lained
against the tyranny of the ma(ority in electoral cases$ $ $ $F BAruego& The Framing of the "hili##ine
Constitution&Tomo %& #ag$ +!>D$ "or eso es un absurdo sostener 8ue la facultad de sus#ender utiliHada
mediante la 0esolucion "endatun haya 8uedado en el Congreso como residuo& inde#endientemente de
la (urisdiccion e2clusiva del Tribunal Electoral #ara resolver #rotestas electorales legislativas$ Ello
e8uivaldria a sostener 8ue los redactores de la Constitucion #usieron un remedio #araderrotarlo al
#ro#io tiem#o mediante una #uerta reservada y trasera #or la 8ue #odria escurrirse el #e8ue?o
monstruo de la F(usticia #oliticaF$ Este (uego infantil no #odian haberlo hecho los redactores de la
Constitucion& los liders de los #artidos 8ue tuvieron alguna res#onsabilidad en la redaccion de dicho
documento$ VKue masQ Esa facultada #ara sus#ender e8uivale #racticamentea una carta blanca #ara
intervenir y estorbar las actuaciones y #rocedimientos del Tribunal Electoral& #rovocando sus#icacias&
creando antici#adamente #re(uicios no solo en la mente del #ublico sino de los miembros mismos&
em#e8ue?eciendo& en una #alabra& el #restigio del tribunal$ VComo se #uede #ensar 8ue la Asamblea
Constituyente #ermitiera y #osibitara ese resultado anti(udicial& reservandoalgo al Congreso en un
tras#aso de facultades 8ue se consideraba total& absoluto e incondicionalQ <os tribunalesordinarios de
(usticia estan #or ley #rotegidos contra todo estorbo y obstruccion a sus funciones$ El Tribunal
Electoral E criatura de la misma Constitucion E tiene& #or lo menos& iguales si no me(ores titulos a
esa im#ermeabilidad& me(or todavia& a esa inmunidad contra toda obstruccion y entor#ecimiento$ El
hecho de 8ue la intromision venga del Congreso o de una de sus camaras no #uede ser una
(ustificacion$
<as deliberaciones de la Asamblea Constituyente arro(an buena luH sobre el es#iritu del #rece#to 8ue
nos ocu#a$ Kueel tras#aso de facultades fue total& absolutoG 8ue al Congreso no se reservo ninguna
facultad& mucho menos la de sus#ender& en toda cuestion relativa a la eleccion de sus miembros& lo
denotan bien claro ciertas observaciones& 8ue a estas alturas resultan #rofeticas& del Delegado
Manuel0o2as& uno de los liders mas autoriHados de la Asamblea Constituyente& hoy #rimer Magistrado
de la nacion$ El 5r$ 0o2as estaba contestando varias inter#elaciones sobre el alcance del nuevo sistema
#ro#uesto$ 0e#licando al Delegado Ventura no #arece sino 8ue el 5r$ 0o2as #resintiera la 0esolucion
"endatun o actos seme(antes a ella cuando di(o lo siguiente: F$ $ $ Ademas& si la Asamblea desea anular
el #oder de la Comision BElectoralD& #uede hacerlo asi mediante ciertas maniobras en su #rimera sesion
cuando se someten las actas a la Asamblea$ El ob(eto es dar a la Comision Electoral todo el #oder
e(ercitado #or la Asamblea referente a las elecciones& actas y condiciones de sus miembrosF Bvease
Angara contra Comision Electoral& su#ra& #ag$ 1M9D$ Ese todo de 8ue habla el 5r$ 0o2as e2cluye la idea
de cual8uier reserva o residuo de(ado a las camaras del Congreso$
5e dice& sin embargo& en la o#inion de la mayoria 8ue los debates en la Asamblea Constituyente sobre
el #rece#to constitucional de 8ue se trata demuestran 8ue la intencion de los redactores de la
Constitucion no fue el entregar todo a la Comision Electoral Bahora Tribunal ElectoralD& sino 8ue se le
confirio solamente la facultad de ser Fthe sole (udge of all contests relating to the election& returns and
8ualifications of the members of the 'ational Assembly$FEs decir E se arguye E 8ue cuando no hay
FcontestF o contencion las camaras tienen la facultad de entender y (uHgar de Fla eleccion& actas y
cualificaciones de sus miembrosF$Esto se des#rende& segun la #onencia& del hecho de 8ue mientras el
FdraftF o #royecto original decia lo siguiente:
The elections& returns and 8ualifications of the members of the 'ational Assembly and all cases
contesting the election of any of its members shall be (udged by an Electoral Commission$
la redaccion final del #royecto 8uedo como sigue:
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
The Electoral Commission shall be the sole (udge of all contests relating to the election& returns& and
8ualifications of the members of the 'ational Assembly$
5e asevera enfaticamente en la o#inion de la mayoria 8ue la su#resion de la #rimera #arte de la clausula
es harto significativa$ Ello demuestra& se dice& 8ue la clausula tenia dos #artes con significados
distintos: la #rimera #arte& relativa a casos no contenciosos& y la segunda referente a casos
contenciosos$ <a eliminacion de la #rimera #arte venia a reducir consiguientemente la (urisdiccion de la
ComisionElectoral a los casos contenciosos& reservandose los no contenciosos a las camaras$ P #ara
#robar esta tesis a #rimera vista deslumbrante se transcribe en la #onencia una larga tirada del diario de
sesiones de la Asamblea Constituyente E tirada 8ue& en verdad& ofrece ciertos e8uivocos y
ambiguedades$ "ero esto no es mas 8ue un as#ecto del cuadro$
Estos nos obliga a revisar y e2aminar toda la #arte del diario de sesiones 8ue abarca los debates sobre
el #articular$Afortunadamente& las discusiones fueron am#lias& #lenas de informacion y detalle& y sobre
todo llevadas muyinteligentemente$ El Delegado Manuel 0o2as& ahora "residente de Fili#inas& era
8uien sostenia el lado afirmativo& esto es& el #rece#to original tal como lo habia sometido el llamando
Comite de 5iete y tal como 8ueda transcritoen el #arrafo anterior$ :n gru#o de Delegados& encabeHado
#or el 4on$ Ale(o <abrador& de Aambales& estaba fundamental y decididamente o#uesto a la formula$
Estos Delegados no ace#taban la reforma #ro#uesta& 8uerian 8ue se conservase el antiguo sistema #or
virtud del cual las camaras eran los (ueces e2clusivos de la elecccion& actas ycualificaciones de sus
miembros$ Acaso sea #ertinente consignar el hecho de 8ue si bien es verdad 8ue los #artidos Banti y
#roD habian declarado una tregua #atriotica y saludable en sus luchas dentro de la Convencion& el 5r$
0o2as #ertenecia al #artido minoritario E el de los #ros E mientras 8ue el 5r$ <abrador era de la
mayoria& el #artido fuerte y #oderoso de los antis cuyo indiscutible lider era el entonces "residente del
5enado 5r$ KueHon$ <a o#osicion del 5r$ <abrador y com#aIJIeros se fundaba #rinci#almente en la
teoria de la se#aracion de #oderes: ellos creian 8ue la reforma era demasiado radical& 8ue la misma
venia a mermar grandemente el #oder y #restigio del de#artamento legislativo&reduciendolo a un estado
de inferioridad y vasalla(e& #articularmente al #oder (udicial& en virtud de la intervencion de miembros
de la Corte 5u#rema en la com#osicion de la Comision o Tribunal Electoral$ Acaso sea #ertinente decir
tambien 8ue entre los ardientes #atrocinadores de la reforma figuraban distinguidos Delegados de la
mayoria entre ellos el 4on$ Vicente .$ Francisco& de Cavite& en la actualidad 5enador de Fili#inas$
Veamos ahora el #roceso de como se enmendo el FdraftForiginal del #rece#to$ <as siguientes
inter#elaciones arro(an co#iosa luH sobre la cuestion$
Delegate VE'T:0A$ 3e have a doubt here as to the sco#e of the meaning of the first four lines&
#aragra#h !& #age 11 of the draft reading: FThe elections& returns and 8ualifications of the members of
the 'ational Assembly and all cases contesting the election of anyof its members shall be (udged by an
electoral Commission $F% should li*e to as* from the gentleman from Ca#iH -hether the election and
8ualification of the members -hose election is not contested shall also be (udged by the Electoral
Commission$
Delegate 0/CA5$ %f there is no 8uestion about the election of the member& there is nothing to be
(udgedG that is -hy the -ord F(udgeFis used to indicate a controversy$ %f there is no 8ustion about the
election of a member& there is nothing to be submitted to the Electoral Commission and there is nothing
to be determined$
Delegate VE'T:0A$ )ut that does carry the idea also that the Electoral Commission shall confirm
also the election of those -hose election is not contestedQ
Delegate 0/CA5$ There is no need of confirmation$ As the gentleman *no-s& theaction of the 4ouse
of 0e#resentatives in confirming the election of its members is (ust a matter of the rules of the
Assembly$ %t is not constitutional$ %t is not necessary$ After a man Badviertase bien estoD fileshis
credentials that he has been elected& that is sufficient& unless the election is contested$F BArruego& The
Framing of the "hili##ine Constitution&##$ +!M& +!L$D
Como se ve& lo 8ue #reocu#ada al Delegado Ventura era 8ue con la fraseologiaindicada la Comision
Electoral tuviera (urisdiccion y com#etencia hasta sobrelas credenciales no #rotestadasG #arece 8ue se
temia esta ambiguedad$ "eroni el Delegado Ventura ni nadie en la Convencion tuvo (amas en la mente
la idea de 8ue la fraseologia envolvia una dual (urisdiccion: una& de #arte de la Asamblea 'acional&
sobre las credenciales no #rotestadasG y otra& de #arte de la Comision Electoral& sobre las credenciales
#rotestadas$ P elDelegado 0o2as& con su contestaciones& establecio bien claramente 8ue se em#leaba la
#alabra F(udgeFG y el Fcontest&F el litigio tenia 8ue ser en(uiciado naturalmente #or la Comision
Electoral$
De la ultima contestacion del Delegado 0o2as transcrita arriba se deduceincuestionablemente 8ue el no
admitia la #osibilidad de 8ue la Asemblea 'acional rehusase su confirmacion a una credencial no
#rotestada o contendida$ El sostenia 8ue esta confirmacion no era constitucional& no era necesaria$
"oreso el di(o categoricamente: FAfter a man files his credential& that issufficient& unless the election is
contested$F A#licado este criterio al caso8ue nos ocu#a& e8uivale a lo siguiente: Des#ues de haberse
#resentado al5enado las credenciales de los recurrentes 5res$ Vera& Dio*no y 0omero Ba ello monta el
certificado de #roclamacion e2#edido #or la Comision sobre EleccionesD& ello era bastante& a menos
8ue su eleccion fuese cuestionada& ycuestionada legalmente& esto es& #rotestada debidamente ante el
Tribunal Electoral$
El #ensamiento del Delegado 0o2as se aclaro mas contestado otras inter#elaciones$ El di(o #ositiva y
terminantemente& re#licando al DelegadoCinco& 8ue no habia ninguna diferencia entre la #rimera y
segunda #arte de laclausulaG 8ue& en realidad& los casos de elections& returns and 8ualifications&F y 8ue
la frase Fand contested electionsF se inserto meramente #ara los efectos de mayor claridad$
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Delegate C%'C/$ Mr$ "resident& % have a similar 8uestion as that #ro#ounded by the gentleman from
%locos 'orte BMr$ VenturaD -hen % arose a -hile ago$4o-ever& % -ant to as* more 8uestions from the
Delegate from Ca#iH$ This #aragra#h ! on #age 11 of the draft cites cases contesting the election
asse#arated from the first #art of the section -hich refers to elections& returns and 8ualifications$
Delegate 0/CA5$ That is merely for the sa*e of clarity$ %n fact the cases ofcontested elections are
already included in the #hrase Fthe elections& returns and 8ualifications$F This #hrase Fand contested
electionsF -as inserted merely for the sa*e of clarity$
Delegate C%'C/$ :nder this #aragra#h& may not the Electoral Commission& at its o-n instance& refuse
to confirm the election of the membersQ
Delegate 0/CA5$ % do not thin* so unless there is a #rotest$ BArruego& id$&#$ +!9$D
"ero hay todavia cosa mas im#ortante$ En realidad& esta misma custion 8ue nos ocu#a ya se #lanteo en
a8uellos debates y la solucion 8ue entonces se le diocuadra #erfectamente con el criterio 8ue
sostenemos en esta disidencia$ ElDelegado <abrador& lider& como ya se ha dicho& de los o#ositores a la
reforma&hiHo al Delegado 0o2as algunas inter#elaciones 8ue #arecian hechas enantici#acion a los
#resentes acontecimientos$ 4e a8ui el dialogo 0o2as=<abrador:
Delegate <A)0AD/0$ Does not the gentleman from Ca#iH believe that unless this #o-er is granted to
the Assembly& the Assembly on its o-n motion does nothave the right to contest the election and
8ualification of its membersQ
Delegate 0/CA5$ % have no doubt that the gentleman is right$ %f this draft is retained& as it is& even if
t-o=thirds of the Assembly believe that a member has not the 8ualifications #rovided by la-& they
cannot remove him for that reason$
Delegate <A)0AD/0$ 5o that the right to remove shall only be retained by the Electoral Commission$
Delegate 0/CA5$ )y the Assembly for misconduct$
Delegate <A)0AD/0$ % mean -ith the res#ect to the 8ualifications of the members$
Delegate 0/CA5$ Pes& by the Electoral Commission$
Delegate <A)0AD/0$ 5o that under this draft& no member of the Assembly has the right to 8uestion
the eligibility of its membersQ
Delegate 0/CA5$ )efore a member can 8uestion the eligibility& he must go to the Electoral
Commission and ma*e the 8uestion heard before the Electoral Commission$
Delegate <A)0AD/0$ 5o that the Electoral Commission shall decide -hether the election is not
contested$
Delegate 0/CA5$ Pes sirG that is the #ur#ose$ BAruego& idem& ##$ +!9& +M9$D
Este dialogo 0o2as=<abrador nos da la me(or clave #ara inter#retar el #erfecto$ <abrador #regunto si
ba(o el mismo la Asamblea tenia derecho acuestionar& de su #ro#ia iniciativa Bon its motionD$ la
eleccion y cualificacion de sus miembrosG 0o2as contesto 8ue '/& 8ue Faun8ue dos terceras #artes de
la Asamblea creyeran 8ue un miembro no tenia las cualificaciones #rovistas #or la ley& ellos no #odrian
removerle #or tal raHonF$
<abrador volvio a #reguntar in8uiriendo sobre 8uien tenia el derecho de remover$ 0o2as contesto: la
Asamblea 'acional #or mala conducta Bfor misconductDG y la Comision Electoral& con res#eto a las
cualificaciones de losmiembros de la Asamblea$
P cuando <abrador volvio a remachar #reguntando si un miembro de la Asamblea'acional #odria& ba(o
el #rece#to 8ue se discutia& cuestionar la elegibilidadde sus miembros& 0o2as contesto categoricamente
8ue Fantes de 8ue un miembro #udiera cuestionar la eligibilidad Bde otroD debia ir a la Comision
Electoral y hacer 8ue la cuestion se oyera ante la Comision Electoral$F Es decir 8ue&a#licado este
criterio al caso nos ocu#a& ni el 5enador "endatun& ni ningun otro 5enador& ni nadie tenia derecho a
cuestionar la elegibilidad de los recurrentes 5res$ Vera& Dio*no y 0omero ante el 5enado& sino 8ue el
asunto debia llevarse directamente al Tribunal Electoral y hacer 8ue este lo en(uiciara$
"ero se #reguntara: Ventonces #or 8ue se reformo el FdraftF o #royecto original eliminando la #rimera
clausula y de(ando solo la segunda& o sea la frase Fall cases contesting the elections& returns and
8ualifications&F etc$ etcQ Es verdad& se hiHo la enmienda& #ero la misma no es sustancial&no afecta al
fondo del #rece#to& no involucra el es#iritu del sistema tal como lo definio y e2#lico el Delegado 0o2as
en sus luminosas res#uestas a las diversas inter#elaciones& #articularmente las dadas al Delegado
<abrador$ 5e ace#to la enmienda mas bien #or raHones #uramente #sicologicas& esas 8ue conoce bien
todo a8uel 8ue este familiarHado con la mecanica de los #arlamentos y asambleas deliberativas$"or un
lado& el Delegado 0o2as veia 8ue habia ciertas dudascon res#ecto al alcance del #royecto tal como
estaba fraseadoG#ero& #or otro lado& el decia 8ue esas dudas carecian de fundamento& 8ue las dos
clausulas del #rece#to tenian un mismo significado& 8ue la segunda ya estaba contenida en la #rimera y
se insertaba tan solo #ara fines de claridad$Asi 8ue& habil estrategia #arlamentario& creyo 8ue #odia
ace#tar #erfectamente la enmienda& entre cuyos #ro#onentes Besto es muy significativo& como se vera
mas adelanteD figuraba #or cierto el Delegado 0afols& #ues con ello no #erdia nada& no com#rometia ni
un a#ice de su #osicion& y en cambio ganaba mucho& atraia el a#oyo de los indecisos&aseguraba la
a#robacion del #rece#to en la votacion final& derrotando a los 8ue estaban fundamentalmente o#uestos
al mismo como& en efecto& los derroto #or 9L votos contra ,!$ Kue la enmienda no era sustancial y de
ningun modoafectaba al sistema& asi lo declaro categoricamente el 5r$ 0o2as cuando& defiriendo a una
sugestion del "residente 0ecto de la Convencion& definio el alcance del cambio diciendo 8ue era Ftan
solo #ara obviar la ob(ecion a#untada#or varios delegados en el sentido de 8ue la #rimera clausula del
@draft@ 8ue dice @The election& returns and 8ualifications of the members of the 'ational Assembly@
#arece dar a la Comision Electoral el #oder de determinar hasta la eleccion de los miembros 8ue no han
sido #rotestados$FEs decir& 8ue o unico 8ue se 8uiso aclarar y establecer fuera de toda duda con la
enmienda es 8ue el #oder de la Comision Electoral no #odia e2tenderse a las credenciales no
#rotestadas& #ero (amas se #enso 8ue el efecto de la enmienda era el desga(ar este #oder de la Comision
Electoral #ara de(arlo como un residuo en la <egislaturaG en otros terminos& (amas se imagino 8ue con
la enmienda la Asamblea 'acional todavia #odria ser (ueH de las credenciales no #rotestadas de sus
miembros$ 4e a8ui las #alabras te2tuales del 5r$ 0o2as:
The difference& Mr$ "resident& consists only in obviating the ob(ection #ointed out by various delegates
to the effect that the first clause -hich states FThe election& returns and 8ualifications of the members
of the 'ational AssemblyF seems to give to the Electoral Commission the #o-er to determine also the
election of the members -ho have not been elected$ And in order to obviate& -e believe that the
amendment is right in that sense $ that is& if -e amend the draft so that it should read as follo-s: FAll
cases contesting the election& etc$&F so that the (udges of the Electoral Commission -ill limit themselves
only to cases in -hich there has been a #rotest against the returns$
'o #udo haberse concebido (amas la #eregrina& fantastica idea de 8ue el FdraftF enmendado de(aba a la
Asamblea 'acional la facultad de en(uiciar la Feleccion& actas y cualificaciones de los miembrosF
contra los cuales no e2istiera ninguna #rotesta ante la Comision Electoral& #or al sencilla raHon de 8ue
ello engendraria las siguientes anomalias: BaD la creacion de dos (ueces: uno& #ara credenciales no
#rotestadas E la Asamblea 'acional o CongresoG y otro& #ara credenciales #rotestadas E la Comision
o Tribunal ElectoralG BbD en un momento dado& una mayoria sin escru#ulos&viendo #eligrar el #oder en
sus manos des#ues de unas elecciones re?idisimas& #odria dar un gol#e de mano mediante la
estratagema de hacer 8ue sus candidatos derrotados se inhiban de #rotestar ante el Tribunal Elctoral a
fin de dar lugar a 8ue el Congreso actue directamente sobre el caso& con la mira de a(usticiar a los
candidatos minoritarios triunfantes ba(o la guillotina de lo 8ue el cinismo de los descreidos ha llamado
(usticia #olitica de las mayoriasG BcD occurriria la #arado(a de 8ue las credenciales no #rotestadas
estarian en #eor situacion 8ue las #rotestada& #or8ue mientras estas ultimas tendrian el beneficio de una
(usticia de verdad& la (usticia (udicial del Tribunal Electoral& a8uellas caerian ba(o la (usticia #olitica de
las mayorias& sedientas de sangre adversaria$ Es indudable 8ue& como hemos dicho en otra #arte de esta
disidencia& la Asamblea Constituyente no #odia ser #arte en un (uego infantil como esteG y el Delgado
0o2as& con su seriedad& con su bien conocida madureH#olitica& con su devocion a la causa de la libertad
y democracia& de ningun modo #odia ser corres#onsable de un #rece#to constitucional 8ue #udiera dar
lugar a tan tremendas anomalias$ P V8ue decir del Delgado 0afolsQ VComo se #uede concebir 8ue& con
sus tristes reminiscencias de la (usticia #olitica de las mayorias& diera su #atrocinio a una enmienda 8ue
#udiera #roducir tales consecuenciasQ
"ara remachar la tesis de 8ue cada camara de nuestro Congreso todavia retiene la facultad de
determinar Fla eleccion& las actas y las cualificaciones de sus miembrosF en casos en 8ue no hay
#rotesta& la mayoria #ro#one en su o#inion el siguiente e(em#lo: FEs elegido #or un distrito congresil
un hombre 8ue habia servido #reviamente 19 a?os en las "risiones de )ilibid& #or estafa$ Como no tuvo
contrincanteBYeste hombre debia de ser muy #o#ularSD& ninguna #rotesta se formula contra su eleccion$
P naturalmente el Tribunal Electoral no ad8uiere (urisdiccion sobre el caso& #ues no hay @contest@ o
controversia$ :na veH informada del hecho Yno #uede la Camara& motu #ro#io& sus#ender la toma de su
(uramentoQ V'o #uede la Camara investigarle y des#ues e2clurleQ 5e observara 8ue cuando un
miembro de la Camara suscita una cuestion res#ecto a las cualificaciones de otro& de ello no se sigue un
#leito electoral& #ues ninguno #retende sustituir a este ultimo$F
"areceria 8ue estabamos e2cusados de re#licar a este argumento #or dos raHones: #rimera& #or8ue
evidentemente el e(em#lo #ro#one un caso 8ue es com#letamente distintodel 8ue nos ocu#a& #ues los
recurrentes no estan acusados de estafa ni de nada 8ue afecta a su caracter& y su caso&como ya hemos
dicho& es de motivacion enteramente electoral& es decir& relacionada con la forma como fueron elegidos
8ue se dice viciada #or actos de violencia y terrorismo de sus #artidariosG y segunda& #or8ue si bien es
verdad 8ue el e(em#lo es meramente hi#otetico& #lantea& sin embargo& un caso 8ue #uede #erfectamente
occurrir y #areceria 8ue ni esta Corte ni ningun miembro suyo deberia adelantar su o#inion sobre
seme(ante hi#otesis susce#tible de realiHarse$ "ero como del e(em#lo se #retende hacer argumento
a8uiles& no tenemos mas remedio 8ue comentarlo y discutirlo$
Ante todo se deben deslindar bien los conce#tos$ El derecho o facultad de e2#ulsar a un miembro de
una camara legislativa BArticulo V%& seccion 19& a#$ >& Constitucion de Fili#inasD es una cosa bien
diferente del derecho de rehusar la admision de uno #ara ser miembro de dicha camara$ En esto ultimo
las cuestiones envueltas se refieren #rinci#almente& tal veH e2clusivamente& a las cualificaciones
constitucionales de a8uiellos 8ue se #resentan #ara ser admitidos como miembros& o bien a la
regularidad y legalidad de las elecciones en 8ue fueron elegidosG mientras 8ue en lo #rimero& esto es& en
lo 8ue toca a la e2#ulsion& lo 8ue de lugar a la accion es el caracter #ersonal o conducta de la #arte
afectada B3illoughby& /n the Constitution of the :nited 5tates& tomo 1$W& #ag$ !11D$
En el e(em#lo 8ue #ro#one la mayoria& la condena #or estafa no es cosa 8ue guarda relacion con las
cualificaciones constitucionales del congresista o 0e#resentante electo ni con la regularidad y legalidad
de las elecciones en 8ue salio victorioso& #or cierto sin ningun contrincante$ Es cosa 8ue afecta a su
caracter #ersonal o conducta$ "or tanto& no cabe discutir su derecho a ser admitido como miembro de la
camaraG el reune las cualificaciones constitucionales Bciudadania& edad& etc$D #ara ser 0e#resentante y la
lim#ieHa de su eleccion esta admitida$ Asi 8ue& #arafraseando al Delegado 0o2as& la F#resentacion de
su credencial de 8ue ha sido eligido& es bastante #ara 8ue sea admitido como miembro$F "ero Vla
condena #or estafaQ V'o #uede la camara #or este motivo investigarle y e2cluirle como elemento no
deseableQ E #regunta la mayoria$ Esta es otra cuestion$ Pa hemos visto 8ue el derecho de admision es
una cosa& y el derecho de e2#ulsion& otra$ El derecho de e2#ulsion& #or mala conducta& lo tienen las
camaras inde#endientemente del Tribunal Electroral$ Pa lo di(o el Delegado 0o2as& contestando al
Delegado <abrador: la facultad de remover& en tratandose de la Feleccion& actas y cualificaciones de los
miembros&F la tiene la Comision o Tribunal Electoral& #revia #rotestaG la facultad de remover& #or mala
conducta& la tiene la Asamblea BCongresoD
"ero e2aminemos el e(em#lo de la estafa 8ue #lantea la mayoria hast sus ultimas consecuencias$
3illoughby dice 8ue sobre este res#ecto el #unto #rinci#al de controversia es si los actos de mala
conducta ob(eto de 8ue(a debenser solo los subsiguientes a la eleccion y 8ue afecten a la dignidad del
Congreso y al debido desem#e?o de sus funciones& o deben ser tambien los anteriores$ F0es#ecto de los
actos de los miembros electos cometidos con anterioridad a su eleccion se ha argumentado fuertemente
8ue las Camaras no deben tenerlos cuenta& #ues se debe conceder 8ue los electores tienen el derecho de
elegir a 8uienes 8uieran #ara re#resentarles en el Congreso& y se debe #resumir 8ue han tenido en
cuenta el caracter y la conducta de a8uellos a 8uienes elegen$F
A disregard of the foregoing doctrine& it has been urged& o#erates as a denial to the 5tates of a right or
#rivilege constitutionally #rovided for them$ Thus& -e find .ames M$ )ec*& former 5olicitor ;eneral of
the :nited 5tates& declaring : F%t seems too clear for argument& that each 5tates has the right to select
from its #eo#le any re#resentative in the 5enate Bor the 4ouseD that it sees fit& irres#ective of his
intellectual or moral 8ualifications B#rovided he #ossesses the 8ualifications s#ecified in the
ConstitutionD& $ $ $F A state may have selected a member of the 5enate or secured his nomination by
un-orthy means$ 4e may be intelectually unfitted for the high office& and his moral character may& in
other res#ects& leave much to be desired$ The "eo#le of the :nited 5tates may (ustifiably thin* that the
5tates has sent to Congress an unfit man& -ho could add nothing to its deliberations& and -hose
influence might -ell be #ernicious$ 'one the less& the 5tates has the right to send him$ %t is its sole
concern& and to nullify its choice is to destroy the basic right of a sovereign 5tate& and amounts to a
revolutionF B3illoughby& idem& ##$ !11& !1+D$
El #rimer #recedente E a?ade el autor citado E de 8ue& como base #ara e2#ulsion& los actos cometidos
antes de la eleccion no deben ser considerados& fue en el caso del 5enador 4um#hrey Marshall& en
1M9!& 8uien fue acusado de 8ue habia cometido #er(urio$ El 5enado en este caso se nego a tomar
(urisdiccion #ara determinar si& de hecho& Marshall habia sido reo de un delito& a #esar del hecho de 8ue
el #idio 8ue el 5enato investigase y determinase el casoF Bsu#ra& #$ !1+D$ "arece 8ue en estos casos el
criteriogeneral y #redominante es 8ue el sufragio #o#ular es como un es#ecie de .ordan 8ue lava con
sus aguas #urificadoras todos los #ecados cometidos antes de la eleccion$ Es como si al #ueblo se le
su#usiera investido de la facultad su#rema de indultar totalmente a sus favoritos #or medio de la balota
electoral$
5e insinua 8ue los recurridos tenian la facultad de ado#tar la 0esolucion "endum en virtud del #rinci#io
de 8ue todo cuer#olegislativo tiene el #oder inherente de ado#tar reglas #ara su organiHacion&
funcionamiento y #reservacion$ 5e cita la #ractica legislativa de 8ue al inaugurarse un cuer#o
deliberativo se forma un comite de credienciales 8ue e2amia los certificados o titulos 8ue #resentan los
miembros #ara su admision$ Dicho comite rinde su informe recomendando la a#robacion o
desa#robacion de las credenciales$ 'o #uede sostenerse una tesis mas #eligrosa 8ue esta$ <as camaras
legislativas son mas& muchisimo mas 8ue una camara de comercio& #or e(em#lo$ <os legisladores son
funcionarios constitucionales$ 5us cualificaciones& la invenstidura y el e(ercicio de su cargo& el termino
del mismo&estan definidos y am#arados #or la Constitucion mediante #rece#tos y dis#osiciones 8ue
o#eran como limitaciones constitucionales sobre el #oder legislativo en general$ Esos #rece#tos y
dis#osiciones no se #ueden enmendar o derogar mediante una ley ordinaria& mucho menos mediante
una resolucion sim#le como la del 5enador "endatun: #ara enmendarlos o derogarlos hace falta 8ue se
reforme la Constitucion #or los #rocesos 8ue ella #rece#tua$ 4acer de#ender la admision del legislador
o la tenencia de sus cargo de una resolucion o acuerdo reglamentario es de los mas subversivo& #ues le
reduciria a un a situacion tan #recaria y tan endeble 8ue un mero em#leado del servicio civil tendria
mas #restancia y mas seguridad 8ue el$
5e nos cita& sin embargo& el caso de )arry vs$ :nited 5tates e2 rel$ Cunningham B+M9 :$5$& L!M& LMG M>
<a-& ed$ ,9MD& #ara demostrar 8ue la 0esolucion "endatun es valida y legal #or entrar y recaer dentro
del #oder inherente del 5enado #ara sus#ender a cual8uier miembro& inde#endientemente de la cuestion
electoral$ 4emos revisado cuidadosamente la sentencia citada y la hemos hallado ina#licable el
#resente caso$ Es verdad 8ue ella tiene cierta relacion con el caso de Vare& candidatoa 5enador en
"ennsylvania en las elecciones de 19+!& a 8uien se lenegro #rima facie el asiento mientras se efectuaba
una investigacion dealegadas irregularidades y #racticas corru#tas cometidas #ara #romover
sunominacion y su eleccion& entre ellas el haber hecho #romesas im#ro#iase ilegales& etc$ "ero& a#arte
de 8ue la sus#ension del (uramento y asientode Vare caia del 5enado American como Funico (ueH de la
eleccion& actas y calificaciones de sus miembros&F solo muy incidental y colateralmentese habla de esto
en el caso de )arry$ <a unica y verdadera cuestion #lanteadaen esta caso era la de si a un tal
Cunningham se le #odia arrestrar& mediante orden del 5enado& y traerle a la barra #ara contestar a
ciertas #reguntassobre la #rocedencia de ciertos fondos gastados en la nominacion y eleccionde Vare$
<a Corte 5u#rema Federal di(o 8ue si& 8ue esto caia dentro de los #oderes (udiciales del 5enado$
F;enerallyF E dice la Corte E Fthe 5enate is alegislative body& e2ercising in connection -ith the
4ouse only the #o-er to ma*e la-s$ )ut it has had conferred u#on it by the Constitution certain #o-ers
-hich are not legislative but (udicial in character$ Among these is the #o-er to (udge of the elections&
returns and 8ualifications of its members$ That #o-er carries -ith it authority to ta*e such ste#s as may
bea##ro#riate and necessary to secure information u#on -hich to decide concerning electionsF B)arry&
su#ra& LM1D$ P al final de la sentencia la Corte sienta la siguiente afirmacion 8ue es muysignificativa
#ara el #resente caso: F4ere the 8uestion under consideration concerns the e2ercise by the 5enate of an
indubitable #o-erG and if (udicial interference can be successfullyinvo*ed it can only be u#on a clear
sho-ing of such arbitrary and im#rovident use of the #o-er as -ill constitute a denial of the due
#rocess of la-$ That condition -e are unable to find in the #resent caseF B)arry& su#ra& LMD$ De suerte
8ue& bien mirado& el asunto de )arry hasta es un argumento en favor de la (urisdiccion de esta Corte
5u#rema #ara conocer y en(uiciar la 0esolucion "endatun&#ara determinar si con ella se ha infringido o
no la Constitucion$
5e arguye 8ue los recurridos no hicieron mas 8ue actuar sobre un informe rendido #or la Comisioon
sobre Elecciones en obediencia a un mandato constitucional$ En el informe se recitaban ciertos hechos
y se sentaban conclusiones sobre alegados actos de terrorismo y violencia 8ue #osian afectar a la
eleccion de los recurrentes$ 5e dice 8ue la 0esolucion "endatun no es sino la reaccion& la res#uesta de
los recurridos adicho informeG 8ue estos tenian absoluta discrecion sobre el #articularG 8ue ello entraba
dentro de sus #oderes #oliticos y no era revisable #or el de#artamento (udicial$ "ara contestar esto nos
bastara re#etir 8ue la 0esolucion "endatun es algo mas 8ue el e(ercicio de un #oder #olitico y
discrecional: es una usur#acion de #oderes constitucionales #ertenecientes a otro organismo
constitucionalG y #ara demostrarlo no necesitamos re#roducir los argumentos ya e2tensamente
e2#uestos$
"or lo demas& el discutido informe de la Comission sobre Elecciones no tiene el valor ni alcane 8ue le
atribuye$ Ese informe no #odia autoriHar ni (ustifica ninguna accion 8ue como la 0esolucion "endatun
tuviese el efecto de #rivar a los recurrentes de sus asientos en el 5enado& siguera tem#oralmente$ El
documento sometido #or la Comision sobre Elecciones 8ue tiene verdadero valor constitucional y legal&
8ue tiene fuerHa obligatoria& es su #roclama declaranda electos a los recurrentes$ Esa #roclama im#one
a los recurridos el deber ministerial de recibir y ace#tar a los recurrentes como miembros del 5enado
hasta 8ue el Tribunal Electoral diga otra cosa$ VComo un informe& 8ue ni si8uiera es al resultado de una
investigacion #ro#ia& sino 8ue esta basado en otros informes de fuerea& #odia tener la trascendencia 8ue
se le ha dado& tomando #ie del mismo #ara una sacudida seismica de tales #ro#orciones como es la
sus#ension de los derechos de tres miembros electos del 5enado y siete miembros electos de la Camara
de 0e#resentantesQ 'i la imaginacion mas libre y erratica en la Asamblea 'acional #udo haberse
figurado (amas este efecto a cuenta de esa clausula inofensiva de la Constitucion 8ue manda a la
Comision sobre Elecciones #resentar un informe des#ues de cada eleccion al .efe E(ecutivo y al
Congreso$
<a accion sobre ese informe no #uede ir mas alla de los limites 8ue confinan cada #oder$ El E(ecutivo&
#or e(em#lo& investigaria los abusos e irregularidades los funcionarios encargados de e(ecutar y hacer
cum#lir la <ey Electoral en cum#limiento de su mandato constitucional de e(ecutar las leyes y de hacer
8ue estas se e(ecuten fielmente BConstitucion de Fili#inas& Articulo V%%& secciones M y 19DG y el
Congreso estudiaria y consideraria reformas a la ley con vista de dicho informe& o bien crearia
inmediatamente el Tribunal Electoral #ara des#achar sin demora las #rotestas sobre elecciones
legislativas$ El E(ecutivo no #odria& #or e(em#lo& so #rete2to de tremendas irregularidades y anomalias
e2#uestas en el informe sobre elecciones locales y #rovinciales& mandar sus#ender el (uramento de
algun conce(al& alcalde o gobernador #rovincial electo& #uesto 8ue esto seria una usur#acion y una
invasion de la (urisdiccion de los tribunales de (usticia$
De todo lo antedicho resulta evidente 8ue& resolviendo la #romera cuestion #ro#uesta& la 0esolucion
"endatun ob(eto de controversia es ilegal& es anticonstitucional y es& #or tanto& insostenible$
5egunda cuestion$ E A la luH de nuestra Constitucion y de nuestras leyes Q tiene este Tribunal 5u#remo
(urisdiccion y com#etencia #ara conocer& en(uiciar y decidir el asuntoQ
<os recurrentes invocan nuestra (urisdiccion #idiendo un remedio a 8ue& segun ellos& tienen derecho
ba(o la Constitucion y la ley$ Alegan 8ue son 5enadores electos y& #or tanto& funcionarios
constitucionales de Fili#inas& #ues el 5enado es cuer#o constitucionalG 8ue han sido debidamente
#roclamados #or la Comission sobre Elecciones ba(o las dis##osiciones de la <ey 'o$ M+, y& #or tanto&
tienen derecho #or ministerio de la Constitucion y de la ley a ocu#ar sus asientos en el 5enado con
todos los derechos& #rerrogativas y #rivilegios ane(os al cargoG 8ue& sin embargo& los recurridos& o mas
bien una mayoria de ellos& han a#robado una resolucion E la 0esolucion "endatun E #or la cual se les
#riva de sud asientosG 8ue dicha resolucion infringe la Constitucion y la leyG #or tanto& #iden dictemos
sentencia Fdeclarrando entramente nula y de ningun valor la citada resolucion& y #rohibiendo
consecuentemente a los recurridos y a cada uno de ellos a im#edir a los recurrentes a continuar en sus
asientos en el 5enado de Fili#inas y a e(ercer libremente sus cargos como 5enadores& y #rohibiendoles
igualmente a realiHer cual8uier otro #rocedimiento ulterior #ara e(eccutar la resolucion citada$F
V"odemos negarnos a asumir la (urisdiccion 8ue se invocaQ V4ay alguna manera de evadir la cuestion&
inhibiendose este Tribunal de declarar si es o no verdad 8ue se han infringido la Constitucion y la ley& y
de conceder el remedio #edido si ha habido tal infraccionQ <a comodidad& la linea de menor resistencia
hubiera sido #or el lado de la inaccion& de la inhibicion$ 'os damos #erfecta cuenta de la tremenda
res#onsabilidad 8ue su#one el mantener la armonia entre los #oderes del Estado$ Es #arte de la
#rudencia y sabiduria de los gobernantes el evitar en todo lo #osible cual8uier ocasion de conflicto
entre dichos #oderes& recordando siem#re 8ue si las instituciones son entidades abstractas& #or ende
anestesicas& insensibles& los hombres estan hechos de arcilla animada y ya no son tan im#asibles como
las instituciones$ "ero hemos hallado 8ue en el #resente caso nuestro deber de actuar& y de actuar
#ositivamente& tiene la fuerHa de un im#erativo categorico$ 'uestra (urisdiccion esta escrita en la
Constitutcion& se halla reafirmada en la ley$ En el Titulo V%%% de la Constitucion Bsobre la (udicaturaD
esta declarada tanto im#licita como e2#resamente la facultad (udicialde resolver y decidir casos
constitucionalesG y en la regla !M del 0eglamento de los Tribunales hallamos la im#lementacion
#rocesal de esa (urisdiccion y com#etencia$
"uede decirse 8ue en este res#ecto nuestra Constitucion es una edicion me(orada de la Constitucion
federal de los Estados :nidos$ Como se sabe& la llamada facultad (udicial de revisar la Constitucion en
controversias #ro#iamente #lanteadas no se halla concedida e2#resamente en la magna carta americana$
4a diso el genio audaH de sus (uristas& #articularmente del gran Marshall& el 8ue arrnaco esa facultad de
las #enumbras de la Constitucion BMarbury vs$ Madison N1L9>O& 1 Cranch& 1>MD contribuyendo ello
grandemente& segun o#inion general de los criticos tanto nacionales como e2ran(eros& a fortalecer y
estabiliHar las instituciones #oliticas de America$ A#rovechando la e2#eriencia americana hemos escrito
e2#resamente en nuestra Constitucion lo 8ue en Americ no era mas 8ue doctrina (udicial o
(uris#rudencia$
5e dice& sin embargo& con todo enfasis& con todo vigor& 8ue aun admitiendo 8ue los recurridos& actuando
como mayoria del 5enado& hayan infringido la Constitucion al a#robar la 0esolucion "endatun y
hacerla efectiva& con todo la (udicatura& la (udicatura fili#ina no tiene (urisdiccion #ara intervenir en el
caso& ba(o el #rinci#io de la se#aracion de #oderes 8ue informa nuestra Constitucion$ 5e arguye 8ue los
tres #oderes del Estado son iguelesG 8ue ninguno de ellos es su#erior al otroG 8ue cada #oder #uede
inter#retar la Constitucion a su modo y cuando asi lo hace ningun otro #oder #uede ni debe
entrometerse yu revisar su inter#retacionG 8ue el 5enado es el unico (ueH de sus actos y si algun
ciudadano sale agraviado #or algun alegado atro#ello a sus derechos constitucionales& su recurso no
esta en acudir al #oder (udicial o al #oder e(ecutivo& sino en a#elar directamente al #ueblo en la e#oca
de elecciones& en los comicios& em#leando el arma civil #or e2celencia del ciudadano E la balotaG y&
finalmente& 8ue el #oder (udicial no es un Fcuralo todo&F una es#ecie de Don Kui(ote 8ue con la lanHa
en ristre #retenda endereeHar todos los entuertos$
Como se ve& nos llaman a decidir custiones de tremenda im#ortancia #ara el desenvolvimiento
constitutcional en este #aisG lo 8ue resolvamos #uede trascender mucho mas alla del #romedio de
tiem#oo en 8ue #uede durar nuestra e2istencia$ "uede dicirse sin inmodestia 8ue grandes diciones del
futuro E em#leamos la #alabra no en su sentido e2clusivamente (udicial E de#enderan de como
resolvamos esas cuestiones formidables 8ue se nos #lantean hoy$
En #arte& el argumento e2#uesto es correcto y acertado$ 'o se #uede discutir 8ue los tres #oderes del
Estado son iguales e inde#endientes entre siG 8ue ninguno de ellos es su#erior al otro& mucho menos el
#oder (udicial 8ue entre los tres es el menos fuerte y el mas #recario en medios e im#lementos
materiales$ Tam#oco se #ude discutir 8ue ba(o la Constitucion cada #oder tiene una Hona& una esfera de
accion #ro#ia y #rivativa& y dentro de esa esfera un cumulo de facultades 8ue le #ertenecen
e2clusivamenteG 8ue dentro de esa esfera y en el suso de esas facultades cada #oder tiene absoluta
discrecion y ningun otro #oder #uede controlar o revisar sus actos so #rete2to de 8ue alguien los
cuestiona o tach de arbitrarios& in(ustos& im#rudentes o insensatos$ "ero la insularidad& la se#aracion
llega solo hasta a8ui$ Desde Montes8uieu 8ue lo #roclamo cientificamente hasta nuestros dias& el
#rinci#io de la se#aracion de #oderes ha sufrido tremendas modificaciones y limitaciones$ El consenso
doctrinal hoy es 8ue la teoria es solo relativa y 8ue la se#aracion de #oderes 8ueda condicionada
mecanica constitucional E la mecanica de los frenos y corta#isas$ B3illoughby& /n the Constitution of
the :nited 5tates& tomo >& #ags$ 1!19& 1!+9& +$X edicion$D Como 8ueda dicho& cada #oder es absoluto
dentro de la esfera 8ue le asigna la ConstitucionG alli el (uego de sus facultades y funciones no se #uede
coartar$ "ero cuando se sale y e2travasa de esa esfera invadiendo otros esferas constitucionales&
e(erciendo facultades 8ue no le #ertenecen& la teoria de la se#aracion ya no le am#ara& la Constitucion
8ue es su#erior a el le sale al encuentro& le restringe y le achica dentro de sus fronteras& im#idiendo sus
incursiones anticonstitucionales$ <a cuestion ahora a determinar es si ba(o nuestro sistema de gobierno
hay un mecanismo 8ue #ermite restablecer el (uego normal de la Constitucion cuando surgen estos
desbara(ustes& estos conflictos 8ue #odriamos llamar de fronteras constitucionalesG tambien es cuestion
a determinar si cuando surgen esos conflictos& un ciudadano sale #er(udicado en sus derechos& el mismo
tiene algun remedio e2#edito y adecuado ba(o la Constitucion y las leyes& y 8uien #uede concederle ese
remedio$ P con esto llegamos a la cuestion basica& cardinal en este asunto$
'uestra o#inion es 8ue ese mecanismo y ese remedio e2isten E son los tribunales de (usticia$ FThey
very essence of the American conce#tion of the se#aration of #o-ers is its insistence u#on the inherent
distinction bet-een la-ma*ing and la-=inter#reting& and its assignment of the latter to the (udiciary& a
notion -hich& -hen brought to bear u#on the Constitution& yields (udicial revie-F BCor-in& The
T-ilight of the 5u#reme Court& #$ 1!D$ En Angara contra Comision Electoral Bsu#raD di(imos 8ue
F#rescindiendo del ti#o ingles y otros ti#os euro#eos de gobierno constitucional& los redactores de
nuestra Constitucion han ado#tado el ti#o americano& en donde el de#artamento (udicial inter#reta y da
efecto a la Constitucion escrita$ En algunos #aises& 8ue han rehusado seguir el e(em#lo americano& se
han insertado dis#osiciones en sus constituciones #rohibiendo a los tribunales 8ue e(erciten su facultad
de inter#retar la ley fundamental$ Esto se toma como un reconocimiento de lo 8ue& de otro modo& seria
la regla de 8ue a falta de #rohibicion e2#resa los tribunales estan obligados a asumir lo 8ue logicamente
es deber suyoF BAngara contra Comision Electoral& !>& .ur$ Fil$& 1M>& 1MD$
En el famoso asunto de Marbuyr vs$ Madison& su#ra& el Tribunal 5u#remo de los Estados :nidos& #or
boca de su gran Chief .ustice .ohn Marshall& en tarminos ine8uivocos definio y e2#lico las facultades
de la (udicatura #ara #oner en vigor la Constitucion como la su#rem ley del #ais& y declaro 8ue Fes
terminantemente de la com#etencia y deber del de#artamento (udicial el decider cual es la ley 8ue rige$
The reasoning of 3ebster and Rent is substantially the same$ 3ebster says: FThe Constitution being the
su#reme la-& it follo-s of course& that every act of the legislature constrary to the la- must be void$
)ut -ho shall decide this 8uestionQ 5hall the legislature itself decide itQ %f so& then the Constitution
ceases to be legal and becomes only a moral restraint for the legislature$ %f they& and they only& are to
(udge -hether their acts be conformable to the Constitution& then the Constitution is advisory and
accessory only& not legally bindingG because& if the construction of it rest -holly -ith them& their
discretion& in #articular cases& may be in favor of very erroneous constructions$ 4ence the courts of la-&
necessarily& -hen the case arises& must decide u#on the validityof #articular acts$F 3ebster& 3or*s& Vol$
%%%& >9$ B3illoughby on the Constitution of the :nited 5tates& Vol$ 1& +d edition ##$ &,$D
En realidad& esta cuestion no es nueva en esta (urisdicion$ El #recedente mas inmediato 8ue tenemos en
nuestra (uris#rudencia es el asunto de Angara contra Comision Electoral ya tantas veces citado B19>!D$
"or #rimera veH se #lanteaban y discutian ante esta Corte cuestiones im#ortantisimas resultantes de la
Constitucion del Common-ealth 8ue acababa de #romulgarse$ 5e trataba #recisamente de deslindar las
Honas constitucionales ocu#adas #or la Asamblea 'acional y la Comision electoralG es decir 8ue&
fundamentalmente& casi& casi las mismas cuestiones 8ue ahora se #lantea ante nosotros$ <a teoria de la
se#aracion de #oderes E el leit motif de la #resente controversia E se analiHo y discutio alli hasta en
sus ultimas im#licaciones los siguientesG .ose Angara habia sido #roclamado 0e#resentante electo #or
uno de los distritos de Tayabas$ Al inaugurarse la Asamblea 'acional su acta fue confirmada #or este
cuer#o (untamente con las de otros 0e#resentantes contra 8uienes no se habian formulado #rotestas$ el
acta de Angara no estaba #rotestada entonces$ Algunos dias des#ues "edro %nsua& su contrincante&
#resento una #rotesta ante la Comision electoral 8ue acababa solamente de constituirse$ Escuadado tras
el hecho de 8ue su acta ya habia sido confirmada #or la Asamblea 'acional& Angara vino a esta Corte
#lanteando una accion orginaria #ara 8ue se e2#idiera un mandamiento de inhibicion #rohibiendole a la
Comision Electoral 8ue siguera conociendo de la #rotesta$ Esta Corte ace#to el reto asumiendo
(urisdiccion sobre el caso& #rocediendo a desem#enar su alta funcion de interllamo deslinde de
facultades constitucionales$ 0econociendo y estableciendo firmemente la (urisdiccion e2clusiva de la
novisima Comision Electoral sobre controversias relativas a la eleccion de miembros de la Asamblea
'acional& esta Corte denego el recurso de #rohibicion$ <levaando las cosas #or la tremenda& la
Asamblea 'acional& ba(o la teoria de la se#aracion de #oderes& #udo haber ignorado la decision de esta
Corte& #udo haber #asado #or encima de la Comision Electoral conservandole el asiento a Angara& ya
8ue el acta de este habia sido confirmada #or ella cuando ((aun no habia #ortesta$ 'o lo hiHo$ <a
Constitucion& casi entre los #a?ales aun de su cuna& se salvo gracias a la com#ostura de todo el mundo&
saliendo ilesa de la #rueba& rodeada de grandes #restigios$ <as conclusiones y #ronunciamientos de la
Corte #or boca del #onente el Magistrado <aure& #arecen estereoti#ados #ara el case 8ue nos ocu#a y
#ara el #resente momento historico con todas sus crisisG asi 8ue los vamos a re#roducir en toda su
integridad a continuacion:
<a se#aracion de #oderes es un #rinci#io fundamental de nuestro sistema de gobierno$ 5e establece& no
#or dis#osicion e2#resa& sino #or division real traHada en nuestra Constitucion$ Cada de#artamento del
;obeierno tiene conocimiento e2clusivo de las materias 8ue caen dentro de su (urisdiccion& y es
su#remo dentro de su #ro#ia esfera$ "ero del hecho de 8ue los tres #oderes han de conservarse
se#arados yu distintos no se sigue 8ue la Constitucion se #ro#uso 8ue fuerean absolutamente
irrestringidos e inde#endientes unos de otros$ <a Constitucion ha dis#uesto un sistema elaborado de
frenos y corta#isas #ara asegurar coordinacion en los traba(os de los varios de#artamentos del
;obierno$ "or e(em#lo& el .efe E(ecutivo& ba(o nuestra Constitucion& es hasta tal #unto erigido en un
freno #ara el #oder legislativo 8ue se re8uiere su asentimiento en la a#robacion de las leyes$ 5in
embargo& esto esta su(eto al ulterior freno de 8ue un #royecto de ley #uede convertirse en ley no
obstante la negativa del "residente de a#robarlo& #or medio de una votacion de dos tercios tiene el
"residente facultad de convocar a la Asamblea cuando lo crea conveniente$ "or otra #arte& la Asamblea
'acional funciona como un freno sobre el E(ecutivo& en el sentido de 8ue es necesario su
consentimiento& #or medio de la Comision de 'ombramientos& en el nombramiento de ciertos
funcionarlosG y es esencial la conformidad de todos sus miembros #ara la conclusien de tratados$
Ademas& en su facultad de determinar 8ue tribunales& 8ue no sea el Tribunal 5u#remo& se habran de
establecer& #ara definir su com#etencia& y de destinar fondos #ara su sostenimiento& la Asamblea
'acional rigte al de#artamento (udicial en cierto grado y medida$ <a Asamblea e(ercita& tambien& la
facultad (udicial de conocer de recusaciones$ P la (udicatura& a su veH& con el Tribunal 5u#remo #or
arbitro final& frena con efectividad a los demas de#artamentos en el e(ercicio de su facultad de
determinar la ley& y de a8ui 8ue #ueda declarar nulos los actos e(ecutivos y legislativos 8ue
contravengan la Constitucion$
"ero& en esencia& la Constitucion ha delineado con mano firme y en terminos energicos la sasignacion
de facultade as los de#artamentos e(ecutivo& legislativo y (udicial de ;obierno$ <a su#er#osicion y el
entralaHamiento de funciones y deberees de los varios de#artamentos& sin embargo& a veces hace dificil
decir #recisamente donde termina uno y em#ieHa otro$ En tiem#os de intra8uilidad social o e2citacion
#olitica& las grandes #iedras angulares de la Constitucion son susce#tibles de ser olvidadas o anubladas&
si no desatendidas enteramente$ En casos de conflicto& el de#artamento (udicial es el unico organismo
constitucional 8ue #uede ser llamado #ara deteminar el #ro#rio deslinde de facultades entre los varios
de#artamentos y entre las unidades integrales o constituyentes de los mismos$
Como cual8uier #roducto humano& nuestra Constitucion carece& desde luego& de #erfeccion y
#erfectibilidadG #ero& en tanto en cuanto estaba en manos de nuestro #ueblo dis#onerlo asi& obrando #or
medio de sus delegados& ese instrumento& 8ue es e2#resion de su soberania& #or limitada 8ue se& ha
establecido un gobierno re#ublicano destinado a obrar y funcionar como un con(unto armonico& ba(o un
sistema de frenos y corta#isas& y con su(ecion a las limitaciones y restricciones 8ue se dis#onen en
dicho instrumento$ <a Constitucion se?ala& en un lengua(e nada incierto& las restricciones y limitaciones
de los #oderes y organismos gubernamentales$ 5i estas restrcciones y limitaciones fueran tras#uestas&
seria inconcebible 8ue la Constitucion no hubiera dis#uesto un mecanismo #or el cual #udiera
encauHarse el curso del ;obierno #or los canales constitucionales& #ues entoneces la distribucion de
#oderes seria merea #alabreria& el bill de derechos meras e2#resiones sentimentales& y los #rinci#ios de
buen gobierno meros a#otegmas #oliticos$ Ciertamente& las limitaciones y restricciones 8ue com#rende
nuestra Constitucion son reales& como debe serlo en cual8uier Constitucion$ En loos Estados :nidos en
donde no se encuentra ninguna concesion constitucional e2#resa en su Constitucion& la #osesion de este
#oder moderador de los tribunales& #or no diceir ya nada de su origen historico y desenvolvimiento
a8ui& ha sido de(ado en re#oso #or la a8uiescencia #o#ular #or un #eriodo de mas de un siglo y medio$
En nuestro caso& este #oder moderador esta concedido& si no e2#resamente& #or decuccion tacita del
articulo +& Titulo V%%%& de nuestra Constitucion$
<a Constitucion es una defnicion de las facultades del ;obierno$ VKuien es el llamado a determinar la
naturaleHa& #ro#osito y alcance de esas facultadesQ <a Constitucion misma ha dis#uesto el organismo
de la (udicatura como el medio racional$ P& cuando la (udicatura media #ara determinar los linderos
constitucionales& no mantiene ninguna su#erioridad sobre los otros de#artamentosG en realida no anula
ni invalida un acto de la <egislatura& sino 8ue solamente asevera la solemne y sagrada obligacion a ella
asignada #or la Constitucion de determinar #retensiones incom#atibles de autoridad dimanada de la
Constitucion& y de establecer #ara las #artes en una contraversia actual los derechos 8ue ese intrumento
asegura y garantiHa a las mismas$ Esto& a la verdad& es todo lo 8ue va im#licito en la e2#resion
Fsu#remacia (udicialF& 8ue #ro#iamente es la facultad de revision (udicial ba(o la Constitucion$ Aun
entonces& este #oder de revision (udicial esta limitado a casos y controversias reales& 8ue se ha de
e(ercitar des#ues de 8ue las #artes han tenido #lena libertad de hacerse oir& y esta& ademas& limitado a la
cuestion constitucional suscitada& o a la misma lis mota #lanteada$ Cual8uier tentativa de abstraccion &
solo conduciria a la dialectica& y obstaculiHaria las cuestiones legales& y a conclusiones esteriles 8ue
nada tendrian 8ue ver con los hechos reales$ Circunsrita de este modo a sus funciones& la (udicatura no
se ocu#a de resolver cuestiones sobre la cordura& (usticia o convenciencia de la legislacion$ Aun mas&
los tribunales conceden la #resucnion de constitucionalidad a las leyes a#robadas #or la <egisltura& no
solamente #or8ue se #resume 8ue esta acata la Constitucion& sino& tambien& #or8ue la (udicatura& en el
fallo de actuales casos y controversias& debe refle(ar la sabiduria y la (usticia del #ueblo& tal y como se
han e2#resado #or medio de sus re#resentantes y #or los de#artamentos e(ecutivo y legislativo del
;obierno$
"ero #or mucho 8ue #udieramos #ostular sobre los frenos internos de #oderes 8ue dis#one nuestra
Constitucion& debe& con todo& recordarse 8ue& segun las #alabras de .ames Madison& el sistema mismo
no es el #rinci#al #aladin de la libertad constitucional $ $ $ el #ueblo& 8ue es el autor de esta bendicion&
debe& tambien& ser su guardian $ $ $ sus o(os deben siem#re estar alertos #ara se?alar& su voH #ara
delatar $ $ $ agresiones a la autoridad de su constitucion$ En ultimo analisis& #ues& el trinof de nuestro
;obierno en los a?os venideros debera ser #uesto a #rueba en el crisol de las mentes y en los coraHones
de los fili#inos& mas bien 8ue en las salas de consultas y camaras de audiencia de los tribunales$F
BAngara contra Comision Electoral& !> .ur$ Fil$& 1!9=1M+$D
Algo mas se #uede a?adir sobre el caso de Angara$ Alli la Corte descarto sin vacilaciones la #osibilidad
de un vacio& de un estado (uridico de inerme im#otencia frente a conflictos constitucionales& sentando
la siguiente conclusion: FEn nuestro caso& la indole de la actual contrversia revela la necesidad de un
arbitro constitucional ultimo 8ue determine la incom#atibilidad de facultades entre dos organismos
creados #or la Constitucion$ 5i fueramos a rehusar el conocer de la contrversia Q8uien determinaria el
conflictoQ P si se de(ara sin decidir ni determinar el conflicto Vno se crearia en si un vacio en nuestro
sistema constitucional 8ue la larga daria #or resultado echar a #erder toda la laborQ El hacer estas
#reguntas es contestarlas$ 'atura vacuum abhorret& #or lo 8ue debemos evitar toda #ostracion en
nuestro sistema constitucional$F 'o solamente esto E a?adimos E sino 8ue a toda costa debemos
evitar 8ue fuera de la legalidad sse forme un Fterritorio de nadieF donde #uedan germinar situaciones
#eligrosas y e2#losivas$
"ero ademas del caos de Angara tenemos en nuestra (uris#rudencia otro #recedente mas inmediato
todavia en a#oyo de la tesis de la su#remacia (udicial en tratandose de inter#retar la Constitucion y de
dirimir conflictos constitucionalesG nos referimos al asunto de Carmen "lanas& recurrente& contra .ose
;il& Comisionado del 5ervicio Civil& recurrido& decidido #or este Tribunal 5u#remo el 1L de enero de
19>9 ba(o la #onencia del mismo Magistrado <aurel B!M "hil$& !+D$ Carmen "lanas& siendo miembro de
la .unta Munici#al de Manila& #ublico un articulo en <a Vanguardia criticando duramente a ciertos
funcionarios del ;obierno& entre ellos el "residente de Fili#inas 5r$ KueHon& en relacion con las
elecciones de Di#utados a la Asamblea 'acional celebradas el L de noviembre de 19>L$ Entre los
fuertes cargos formulados #or la articulista contra los dioses del /lim#o oficial & figuraban los
siguientes: 8ue& no obstante el tacito interdicto im#uesto #or la Constitucion al dis#oner 8ue el
"residente de Fili#inas e(erciese su cargo #or un solo #eriodo E a?os E sin reeleccion& situandosele de
esta manera en las serenas alturas del "oder como un su#remo arbitro& moderador y neutral& el 5r$
KueHon intervino activamente en a8uellas elecciones a favor de los nacionalistas #oniendo en (uego
toda la enorme influencia de su cargo y a#alstando asi a los condidatos de la o#osicionG 8ue toda la
ma8uinaria del ;obierno se moviliHo favor de los candidatos nacionalistas& colocandose en la
vanguardia de dicha movliHaccion los miembros del ;abineteG y 8ue no se escatimaron medios #ara
asegurar el trifunfo de los coandidatos de la adminstracion& el fraude y la corru#cion inclusive$ Al dia si
guiente de haberse #ublicado este articulo sensacional& la 5rta$ "lanasa recibio una carta firmada de la
siguiente manera: F)y authority of the "resident: .orge )$ Vargas& 5ecretary to the "resident&F en donde
se le decia: F"or la #resente se le instruye 8ue com#areHca ante el Comisionado del 5ervicio Civil& sola
o acom#a?ada #or un abogado& a las 9 de la ma?ana& 'oviembre ++& #ara #orbar las declaraciones
hechas #or usted$ El 8ue tales cargo no se #uedan sostener o no se #ruebe 8ue se han hecho de buena fe&
sera considerado como raHon suficiente #ara su sus#ension o destitucion del cargo$F
<a 5rta$ "lanas ob(eto a la investigacion rescusando al Comissionaldo del 5ervicio Civil$ Este& sin
embargo& insistio en #roseguir la investigacion y fue entonces cuando ella vino ante este Tribunal
5u#remo #idiendo un mandamiento de #rohibicion contra el Comisionado& #or los siguientes
fundamentos& entre otros: 8ue ba(o la Constitucion y las leyes 8ue #rotegen la libertad de #alabra y de
e2#resion& ella tenia derecho o formular la censura de 8ue se trata como libre ciudadana de un #ais
democreticoG 8ue& en efecto& ella escribio el articulo no como conce(al sino como #ersona #articularG
8ue como funcionario ella solamente #odia ser investigada y e2igirsele res#onsabilidad #or motivo de
#revaricacion& mala conducta o infraccion relacionada con su cargo& y este no era el casoG 8ue
su#oniendo 8ue el articulo en cuestion fuera libeloso o contuviera algo #or lo cual la articulista #udiera
ser cirminalmente res#onsable& el Codigo "enal y el "rocedimiento Criminal 5e?alan el modo de
hacerefectiva esa res#onsabilidad ante los tribunales de (usticia$ El "rocurador ;eneral& al im#ugnar el
recurso& aleego entre otros fundamentos 8ue este Tribunal& ba(o Fel #rinci#io de la se#aracion de
#oderes establecido #or la Constitucion& no tenia (urisdiccion #ara revisar las ordenes del (efe E(ecutivo
de 8ue se trata& las cuales son de caracter #uramente administrativo&F citandose en a#oyo de la
im#ugnacion las sentencias de este Tribunal en los asunto de 5everino contra El ;obernador ;eneral y
.unta "rovincial de 'egros /ccidental& Abueva contra 3ood y Ale(andrion contra KueHon& citados en
otra #arte de esta disiddencia$ Esta Corte desestimo la ob(ecion y resolvio 8ue tenia (urisdiccion y
com#etencia sobre el caso& diciendo 8ue si bien Flos actos del E(ecutivo e(ecutados dentro de los limites
de su (urisdiccion son sus actos oficialies y los tribunales no dirigiran ni controlaran la accion e(ecutiva
en tales casosF Bla regla es la de no=intervencionD& sin embargo& Fde esta #remisa legal no se sigue
necesariamente 8ue no #odemo in8uirir la valideH o constitucionalidad de sus actos cuando estos se
cuestionan y atacan en un #rocedimiento legal a#ro#iado$F F"or lo 8ue res#ecta a la (udicaturaF E
a?adio esta Corte E Fsi bien es verdad 8ue ella no agara Uni la est#ada ni la bolsa&F es #or arreglo
constitucional el organo llmado #ara deslindar las fronteras constitucionales& y al Tribunal 5u#remo
esta encomendada e2#resamente o #or necesari aim#licacion la oblligacion de determinar en
#rocedimientos a##ro#ieados la validea o constitucionalidad de cual8uier tratado& ley& ordenanaHa&
orden e(ecutiva o regulacion$F
Es verdad 8ue esta Corte denego el recurso inter#uesto #or la 5rta$ "lanas& #ero no #or el fundamento
de la falta de (urisdiccion alegado #oor el "rocurador ;eneral& sino #or8ue llego a la conclusion de 8ue
la orden de investigacion cuestionada caia dentro de los limites constitucionales de la (urisdiccion del
"residente& y& #or tanto& era valida& constitucional y legalmente$ 4e a8ui los #rononciamientos
#ertinentes de la Corte& los cuales no tienen des#erdicio y reafirman con todo vigor la doctrina de la
su#remacia (udicial en materia de deslindes constitucionales& establecida en el asunto de Angara& a
saber:
The 5olicitor ;eneral& under the last #aragra#h B#ar$ 19D of his amended ans-er& raises the 8uestion of
(urisdiction of this court over the acts of the Chief E2ecutive$ 4e contends that Funder the se#aration of
#o-ers mar*ed by the Constitution& the court has no (urisdiction to revie- the orders of the Chief
E2ecutive& evidenced by Anne2 A and Anne2 C of the #etition& -hich are of #urely administrative
character$F 0eliance is had on the #rrvious decisions of this court: 5everino vs$ ;overnor=;eneral
BN1919O& 1! "hil$& >!!DGAbueva vs$ 3ood BN19+O& , "hil$& !1+DG and Ale(andrino vs$ KueHon BN19+O&
! "hil$& L>D$ Although this is the last #oint raised by the ;overnment in its ans-er& it should& for
reasons that are a##arent& be first to be considered$ %f this court does not have (urisdiction to entertain
these #roceedings& then& the same should be dismissed as a matter of courseG other-ise the merits of the
controversy should be #assed u#on and determined$
%t must be conceded that the acts of the Chief E2ecutive #erformed -ithin the limits of his (urisidction
are his official acts and courts -ill neither direct nor restrain e2ecutive action in such cases$ The rule is
noninterference$ )ut from this legal #remise& it does not necessarily follo- that -e are #recluded from
ma*ing an in8uirey into the validity or constitutionality of his acts -hen those are #ro#erly challenged
in an a##ro#riate legal #roceeding$ The classical se#aration of governmental #o-ers& -hether vie-ed in
the light of the #olitical #hiloso#hy of Aristotle& <oc*e& or Montes8uieu& or of the #ostulations of
Mabini& Madison& or .efferson& is a relative theory of government$ There is more truism and actuality in
interde#endence than in inde#endence and se#aration of #o-ers& for as observed by .ustice 4olmes in a
case of "hili##ine orgin& -e cannot lay do-n F-ith mathematical #recision and divide the branches into
-atertight com#artmentsF not only because Fthe great ordinances of the Constitution do not establish
and divide fields of blac*s and -hiteF but also because Feven the more s#ecific of them are found to
terminate in a #enumbra shading gradually from one e2treme to the other$F B5#ringer vs$ ;overnment
N19+LO& +MM :$5$ 1L9G M+ <a- ed$& L,& L,+$D As far as the (udiciary is concerned& -hile it holds
Fneither the s-ord nor the #urseF it is by constitutional #lacement the organ called u#on to allocate
constitutional boundaries& and to the 5u#reme Court is entrusted e2#ressly or by necessary im#lication
the obligation of determinig in a##ro#riate cases the constitutionality or validity of any treaty& la-&
ordinance& or e2ecutive order or regulation$ B5ec$ + N1O& Article V%%%& Constitution of the "hili##ines$D %n
this sense and to this e2tent& the (udiciary restrains the other de#artments of the government and this
result is one of the necessary corollaries of the Fsystem of chec*s and balancesF of the government
established$
%n the #resent case& the "resident is not a #arty to the #roceeding$ 4e is neither com#elled nor restrained
to act in a #articular -ay$ the Commissioner of Civil 5ervice is the #arty res#ondent and the theory is
advanced by the ;overnment that because an investigation underta*en by him is directed by authority
of the "resident of the "hili##ines& this court has no (urisdiction over the #resent #roceedings instituted
by the #etitioner& Carmen "lanas$ The argument is ferafetched$ A mere #lea that a subordinate officer of
the government is acting under orders from the Chief E2ecutive may be an im#ortant averment& but is
neither decisive nor conclusive u#on this court$ <i*e the dignity of his high office& the relative
immunity of the Chief E2ecutive from (udicial interference is not in the nature of a sovereign #ass#ort
for all the subordinate officials and em#loyees of the E2ecutive De#artment to the e2tent that at the
mere invocation of the authority that it #ur#orts the (urisdiction of this court to in8uire into the validity
or legality of an e2ecutive order is necessarily abated or sus#ended$ The facts in 5everino vs$
;overnor=;eneral Bsu#raD& Abueva vs$ 3ood Bsu#raD& and Ale(andrino vs$ KueHon& Bsu#raD& are
different& and the doctrines laid do-n therein must be confined to the facts and legal environment
involved and -hatever general observations might have been made in elaboratioon of the vie-s therein
e2#ressed but -hich are not essential to the determination of the issues #resented are mere obiter dicta$
3hile& generally& #rohibition as an e2traordinary legal -rit -illnot issue to restrain or control the
#erformance of other than (udicial or 8uasi=(udicial functions B,9 C$.$& !,LD& its issuance and
enforcement are regulated by statute and in this (urisdiction it may issue to any inferior tribunal&
cor#oration& board& or #erson& -hether e2ercising functions (udicial or ministerial& -hose acts are
-ithout or in e2cess of (urisidction$ B5ecs$ ,1! and ++!& Code of Civil "rocedure$D The terms F(udicialF
and FministerialF used -ith reference to FfunctionsF in the statute are undoubtedly com#rehensive and
include the challenged investigation by the res#ondent Commissioner of Civil 5ervice& -hich
investigation if unauthoriHed and is violative of the Constitution as contended is a fortiori -ithout or in
e2cess or (urisdiction$ The statutory rule in this (urisdiction is that the -rit of #rohibition is not
confined e2clusively to courts or tribunals to *ee# them -ithin the limits of their o-n (urisdiction and
to #revent them from encroaching u#on the (urisdiction of other tribunals& but -ill issue& in a##ro#riate
cases& to an officer or #erson -hose acts are -ithout or in e2cess of his authority$ 'ot infre8uently& Fthe
-rit is granted& -here it is necessary for the orderly administration of (ustice& or to #revent the use of
the strong arm of the la- in an o##ressive or vindictive manner& or a multi#licity of actions$F
BDimayuga and Fa(ardo vs$ FernandeH N19++O& > "hil$& >9& >9MG Agli#ay vs$ 0uiH N19>MO& >, /ff$
;aH$& 1+!$D This court& therefore& has (urisdiction over the instant #roceedings and -ill accordingly
#roceed to determine the merits of the #resent controversy$
5e arguye& sin embargo& 8ue de #ermitirse la interventcion(udicial #ara deslinde constitucional o #ara
dirimir conflictos constitucionales& ello tiene 8ue ser en casos o #rocedimientos a#ro#iados$ 5e dice 8ue
en el asunto de Angara la intromision (udicial era #rocedente y (ustificada #or8ue en el la #arte litigante
era solo la Comision BTribunalD Electoral& como recurrida& y la Asamblea 'acional& como uno de los
tres #oderes del Estado& no era ni recurrente ni recurrida$ "or analogia se insinua tambien 8ue en el
asunto de "lanas contra ;il "residente de Fili#inas no era #arte directa sino tan solo el Comisionado
del 5ervicio Civil$
El argumento es de esos 8ue& #or su sutileHa& #rovocan una batalla de arguc2ias hasta sobre el filo de
una nava(a& como se suele dicir$ Es verdad 8ue en el caso de Angara la Asamblea 'acional no era #arte
directa #or8ue de su inclusion no habi necesidadG #ero Vcambia ello el as#ecto de la cuestionQ V5e
#uede negar 8ue alli habia conflicto de (urisdicciones contituciones constitucionales entre la Asamablea
y la Comision electoral y 8ue cuando& a instancia de #arte& se invoco y #idio la intervencioon de esta
Corte& la misma intermvino y se declaro com#etente #ara hacer el deslinde constituticonal y finalmente
ad(udico la Hona dis#utada a la Comision BTribunalD ElectoralQ 5u#ongase 8ue una mayoria de los
miembros de la Asamblea 'acional& #asando #or encima de la sentencia de esta Corte& hubieran
insistido en hacer efectiva la confirmacion del acta de Angara y le hubieran dado un asiento en los
escanos de dicha Asamblea& des#o(ando a la Comision Electoral de su derecho de conocer y en(uiciar la
#rotesta de %nsua Qhubiera ello modificado la fase fundamental del caso& haciendo constitucional lo 8ue
era anticonstitucional& y hubiera #erdido este Tribunal 5u#remo la (urisdiccion #ara entender del
asuntoQ %ndudablemente 8ue no: la infraccion de la Constitucion seria misma& tal veH mayor y mas
graveG y la (urisdiccion de este Tribunal #ara interveneir en el conflicto& mas obligada y mas forHosa& a
fin de mantener inviolada la su#rema <ey de la nacion$ En otras #alabras& la inhibicion (udicial no seria
una actitud mas correcta& mas sana y mas #rudente tan solo #or8ue la infraccion de la Constitucion
fuera mas audaH y mas agresiva$ A8ui no habria medias tintas: to be or not to be& 8ue di(o 4amlet$
P lo #ro#io se #uede decir del asunto de "lanas contra ;il$ Es verdad 8ue el "residente no estaba
nombrado como #arte directa en el litigio$ "ero Q8ue mas daQ Q'o se trataba de una orden e(ecutiva
e2#edida #or directa autoriHacion del "residenteQ P asi como se #udo dictar una sentencia a favor del
recurrido #or el fundamento de 8ue con la e2#edicion de la orden cuestionada el "residente ne se habia
e2tralimitado de sus facultades constitucionales y estatutorias& a sensu contrario tambien se hubiera
#odido dictar una sentencia adversa& es decir& si se hubiese tratado de un acto e(ecutivo 8ue cae fuera de
las facultades conferidas al "residente #or la ConstitucionG y en este ultimo caso la sentencia no hubiera
sido menos derogatoria tan solo #or8ue hubiese estado dirigida contra el Comisionado del 5ervicio
Civil 8ue actuaba #or mandato directo del "residente$ El 8ue esta a las maduras& tambien debe estar a
las duras$ $ $ $
5e nos dice& sin embargo& 8ue el caso de Angara no es la cita #ertinente a#licable& sino el de
Ale(andrino contra KueHon B! .ur$ Fil$& LM& 1,1D& decidido en 19+$ El 5enador Ale(andrino agredio a
otro miembro del 5enado fuera de la sala de sesiones de resultas de un debate acalorado$ Con motivo
del incidente la mayoria a#robo una resulucion$ sus#endiendo a Ale(andrino #or un a?o y #rivandole&
ademas& de todas sus #rerrogativas& #rivilegios y emolumentos durante dicho #eriodo de tiem#o$
Ale(andrino #lanteo ante esta Corte una accion originaria #idiendo la e2#edicion de una orden de
mandamus o interdicto #ara 8ue se le re#usiera en su cargo on todos los drechos y #rivilegios ane2os$
5e denego el recurso #or el fundamento de 8ue esta Corte carecia de (urisdiccion #ara conocer del
asunto$
:n somero e2amen del caso Ale(andrino demuestra& sin embargo& 8ue no tiene ninguna #aridad con el
8ue nos ocu#a$ Es evidente 8ue el 5enado tenia el derecho de castigar a Ale(andrino dentro de sus
facultades disci#linarias #rovistas #or la ley organica E la <ey .ones$ Esta era una facultad
discrecional y constitucional cuyo e(ercicio no #odia ser regido ni revisado #or ningun otro #oder$
Como hemos dicho mas arriba& cada #oder es arbitro unico y e2clusivo dentro de su esfera
constitucional$ B"lanas contra ;il& !M "hil$& !+$D 'inguno tiene derecho a entrometerse en la forma
como se las arregla alli$ "ero nuestro caso es com#letamente diferente$ A8ui los recurridos o la mayoria
de los 5enadores han e(ercido una facultad 8ue constitucionalmente no les #ertenece$ "or tanto& han
tras#asado los confined de su #redio constitucional& invadiendo otroG #or tanto& la 0esolucion "endatun
es com#letamente ultra vires$ P no es necesario 8ue re#itamos los argumentos ya e2tensamente
desarrollados acercade este #unto$
Todas las autoridades 8ue se citan en la decision de la mayoria en el asunto de Ale(andrino tienen la
misma ratio decidendi& el mismo leit motif$ 5e trata de casos en 8ue los actos discutidos recaian dentro
de las facultades constitucionales del #oder envuelto en el litigioG de ahi la negativa del de#artamento
(udicial a intervenir& a entrometerse$
P si e2aminamos los #recedentes locales sobre la materia& vemos 8ue la veta de la (uris#rudencia tiene
el mismo ti#o& la misma naturaleHa$ En el asunto de )arcelon contra )a*er y Thom#son B, .ur$ Fil$& L9D
se declaro legal lo hecho #or el ;obernador ;eneral #or la raHon de 8ue caia dentro de sus #oderes
#oliticos o e(ecutivos ba(o la constitucion$
<o #ro#io se hiHo en los siguientes asuntos:
Forbes contra Chuoco Tiaco y Crossfield& 1! .ur$ Fil$& ,>,G Asunto de McCulloch Dic*& >L .ur$ Fil$& >&
++,& +9G 5everino contra gobernador ;eneral y .unta "rovincial de 'egros /ccidental& 1! .ur$ Fil$&
>!9G Abueva contra 3ood& , .ur$ Fil$& !>$
Al negarse esta Corte a revisar lo actuado #or el .efe E(ecutivo en los casos citados& ha tenido
indudablemente en cuenta el siguiente #ronunciamiento del Chief .ustice Marshall en el citado asunto
de Marburry vs$ Madison: FThe Constitution itself endo-s the "resident -ith certain im#ortant #olitical
#o-ers in the e2ercise of -hich he is to use his o-n discretion& and is accountable onlyu to his country
in his #olitical character& and to his o-n conscience$F De modo 8ue& en ultimo resultado& en tales casos
se ha reconocido 8ue el e(ecutivo ha e(ercido solamente sus #oderes constitucionalesG nada hay en ellos
8ue sugiera la idea de la inmunidad e irres#onsabilidad #or una infraccion de la Constitucion$
Contra la #retension de 8ue el de#artamento (udicial no #uede revisar los #rocedimientos de una
Camara legislativa en casos de e2tralimitacion constitucional y dictar la orden corres#ondiente& militan
varios #recedentes en la (uris#rudencia americana$ El mas conocido y celebrado entre ellos es el asunto
de Rilbourn vs$ Thom#son B19> :$5$& 1!LG +! <a-$ ed$& >MMD$ En 1LM! la Camara de 0e#resentantes de
los Estados :nidos a#robo una resolucion dis#oniendo 8ue se investigara cierta com#ania en la 8ue el
gobierno federal& #or medio del 5ecretario de la Marina& habia hecho de#ositos im#rovidentes de dinero
#ublico$ 5e decia 8ue la com#ania estaba en 8uiebra y el gobierno federal era uno de los mayores
acreedores$ 5e alegaba& ademas& en la resolucion 8ue los tribunales eran im#otentes #ara hacer algo en
el caso y #roteger el interes #ublico$ 5e nombraba en la resolucion un comite de cinco 0e#resentates
#ara efectuar la investigacion$
En el curso de la investigacion se le cito al recurrente 4allet Rilbourn sub#oena duces tecum #ara 8ue
#rodu(era ante el comite ciertos documentos y contestase ciertas #reguntas$ Rillbourn se nego a hacer
lo uno y lo otro$ Rilbourn fue entonces arrestado #or orden del 5#ea*er y como 8uiera 8ue siguio
rehusando contestar las mismas #reguntas formulada ahora #or el 5#ea*er y #roducir los documentos
re8ueridos #or el comite& la Camara a#robo otra resolucion dis#oniendo 8ue Rilbourn fuese otra veH
arrestado y detenido en la carcel de Distrito de Columbia hasta 8ue se aviniese a cum#lir la orden
contenida en las resoluciones de la Camara de re#resentantes$ Rilbourn no solo inistio en su negativa&
sino 8ue formulo una 8ue(a contra el sargento de armas de la Camara y los cinco miembros del Comite
#or Ftres#ass for false im#risonment&F acusandoles de haberle arrancado de su casa mediante fuerHa y
detnido #or , dias en la carcel$ Elevado el asunto al Tribunal 5u#remo Federal& este declaro 8ue la
resolucion de investigacion era anticonstitucionalG 8ue la investigacion no tenia #or ob(eto una accion
legislativa sino 8ue era mas bien #ara una in8uisicion de caracter (udicialG asi 8ue la Corte declaro lo
siguiente:
%n loo*ing to the "reamble and 0esolution under -hich the committee acted& before -hich Mr$
Rilbourn refused to testify& -e are of o#inion that the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives not only e2ceeded the
limit of its o-n authority& but assumed a #o-er -hich could only be #ro#erly e2ercised by another
branch of the government& because the #o-er -as in its nature clearly (udicial$
The Constitution declares that the (udicial #o-er of the :nited 5tates shall be vested in one 5u#reme
Court& and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain$ %f -hat -e have said
of the division of the #o-ers of the government among the three de#artments be sound& this is
e8uivalent to a declaration that no (udicial #o-er is vested in the Congress or either branch of it& save in
the cases s#ecifically enumerated to -hich -e have referred $ $ $
3e are of o#inion& for these reasons& that the 0esolution of the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives authoriHing
the investigation& -as in e2cess of the #o-er conferred on that body by the ConstitutionG that the
committee& therefore& had no la-ful authority to re8uire Mr$ Rilbourn to testify as a -itness beyond
-hat he voluntarily chose to tellG that the orders and resolutions of the 4ouse& and the -arrant of the
5#ea*er& under -hich Mr$ Rilbourn -as im#rosined& are& in li*e manner& void for -ant of (urisdiction in
that body& and that his im#risonment -as -ithout any la-ful authority$ BRilbourn vs$ Thom#son& 19>
:$5$& 1!LG +! <a-$ ed$& >MM$D
Finalmente& la Corte dis#uso 8ue la causa contra Thom#son& el sargento de armas& se devolviera al
tribunal de origen #ara ulteriores #rocedimientos$ 5e estimo el sobreseimiento con res#ecto a los
miembros del comite ba(o el #rinci#io de la libertad #arlamentaria de debate 8u les hacia imunes$ A
#ro#osito de esto ultimo son muy significativas las siguientes #alabras de la Corte:
%t is not necessary to decided here that there may not be things done& in the one 4ouse or other& of an
e2traordinary character& for -hich the members -ho ta*e #art in the act may be held legally
res#onsible$ %f -e could su##ose the members of these bodies so far to forget their high functions and
the noble instrument under -hich they act as to imitate the <ong "ariliament in the e2ecution of the
Chief Magistrate of the 'ation& or to follo- the e2am#le of the French Assembly in assuming the
functions of a court for ca#ital #unishment& -e are not #re#ared to say that such an utter #erversion of
their #o-ers to a criminal #ur#ose -ould be screened from #unishment by the constitutional #rovision
for freedom of debate$ B%dem$ #$ >9+$D
Ademas de la #recedente cita& varias decisiones de los mas altos tribunales #ueden ictarse en a#oyo de
la doctrina de 8ue Ftodos los funcionarios& de#artamentos o agencias gubernamentales estan su(etos a
restriccion (udicial cuando obran fuereaa de sus facultades& legales o constitucionales& y #or virtud de
dicha e2tralimitacion #rivan a un ciudadano de sus derechosF B/sborn vs$ :nited 5tates )an*& 9
3heaton N:$5$O& M>9G )oard of <i8uidation vs$ McComb& 9+ N:$5$O& ,>1G :nited 5tates vs$ <ee& 19!
:$5$& 19!G Virginia Cases& 11 :$5$& >11G 0egan vs$ Farmers T Co$& 1, :$5$& >!+G 5mith vs$ Ames&
1!9 :$5$ !!G E2 #arte Poung& +99 :$5$ 1+>G "hiladel#hia Co$ vs$ 5timson& ++> :$5$ !9,$D
0es#ecto de la facultad (udicial #ara e2#edir& en casos a#ro#iados& ordenes coercitivas dirigidas a
funcionarios de la <egislatura& hay en la (uris#rudencia americana una buena co#ia de autoridades$ 4e
a8ui algunas de ellas:
$ $ $ En el asunto E2 #arte "ic*ett B+ Ala$& 91D se libro el mandamiento contra el "residente de la
Camara de re#resentantes #ara obligarle a 8ue certificara al %nterventor de Cuentas "ublicas la cantidad
a 8ue tenia derecho el recurrente como miembro de lal Camara como com#ensacion #or milla(e y
dietas$ En el asunto de 5tate vs$ Elder B>1 'eb$& 1!9D& se libro el mandamiento #ara obligar al
"residente de la Camara de 0e#resentantes #ara 8ue abriera y #ublicara los resultados de la eleccion
general$ En el asunto de 5tate vs$ Moffitt B, /hio& >,9D se declaro 8ue #rocedia e2#edir un mandamus
contra el "residente de la Camara de 0e#resentantes #ara obligarle 8ue certificara la eleccion y
nombramiento de funcionarios$ En el asunto de 3olfe vs$ McCaull BM! Va$& LMD se e2#idio el
mandmiento #ara obligar al Archivero de las 'ominas de la Camara de 0e#resentantes a 8ue
im#rimiera y #ublicara un #royecto de ley a#robado #or la <egislatura y& a solicitud& 8ue facilitara
co#ia del mismo #ro#iamente certificada$ BVeanse tambien los asuntos de Rilbourn vs$ Thom#son& 19>
:$5$& 1!LG 5tatee vs$ ;ilchrist& ! Fla$& 1"eo#le vs$ Marton& 1,! '$P$& 1>!$D BAle(andrino contra
KueHon& ! .ur$ Fil& LM& 19$D
De lo e2#uesto resulta evidente 8ue esta Corte tiene facultad #ara dictar la sentencia y e2#edir el
interdicto 8ue se solicita$ <a orden ira dirigida no contra el 5enado de Fili#inas& entidad abastracta 8ue
nada ha hecho contra la Constitucion$ <a orden resitringente ira dirigida contra los recurridos en cuanto
ellos intentan hacer efectiva una resolucion 8ue es ilegal& 8ue es anticonstitucional& lo mismo 8ue se
hiHo en el asunto de Rilbourn$ 5e les restringe y cohibe como se les restringiria y cohibiria si& #or
e(em#lo& en veH de la 0esolucion "endatun& hubieran a#orbado otra resolucion mandando a la carcel a
los recurrentes hasta 8ue el Tribunal Electoral resuelva la cuestion de sus actas$ V4abria alguien 8ue
sostuviera 8ue si en tal caso vinieran a esta Corte los afectados #ara #edir el adecuado remedio contra
el atro#ello& esta Corte no #odria concederlo ba(o la teoria de la se#racion de #oderesQ <uego la
cuestion se reduce a una de grado& de tama?o de la transgresion constitucionalG #ero es obvio 8ue
nuestra (urisdiccion y com#etencia no 8ueda condicionada #or el volumen de la transgresion$ VP 8uien
diria en tal caso 8ue el 5enado de Fili#inas ha sido el su(eto de la orden de interdicto& con grave
desdoro de sus altos #restigios como uno de los tres #oderes del EstadoQ
"uesto 8ue la accion en el #resente caso va dirigida no contra el 5enado como cor#oracion o
institucion& sino contra una mayoria de sus miembros como #ersonas& como individuos& si bien en su
conce#to de 5enadores& dicho se esta 8ue tenemos com#etencia #ara conceder el recurso& no solo #or
las raHones constitucionales ya e2#uestas& sino #or8ue esta claramente reconocida y definida dicha
com#etencia en nuestros estatutos: anteriormente en los articulos ++! y ,1! de la <ey 'o$ 199 BCod$ de
"roc$ Civ$D& y ahora en la regla !M& secciones + y & 0eglamento de los Tribunales$ Estas dis#osiciones
legales #rescriben 8ue el mandamiento de inhibicion B#rohibitionD #uede e2#edirse a Funa cor#oracion&
(unta& o #ersona& en e(ercicio de sus funciones (udicales o ministeriales& siem#re 8ue se demuestre 8ue
carecian de com#etencia o se han e2tralimitado de ella en las actuaciones 8ue hayan #racticadoF
B"lanas contra ;il ut su#raD$ 5in embargo& se arguye 8ue los recurridos como 5enadores no e(ercen
funciones (udiciales ni ministeriales& sino legislativasG luego la regla no es a#licable a ellos$ "ero es
evidente 8ue en el #resente caso la funcion de 8ue se trata no es de caracter legislativo sino ministerialG
a#enas es necesario decir 8ue la 0esolucion "endatun no es un acto legislativo$ )a(o la Constitucion y
los estatutos el derecho de un miembro electo del Congreso a ser admitido y a ocu#ar su asiento es de
naturaleHa ministerial& im#erativa$ <a <ey 'o$ M+, del Common-ealth& a#robada #or el #asado
Congreso #ara im#limentar la <ey Electoral con vista a <as elecciones nacionales del #asado +> de
Abril& dice en #arte lo siguiente:
A0T$ 11$ <a Comision de Elecciones hara el escrutinio de los resultados #ara 5enadores tan #ronto
como se hayan recibido las actas decada #rovincia y ciaudad& #ero no de#ues del viente de mayo de
milnovecientos cuarenta y seis$ 5era #roclamados elegidos los dieciseis candidatos inscritos 8ue
obtuvieren el mayor numero de votos #ara el cargo de 5eandor$ En caso de 8ue a#areciere de los
resultados del escrutinio de los votos #ara 5enadores 8ue dos os mas candidatos han obtenido el mismo
numero de votos #ara el decimose2to #uesto& la Comision de Elecciones& des#ues de hacer constar este
hecho en el acta corres#ondiente& celebrara otra sesion #ublica& #revia notificacion con tres dias de
antelacion a todos los candidatos em#atados& #ara 8ue ellos os sus re#resentantes debidamente
autoriHados #uedan estar #resentes si asi lo desearen& en la cual #rocedera al sorteo de los candidatos
em#atados y #roclamara el candidato 8ue saliere favorecido #or la suerte$ El condidato asi #roclamado
tendra derecho a tomar #osesion del cargo del mismo modo 8ue si hubiere sido elegido #or #luralidad
de votos$ Acto seguido& la Comision de Elecciones levantara acta del #rocedimiento seguido en el
sorteo& de su resultado y de la #roclamacion subsi8uiente$ 5e enviaran co#ias cerfificadas de dicha acta
#or correo certificado al 5ecretario del 5enado y a cada uno de os candidatos em#atados$
Art$ 1+$ $ $ $ The candidates for Member of the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives and those for 5enator -ho
have been #roclaimed elected by the res#ective )oard of Canvassers and the Commission on Elections
shall assume office and shall hold regular session for the year 19! on May +,& 19! Blas bastardillas
son nuestrasD$
5i ba(o estas dis#osisciones legales los recurrentes tienen el derecho de asumir el cargo& es obvio 8ue
los demas 5enadores& entre ellos los recurridos& tienen el correlativo deber ministerial de no im#edirles
el e(ercicio de ese derecho& o dicho de otro modo& el correlativo deber ministerial de admitirles #ara 8ue
tomen #osesion de sus cargos a la sola #resentacion de sus credenciales 8ue en este caso viene a ser la
#roclama e2#edidda #or la Comision sobre Elecciones declarandolos electos BDelegado 0o2as& debates
en la Asamblea Constituyente& ut su#raD$ 5e dice 8ue la frase shall assume office& con ser im#erative& no
im#one una obligacion es#ecifica de admitir a cual8uier miembro electo& sino 8ue es tan solo un
mandamiento& un directive al legislador electo #ara 8ue tome #osesion de su cargo inmediatamente&
como si un candidato triunfante 8ue& es de #resumir& se #resento voluntariamente candidato y a lo
me(or gasto una fortuna #ara #romover su eleccion& necesitara de ese u*ase legislativo #ara asumir su
oficio$ "ero concedamos #or un momento& arguendo& 8ue esa dis#osicion legal no tiene mas 8ue el
significado de una es#ecie de conscri#cion civil& todavia cabe #reguntar: Vcomo #rodri el legislador
electoasumir forHosamente BshallD su cargo& si& #or otro lado& un mayoria de sus com#a?eros en
conclave tuvieran la facultad discrecional E 8ue #uede degenerar en arbitraria E de negarle el asiento&
si8uiera sea con caracter tem#oralQ V'o seria ello claramente un absurdo& un contrasentidoQ <uego la
conclusion logica y natural es 8ue esa frase im#erativa es de doble via& esto es& tanto #ara admitir al
miembro electo como #ara 8ue este asuma el cargo$
5e a#unta el temor de 8ue la intervencion (udicial en el caso 8ue nos ocu#a #uede dar lugar a una grave
consecuencia E la de 8ue una orden adversa sea desobedecida #or los recurridos& suscitandose #or tal
motivo un conflicto de #oderes$ "ero& a#arte de 8ue el deber E ma2ime si esta im#uesto #or la
Constitucion y las leyes E se tiene 8ue cum#lir rigurosamdnete #or #enoso 8ue fuese sin
consideraciona las consecuencias& #arece im#ro#io e in(usto #resumir 8ue los recurridos sean ca#aces&
en un momento dado& de des#laHar las cuestiones 8ue entra?a la #resente controversia del elevado nivel
en 8ue deben discutirse y resolverse& en medio de un atmosfera de absouta im#ersonalidad y
ob(etividad& libre de los miasmas de la #asion y sus#icacia P no se diga& fulaniHando ostensiblemente la
cuestion 8ue cuando la (udicatura& en el a#ro#iado e(ercicio de su facultad de inter#retar la Constitucion
y los estatutos& dicta un fallo adverso a ciertos intereses y a ciertos hombres #ertenecientes a otro #oder
del Estado& humilla y em#e8ue?ece con ello a ese #oder& colocandolo en condicion inferior y
subalterna$ en los grandes conflictos y dis#utas sobre la cosa #ublica lo 8ue& en verdad& em#e8ue?ece y
deslustra no es el contrateim#o y reves 8ue se sufre E incidente inevitable en toda noble lid #or la
raHon& la verdad y la (usticia E sino la falta de esa serena dignidad& de ese sentido sobrio de #ro#ia
inhibicion y #ro#io dominio #aa ace#tar y sufrir el reves& de todo eso 8ue es la me(or #iedra de to8ue de
la madureH #olitica y de las virtudes #ublicas en un regimen de caracter #o#ular y democratico$ <os
hombres van y vienen& #asan con sus miserias y sus dis#utas en la interminable caravana del tiem#oG
las instituciones 8uedan& y eso es lo 8ue im#orta salvar a toda costa #or encima de las #asiones y
ca#richos transeuntes del momento$
5e esta corte tiene& segun la Constitucion& facultad #ara conceder el remedio solictado& es de su#oner
8ue los recurridos acataran el fallo 8ue se dicte& #ues son hombres de orden y de ley& y seran los
#rimeros en dar el e(em#lo de cum#lir los mandatos de la Constitucion& inter#retados y a#licados #or la
(udicaturaG #ero si E lo 8ue #ara nosotros es im#osible 8ue ocurra E escudandose tras sus #rivilegios&
llegaren al e2tremo de cometer desacato& 8ue cada cual asuma su res#onsabilidad ante su conciencia&
ante el #ais y ante la historia$ Esta Corte habra cum#lido solamente consu deber& sin miedo y sin favor&
y en la forma me(or 8ue le haya sido dable hacerlo en la medida de sus luces y alcances$
En esta (urisdiccion tenemos un #recedente ti#ico& claro y terminante de orden coercitiva dirigida #or el
de#artamento (udicial al de#artamento e(ecutivo del gobierno$ 'os referimos al asunto de Conce#cion
contra "aredes B+ .ur$ Fil$& !>9D en el cual se trataba de una solicitud de mandamiento de inhibicion
ordenando al recurrido 5ecretario de .usticia de inhibicion ordenando al recurrido 5ecretario de .usticia
8ue desistiera de #oner en vigor las dis#osiciones de la <ey 'o$ +91 8ue e2igia a los (ueces de #rimera
instancia 8ue echasen suertes cada cinco a?os #ara el cambio de distritos$ Esta Corte declaro 8ue la ley
#o#ularmente conocida #or ley de la Floteria (udicialF era anticonstitucional$ 5e concedio& #or tanto& el
mandamiento de #rohibicion& haciendose definitivo el interdicto #reliminar e2#edido$
5olo nos 8ueda #or considerar el argumento de#rimente& desalentador de 8ue el caso 8ue nos ocu#a no
tiene remedio ni ba(o la Constitucion ni ba(o las leyes ordinarias$ A los recurrentes se les dice 8ue no
tienen mas 8ue un recurso: es#erar las elecciones y #lantear directamente la cuestion ante el #ueblo
elector$ 5i los recurrentes tienen raHon& el #ueblo les reivindicara eleigiendoles o elevando a su #artido
al #oder& re#udiando& en cambio& a los recurridos o a su #artido$ algunas cosas se #odrian decir acerca
de este argumento$ 5e #odria decir& #or e(em#lo& 8ue el remedio no es e2#edito ni adecuado #or8ue la
mayoria de los recurridos han sido elegidos #ara un #eriodo de seis a?os& asi 8ue no se les #odra e2igir
ninguna res#onsabilidad #or tan largo tiem#o$ 5e #odria decir tambien 8ue en una eleccion #olitica
entra muchos factores& y es #osible 8ue la cuestion 8ue se discute hoy& con ser tan fervida y tan
#al#itante& 8uede& cuando llegue el caso& obscurecida #or otros FissuesF mas #resionantes y decisvos$
Tambien se #odria decir 8ue& inde#endientemente de la (usticia de su causa& un #artido minoritario
siem#re lucha con desventa(a contra el #artido mayoritario$
"ero& a nuestro (uicio& la me(or contestacion al argumento es 8ue no cabe concebir 8ue los redactores de
la Constitucion fili#ina hayan de(ado en medio de nuestro sistema de gobierno un #eligroso vacio en
donde 8uedan #araliHados los resortes de la Constitucion y de la ley& y el ciudadano 8ueda inerme&
im#ortente frente a lo 8ue el considera flagrante transgresion de sus derechos$ <os redactores de la
Constitucion conocian muy bien nuestro sistema de gobierno E sistema #residenecial$ 5abian mauy
bien 8ue este no tiene la fle2ibilidad del ti#o ingles E el #arlamentario$ En %nglaterra y en los #aises
8ue siguen su sistema hay una magnifica valvula de seguridad #oliticaG cuando surge una grave crisis&
de esas 8ue sacuden los cimientos de la nacion& el #arlamento se disuelve y se convocan elecciones
generales #ara 8ue el #ueblo decida los grandes FissuesF del dia$ Asi se consuman verdaderas
revoluciones& sin sangre& sin violencia$ El sistema #residencial no tiene esa valvula$ El #eriodo 8ue
media de eleccion a eleccion es infle2ible$ Entre nosotros& #or e(em#lo& el #eriodo es de seis a?os #ara
el 5enado& y de cuatro a?os #ara la Camara de 0e#resentantes y los gobiernos #rovinciales y
munici#ales$ 5olamente se celebran elecciones es#eciales #ara cubrir vacantes 8ue ocurran entre unas
elecciones generales y otras$ 5e com#rendera facilmente 8ue ba(o un sistema asi es harto #eligroso& es
(ugar con fuego el #osibilitar situaciones donde el individuo y el #ueblo no #ueden buscar el am#aro de
la Constitucion y de las leyes& ba(o #rocesos ordenandos y e2#editos& #ara #roteger sus derechos$
En resumen& direcmos lo siguiente:
Tenemos una Constitucion escrita 8ue re#resenta el genio #olitico y socio de nuestro #ueblo& 8ue
encarna nuestra historia& nuestras tradiciones& nuestra civiliHacion y cultura influida #or las mas grandes
civiliHaciones y culturas conocidas en el mundo$ Esa Constitucion se escribio no solo #ara el
Common-ealth& sino #ara la 0e#ublica: esta hecha #ara #erdurar y sobrevivir a todas las crisis y
vicisitudes$ 5obrevivio casi milagrosamente a la #eor de estas E la ocu#acion (a#onesa$ Es un
formidable instrumento de libertad y democracia$ 5u modelo mas cercano es la Constitucion
americana& #ero en ciertos res#ectos es una su#eracion del modelo$ :no de sus as#ectos mas originales
y #rogresivos es indudablemente la creacion del Tribunal Electoral$ Esta reforma constituye el valiente
reconocimiento de una dura realidad& al #ro#io tiem#o 8ue un energico remedio$
"ero en las constituciones la letra no es el todo& ni si8uiera lo #rinci#al$ <o im#oratante& lo fundamental
es el es#iritu& el caracter del #uebloG son las #racticas& las costumbres& los habitos #oliticos 8ue
vivifican e im#lementan la letra esrita 8ue es inorganica e inerte$ E2ce#tuando el #arentesis tragico de
la guerraa& nuestra Constitucion lleva unos ocho a?os de vigencia$ En ese breve #eriodo de tiem#o se
ha formado en su derredor una limitada (uris#rudencia& encaminada a robustecerla y e2#andirla como
intrumento de libertad y democracia$ <os casos de Angara y "lanas& tan co#iosamente comentados en
esta modesta disidencia& son ti#icamente re#resentativos de esa magnifica tendencia$ <a custion ahoraa
es si esta ha de #oder continuar sin estorbos& sin trabas& o ha de sufrir un serio reves en su marcha
ascendente$ 'uestro sentir es 8ue se debe #ermitir el ordenado desenvolvimiento de la Constitucion en
toda su anchura& ba(o los am#lisimos aus#icios de la libertad& en terminos y #ers#ectivas 8ue hagan de
ella la formidable herramienta de democracia y (usticia 8ue debe ser$
Y /(ala el resultado del #resente asunto no sea #arte #ara estorbar ese desenvolvimientoS
Footnotes
1 e$g$& (eo#ardy in #rosecutionG t-o=thirds vote to declare la- unconstitutional& etc$
+ <egislative members of the Commission -ere not sued as assemblymen$
> 'ot 8ualified as selectorEnot 8ualified as congressmann BConstitution& Article V%& section M& in
relation -ith section 9 aO Election CodeD$
5ee <o#eH ve$ De los 0eyes& su#ra$
The <a-#hil "ro(ect = Arellano <a- Foundation

Today is Tuesday& 5e#tember 9+& +91
search
0e#ublic of the "hili##ines
5:"0EME C/:0T
Manila
E' )A'C
;$0$ 'o$ <=,L+L9 .uly +& 19L+
VA<E'T%'/ <$ <E;A5"%& #etitioner&
vs$
T4E 4/'/0A)<E M%'%5TE0 /F F%'A'CE and T4E 4/'/0A)<E C/MM%55%/'E0 andZor
T4E ):0EA: /F %'TE0'A< 0EVE':EG res#ondents$

)A00ED/& .$:
"etition filed by the 4onorable Valentino <$ <egas#i& incumbent member of the interim )atasang
"ambansa& #raying that this Court declare "residential Decree 1L9 Fgranting ta2 amnesty and filing of
statement of assets and liabilities and some other #ur#osesF unconstitutional$
The #etition contains the follo-ing allegations:
,$ That said decree -as issued by the "resident under su##osed legislative #o-ers granted him
under Amendment 'o$ ! of the Constitution #roclaimed in full force and effect as of /ctober +M& 19M!
#ursuant to "roclamation 'o$ 1,9, and -hich is 8uoted as follo-s:
3henever in the .udgment of the "resident& there e2ists a grave emergency or a threat or imminence
thereof& or -henever the interim )atasang "ambansa or the regular 'ational Assembly fails or is unable
to act ade8uately on any matter for any reason that in his (udgment re8uires immediate action& he may
in order to meet the e2igency& issue the necessary decrees& orders& or letters of instruction& -hich shall
form #art of the la- of the land$
!$ That said decree -as #romulgated des#ite the fact that under the Constitution FBTDhe legislative
#o-er shall be vested in a )atasang "ambansaF B5ec$ 1& Article V%%%D and the "resident may grant
amnesty only -ith concurrence of the )atasang "ambansa B5ec$ 11& Art$ V%%DG
M$ That Amendment 'o$ ! is not one of the #o-ers granted the "resident by the Constitution as
amended in the #lebiscite of A#ril M& 19L1G that -hile 5ection 1! of Art$ V%% of the Constitution
#rovides:
All #o-ers vested in the "resident of the "hili##ines under the 19>, Constitution and the la-s of the
land -hich are not herein #rovided for on conferred u#on any official shall be deemed and are hereby
vested in the "resident unless the )atasang "ambansa #rovides other-ise$
such re=confirmation of e2isting #o-ers did not mean to include the "resident@s legislative #o-ers
under Amendment 'o$ !: by Fthe la-s of the land -hich are not herein #rovided for or conferred u#on
any officialF only those la-s that have been #assed by the e2isting andZor #rior legislature are intendedG
L$ That the 0es#ondents are intending and in fact im#lementing the #rovisions of the 8uestioned
decree and the same tends to affect all ta2#ayers in the "hili##ines including herein "etitionerG that he
is no- in a 8uandary on -hether to ta*e advantage of the benefits of said decree since the same is of
doubtful constitutionality leaving him no #rotection as guaranteed by the decree and thus sub(ect him to
#rosecution for violation of -hich other-ise -ould have held him immune under said decreeG
9$ That as a member of the )atasang "ambansa he *no-s that the sub(ect of the 8uestioned decree
has not been brought to the attention of the )atasang "ambansa re8uiring immediate attention& the fact
being that the original ta2 amnesty decree -hich the 8uestioned decree amended or modified has long
been effective and im#lemented by the 0es#ondents -hile the )atasang "ambansa -as in sessionG
19$ That "residential Decree 'o$ 1L9 is #atently null and void having been #assed -ithout the
concurrence of the )atasang "ambansa and it is li*e-ise of #ublic interest and of the nation that the
8uestion of -hether the "resident retained his legislative #o-er after lifting Martial <a- and after the
Constitution -as amended on A#ril M& 19L1 be resolvedG
11$ That the 8uestioned decree being the first dated after the lifting of Martial <a- and the A#ril M
amendments brings to test the validity of the e2ercise of standby emergency #o-ers invo*ed in
Amendment 'o$ !$ B"#$ >=!& record$D
As the #etitioner himself #uts it in his memorandum& the issue is: 3hether the 19M> Constitution as
amended by "lebiscite=0eferendum of 19M!& retained the same amendments& more #articularly
Amendment 'o$ !& after it -as again amended in the "lebiscite held on A#ril M& 19L1Q
/n the issue thus formulated by #etitioner& it is maintained that FAmendment 'o$ ! is rendered
ino#erable& deleted andZor re#ealed by the amendments of A#ril M& 19L1F$ /#ening his discussion of
this #ro#osition thus:
Amendment 'o$ ! as originally submitted to the #eo#le for ratification under "res$ Dec$ 'o$ 19>>& and
thereafter a##roved reads as follo-s:
3henever in the (udgment of the "resident B"rime MinisterD& there e2ists a grave emergency or a threat
or imminence thereof& or -henever the %nterim )atasang "ambansa or the regular 'ational Assembly
fails or is unable to act ade8uately on any matter for any reason that in his (udgment re8uires immediate
action& he may& in order to meet the e2igency& issue the necessary decrees& orders& or letters of
instruction& -hich shall form #art of the la- of the land$
3hether the matter or that there -as an e2igency -hich re8uired immediate action let it be conceded
that in the (udgment of the "resident such facts do e2ist$ BEm#hasis oursD
%t is to be observed that the original te2t mentions "resident B"rime MinisterD$ This is so because under
'o$ > of the same amendment&
$$$ The incumbent "resident of the "hili##ines shall be the "rime Minister and he shall continue to
e2ercise all his #o-ers even after the interim )atasang "ambansa is organiHed and ready to discharge
its functions& and li*e-ise he shall continue to e2ercise his #o-ers and #rerogatives under the 19>,
Constitution and the #o-ers vested in the "resident and the "rime Minister under this Constitution$
"arenthetically& the term F%ncumbent "residentF em#loyed in the transitory #rovisions could only refer
to "resident Ferdinand E$ Marcos BA8uino vs$ Commission on Elections& !+ 5C0A +M,D$
After the A#ril M amendments there e2ists no longer Fa "resident B"rime MinisterDF but FA
"residentFand FA "rime Minister$F They are no- t-o different offices -hich cannot be held by a single
#erson E not a transitory one but a regular one #rovided for and governed by the main #rovisions of
the ne-ly amended Constitution$ 5ubse8uent events acce#t the reality that -e are no longer governed
by the transitory #rovisions of the Constitution$ B"#$ +M=+L& 0ecord$D
#etitioner rationaliHes his affirmative #osition thereon this -ise:
%s Amendment 'o$ ! of the 19M> Constitution as a##roved in 19M! re#roduced or unaffected by the
A#ril M& 19L1 amendmentQ /r& is it considered re#ealed by /missionQ
The Constitutional #rovisions of the "residency do not restate the #rovisions of Amendment 'o$ !
-hich grants the "resident B"rime MinisterD limited #o-ers to legislate$ This is tantamount to a
-ithdra-al or deletion of such grant$
There is no -ay by -hich the incumbent "resident be referred to anymore as the Fincumbent "residentF
in the amendment of 19M!$ 3hile it is true that Amendment 'o$ ! fails to distinguish bet-een
FincumbentF and FregularF all #rovisions -ith reference to the #o-ers of the "residency is deemed
foreclosed by Article V%% of the ne-ly amended Constitution$ Article V%% enumerates #residential
#o-ers$ To construe that the 19M! Amendments are still a##licable& other than that referring to the
%nterim )atasang "ambansa -ould be an incom#atibility to the a##lication of the #resent constitutional
#rovisions$
;enerally ta*en& the 19M! amendments are amendments to the transitory #rovisions of the Constitution$
%nsofar as the office of the "resident or the "rime Minister is concerned they have ceased to be
governed by the transitory #rovisions but under the ne-ly amended Constitution$
)atas "ambansa )lg$ 1+, called for the election of a "resident under the ne-ly amended Constitution$
"resident Marcos ran as candidate and -as #roclaimed the duly elected "resident of the "hili##ines by
resolution no$ + of the )atasang "ambansa dated .une +1& 19L1$ 4e too* his oath of office as the duly
elected "resident$ The "rime Minister& the Members of the Cabinet and the E2ecutive Committee too*
their oaths after having been a##ointed and are no- e2ercising their functions #ursuant to the ne-
#rovisions$ 3e even consider ourselves the Fourth 0e#ublic because of a ne- system of government$
3hat #articular #art of the ne-ly amended Constitution -ould Amendment 'o$ ! fit inQ
"resident Ferdinand E$ Marcos ceased to be the incumbent resident referred to in the transitory
#rovisions or in the 19M! amendments$ The 5olicitor ;eneral argued that Amendment 'o$ ! #rovided
for the contingency that the office -ould be se#arated consisting of a ceremonial "resident and a "rime
Minister -ho -ill be he e2ecutive$ Pet& -ithout e2#ress constitutional grant the "resident no- assumes
a #o-er intended to be that of the "rime Minister$ The intent of the 19L1 amendments could not be
inter#reted any other -ay e2ce#t that after the amendment it -ould no longer be #ro#er to e2ercise
those re#osed u#on the "rime Minister$ "o-ers #reviously re#osed u#on the "rime Minister -ere
e2#ressly removed from him and given to the "resident$ Amendment 'o$ ! is not one of those$
The #ro#osed amendments under )atasan $ 'o$ 19 became Kuestion 'o$ 1 in the ballot of A#ril M&
19L1 #lebiscite to -hich the voter -as as*ed B)$"$ )lg$ 1++D:
Do you vote for the a##roval of an amendment to the Constitution and to Amendment 'o$ +& as
#ro#osed by the )atasang "ambansa in 0esolution 'o$ +& -hich& in substance& calls for the
establishment of a modified #arliamentary system& amending for this #ur#ose Articles V%%& V%%% and %C
of the Constitution& -ith the follo-ing #rinci#al features: $$$
'o-here in feature B1D -as it submitted that the "resident -ould en(oy conditional or 8ualified
legislative #o-ers as modified #arliamentary system$
The original intent to set out the original act or section as amended is most commonly indicated by a
statement in the amendatory act that the original la- is amended to Fread as follo-s$F The ne- statute
is a substitute for the original act or section$ /nly those #rovisions of the original act or section
re#eated in the amendment are retained B"aras vs$ <and 0egistration Commission& .uly +!& 19!9& <=
1!911D$
That FThe <egislative #o-er shall be vested in the )atasang "ambansaF is an old #rovision -hich has
been retained$ This in essence -as Kuestion 'o$ 1 in the A#ril M "lebiscite as to -ho e2ercise
legislative #o-ers and -ho are to e2ecute$ 'o-here in the a##roved Amendment can it be hinted that
the hybrid=ty#e of government also includes a one=man legislature$ The intent to re#ose legislation only
u#on the )atasan is very a##arent$ The ado#tion of the ne- Constitution re#eals and su#ersedes all the
#rovisions of the older one not continued in force by the ne- instrument B1! C$.$5$ LLD$ B"#$ >9=>>&
0ecord$D
After mature study and deliberation and considering the #eculiar circumstances that dictated the
formulation of Amendment 'o$ !& the Court@s conclusion is& that Assemblyman="etitioners #osture
lac*s& to say the least& sufficient merit$
Constitutional la- is not sim#ly the literal a##lication of the -ords of the Charter$ The ancient and
familiar rule of constitutional construction that has consistently maintained its intrinsic and
transcendental -orth is that the meaning and understanding conveyed by the language& albeit #lain& of
any of its #rovisions do not only #ortray the influence of current events and develo#ments but li*e-ise
the inesca#able im#erative considerations rooted in the historical bac*ground and environment at the
time of its ado#tion and thereby caused their being -ritten as #art and #arcel thereof$ As long as this
Court adheres closest to this #ers#ective in vie-ing any attac* against any #art of the Constitution& to
the end of determining -hat it actually encom#asses and ho- it should be understood& no one can say
3e have misguided /urselves$ 'one can reasonably contend 3e are treading the -rong -ay$
True enough Article V%%%& 5ec$ 1 of the "hili##ine Constitution as amended in 19L1 e2#licitly ordains
that FBTDhe legislative #o-er shall be vested in a )atasang "ambansaF$ 5ection +& ho-ever& readily
reveals that the )atasang "ambansa contem#lated in that 5ection 1 is the regular assembly Bformerly
referred to as 'ational Assembly& no- as )atasang "ambansa E evidently to indigeniHe the
nomenclature& -hich& incidentally should have been done also -ith the "angulo and "angunang
MinistroD& to be elected in May 19L& #er 5ec$ ,B1D of the same Article$ Thus& to begin -ith& in the
instant case& 3e must *ee# in mind that at least for the #resent and until 19L& -hat can be #ro#erly
discussed here are only the legislative #o-ers of the interim )atasang "ambansa as such$
3ithout intending any reflection on any of those res#onsible for the %dea& it may be that it is for non=
essential reasons that the current legislative assembly is being referred to generally sim#ly as the
)atasang "ambansa$ For in legal truth and in actual fact& and as e2#ressly admitted by #etitioner& it is
inherently no more no less than the same interim$ )atasang "ambansa created by Amendment 'o$ + by
virtue of the 0eferendum="lebiscite of /ctober 1!=1M& 19M!$ And& in this connection& it may be
observed that indubitably& and as a necessary and logical conse8uence& the amendment of Amendment
'o$ + in 19L1 carried -ith it the corres#onding a##ro#riate ad(ustments literal and other-ise of
Amendment 'os$ > and & although these latter t-o -ere not s#ecifically mentioned in the #ro#osal
#ursuant to )"=CA 0esolution 'o$ of the )atasan& acting as a constituent body nor in the "lebiscite
0eferendum Act itself& much less in the ballots #resented to and used by the voters$ This is because it
cannot be denied that Amendments > and are by their very nature inse#arable #arts of amendment 'o$
+$
)ut e2amining closely ho- the 19L1 amendments altered Amendment 'o$ +& it -ill be readily seen that
the only change consisted of the non=inclusion of the Fincumbent "residentF as member of the
assembly in #ursuance of the fundamental ob(ective to se#arate the "residency from the regular
legislative body and thereby establish in our country a modified form of #arliamentary government
more a##ro#riate for and suitable to the #eculiar conditions of our #olitical develo#ment and the
idiosyncrasies of our #eo#le& and at the same time introduce into it features that -ould strengthen its
structure so as to enable the government to co#e -ith emergencies or abnormal situations& not only li*e
those that #resently e2ist but even those that might arise in the future$ Thus& it is characteriHed -ith a
#residency more #o-erful than the idea of a strong "resident desired by "resident KueHon and actually
embodied in the 19>, Constitution$
%t is& therefore& evident that the reference to Amendment 'o$ + in the amendments of 19L1 -as not
intended at all to convert or u#grade the #resent e2isting assembly into the regular )atasang "ambansa$
To re#eat& -hat -e have no- is still the interim )atasang "ambansa created in 19M!$ %m#ortantly& it
must be said that had the #resent )atasan& acting as a constituent body& ever thought of ma*ing itself
the regular 'ational Assembly& the very odious s#ectacle that the #eo#le re(ected -hen in the
referendum of .anuary 19=1,& 19M> they re#ulsed and re#udiated the interim 'ational Assembly
#rovided for in 5ections 1 and + of Article CV%% BTransitory "rovisionsD of the 19M> Constitution
-hereby the members of the old Congress of the "hili##ines made themselves automatically members
of the interim assembly -ould have resuscitated& and -e can readily imagine ho- the reaction of our
#eo#le -ould have been e2actly the same as in 19M> and for sure the 19L1 #ro#osed constitutional
amendment affecting the )atasang -ould again have been denied sanction by our #eo#le$
4aving arrived at the ineludible that the #resent )atasan is still interim& it also ineluctably follo-s that
its legislative authority cannot be more e2clusive no- after 19L1 amendments than -hen it -as
originally created in 19M!$ Thus even as the interim )atasan -hich came into being Fin lieu of the
%nterim 'ational AssemblyF by virtue of Amendment 'o$ + conse8uently ac8uired Fthe same #o-ers
and its Members E the same functions& res#onsibilities& rights and #rivileges& and dis8ualifications as
the regular 'ational Assembly and the members thereofF& there can be no 8uestion that coeval -ith the
creation of the interim )atasan& Amendment 'o$ ! came into force and effect$ And Amendment 'o$ !
mandates in une8uivocal and unambiguous terms the grant of concurrent legislative authority to an
official Bthe "resident N"rime MinisterOD -ho is not in the )atasan itself$
%n brief& the ine2orable logic of the events that brought forth the #resent )atasan leads to no other
conclusion than that the legislative authority vested in it by Amendment 'o$ +& read together -ith
5ection 1& Article CV%% and 5ection 1& of Article V%%% of the 19M> Constitution& is sub(ect to the e2ternal
concurrent legislative #rerogative that Amendment 'o$ ! vests on the F"resident B"rime MinisterD$F
Actually& the insistence of #etitioner that Amendment 'o$ ! has been re#ealed by the 19L1 amendments
s#rings from another #oint of vie-$ %t is fundamentally based on analysis and ratiocination related to
the language and tenor thereof$ "etitioner maintains that said amendments vested e2traordinary
legislative #o-ers on Fthe "resident B"rime MinisterDF and on nobody else& and since there is no one
-ho is "resident B"rime MinisterD under our #resent governmental set=u# #ursuant to 19L1
amendments& no one in the e2isting government can e2ercise said #o-ers$
The #ersuasive force of such theory is more a##arent than real$ As 3e have said earlier& the
Constitution is not merely a literal document to be al-ays read according to the #lain and ordinary
signification of its -ords$ )eneath and beyond the literal terms of the Charter& li*e a mine of
incalculably immense treasures& are elements and factors radiating from #olitical and economic
develo#ments of the situation #revailing at the time of the inclusion of any #articular #rovision thereof
or amendment thereto$ %t is only from the light of the im#lications of such elements and factors that the
real essence and significance of the -ords of the constitutional #rovision under scrutiny can be
#ro#erly and ade8uately seen and com#rehended$
3ith reference to Amendment 'o$ !& it is of decisive im#ortance that anyone -ho -ould try to
deci#her its true im#ort should be ac8uainted -ith its ration d@tre& i$e$& the -hys and the -herefores
thereof$ Contrary to the im#utations of #etitioner& this amendment is not rooted in the authoritarian&
much less dictatorial tendencies or inclinations of anyone$ Any tinge or tint of authoritarianism in it is
not there for the sa*e of the %deology of dictatorshi# or authoritarian itself$ 5uch hue of a one=man
authoritarianism it someho- connotes is there only because it is so dictated by #aramount
considerations that are needed in order to safeguard the very e2istence and integrity of the nation and
all that it stands for$ "erha#s the truismEalmost a dogmaE-ell recogniHed by constitutionalists and
#olitical scientists of all #ersuasions as a convenient #ragmatic rule for survival of nations& namely& that
in an emergency& the best form of government is a dictatorshi#& might have been in the mind of those
-ho formulated it& but it is 8uite obvious& as -ill be e2#lained anon& that other fundamental factors
must have been ta*en into account in order #recisely to minimiHe the rigors and generally feared
o##ressiveness of a dictatorshi# in an unrestricted martial regime& its being dubbed as martial la-
F"hili##ine styleF not-ithstanding$
At this (uncture& it must be em#hatically made clear that e2#licitly the #o-er that Amendment 'o$ !
vests u#on the F"resident B"rime MinisterDF are to be e2ercised only on t-o s#ecified occasions&
namely& B1D F-hen in Bhis (udgmentD a grave emergency e2ists or there is a threat or imminence
thereofF and B+D F-henever the interim )atasang "ambansa or the regular 'ational Assembly Bno-
regular )atasang "ambansaD fails or is unable to act ade8uately on any matter for any reason that in his
(udgment re8uires immediate action$F The #o-er is to Fissue necessary decrees& orders& or letters of
instruction -hich shall form #art of the la- of the land$F As the tenor of the amendment readily
im#arts& such #o-er may be e2ercised even -hen the )atasan is in session$ /bviously& therefore& it is a
#o-er that is in the nature of the other "o-ers -hich the Constitution directly confers u#on the
"resident or allo-s to be delegated to him by the )atasan in times of crises and emergencies$
%ndeed& it is but fitting and #ro#er that in framing the fundamental la- of the land -hich sets u# a form
of government and defines and delimits the #o-ers thereof and its officers& reserving as they must
#lenary sovereignty to themselves& the #eo#le should #rudently #rovide -hat #o-ers may and should
be e2ercised by the government andZor its officials in times of crises and emergencies that could
(eo#ardiHe the very life andZor territorial integrity of the country$ Even as individual rights and liberties
are valued and enshrined as inviolable& the #eo#le& as they -rite their Charter thru a convention or other
legitimate means& cannot ignore that in the event of -ar& insurrection& rebellion or invasion& including
any other critical situation& any one of -hich cannot but affect the regular course of normal
constitutional #rocesses and institutions as -ell as the #rerogatives and freedoms of individual citiHens
of and inhabitants -ithin the country& a##ro#riate #rotective& defensive and rehabilitative measures
must be #rovided therein and may be made to function or o#erate$
Accordingly& both in the 19>, Constitution of the "hili##ines and in that of 19M>& the follo-ing
#rovisions -ere #recisely intended to o#erate during such #erilous situations:
1$ %n times of -ar or other national emergency& the )atasang "ambansa may by la- authoriHe the
"resident for a limited #eriod and sub(ect to such restrictions as it may #rescribe& to e2ercise #o-ers
necessary and #ro#er to carry out a declared national #olicy$ :nless sooner -ithdra-n by resolution of
the )atasang "ambansa& such #o-ers shall cease u#on its ne2t ad(ournment$ The 19>, version of this
#rovision differs from it in that -hat -as granted to the "resident -as not the broad authority Fto
e2ercise such #o-ers necessary and #ro#erF but only to issue rules and regulations #ur#orted to
accom#lish the same ob(ective$
+$ 5ection 19B+D of Article V%% of the 19>, Constitution #rovided thus:
$$$ B+D The "resident shall be commander=in=chief of all armed forces of the "hili##ines and& -henever
it becomes necessary& he may call out such armed forces to #revent or su##ress la-less violence&
invasion& insurrection& or rebellion$ %n case of invasion& insurrection or rebellion or imminent danger
thereof& -hen the #ublic safety re8uires it& he may sus#end the #rivileges of the -rit of habeas cor#us&
or #lace the "hili##ines or any #art thereof under the martial la-$$$
:nder 5ection 1+ of Article %C of the 19M> Constitution& e2actly the same #o-ers -ere conferred on
the "rime Minister$
4o-ever& -hat is no- 5ection 9 of Article V%%% under the 19L1 amendments transferred all said #o-ers
to the "resident$
As can be seen& as authoriHed by the Commander=in=Chief clause of all our Constitutions& there have
been as there still are three other measures that may be resorted to during an emergency& namely:
B1D Call out such armed forces to #revent or su##ress la-less violence& invasion& insurrection or
rebellion or imminent danger thereof& -hen #ublic safety re8uires itG
B+D 5us#end the #rivilege of the -rit of habeas cor#us& and
B>D "lace the "hili##ines or any #art thereof under martial la-$
%t a##ears& therefore& that -ithin the four corners of the Constitution itself& -hether that of 19>, or that
of 19M>& there -ere four constitutionally designed -ays of co#ing -ith abnormal situations in the
country& namely: B1D the so=called emergency #o-ers delegated by the assembly to the "residentG B+D
the calling of the armed forcesG B>D the sus#ension of the #rivilege of the -rit of habeas cor#us and BD
the #lacing of the country or any #art thereof under martial la-$ :nderstandably& it is to be su##osed
that these measures are to be resorted to one after the other according to the degree of gravity of the
situation$
A bac*-ard glance at our #ast e2#eriences since the im#lantation of American sovereignty in our
country at the turn of the century should remind us that at one time or another all of these four
measures have been resorted to& albeit martial la- #roclamations in the long #ast -ere limited in area
and duration because of the localiHed nature of the disturbances they -ere meant to remedy$
)earing all the foregoing considerations in mind& the 8uestion that naturally arises at this (uncture is
-hat need is there for the #o-er contem#lated in Amendment 'o$ !Q 3hy does the country have to
have a one=man legislating authority concurrent -ith the )atasang "ambansaQ Are the above=discussed
safeguards not enoughQ
At this #oint& it must be noted that Amendment 'o$ ! does not refer only to the interim )atasang
"ambansa but also to the regular F'ational AssemblyF Bno- )atasang "ambansaD& a consideration
-hich lends force to the conclusion that the 19L1 amendments could not have been intended nor
understood to do a-ay -ith it$ 3hat& indeed& is the fundamental ration d@tre of Amendment 'o$ !Q
%t is to be recalled that the said amendment -as formulated in /ctober 19M!& more than fully four years
after the -hole "hili##ines -as first #laced under martial la- #ursuant to "roclamation 19L1 dated
5e#tember +1& 19M+$ True& -ithout loss of time& "resident Marcos made it clear that there -as no
military ta*e=over of the government& and that much less -as there being established a revolutionary
government& even as he declared that said martial la- -as of a double=barrelled ty#ed& unfamiliar to
traditional constitutionalists and #olitical scientists E for t-o basic and transcendental ob(ectives -ere
intended by it: B1D the 8uelling of nation-ide subversive activities characteristic not only of a rebellion
but of a state of -ar fanned by a foreign #o-er of a different %deology from ours& and not e2cluding the
sto##ing effectively of a bre-ing& if not a strong se#aratist movement in Mindanao& and B+D the
establishment of a 'e- 5ociety by the institution of disci#linary measures designed to eradicate the
dee#=rooted causes of the rebellion and elevate the standards of living education and culture of our
#eo#le& and most of an the social amelioration of the #oor and under#rivileged in the farms and in the
barrios& to the end that ho#efully insurgency may not rear its head in this country again$
The immediate reaction of some sectors of the nation -as of astonishment and dismay& for even if
everyone *ne- that the gravity of the disorder& la-lessness& social in(ustice& youth and student activism
and other disturbing movements had reached a #oint of #eril& they felt that martial la- over the -hole
country -as not yet -arranted$ 3orse& #olitical motivations -ere ascribed to be behind the
#roclamation& -hat -ith the then constitutionally une2tendible term of "resident Marcos about to
e2#ire& and this sus#icion became more credible -hen o##osition leaders and outs#o*en anti=
administration media #eo#le -ho did not hesitate to resort even to libel -ere immediately #laced under
indefinite detention in military cam#s and other unusual restrictions -ere im#osed on travel&
communication& freedom of s#eech and of the #ress& etc$ %n a -ord& the martial la- regime -as
anathema to no small #ortion of the #o#ulace$ Criticisms or ob(ections thereto -ere& of course& mostly
covert& but there -ere even instances of o#en resistance$
Truth to tell& martial la- is generally un-elcome any-here in the -orld$ And -hen it is #rolonged
-ithout anyone *no-ing -hen it -ould be lifted& the feeling of discontent gro-s and s#reads$ %ndeed&
it is difficult to describe fully in an o#inion li*e this all that many consider obno2ious in martial la-$
5uffice it to say that the 'e- 5ociety that came out of it did have its laudatory features a##reciated by
large segments of the #eo#le& but -ith many cases of abuses of the military marring such rece#tive
attitude& the clamor for the early lifting of martial la- became more and more audible$
3e can definitely say that no one more than "resident Marcos -as a-are of those feelings and
sentiments and& in fact& even of the undercurrents of resistance$ And as 3e visualiHe the situation he
found himself in& he -as faced -ith no less than a dilemma$ 4e -as convinced of the advantages& not
#ersonally to him& but to general -elfare of martial la-& but at the same time he -as also conscious that
martial la-& in any form E call it "hili##ine style& smiling& benign or -ith any other eu#hemistic
ad(ective E -as gro-ing to be more and more distasteful$ Even the 'e- 5ociety it -as su##osed to
bring about -as slo-ly losing its s#lendor$ )ac*sliding -as cree#ing in some -ays& disci#line -as
loosening$ )ut over and above all such adverse develo#ments& the #erils to national security and #ublic
order still remained& if in a slightly lesser degree$
%t -as in the light of the above circumstances and as a means of solving the dilemma aforementioned
that the conce#t embodied in Amendment 'o$ ! -as born$ %n brief& the central %dea that emerged -as
that martial la- may be earlier lifted& but to safeguard our country and #eo#le against any abru#t
dangerous situation -hich -ould -arrant the e2ercise of some authoritarian #o-ers& the latter must be
constitutionally allo-ed& thereby to obviate the need to #roclaim martial la- and its concomitants&
#rinci#ally the assertion by the military of #rerogatives that made them a##ear su#erior to the civilian
authorities belo- the "resident$ %n other -ords& the #roblem -as -hat may be needed for national
survival or the restoration of normalcy in the face of a crisis or an emergency should be reconciled -ith
the #o#ular mentality and attitude of the #eo#le against martial la-$
3e have said earlier that the Constitution has four built=in measures to co#e -ith crises and
emergencies$ To reiterate& they are: BaD emergency #o-ers e2#ressly delegated by the )atasanG BbD call
of the armed forces& -ho other-ise are su##osed to be in the barrac*sG BcD sus#ension of the #rivilege
of the -rit of habeas cor#usG and BdD martial la-$ /f these four& the #eo#le disli*e martial la- most and
-ould& if #ossible& do a-ay -ith it in the Constitution$ And the "resident -ho first conceived of -hat is
no- Amendment 'o$ ! *ne- this$ Thus& /ur understanding of the develo#ment of events and attitudes
that led to the ado#tion of Amendment 'o$ ! is that in addition to the four measures authoriHed in the
body of the charter& this amendment is su##osed to be a fifth one #ur#ortedly designed to ma*e it
#ractically unnecessary to #roclaim martial la-& e2ce#t in instances of actual surface -arfare or
rebellious activities or very so#histicated subversive actions that cannot be ade8uately met -ithout
martial la- itself$ Very evidently& the #ur#ose of Amendment 'o$ ! is that the "hili##ines be henceforth
s#ared of martial la- unless manifest e2treme situations should ever demand it$
To reca#itulate& the amendments of /ctober 19M! -ere deliberately designed against martial la-$ The
creation thereby of the interim )atasang "ambansa in lieu of the interim 'ational Assembly -hich
never came into being because of vehement and (ustified #o#ular re#udiation thereof -as definitely an
indis#ensable ste# to-ards the lifting of martial la-$ Everyone can understand that martial la- could
not be lifted -ithout a legislative body to ma*e the la-s$ The legislative authority could not be left in
the hands of the "resident B"rime MinisterD$ %t -ould have been anachronistic to lift martial la- and
still leave the la-=ma*ing authority -ith the "resident B"rime MinisterD alone$
0elatedly but more im#ortantly& the vesting of the legislative authority to the interim )atasang
"ambansa& -ithout more or e2clusively& -ould have maintained the safeguards of national security
only to the four traditional constitutional measures re#eatedly discussed above& including martial la-$
The framers of the amendment realiHed only too -ell they had to loo* for a remedy thereto& the disli*e
of the #eo#le& (ustified or not& of martial la-$ And so& to ma*e the #roclamation of martial la- remotest&
but nevertheless enable the government to meet emergencies effectively& they conceived the %dea of
granting to the "resident B"rime MinisterD the #o-er endo-ed to him by Amendment 'o$ !$
5*e#tics and hardcore critics of the administration there must be -ho -ould sarcastically allude to
Amendment 'o$ ! as martial la- (ust the same but only li*e a dog -ith merely another collar$ A -ord
of e2#lanation is thus called for of the vital differences bet-een one and the other$
The attitude of those -ho are o##osed to Amendment 'o$ ! must be due to lac* of sufficient
ac8uaintance -ith the real essence of the various constitutionally authoriHed emergency measures
im#eratively needed to safeguard the national security and integrity already discussed above$ The
delegation of legislative #o-er thru the issuance of rules and regulations to carry out a national #olicy
declared by the )atasan has its o-n virtues as a restrained -ay of conferring la-=ma*ing authority to
the E2ecutive during an emergency$ %t is limited& restricted& sub(ect to conditions and tem#orary$ %t is
obviously the sim#lest remedy to co#e -ith an abnormal situation resulting in the least violence to
revered democratic re#ublican #rocesses constitutionally established$
)ut being #urely a #olitical and legislative remedy& it cannot be ade8uate -hen la-less violence
becomes generaliHed and #ublic safety is in (eo#ardy& hence the need to call out the armed forces$ And
-hen such situation still aggravates to the #oint of re8uiring the #reventive incarceration or detention
of certain leaders or over active elements& it becomes inevitable to sus#end the #rivilege of the -rit of
habeas cor#us$
5hould matters really go out of hand even after the #utting into effect of the measures aforementioned&
under the constitution$ -ithout Amendment 'o$ !& the only recourse -ould be to #roclaim martial la-$
)ut inasmuch as martial la- is an e2treme measure that carries -ith it re#ressive and restrictive
elements un#o#ular to liberty loving and democratically minded sectors of the country& it is but natural
to thin* of it only as a very last resort$
3ell& it is to avoid the necessity of resorting to the #roclamation of martial la- that Amendment 'o$ !
-as conceived$ "ara#hrasing "resident Marcos himself& martial la- is the la- of the gun& that im#lies
coercion and an active and direct role in the government by the military$ Thus& the virtue of
Amendment 'o$ ! is that such undesirable features of martial la- do not have to accom#any the
e2ercise of the #o-er thereby conferred on the E2ecutive$ To be sure& the calling out of the armed
forces and the sus#ension of the #rivilege of the -rit of habeas cor#us& -hich are concomitants of
martial la-& may be left out or need not be resorted to -hen the "resident acts by virtue of such #o-er$
%t is& therefore& evident that it is grossly erroneous to say that Amendment 'o$ ! is in reality no less
than disguised martial la-$
A##arently conceding& at least in gratia argumenti& the truth and the logic of all the foregoing
discussion and conclusions& #etitioner raises the 8uestion of ho- can Amendment 'o$ ! fit into the ne-
set u# under the 19L1 amendments& -hich abolished the dual #osition of "resident Marcos of "resident=
"rime Minister mandated by the 19M! Amendment 'o$ >$ According to #etitioner& "resident Marcos is
"resident no- Bno longer "resident="rime MinisterD #ursuant to the 19L1 amendments and by virtue of
his election as such as #roclaimed by the )atasan on .une +1& 19L1$ 'ot -ithout a bit of sarcasm&
#etitioner even refers to the reference to the status of our government after the inauguration of
"resident Marcos as the Fourth 0e#ublic$ 4o- then& #etitioner as*s& can the "resident of the Fourth
"hili##ine 0e#ublic e2ercise #o-ers granted to the "resident="rime Minister of the #rovisional
government established by the Transitory "rovisions and conferred u#on him only by Amendment 'o$
! of /ctober 19M!Q
%f 3e go solely by the rules of literature& a considerable degree of #lausibility& as 3e have intimated
earlier in this o#inion& may be conceded to the #ose of #etitioner$ %t indeed seems that since the
#ositions of "resident and "rime Minister have been se#arated by the 19L1 amendments and the same
do not state to -hom the #o-er under Amendment 'o$ ! -ould a##ertain& neither the #resent "resident
nor the #resent "rime Minister can e2ercise such #o-er$ )ut again& 3e hold that #etitioner is laboring
under a misconce#tion of facts and of the #rinci#les of constitutional construction$
Earlier hereinabove& 3e discoursed on the inevitability of the conclusion that the current )atasan&
being merely interim Fin lieu of the interim 'ational AssemblyF established under 5ection 1 of the
Transitory "rovisions& it is sub(ect to the #rovisions of Amendment 'o$ ! -hich -as a##roved and
ratified together -ith the creation of the )atasan$ 3e have also made a rather e2tensive e2#osition of
the -hys and -herefores behind Amendment 'o$ !$ As may be noted& the ultimate thrust of /ur
discussion is to establish as a legal #ro#osition that behind and beneath the -ords of the amendment&
the literal reference to Fthe "resident B"rime MinisterDF in Amendment 'o$ ! -as the intention to ma*e
such reference descri#tive of the #erson on -hom is vested the totality of the e2ecutive #o-er under
the system of government established thereby$ For as a matter of general #rinci#le in constitutional la-&
belonging as he does to the #olitical de#artment of the government& it is only -ith such official that& the
high #rerogative of #olicy determination can be shared$ And in this connection& it is very im#ortant to
note that the amendment does not s#ea* of the Fincumbent "residentF only& as in the other amendments&
li*e 'os$ 1& > and ,& but of the "resident& meaning to include all future #residents$ More& Amendment
'o$ ! ma*es mention not only of the interim )atasan but also of the regular one$ All these
unmista*ably im#ly that the #o-er conferred u#on the "resident thereby -as not for "resident Marcos
alone but for -hoever might be "resident of the "hili##ines in the future$
As to the #arenthetical mention therein of the "rime Minister& 3e are of the considered vie- that it -as
necessary to do so because under the governmental system then& -hich -as mar*edly "rime
Ministerial& the substantive e2ecutive #o-ers -ere vested in the "rime Minister& the "resident being
merely the symbolical and ceremonial head of state& and the t-o #ositions -ere being held by one and
the same #erson$ %n other -ords& the #o-er -as contem#lated to be conferred u#on -homsoever -as
vested the e2ecutive #o-er& and that is as it should be& for& to reiterate& from the very nature of the
#o-er itself& the authority to legislate should be allo-ed& if at all& to be shared only -ith one in the
#olitical de#artment& directly deriving #o-er from the vote of the #eo#le$
3ithal& as the 5olicitor ;eneral a#tly #osits& it is neither sound nor in consonance -ith -ell and long
settled #rinci#les of constitutional construction to recogniHe amendments or re#eals of constitutional
#rovisions by im#lications& s#ecially in regard to a transcendental matter as that herein under
discussion$ %ndeed& the fact that Amendment 'o$ ! -as not in any -ay or sense mentioned in the
amendments submitted to the #eo#le for ratification in 19L1 and there being nothing in the latter
intrinsically inconsistent -ith the former& it is safe to conclude that it -ould be deceiving the #eo#le
themselves and de#riving them of something they had decided in 19M! to be #art of the fundamental
la- of the land to no- eliminate the #o-er conferred by them u#on the E2ecutive of sharing legislative
authority -ith the )atasan on a##ro#riate occasions of emergency and urgency$
Anent #etitioner@s claim that the "resident may not constitutionally grant the amnesty #rovided for in
"$D$ 1L9& to /ur mind& the follo-ing -ell ta*en brief ans-er of the 5olicitor ;eneral& -ith -hom 3e
fully agree& is more than sufficient to dis#ose of the same adversely to #etitioner@s stance:
"etitioner argues that "residential Decree 1L9 is li*e-ise invalid for it did not en(oy the concurrence
of the )atasan$ 4e relies on Article V%%& 5ection 11 of the Constitution -hich #rovides that E
The "resident may& e2ce#t in cases of im#eachment& grant re#rieves& commutations and #ardons& remit
fines and forfeitures and -ith the concurrence of the )atasang "ambansa& grant amnesty$
Again& -e beg to disagree$ Article V%%& sec$ 11& a##lies only -hen the "resident is e2ercising his #o-er
of e2ecutive clemency$ %n the case at bar& "residential Decree 1L9 -as issued #ursuant to his #o-er to
legislate under Amendment 'o$ !$ %t ought to be indubitable that -hen the "resident acts as legislator
as in the case at bar& he does not need the concurrence of the )atasan$ 0ather& he e2ercises concurrent
authority vested by the Constitution$
3e cannot close this o#inion -ithout underscoring the #atent tendency and unrelenting effort of the
leadershi# of the country to ma*e our government and our -ay of life indigenously Fili#ino as much as
it is #ossible to ma*e them so$ %t has& of course& tried its utmost to see -hat is good in other lands& but it
has chosen generally to bring out -hat is best in our o-n traditions& usages& customs and systems that
have #roven efficacious and beneficial during the times of our forebears$ The sanggunians and
barangays& -hich have inherited from the Fili#inos of the #ast and that have been institutionaliHed in
Constitutional Amendment 'o$ M of 19M! have& as everyone can see& #roven to be unsha*able bedroc*s
for the foundation of duly constituted governmental authority -ith firm nation-ide mass base$ /ur
#resent government& if in some -ays similar to any foreign one& is in truth a #roduct of our o-n genius
in #olitical science and matters of government$ 'o-here else in the -orld but in the "hili##ines are
martial la- decrees and acts sub(ect to the (udicial scrutiny of the 5u#reme Court$ Amendment 'o$ ! is
of the same strain$ %t is our native and indigenous -ay of co#ing -ith crucial situations$
3e are Fili#inos& so much so that the -riter of this o#inion has #ur#osely avoided reference to& much
less lifted 8uotations from alien (uris#rudence and authorities$ %f only in this #articular case& it is but
a##ro#riate to use language and style of our o-n$
All the above #remises ta*en into account$ /ur considered conclusion and (udgment is that Amendment
'o$ ! of /ctober 19M! of the Constitution of 19M> has not been in any-ay altered or modified& much
less re#ealed by the constitutional amendments of 19L1$
34E0EF/0E& the #etition is dismissed$ 'o costs$
Ma*asiar& Conce#cion& .r$ ;uerrero& "lana& Escolin& Vas8ueH and 0elova& ..$& concur$
Melencio=4errera& .$& concur in the result$
Teehan*ee& %$& reserves his vote$
;utierreH& .r$ .$& is on leave$


5e#arate /#inions

AK:%'/& .$& concurring:
% concur$ Amendment 'o$ ! 8ualifies or limits Amendment 'o$ ,& -hich #rovides that Fthe incumbent
"resident shall continue to e2ercise legislative #o-ers until martial la- shall have been liftedF$ 4ence&
Amendment 'o$ ! should be read as if it begins -ith the clause: F4o-ever& des#ite the lifting of
martial la-& $$$F
A)AD 5A'T/5& .$& concurring:
% concur in the result$ % should state that as 5ecretary of .ustice % #artici#ated in the drafting of the 19M!
Amendment to the ConstitutionG that Amendment 'o$ ! -as intended to give to the "resident B"rime
MinisterD the #o-er to issue decrees& etc$ sub(ect to the conditions s#ecified therein even after the
lifting of martial la- as sho-n by the fact that it is not only the interim )atasang "ambansa -hich is
mentioned but also the regular 'ational AssemblyG that the -ords "resident B"rime MinisterD -ere used
in Amendment 'o$ ! Band also in Amendment 'o$ D sim#ly because at that time both #ositions -ere
occu#ied by the incumbent "residentG that the fact that at #resent one #erson is "resident and another
#erson is "rime Minister does not mean the "resident has lost his #o-er under Amendment 'o$ ! for
that #o-er -as intended to be used by the head of governmentG and that -hat has to be borne in mind is
that the structure of the government at "resent is essentially that of the #residential ty#e for the
"resident is both head of state and head of government -hile the "rime Minister& des#ite his lofty title&
is but an alter ego of the "resident$
DE CA5T0/& .$: concurring:
The only issue raised by #etitioner to -hich % -ish to address myself in this se#arate o#inion& being in
full concurrence -ith ho- the other issues are dis#osed of in the ma(ority o#inion& is -hether
Amendment 'o$ ! B19M!D is still in force after the 19L1 Amendments to the 19M> Constitution$
Amendment 'o$ ! reads:
3henever in the (udgment of the "resident B"rime MinisterD& there e2ists a grave emergency or a threat
or imminence thereof& or -henever the %nterim )atasang "ambansa or the regular 'ational Assembly
fails or is unable to act ade8uately on any matter for any reason that in his (udgment re8uires immediate
action& he may& in order to meet the e2igency& issue the necessary decrees& orders& or letters of
instruction& -hich shall form #art of the la- of the land$
3hat should be em#hatically #ointed out is that the effectiveness of this #rovision is intended to
continue into the future& even beyond the regime of the interim national assembly B)atasan "ambansaD&
as a -ise and #ermanent feature of /ur constitutional system$ This is clear from the reference made
therein of the regular 'ational Assembly& the lifetime of -hich is -ithout a #re=fi2ed limit& as is the
very e2istence of the 0e#ublic itself$ %f for this reason alone& its abrogation or elimination from the
Constitution of -hich the original intention -as to ma*e it a #art and #arcel& may be effected only by
no less than a clear and e2#ress re#eal$ 'o such mode of re#eal is discoverable from the 19L1
amendments of the Constitution$ "etitioner -ould& ho-ever& see a re#eal by Fomission$F
% fail to see such *ind of re#eal$ The #o-er granted by Amendment 'o$ ! is& by its language& to be
e2ercised by the F"resident B"rime MinisterD$F These -ords are inter#reted by #etitioner as meaning
that only -hen the "resident is at the same time the "rime Minister& -hich can only refer to "resident
Ferdinand E$ Marcos& may the #o-er granted by Amendment 'o$ ! be deemed to remain effective$ )ut
-hen& as it ha##ened after the 19L1 amendments and the last #residential elections& the t-o offices had
ceased to be combined or unite in the #erson& of "resident Marcos& the office of "rime Minister being
no- held by another official& "rime Minister Cesar Virata& the #o-er conferred by Amendment 'o$ !
may no longer be e2ercised by any official and therefore the amendment is deemed erased from the
Constitution$ This is a most sim#listic inter#retation that does not do (ustice to the transcendentally
im#ortant ob(ectives of the amendment$
%t is here -here % -ould -ish to e2#ress my vie- that in using the -ords F"resident B"rime MinisterDF
in Amendment 'o$ !& the intent is for the "resident to e2ercise the #o-er -hile he is in #ossession of
the high e2ecutive #rerogatives& but -hen there shall be a regular "rime Minister& it is to the latter that
the #o-er -ould #ertain not to the "resident anymore& because under the Constitution at the time the
19M! Amendments -ere ado#ted it -as envisioned that the "resident -ould be vested only -ith
essentially ceremonial #o-ers& the highest e2ecutive #o-ers to be then e2ercised by the "rime Minister$
The -ord F"rime MinisterF immediately follo-ing the -ord F"residentF& but enclosed in #arenthesis
-as therefore& meant to indicate that -hen the change -ill ta*e #lace -hereby the "rime Minister ta*es
over the e2ecutive #o-ers from the "resident& then it is the former& not the latter& -ho -ould e2ercise
the #o-er defined in Amendment 'o$ !& to obviate thereby the need of a ne- amendment$ The -ord
F"residentF -ould automatically be re#laced by the -ord F"rime MinisterF& thus continuing in force the
#rovision of Amendment 'o$ !$
To my mind& this is the more reasonable inter#retation than to say that the aforementioned -ords -ere
merely descri#tive of the actual nature of the #osition held by the Fincumbent "residentF as& indeed
only the incumbent "resident could #ossibly combine the t-o #ositions in his single #ersonality$ %f this
-ere the intention& there -ould have been no need to enclose the -ord F"rime MinisterF in #arenthesis$
%n doing so& the intention is made clear that it is the "rime Minister -ho automatically ta*es over the
e2ercise of the #o-er -hen the "resident is stri##ed of real e2ecutive #o-er and vested -ith mainly
ceremonial #o-ers& as obtains in most #arliamentary governments$
3ith the intent as above indicated thus so clearly manifested the 19L1 amendment& far from re#ealing
Amendment 'o$ ! by omission as #etitioner contends& should be construed as having the effect of
vesting the #o-er defined therein in the Chief E2ecutive as no- #rovided in the 19L1 amendments$
This official is none other than the "resident to -hom -ere transferred the #o-ers originally intended
to be vested in the "rime Minister as the chief e2ecutive official in a #arliamentary system that the
19M> Constitution& at the beginning& intended to establish for our government$ The "resident -ould
accordingly be the #ro#er official to e2ercise the #o-er granted by Amendment 'o$ ! -hich& by its
intrinsic #rovision& should be maintained in effect by all reasonable intendment rather than deemed
re#ealed only by im#lication -hich is never favored$
The vie- herein e2#ressed -ould& in my humble o#inion& accord more to ho- the #eo#le voted for the
amendments of 19L1 -ho& it may be safe to assert& never had the least intent& to erase Amendment 'o$
! from the Constitution -hich in 19M!& they solemnly resolved to #ermanently enshrine as a ne- but
-ise and transcendentally desirable conce#t of constitutional #o-er of legislation& dictated by the
highest interest of national -elfare and security$ Much less had they any a-areness that by voting for
the amendments& they -ould be voting for the elimination of Amendment 'o$ ! from the Constitution&
for such a result -as never given to their conscious understanding$ %t is fundamental in the
inter#retation of statutes and Constitutions that -hat is controlling is the legislative intent& or the intent
of those -ho enact the la- or the Constitution& -ho& in the case of the latter& are mainly the #eo#le
-ithout -hose ratification any amendment #ro#osed by the constituent body -ould be of no effect$ The
#etitioner himself seems ready to be counted among those -ho -ould not 8uestion the -isdom and
urgent need of Amendment 'o$ !& reason for -hich the ma(ority o#inion may have been needlessly
over=burdened -ith a lengthy discourse over the reasons behind& and (ustification for& the ado#tion of
Amendment 'o$ ! -hich -ere su##osed to have been *no-n by all before the #eo#le -ent to the #olls
to vote for its ratification$ This % say& -ith a#ologies to the learned #onente& and hasten to admit that the
dis8uisition is delectably erudite and scholarly$ For the #etitioner himself said: F3hether the matter or
that there -as an emergency -hich re8uired immediate action& let it be conceded that in the (udgment
of the "resident such facts do e2ists$F %f he no- 8uestions the constitutionality of Amendment 'o$ !& it
is more on ground of form rather than of substance& based merely on his feeling of s*e#ticism that it no
longer fits into the #attern or format of the 19M> Constitution as amended on A#ril M& 19L1$
Fernando& C$.$& concurs and reserves the right to file a brief statement of his vie-s$


5e#arate /#inions
AK:%'/& .$& concurring:
Amendment 'o$ ! 8ualifies or limits Amendment 'o$ ,& -hich #rovides that Fthe incumbent "resident
shall continue to e2ercise legislative #o-ers until martial la- shall have been liftedF$ 4ence&
Amendment 'o$ ! should be read as if it begins -ith the clause: F4o-ever& des#ite the lifting of
martial la-& $$$F
A)AD 5A'T/5& .$& concurring:
% concur in the result$ % should state that as 5ecretary of .ustice % #artici#ated in the drafting of the 19M!
Amendment to the ConstitutionG that Amendment 'o$ ! -as intended to give to the "resident B"rime
MinisterD the #o-er to issue decrees& etc$ sub(ect to the conditions s#ecified therein even after the
lifting of martial la- as sho-n by the fact that it is not only the interim )atasang "ambansa -hich is
mentioned but also the regular 'ational AssemblyG that the -ords "resident B"rime MinisterD -ere used
in Amendment 'o$ ! Band also in Amendment 'o$ D sim#ly because at that time both #ositions -ere
occu#ied by the incumbent "residentG that the fact that at #resent one #erson is "resident and another
#erson is "rime Minister does not mean the "resident has lost his #o-er under Amendment 'o$ ! for
that #o-er -as intended to be used by the head of governmentG and that -hat has to be borne in mind is
that the structure of the government at "resent is essentially that of the #residential ty#e for the
"resident is both head of state and head of government -hile the "rime Minister& des#ite his lofty title&
is but an alter ego of the "resident$
DE CA5T0/& .$: concurring:
The only issue raised by #etitioner to -hich % -ish to address myself in this se#arate o#inion& being in
full concurrence -ith ho- the other issues are dis#osed of in the ma(ority o#inion& is -hether
Amendment 'o$ ! B19M!D is still in force after the 19L1 Amendments to the 19M> Constitution$
Amendment 'o$ ! reads:
3henever in the (udgment of the "resident B"rime MinisterD& there e2ists a grave emergency or a threat
or imminence thereof& or -henever the %nterim )atasang "ambansa or the regular 'ational Assembly
fails or is unable to act ade8uately on any matter for any reason that in his (udgment re8uires immediate
action& he may& in order to meet the e2igency& issue the necessary decrees& orders& or letters of
instruction& -hich shall form #art of the la- of the land$
3hat should be em#hatically #ointed out is that the effectiveness of this #rovision is intended to
continue into the future& even beyond the regime of the interim national assembly B)atasan "ambansaD&
as a -ise and #ermanent feature of /ur constitutional system$ This is clear from the reference made
therein of the regular 'ational Assembly& the lifetime of -hich is -ithout a #re=fi2ed limit& as is the
very e2istence of the 0e#ublic itself$ %f for this reason alone& its abrogation or elimination from the
Constitution of -hich the original intention -as to ma*e it a #art and #arcel& may be effected only by
no less than a clear and e2#ress re#eal$ 'o such mode of re#eal is discoverable from the 19L1
amendments of the Constitution$ "etitioner -ould& ho-ever& see a re#eal by Fomission$F
% fail to see such *ind of re#eal$ The #o-er granted by Amendment 'o$ ! is& by its language& to be
e2ercised by the F"resident B"rime MinisterD$F These -ords are inter#reted by #etitioner as meaning
that only -hen the "resident is at the same time the "rime Minister& -hich can only refer to "resident
Ferdinand E$ Marcos& may the #o-er granted by Amendment 'o$ ! be deemed to remain effective$ )ut
-hen& as it ha##ened after the 19L1 amendments and the last #residential elections& the t-o offices had
ceased to be combined or unite in the #erson& of "resident Marcos& the office of "rime Minister being
no- held by another official& "rime Minister Cesar Virata& the #o-er conferred by Amendment 'o$ !
may no longer be e2ercised by any official and therefore the amendment is deemed erased from the
Constitution$ This is a most sim#listic inter#retation that does not do (ustice to the transcendentally
im#ortant ob(ectives of the amendment$
%t is here -here % -ould -ish to e2#ress my vie- that in using the -ords F"resident B"rime MinisterDF
in Amendment 'o$ !& the intent is for the "resident to e2ercise the #o-er -hile he is in #ossession of
the high e2ecutive #rerogatives& but -hen there shall be a regular "rime Minister& it is to the latter that
the #o-er -ould #ertain not to the "resident anymore& because under the Constitution at the time the
19M! Amendments -ere ado#ted it -as envisioned that the "resident -ould be vested only -ith
essentially ceremonial #o-ers& the highest e2ecutive #o-ers to be then e2ercised by the "rime Minister$
The -ord F"rime MinisterF immediately follo-ing the -ord F"residentF& but enclosed in #arenthesis
-as therefore& meant to indicate that -hen the change -ill ta*e #lace -hereby the "rime Minister ta*es
over the e2ecutive #o-ers from the "resident& then it is the former& not the latter& -ho -ould e2ercise
the #o-er defined in Amendment 'o$ !& to obviate thereby the need of a ne- amendment$ The -ord
F"residentF -ould automatically be re#laced by the -ord F"rime MinisterF& thus continuing in force the
#rovision of Amendment 'o$ !$
To my mind& this is the more reasonable inter#retation than to say that the aforementioned -ords -ere
merely descri#tive of the actual nature of the #osition held by the Fincumbent "residentF as& indeed
only the incumbent "resident could #ossibly combine the t-o #ositions in his single #ersonality$ %f this
-ere the intention& there -ould have been no need to enclose the -ord F"rime MinisterF in #arenthesis$
%n doing so& the intention is made clear that it is the "rime Minister -ho automatically ta*es over the
e2ercise of the #o-er -hen the "resident is stri##ed of real e2ecutive #o-er and vested -ith mainly
ceremonial #o-ers& as obtains in most #arliamentary governments$
3ith the intent as above indicated thus so clearly manifested the 19L1 amendment& far from re#ealing
Amendment 'o$ ! by omission as #etitioner contends& should be construed as having the effect of
vesting the #o-er defined therein in the Chief E2ecutive as no- #rovided in the 19L1 amendments$
This official is none other than the "resident to -hom -ere transferred the #o-ers originally intended
to be vested in the "rime Minister as the chief e2ecutive official in a #arliamentary system that the
19M> Constitution& at the beginning& intended to establish for our government$ The "resident -ould
accordingly be the #ro#er official to e2ercise the #o-er granted by Amendment 'o$ ! -hich& by its
intrinsic #rovision& should be maintained in effect by all reasonable intendment rather than deemed
re#ealed only by im#lication -hich is never favored$
The vie- herein e2#ressed -ould& in my humble o#inion& accord more to ho- the #eo#le voted for the
amendments of 19L1 -ho& it may be safe to assert& never had the least intent& to erase Amendment 'o$
! from the Constitution -hich in 19M!& they solemnly resolved to #ermanently enshrine as a ne- but
-ise and transcendentally desirable conce#t of constitutional #o-er of legislation& dictated by the
highest interest of national -elfare and security$ Much less had they any a-areness that by voting for
the amendments& they -ould be voting for the elimination of Amendment 'o$ ! from the Constitution&
for such a result -as never given to their conscious understanding$ %t is fundamental in the
inter#retation of statutes and Constitutions that -hat is controlling is the legislative intent& or the intent
of those -ho enact the la- or the Constitution& -ho& in the case of the latter& are mainly the #eo#le
-ithout -hose ratification any amendment #ro#osed by the constituent body -ould be of no effect$ The
#etitioner himself seems ready to be counted among those -ho -ould not 8uestion the -isdom and
urgent need of Amendment 'o$ !& reason for -hich the ma(ority o#inion may have been needlessly
over=burdened -ith a lengthy discourse over the reasons behind& and (ustification for& the ado#tion of
Amendment 'o$ ! -hich -ere su##osed to have been *no-n by all before the #eo#le -ent to the #olls
to vote for its ratification$ This % say& -ith a#ologies to the learned #onente& and hasten to admit that the
dis8uisition is delectably erudite and scholarly$ For the #etitioner himself said: F3hether the matter or
that there -as an emergency -hich re8uired immediate action& let it be conceded that in the (udgment
of the "resident such facts do e2ists$F %f he no- 8uestions the constitutionality of Amendment 'o$ !& it
is more on ground of form rather than of substance& based merely on his feeling of s*e#ticism that it no
longer fits into the #attern or format of the 19M> Constitution as amended on A#ril M& 19L1$
Fernando& C$.$& concurs and reserves the right to file a brief statement of his vie-s$
The <a-#hil "ro(ect = Arellano <a- Foundation

Today is Tuesday& 5e#tember 9+& +91
search
0e#ublic of the "hili##ines
5:"0EME C/:0T
Manila
E' )A'C
;$0$ 'o$ <=+L+1 .anuary 1L& 19>!
.:A' )E';A/'& #etitioner=a##ellant&
vs$
T4E 5EC0ETA0P /F .:5T%CE and T4E %'5:<A0 A:D%T/0& res#ondents=a##ellees$
Mario )engHon for a##ellant$
/ffice of the 5olicitor=;eneral 4ilado for a##ellees$
MA<C/<M& .$:
This case -as brought by a former (ustice of the #eace to test the validity of the veto by the ;overnor=
;eneral of section M of Act 'o$ 9,1& the 0etirement ;ratuity <a-$ %n the trial court the #etition for a
-rit of mandamus directed to the 5ecretary of .ustice and the %nsular Auditor -as dismissed$
Thereu#on the losing #arty a##ealed$
The facts& as sti#ulated disclose the follo-ing: .uan )engHon& the #etitioner -as a##ointed (ustice of
the #eace for the munici#ality of <ingayen& "angasinan& on March M& 191+$ 4aving reached the age of
si2ty=five& he ceased to hold this #osition on .anuary 1& 19>>& by reason of the #rovisions of Act 'o$
>L99$ /n that date& acting #ursuant to instructions received from the .udge of First %nstance for the
district& he turned over the office of .ustice of the #eace to the au2iliary (ustice of the #eace of the
munici#ality$ 5ubse8uently the #etitioner addressed communications to the 5ecretary of .ustice& the
;overnor=;eneral& and the %nsular Auditor a##lying for gratuity under Act 'o$ 9,1& but all of these
officials advised him that he -as not entitled to the benefits of the Act$ Accordingly& on March M& 19>&
the instant com#laint -as filed -ith the Court of First %nstance of Manila$
Act 'o$ 9,1 is entitled& FAn Act to #rovide for the #ayment of retirement gratuities to officers and
em#loyees of the %nsular ;overnment retired from the service as a result of the reorganiHation or
reduction of #ersonal thereof& including the (ustice of the #eace -ho must relin8uish office in
accordance -ith the #rovisions of Act 'umbered Thirty=eight hundred and ninety=nine& and for other
#ur#oses$F The body of the Act #rovides in several sections for the officers and em#loyees -ho may be
granted gratuities thereunder& the rates of of gratuities to be #aid& and other matters$ Among these
sections& as the bill #assed the "hili##ine <egislature& -as section M& reading: FThe (ustices of the #eace
-ho must relin8uish office during the year nineteen hundred and thirty=three in accordance -ith the
#rovisions of Act 'umbered Thirty=eight hundred and ninety=nine& shall also be entitled to the
gratuities #rovided for in this Act$F Follo-ing this is section 19& reading: FThe necessary sum to carry
out the #ur#oses of this Act is hereby a##ro#riated out of any funds in the %nsular Treasury not
other-ise a##ro#riated&F and section 1+ reading: F%f& for any reason& any section or #rovision of this Act
is disa##roved by the ;overnor=;eneral or is challenged in a com#etent court and is held to be
unconstitutional or invalid& one of the other sections or #rovisions hereof shall be affected thereby and
such other sections and #rovisions shall continue to govern as if the section or #rovision so disa##roved
or held invalid had never been incor#orated in this Act$F The Act -as Fa##rovedF by the ;overnor=
;eneral& section M e2ce#ted& February +1& 19>>$F The "hili##ine <egislature acce#ted the veto$
5ection 19 of the former /rganic Act& the Act of Congress of August +9& 191!& established the #ractice
for the enactment of a la-& including the sanctioning of the veto #o-er by the ;overnor=;eneral$
5#ecifically it #rovided: FThe ;overnor=;eneral shall have the #o-er to veto any #articular item or
items of an a##ro#riation bill& but the ob(ect$F The Constitution of the "hili##ines& article V%& section 11
B+D contains ab e2actly similar #rovision& e2ce#t that the -ords FThe "residentF are substituted for the
-ords FThe ;overnor=;eneral&F and e2ce#t that succeeding sentences in the constitution #rescribed the
#rocedure for vetoing one or more items of an a##ro#riation bill in a more e2#licit manner$
The first thought that occurs to one in resolving the a##eal of the #etitioner is that& -ithin the meaning
of section M of Act 'o$ 9,1& on the assum#tion that it be restored to the la- by the (udiciary& he has
not sho-n himself to be a (ustice of the #eace -ho -as forced to relin8uish office during the year 19>>$
At least& he did not ta*es ste#s to vindicate an alleged right as did the (ustices of the #eace of the
munici#ality of Malinao& Albay& and the munici#ality of Alabat& Tayabas$ B0egalado vs$ Pulo N19>,1&
!1 "hil$& 1M>G Ta?ada vs$ Pulo N19>,1& !1 "hil$& ,1,$D 4o-ever& this #oint has not been advanced by the
;overnment either in the lo-er court or on a##eal& and so it -ould seem to be ina##ro#riate to
manufacture a defense for the res#ondents$
5omething might also be made of the #ro#osition on -hich the trial (udge relied for dismissal and
-hich is brought into vie- by the first assigned error$ %n other -ords& since the duty -hich the
#etitioner claims is en(oined by la- u#on the res#ondent not only does not e2ist but -ould re8uire the
intervention of the ;overnor=;eneral& -ho is not a #arty& to e2ist& no cause of action is made out$ This&
ho-ever& merely results in hiding behind a technicality to *ee# the #arties from securing the o#inion of
the courts on the main issue$ 3e #refer to satisfy the #etitioner by ruling on the 8uestion suggested by
the first sentence of this decision and -hich is raised s8uarely by the second assigned error$
The ;overnor=;eneral #ur#orted to act #ursuant to the #ortion of section 19 of the /rganic Act -hich
is above 8uoted$ The *ey -ords of that sentence are Fa##ro#riation billF and Fitem or items$F An
a##ro#riation in the setting a#art by la- of a certain sum from the #ublic revenue for a s#ecified
#ur#ose$ An item is the #articulars& the details& the distinct and severable #arts of the a##ro#riation or of
the bill$ 'o set from of -ords is needed to ma*e out an a##ro#riation or an item B5tate vs$ Moore
N1L9!O& ,9 'eb$& LLG Callaghan vs$ )oyce N191,O& 1M AriH$& >>$D
3ithin the meaning of these -ord& is Act 'o$ 9,1 an a##ro#riation billQ Are there #articular items in
that bill -hich the ;overnor=;eneral could constitutionally vetoQ 3e are led to ans-er both 8uestion in
the affirmative$
The former /rganic Act and the #resent Constitution of the "hili##ines ma*e the Chief E2ecutive an
integral #art of the la-=ma*ing #o-er$ 4is disa##roval of a bill& commonly *no-n as a veto& is
essentially a legislative act$ The 8uestions #resented to the mind of the Chief E2ecutive are #recisely
the same as those the legislature and must determine in #assing a bill& e2ce#t that his -ill be a broader
#oint of vie-$
The Constitution is a limitation u#on the #o-er of the legislative de#artment of the government& but in
this res#ect it is a grant of #o-er to the e2ecutive de#artment$ The <egislature has the affirmative
#o-er to enact la-sG the Chief E2ecutive has the negative #o-er by the constitutional e2ercise of
-hich he may defeat the -ill of the <egislature$ %t follo-s that the Chief E2ecutive must find his
authority in the Constitution$ )ut in e2ercising that authority he may not be confined to rules of strict
construction or ham#ered by the un-ise inference of the (udiciary$ The courts -ill indulge every
intendment in favor of the constitutionality of a veto the same as they -ill #resume the constitutionality
of an act as originally #assed by the <egislature$ BCommon-ealth vs$ )arnett N1991& 199 "a$& 1!1G
<$0$A$& LL+G "eo#le vs$ )oard of Councilmen N1L9+O& +9 '$P$5$& ,+G Fulmore vs$ <ane N1911O& 19$&
Te2as Co$ vs$ 5tate N19+MO& ,> A$<$0$& +,L$D
%n determining -hether or not the ;overnor=;eneral ste##ed outside the boundaries of his legislative
functions& -hen he attem#ted to veto one section of Act 'o$ 9,1& -hile a##roving the rest of the bill&
-e are not -ithout the aid of the construction #laced on his action by both legislative and e2ecutive
de#artments$ That the "hili##ine <egislature intended Act 'o$ 9,1 to be an a##ro#riation measure
-ith various items is a##arent from a reading of section 1+ thereof -hereby the <egislature antici#ated
the #ossibility of a #artial veto of the bill by the Chief E2ecutive$ 'ot only this& but after the Chief
E2ecutive too* action& the <egislature made no attem#t to override the veto or to amend the la- to
bring into being the section -hich the ;overnor=;eneral had eliminated$ Then the same 8uestion came
again before the e2ecutive de#artment& and all of its united in sustaining the validity of the ;overnment
;eneral@s veto$
3hile contem#oraneous construction is not decisive for the courts& yet -here a construction of statutes
has been ado#ted by the legislative de#artment and acce#ted by the various agencies of the e2ecutive
de#artment& it is entitled to great res#ect$ %t is our understanding that it has been the #ractice of the
Chief E2ecutive in the inter#retation of his constitutional #o-ers to veto se#arate items in bills
analogous to that before us& and that this #ractice has been ac8uiesced in #reviously -ithout ob(ection&
so that it -ould re8uire a clear sho-ing or unconstitutionality for the courts to declare against it$ 5ince&
therefore& legislative intent and e2ecutive #ur#ose is evident& it devolves u#on the (udiciary to give
differential attention to the attitude assumed by the other t-o branches of the ;overnment$
Vie-ed from another direction& there can be no doubt that Act 'o$ 9,1 is an a##ro#riation bill$ That is
manifest from its #rovisions& and #articularly from section 19 by -hich the necessary sum to carry out
the #ur#oses of the Act -as Fhereby a##ro#riated out of any funds in the %nsular Treasury not other-ise
a##ro#riated$F %t has& ho-ever& been faintly suggested that by an a##ro#riation bill is meant a general
a##ro#riation bill$ 3e are sho-n nothing substantial to su##ort this allegation$ :nli*e in other
constitutions& the -ord FgeneralF -as omitted& and -e #resume intentionally& from the /rganic Act and
the Constitution$ :nder such conditions& the courts -ould not be authoriHed to insert a -ord and by so
doing amend the la-$
The same considerations hold true -ith regard to the 8uestion of -hether or not there -as a #articular
item -hich the ;overnor=;eneral could validly veto$ 'o further action by the <egislature -as
contem#lated$ The accounting officers -ould have e2#erienced no difficulty in setting u# the different
items #rovided for under Act 'o$ 9,1$ %t -ould have been a facile matter to eliminate the money
needed to ma*e section M thereof effective$ The Chief E2ecutive had the right to ob(ect to the
e2#enditure of money for a s#ecified #ur#ose and amount -ithout being under the necessity of at the
same time refusing to agree to other e2#enditures -hich met -ith his entire a##roval& and that intention
-as une8uivocably e2#ressed$
3e have gone to the trouble to e2amine all of the authorities cited by the #arties and other authorities
not brought to our attention by them$ %t -ill be found that in #ractically all of these cases there -as a
conflict bet-een the legislative and e2ecutive de#artments -hich the (udiciary had to decide$ 4ere
there is no such conflict& but unison bet-een the t-o$ 4ere on the contrary the (udiciary is as*ed to ta*e
the initiative and to restore a section to a la- against the e2#licit confirmation of e2ecutive authority by
the <egislature and against e2#licit action ta*en by the Chief E2ecutive$ %n our o#inion& it -as never
intended by a mere #rocess of reasoning& ho-ever #lausible& for the courts to breathe life into a #ortion
of an Act -hich has not been given life by the other de#artments of the government acting in
conformity -ith the Constitution$
Deciding& therefore& the main issue as re8uested by the #etitioner and a##ellant& -e are constrained to
rule against him and to hold that the veto by the ;overnor=;eneral of section M of Act 'o$ 9,1 -as in
conformity -ith the legislative #ur#ose and the #rovisions of the /rganic Act$ For this reason& the
(udgment brought on a##eal -ill be affirmed& -ithout #ronouncement as to the costs in either instance$
Avance?a& C$.$& Abad 5antos& 4ull& %m#erial& DiaH& and 0ecto& ..$& concur$
5e#arate /#inions
V%<<A=0EA<& .$& dissenting:
The #hrase Fany #articular item or items of an a##ro#riation billF used in section 19 of the .ones <a-
refers to an a##ro#riation bill -hich is com#osed of several items of a##ro#riation and not to one
-hich contains only an item of a##ro#riation$
Act 'o$ 9,1& as its title indicates& in FAn Act to #rovide for the #ayment of retirement gratuities to
officers and em#loyees of the %nsular ;overnment retired from the service as a result of the
reorganiHation or reduction of #ersonnel thereof& including the (ustices of the #eace -ho must
relinguish office in accordance -ith the #rovisions of Act 'umbered Thirty=eight hundred and ninety=
nine& and for other #ur#oses$F %n other -ords& said Act is a gratuity la-& a##ro#riating in its section 19
the necessary sum to #ay the gratuities herein granted$
/utside of section 19 there is no other #rovision or item a##ro#riating any other sum of money -hich
may be considered an item of an a##ro#riation$
"aragra#hs BaD& BbD& and BcD of section 1 classify the officers and em#loyees -ho shall be entitled to
gratuity and establish the rate thereon according to salary and years of service$
5ection + establishes the #reference in the se#aration and retirement of em#loyees$
5ection > determines the salary on -hich the gratuity should be based$
5ection gives the se#arated or retired em#loyee and officer the choice bet-een the #resent gratuity
la- and other gratuity la-s under -hich they may be entitled to gratuity$
5ection , designates the #erson to -hom #ayment of gratuity shall be made in case of death$
5ection ! establishes the conditions under -hich a se#arated or retired officer or em#loyee under the
la- may be rea##ointed$
5ection M e2tends the benefit of the la- to (ustices of the #eace under certain conditions$
5ection L #rovides that the offices and #ositions created shall be considered abolished i#so facto& -ith
certain e2ce#tions$
5ection 9 e2cludes from the benefit of the la- officers and em#loyees -ho have voluntarily retired$
5ection 19 a##ro#riates the necessary sum for the #ayment of the gratuities$
5ection 11 fi2es the date on -hich the la- shall ta*e effect$
5ection 1+ #rovides that the disa##roval by the ;overnor=;eneral of any section or #rovision of the
Act& or the declaration of unconstitutionality of the same shall not effect the other sections$
%t -ill be seen that none of the sections above enumerated& e2ce#t section 19& contains any
a##ro#riation of money$
All the t-elve sections of Act 'o$ 9,1& -ith the e2ce#tion of section 19& contain only conditions under
-hich the money a##ro#riated in said section 19 may be #aid$ %f this is true& the vetoing by the
;overnor=;eneral of section M -hich e2tends the gratuity #ayment in said la- to (ustices of the #eace
is unauthoriHed by the Constitution because& as stated above& it contains no a##ro#riation of money but
a mere designation of the officers to -hom the money a##ro#riated may be #aid$
%n the case of 5tate vs$ 4older BM! Miss$& 1,LG +> 5o$ 0e#$& !>D& the 8uestion -as -hether the
follo-ing endorsement and 8ualified a##roval of FAn act to a##ro#riate money for the su##ort and
maintenance of the %ndustrial %nstitute and College for the years 1L9L and 1L99&F -as constitutional or
not:
F% a##rove that #art of this bill #receding the -ord F#rovided&F in the first sectionG and a##rove the
suggestion in said section that by=la-s #rovide for e8ual dormitory #rivileges to all #u#ils& -hether
ta*ing industrial or academic courses& single or togetherG and % a##rove that #art of said section
#roviding for the e2#enditures of said money under the direction or a##roval of the trustees& and for
re#ort thereof to the legislatureG and % a##rove section +$ The other #arts& by authority of section M> of
the state constitution& % disa##rove$ $ $ $F$
5ection M> of the Constitution of the 5tate of Mississi##i #rovides as follo-s:
5EC$ M>$ The governor may veto #arts of any a##ro#riation bill& and a##rove #arts of the same and the
#ortions a##roved shall be la-$
The la- in 8uestion reads as follo-s:
An act to a##ro#riate money for the su##ort and maintenance of the %ndustrial %nstitute and College for
the years 1L9L and 1L99$
5ECT%/' 1$ )e it enacted by the legislature of the state of Mississi##i& that the follo-ing sums of
money be and the same are hereby a##ro#riated out of any money in the treasury not other-ise
a##ro#riated& for the su##ort and maintenance of the %ndustrial %nstitute T College:
For salaries of teachers and officers:
For the year 1L9L [+9&99$99
For the year 1L99 +9&99$99
For e2tending se-er 1&!99$99
For #ainting building and re#airs 1&!99$99
Trustees@ meetings& commencement e2ercises& #rinting& etc$ L99$99
All of said amounts to be dra-n by draft of the #resident of the college& a##roved by the governor and
the auditor of #ublic accounts& and the auditor shall issue his -arrant on the state treasurer for the said
several sums: #rovided that no #art of the money hereby a##ro#riated for -ages or salaries shall be
available unless the board of trustees shall first ado#t and enact rules and by=la-s to the follo-ing
effect: First$ Conferring u#on the #resident of the college the #o-er to recommend to the board of
trustees all the teachers -ho may hereafter be em#loyed& and to select and remove other em#loyees
-ho are not teachers& and giving the #resident the authority for sufficient cause in his discretion to
remove or sus#end any members of the faculty sub(ect to the a##roval of the trustees$ 5econd$
Conferring u#on the #resident of the college sub(ect to the a##roval of the trustees to arrange and
s#ecify the course of study and to fi2 the schedules of studies and classes and to establish rules of
disci#line for the government of the #u#ils$ Third$ )y=la-s #roviding for e8ual dormitory #rivileges to
all #u#ils -hether ta*ing industrial or academic courses& singly or together& and by=la-s to enforce the
faithful discharge of duties of all officers& #rofessors or em#loyees& and before the auditor shall issue
any -arrant under this act& the board of trustees shall file -ith the auditor a certified co#y of their
action com#lying -ith the above conditions$ All of said money to be e2#ended under the direction or
a##roval of the trustees of the college& and a re#ort of the e2#enditures made to the legislature$
%n deciding the case the 5u#reme Court of Mississi##i said in #art the follo-ing:
5ection M> of the Constitution relates to general a##ro#riation bills& or those containing several items of
distinct a##ro#riationsG that is to say& s#ecial a##ro#riation bills& -ith distinct items of a##ro#riations$ %t
a##lies to such as are made u# of #arts& and consist of #ortions se#arable from each other as
a##ro#riations$ %t -as not designed to enable the governor to veto ob(ectionable legislation in
a##ro#riation bills& for that is #rovided for in section !9$ $ $ $
The same court& in another #ortion of the decision& said the follo-ing:
$ $ $ The signing of the bill by the governor -as 8ualified in the act and on the enrolled bill& and did not
become la- in #art& because it -as not an a##roval of #arts and disa##roval of #arts of such a bill& as is
in vie- in section M> of the constitutionG the bill in this case& in the #arts vetoed& not being an
a##ro#riation bill& -ithin its meaning& and not being a veto of #arts of distinct and se#arable
a##ro#riations$ To hold that the bill became la- as a -hole -ould be to ma*e it so -ithout the
governor@s a##roval& and in the face of his a##roval& of the conditions$ )oth legislative declaration and
e2ecutive a##roval are essential #rere8uisites to the enactment of any la-$
The action of the governor having been unconstitutional& and therefore void& his action in dealing -ith
the bill -as a nullityG but the legislature having ad(ourned -ithin five days after the #resentation of the
bill to the governor& the bill& in legal contem#lation& must be held to be yet in the hands of the governor&
and may become la-& unless sent bac* by him -ithin three days after the beginning of the ne2t session
of the legislature$ $ $ $
/n the same #rinci#le and for the same reason the veto of the ;overnor=;eneral of section M of Act 'o$
9,1 -hich is not an item o f a##ro#riation is null and void as in e2cess of the #o-er granted to him by
section 19 of the .ones <a-$
The fact that section 1+ of Act 'o$ 9,1 has #rovided that F%f& for any reason& any section or #rovisions
of this Act is disa##roved by the ;overnor=;eneral or is challenged in a com#etent court and is held to
be unconstitutional or invalid& none of the other sections or #rovisions hereof shall be affected thereby
and such other sections and #rovisions shall continue to govern as if the section or #rovision so
disa##roved or held invalid had never been incor#orated in this Act&F could not have rendered valid and
unconstitutional the disa##roval by the ;overnor=;eneral of said section MG for the only #o-er -hich
the legislature has in case a bill is vetoed by the ;overnor=;eneral is to override said veto by a t-o=
third vote of its members and it cannot ratify or validate an invalid veto because of its
unconstitutionality$
%t is suggested in the ma(ority o#inion that the ;overnor=;eneral having vetoed section M of Act 'o$
9,1 and the <egislature not having overriden said veto the #resum#tion is that the act of the
;overnor=;eneral -as constitutional and this court must res#ect said im#lied a##roval$ %f such doctrine
should #revail& then the e2ecutive may encroach u#on the #o-ers of the legislature& and if the latter
should ac8uiesce in said encroachment either by sanctioning it in the bill -hich is the sub(ect of
encroachment or by failing to override said veto& and the courts must res#ect such encroachment -hen
the constitutionality of said bill is #ut in 8uestion& then the (udicial branch of the government instead of
being the guardian of the Constitution -ill become an accom#lice to its violation& and the rights of the
#eo#le -ill have no #rotection$
For the foregoing reasons& % am of the o#inion: First& that -hile Act 'o$ 9,1 contains an a##ro#riation
to give it effect& it is not an Fa##ro#riation billF containing itemiHed a##ro#riations and therefore is not
one -hich the ;overnor=;eneral can veto under the last #aragra#h of section 19 of the .ones <a-G
second& that section M of Act 'o$ 9,1& -hich e2tends to (ustices of the #eace the gratuity granted in
said Act& is a condition for the #ayment of the money a##ro#riated in section 19 thereof and not an
FitemF of a##ro#riation& and& therefore& the disa##roval of the same by the ;overnor=;eneral is
unconstitutional and as such null and voidG and third& that the #roviso contained in section 1+ of Act
'o$ 9,1 to the affect that the disa##roval of any of its sections by the ;overnor=;eneral shall not
affect the rest of the bill& did not and could not validate an unconstitutional e2ercise of the veto #o-er$
%t is& therefore& the o#inion of the undersigned that the decision of the lo-er court should be reversed
and the -rit granted$
Vic*ers& )utte& and ;oddard& ..$& concur$
The <a-#hil "ro(ect = Arellano <a- Foundation

)E';A/' V5 5EC0ETA0P /F .:5T%CE& !L "4%< 91+FACT5The governor general vetoed section
M of Act number 9,1& the 0etirement ;ratuity <a-$ This veto -asacce#ted by the legislature$ %t -as&
ho-ever& contended by #etitioner& a (ustice of #eace entitled tobenefits under said section M& that the la-
-as not an a##ro#riation bill so that the ;overnor ;eneralcould validly veto an item or items
therein$%55:E3hether or not the governor general can validly veto an item on the 0etirement ;ratuity
la-$0:<%';%n determining -hether or not the ;overnor=;eneral ste##ed outside the boundaries of his
legislativefunctions& -hen he attem#ted to veto one section of Act 'o$ 9,1& -hile a##roving the rest
of the bill& -eare not -ithout the aid of the construction #laced on his action by both legislative and
e2ecutivede#artments$ That the "hili##ine <egislature intended Act 'o$ 9,1 to be an a##ro#riation
measure -ithvarious items is a##arent from a reading of section 1+ thereof -hereby the <egislature
antici#ated the#ossibility of a #artial veto of the bill by the Chief E2ecutive$ 'ot only this& but after the
Chief E2ecutivetoo* action& the legislature made no attem#t to override the veto or to amend the la- to
bring into being asection -hich the ;overnor=;eneral had eliminated$ Then the same 8uestion came
again before thee2ecutive de#artment& and all of its official united in sustaining the validity of the
;overnor=;eneral\s veto$3hile contem#oraneous construction is not decisive for the courts& yet -here
a construction of statuteshas been ado#ted by the legislative de#artment and acce#ted by the various
agencies of the e2ecutivede#artment& it is entitled to great res#ect$ %t is our understanding that it has
been the #ractice of the Chief E2ecutive in the inter#retation of his constitutional #o-er to veto
se#arate items in a bill analogous to thatbefore us& and that this #ractice has been ac8uiesced in
#reviously -ithout ob(ection& so that it -ouldre8uire a clear sho-ing of unconstitutionality for the
courts to declare against it$ 5ince& therefore&legislative intent and e2ecutive #ur#oses is evident& it
devolves u#on the (udiciary to give deferentialattention to the attitude assumed by the other t-o
branches of the ;overnment$
Today is Tuesday& 5e#tember 9+& +91
search
0e#ublic of the "hili##ines
5:"0EME C/:0T
Manila
E' )A'C
;$0$ 'o$ <=+>>+! December 1L& 19!,
"4%<%""%'E C/'5T%T:T%/' A55/C%AT%/'& %'C$& ./5E E$ 0/ME0/& 5A<VAD/0 A0A'ETA&
;:%<<E0M/ )$ ;:EVA0A& "%/ "ED0/5A& C/'0AD/ )E'%TEA& ./5E M$ A0:E;/&
5/TE0/ 4$ <A:0E<& FE<%C)E0T/ M$ 5E00A'/& and 0/MA' /AAETA& #etitioners&
vs$
"ED0/ M$ ;%ME'EA& ./5E VE<A5C/& E<AD%/ 5A<%TA and ./5E AV%<E5& res#ondents$
0oman /Haeta& ;uillermo )$ ;uevara& .ose M$ Aruego& 5otero 4$ <aurel and Feli2berto M$ 5errano for
themselves and for other #etitioners$
/ffice of the 5olicitor ;eneral for res#ondents$
0E;A<A& .$:
3e are called u#on in this case to decide the grave and fundamental #roblem of the constitutionality of
0e#ublic Act 'o$ >L>! Finsofar as the same allo-s retirement gratuity and commutation of vacation
and sic* leave to 5enators and 0e#resentatives& and to the elective officials of both houses Bof
CongressD$F The suit -as instituted by the "hili##ine Constitution Association& %nc$ B"hilconsa& for
shortD& a non=#rofit civic organiHation& duly incor#orated under "hili##ine la-s& by -ay of a #etition for
#rohibition -ith #reliminary in(unction to restrain the Auditor ;eneral of the "hili##ines and the
disbursing officers of both 4ouses of Congress from F#assing in audit the vouchers& and from
countersigning the chec*s or treasury -arrants for the #ayment to any former 5enator or former
Member of the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives of retirement and vacation gratuities #ursuant to 0e#ublic Act
'o$ >L>!G and li*e-ise restraining the res#ondent disbursing officers of the 4ouse and 5enate&
res#ectively& and their successors in office from #aying the said retirement and vacation gratuities$F
%t is argued that the above=numbered 0e#ublic Act& at least to the end that it #rovided for the retirement
of the members of Congress in the manner and terms that it did& is unconstitutional and void$ The
challenge to the constitutionality of the la- is centered on the follo-ing #ro#ositions:
1$ The #rovision for the retirement of the members and certain officers of Congress is not e2#ressed in
the title of the bill& in violation of section +1 B1D of Article V% of the Constitution$
+$ The #rovision on retirement gratuity is an attem#t to circumvent the Constitutional ban on increase
of salaries of the members of Congress during their term of office& contrary to the #rovisions of Article
V%& 5ection 1 of the Constitution$
>$ The same #rovision constitutes Fselfish class legislationF because it allo-s members and officers of
Congress to retire after t-elve B1+D years of service and gives them a gratuity e8uivalent to one year
salary for every four years of service& -hich is not refundable in case of reinstatement or re=election of
the retiree& -hile all other officers and em#loyees of the government can retire only after at least t-enty
B+9D years of service and are given a gratuity -hich is only e8uivalent to one month salary for every
year of service& -hich& in any case& cannot e2ceed + months$
$ The #rovision on vacation and sic* leave& commutable at the highest rate received& insofar as
members of Congress are concerned& is another attem#t of the legislators to further increase their
com#ensation in violation of the Constitution$
The te2t of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ >L>!
The te2t of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ >L>! reads:
A' ACT AME'D%'; 5:)5ECT%/' BcD& 5ECT%/' T3E<VE /F C/MM/'3EA<T4 ACT
':M)E0ED /'E 4:'D0ED E%;4TP=5%C& A5 AME'DED )P 0E":)<%C ACT ':M)E0ED
T4%0TP 4:'D0ED '%'ETP=5%C:
)e it enacted by the 5enate and 4ouse of 0e#resentatives of the "hili##ines in Congress assembled:
5ECT%/' 1$ 5ubsection BcD& 5ection t-elve of Common-ealth Act 'umbered /ne 4undred eighty=
si2& as amended by 0e#ublic Act 'umbered Thirty hundred ninety=si2& is further amended to read as
follo-s:
FBcD 0etirement is li*e-ise allo-ed to a member& regardless of age& -ho has rendered at least t-enty
years of service$ The benefit shall& in addition to the return of his #ersonal contributions #lus interest
and the #ayment of the corres#onding em#loyer@s #remiums described in subsection BaD of 5ection five
hereof& -ithout interest& be only a gratuity e8uivalent to one month@s salary for every year of service&
based on the highest rate received& but not to e2ceed t-enty=four months: "rovided& That the retiring
officer or em#loyee has been in the service of the said em#loyer or office for at least four years
immediately #receding his retirement$
F0etirement is also allo-ed to a senator or a member of the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives and to an elective
officer of either 4ouse of the Congress& regardless of age& #rovided that in the case of a 5enator or
Member& he must have served at least t-elve years as a 5enator andZor as a member of the 4ouse of
0e#resentatives& and& in the case of an elective officer of either 4ouse& he must have served the
government for at least t-elve years& not less than four years of -hich must have been rendered as such
elective officer: "rovided& That the gratuity #ayable to a retiring senator& member of the 4ouse of
0e#resentatives& or elective officer& of either 4ouse& shall be e8uivalent to one year@s salary for every
four years of service in the government and the same shall be e2em#t from any ta2 -hatsoever and
shall be neither liable to attachment or e2ecution nor refundable in case of reinstatement or re=election
of the retiree$
FThis gratuity is #ayable by the em#loyer or office concerned -hich is hereby authoriHed to #rovide the
necessary a##ro#riation or #ay the same from any une2#ended items of a##ro#riations or savings in its
a##ro#riations or saving in its a##ro#riations$
FElective or a##ointive officials and em#loyees #aid gratuity under this subsection shall be entitled to
the commutation of the unused vacation and sic* leave& based on the highest rate received& -hich they
may have to their credit at the time of retirement$F
5ECT%/' +$ This Act shall ta*e effect u#on its a##roval$
A##roved& .une ++& 19!>$
The 5olicitor ;eneral@s /ffice& in re#resentation of the res#ondent& filed its ans-er on 5e#tember L&
19!& and contends& by -ay of s#ecial and affirmative defenses that:
1$ The grant of retirement or #ension benefits under 0e#ublic Act 'o$ >L>! to the officers ob(ected to
by the #etitioner does not constitute Fforbidden com#ensationF -ithin the meaning of 5ection 1 of
Article V% of the "hili##ine Constitution$
+$ The title of the la- in 8uestion sufficiently com#lies -ith the #rovisions of 5ection +1& Article V%& of
the Constitution that Fno bill -hich may be enacted into la- shall embrace more than one sub(ect
-hich shall be e2#ressed in the title of the bill$
>$ The la- in 8uestion does not constitute legislation$
$ Certain indis#ensable #arties& s#ecifically the elected officers of Congress -ho are authoriHed to
a##rove vouchers for #ayments for funds under the la- in 8uestion& and the claimants to the vouchers
to be #resented for #ayment under said items& -ere not included in the #etition$
,$ The #etitioner has no standing to institute this suit$
!$ The #ayment of commutable vacation and sic* leave benefits under the said Act is merely Fin the
nature of a basis for com#uting the gratuity due each retiring memberF and& therefore& is not an indirect
scheme to increase their salary$
A brief historical bac*ground of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ >L>!
0e#ublic Act 'o$ >L>! -as originally 4ouse )ill 'o$ !9,1& -hich -as introduced by Congressmen
Marcial 0$ "imentel of Camarines 'orte and Marcelino 0$ Veloso of the Third District of <eyte& on
May !& 19!>$ /n the same date& it -as referred to the Committee on Civil 5ervice$ -hich on the
follo-ing May L& submitted its 0E"/0T 'o$ >1+9& recommending a##roval of the bill -ith
amendments& among others& that the -ord FT3E'TPF in the bill as filed E re#resenting the number
of years that a senator or member must serve in Congress to entitle him to retirement under the bill E
must be reduced to FT3E<VEF years& and that the follo-ing -ords -ere inserted& namely& FA'D T4E
5AME Breferring to gratuityD 54A<< )E ECEM"T F0/M A'P TAC 34AT5/EVE0 A'D 54A<<
'/T )E <%A)<E F0/M ATTAC4ME'T /0 ECEC:T%/' '/0 0EF:'DA)<E %' CA5E /F
0E%'5TATEME'T /0 0EE<ECT%/' /F T4E 0ET%0EE$F /n May L& 19!>& the bill -ith the
#ro#osed amendments -as a##roved on second reading$ %t -as #assed on third reading on May 1>&
19!>& and on the same day -as sent to the 5enate& -hich& in turn& on May +>& 19!>& #assed it -ithout
amendment$ The bill -as finally a##roved on .une ++& 19!>$ As e2#lained in the EC"<A'AT/0P
'/TE attached to the bill& among others E
The inclusion of members of Congress in subsection BcD& 5ection 1+ of C$A$ 1L!& as amended& -ill
enable them to retire voluntarily& regardless of age& after serving a minimum of t-enty years as a
Member of Congress$ This gratuity -ill insure the security of the family of the retiring member of
Congress -ith the latter engaging in other activities -hich may detract from his e2alted #osition and
usefulness as la-ma*er$ %t is e2#ected that -ith this assurance of security for his loved ones& deserving
and -ell=intentioned but #oor men -ill be attracted to serve their #eo#le in Congress$
As finally a##roved& the la- B5ubsection NcO& #aragra#h +& 5ection 1& 0$A$ >L>!D allo-s a 5enator or a
Member of the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives and an elective officer of either 4ouse of Congress to retire
regardless of age$ To be eligible for retirement& he must have served for at least t-elve years as such
5enator andZor as member of the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives$ For an elective officer of either 4ouse& he
must have served the government for at least t-elve years& of -hich not less than four years must have
been rendered as such elective officer$ The gratuity #ayable by the em#loyer or office concerned is
e8uivalent to one year@s salary for every four years of service in the government$ 5aid gratuity is
e2em#t from ta2ation& not liable to attachment or e2ecution& and not refundable in case of reinstatement
or re=election of the retiree$
First legal #oint E #ersonality of the "etitioner to bring suit$
The first #oint to be considered is -hether #etitioner "hilconsa has a standing to institute this action$
This Court has not hesitated to e2amine #ast decisions involving this matter$ This Court has re#eatedly
held that -hen the #etitioner& li*e in this case& is com#osed of substantial ta2#ayers& and the outcome
-ill affect their vital interests& they are allo-ed to bring this suit$ B"ascual v$ 5ecretary& ;$0$ 'o$ <=
199,& December +9& 19!9G and ;onHales v$ 4echanova& !9 /ff$ ;aH$ L9+ N19!>OD$
The #etitioner& "hilconsa& is #recisely a non=#rofit& civic organiHation com#osed of several leaders from
all -al*s of life -hose main ob(ective is to u#hold the #rinci#les of the Constitution$
%n re(ecting the motion to dismiss in the case of "ascual v$ 5ecretary& su#ra& this Court stated& among
other things& that Fthere are many decisions nullifying& at the instance of the ta2#ayers& la-s #roviding
the disbursement of #ublic funds& u#on the theory that the e2#enditure of #ublic funds by an officer of
the 5tate for the #ur#ose of administering an unconstitutional act constitutes a misa##ro#riation of such
funds& -hich may be en(oined at the re8uest of the ta2#ayers$F1 This legislation B0e#ublic Act >L>!D
involves the disbursement of #ublic funds$
3e are not& ho-ever& unmindful of the ruling laid do-n by the 5u#reme Court of the :nited 5tates in
the case of Massachusetts v$ Mellon& +!+ :$5$ M& holding that:
$$$ the relation of a ta2#ayer of the :nited 5tates to the Federal ;overnment is very different$ 4is
interest in the moneys of the Treasury E #artly realiHed from ta2ation and #artly from other sources E
is shared -ith millions of othersG is com#aratively minute and indeterminableG and the effect u#on
future ta2ation of any #ayment out of the funds& so remote& fluctuating and uncertain& that no basis is
afforded for an a##eal to the #reventive #o-ers of e8uity$
The general vie- in the :nited 5tates& -hich is follo-ed here& is stated in the American .uris#rudence&
thus E
%n the determination of the degree of interest essential to give the re8uisite standing to attac* the
constitutionality of a statute the general rule is that not only #ersons individually affected& but also
ta2#ayers have sufficient interest in #reventing the illegal e2#enditure of moneys raised by ta2ation and
may therefore 8uestion the constitutionality of statutes re8uiring e2#enditure of #ublic moneys$ B11
Am$ .ur$ M!1G em#hasis su##lied$D
As far as the first #oint is concerned& 3e hold& therefore& that the contention of the 5olicitor ;eneral is
untenable$
5econd legal #oint E3hether or not 0e#ublic Act 'o$ >L>! falls -ithin the #rohibition embodied in
Art$ V%& section 1 of the Constitution$
The first constitutional 8uestion is -hether 0e#ublic Act >L>! violates 5ection 1& Article V%& of the
Constitution& -hich reads as follo-s:
The senators and the Members of the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives shall& unless other-ise #rovided by la-&
receive an annual com#ensation of seven thousand t-o hundred #esos each& including #er diems and
other emoluments or allo-ances& and e2clusive only of travelling e2#enses to and from their res#ective
districts in the case of Members of the 4ouse of 0e#resentative and to and from their #laces of
residence in the case of 5enators& -hen attending sessions of the Congress$ 'o increase in said
com#ensation shall ta*e effect until after the e2#iration of the full term of all the Members of the
5enate and of the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives a##roving such increase$ :ntil other-ise #rovided by la-&
the "resident of the 5enate and the 5#ea*er of the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives shall each receive an
annual com#ensation of si2teen thousand #esos Bem#hasis su##liedD
)efore discussing this #oint& it is -orthy to note that the Constitution embodies some limitations and
#rohibitions u#on the members of Congress& to -it:
1$ They may not hold any other office or em#loyment in the ;overnment -ithout forfeiting their
res#ective seatsG
+$ They shall not be a##ointed& during the time for -hich they are elected& to any civil office -hich
may have been created or the emoluments -hereof shall have been increased -hile they -ere members
of CongressG B5ection 1!& Article V%& ConstitutionD
>$ They cannot be financially interested in any franchiseG
$ They cannot a##ear in any civil case -herein the ;overnment is an adverse #artyG
,$ They cannot a##ear as counsel before any Electoral TribunalG and
!$ They cannot a##ear as counsel in any criminal case -here an officer or em#loyee of the ;overnment
is accused$ B5ection 1M& Article V%& ConstitutionD
%n addition to the above #rohibitions& the Anti=;raft <a- B0e#ublic Act >919D also #rohibits members
of Congress to have any s#ecial interest in any s#ecific business -hich -ill directly or indirectly be
favored by any la- or resolution authored by them during their term of office$
%t is thus clear that the Constitutional Convention -isely surrounded the Constitution -ith these
limitations and #rohibitions u#on Members of Congress$ This is a #ractical demonstration or
a##lication of the #rinci#le of the and balances -hich is one of the #eculiar characteristics of our
Constitution$ %n the light of this bac*ground& can 3e conclude that Congress can validly enact 0e#ublic
Act >L>!& #roviding retirement benefits to its members& -ithout violating the #rovisions in the
aforementioned Article V%& 5ection 1& of the Constitution& regarding increase of the com#ensation act
including other emolumentsQ
%t is -orthy to note that the original salary for the members of the 'ational Assembly Bunicameral
bodyD -as fi2ed at ",&999$99 #er annum each$ This -as raised to "M&+99 #er annum by the enactment
of the 199 Constitutional amendment& -hen the unicameral body& the 'ational Assembly& -as
changed to Congress& com#osed of t-o bodies& the 5enate and the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives$ Again& in
19!& by the enactment of 0e#ublic Act 1>& the salary for the Members of Congress -as raised to
">+&999$99 #er annum for each of themG and for the "resident of the 5enate and the 5#ea*er of the
4ouse of 0e#resentatives& to "9&999$99 #er annum each$
<i*e-ise& it is significant that& as stated above& -hen the Constitutional Convention first determined the
com#ensation for the Members of Congress& the amount fi2ed by it -as only ",&999$99 #er annum& but
it embodies a s#ecial #roviso -hich reads as follo-s: F'o increase in said com#ensation shall ta*e
effect until after the e2#iration of the full term of all the members of the 'ational Assembly elected
subse8uent to a##roval of such increase$F %n other -ords& under the original constitutional #rovision
regarding the #o-er of the 'ational Assembly to increase the salaries of its members& no increase
-ould ta*e effect until after the e2#iration of the full term of the members of the Assembly elected
subse8uent to the a##roval of such increase$ B5ee Aruego& The Framing of the Constitution& Vol$ 1& ##$
+9!=>99G 5inco& "hili##ine ;overnment and "olitical <a-& th ed$& #$ 1LMD
This goes to sho- ho- Healous -ere the members of the Constitutional Convention in guarding against
the tem#tation for members of Congress to increase their salaries$ 4o-ever& the original strict
#rohibition -as modified by the subse8uent #rovision -hen the Constitutional amendments -ere
a##roved in 199+
The Constitutional #rovision in the aforementioned 5ection 1& Article V%& includes in the term
com#ensation Fother emoluments$F This is the #ivotal #oint on this fundamental 8uestion as to -hether
the retirement benefits as #rovided for in 0e#ublic Act >L>! fall -ithin the #urvie- of the term Fother
emoluments$F
Most of the authorities and decided cases have regarded FemolumentF as Fthe #rofit arising from office
or em#loymentG that -hich is received as com#ensation for services or -hich is anne2ed to the
#ossession of an office& as salary& fees and #er8uisites$>
%n another set of cases& FemolumentF has been defined as Fthe #rofit arising from office or em#loymentG
that -hich is received as com#ensation for services& or -hich is anne2ed to the #ossession of office& as
salary& fees and #er8uisitesG advantage& gain& #ublic or #rivate$F The gain& #rofit or advantage -hich is
contem#lated in the definition or significance of the -ord FemolumentF as a##lied to #ublic officers&
clearly com#rehends& 3e thin*& a gain& #rofit& or advantage -hich is #ecuniary in character$ Bciting
Ta2#ayers@ <eague of Cargon County v$ Mc"herson& , "$ +d$ L9M& 99l$: 9 3y$ +!G 19! A$<$0$ M!MD
%n 5chieffelin v$ )erry& +1! '$P$5$ Bciting 3right v$ Craig& +9+ A##$ Div$ !L& 19, '$P$5$ >91& affirmed
+> '$P$ ,L& 1>L '$E$ 1D& it has been established that #ensions and retirement allo-ances are #art
of com#ensation of #ublic officialsG other-ise their #ayment -ould be unconstitutional$
%n another case& 5tate v$ 5chmahl& 1, '$3$ M9,& 1+, Minn$ 19& it is stated that Fas used in Article &
section 9& of the Constitution of Minnesota& #roviding that no 5enator or 0e#resentative shall hold any
office& the emoluments of -hich have been increased during the session of the <egislature of -hich he
-as a member& until after the e2#iration of his term of office in the <egislature& the -ord FemolumentsF
does not refer to the fi2ed salary alone& but includes fees and com#ensation as the incumbent of the
office is by la- entitled to receive because he holds such office and #erformed some service re8uired of
the occu#ant thereof$F
From the decisions of these cases& it is evident that retirement benefit is a form or another s#ecies of
emolument& because it is a #art of com#ensation for services of one #ossessing any office$
0e#ublic Act 'o$ >L>! #rovides for an increase in the emoluments of 5enators and Members of the
4ouse of 0e#resentatives& to ta*e effect u#on the a##roval of said Act& -hich -as on .une ++& 19!>$
0etirement benefits -ere immediately available thereunder& -ithout a-aiting the e2#iration of the full
term of all the Members of the 5enate and the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives a##roving such increase$ 5uch
#rovision clearly runs counter to the #rohibition in Article V%& 5ection 1 of the Constitution$
Third <egal "oint E 3hether or not the la- in 8uestion violates the e8ual #rotection clause of the
Constitution$
Another reason in su##ort of the conclusion reached herein is that the features of said 0e#ublic Act
>L>! are #atently discriminatory& and therefore violate the e8ual #rotection clause of the Constitution$
BArt$ %%%& 5ec$ 1& #art$ 1$D
%n the first #lace& -hile the said la- grants retirement benefits to 5enators and Members of the 4ouse
of 0e#resentatives -ho are elective officials& it does not include other elective officials such as the
governors of #rovinces and the members of the #rovincial boards& and the elective officials of the
munici#alities and chartered cities$
The #rinci#le of e8ual #rotection of la- embodied in our Constitution has been fully e2#lained by :s
in the case of "eo#le v$ Vera& !, "hil$ ,!& 1+!& -here 3e stated that the classification to be reasonable
must be based u#on substantial distinctions -hich ma*e real differences and must be germane to the
#ur#oses of the la-$
As -ell stated by 3illoughby on the Constitution of the :nited 5tates Bsecond editionD& #$ 19>M& the
#rinci#le of the re8uirement of e8ual #rotection of la- a##lies to all #ersons similarly situated$ 3hy
limit the a##lication of the benefits of 0e#ublic Act >L>! to the elected members of CongressQ 3e feel
that the classification here is not reasonable$ B5ee also 5inco& "hili##ine "olitical <a-& 11th ed$ N19!+OG
5elected Essays on Constitutional <a- N19>L=!+O& #$ ML9G The E8ual "rotection of the <a-s& >M Cal$
<a- 0ev$ >1$D
5econdly& all members of Congress under 0e#ublic Act >L>! are given retirement benefits after serving
t-elve years& not necessarily continuous& -hereas& most government officers and em#loyees are given
retirement benefits after serving for at least t-enty years$ %n fact& the original bill of Act >L>! #rovided
for t-enty years of service$
%n the third #lace& all government officers and em#loyees are given only one retirement benefit
irres#ective of their length of service in the government& -hereas& under 0e#ublic Act >L>!& because of
no age limitation& a 5enator or Member of the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives u#on being elected for +
years -ill be entitled to t-o retirement benefits or e8uivalent to si2 years@ salary$
Also& -hile the #ayment of retirement benefits BannuityD to an em#loyee -ho had been retired and
rea##ointed is sus#ended during his ne- em#loyment Bunder Common-ealth Act 1L!& as amendedD&
this is not so under 0e#ublic Act >L>!$
<astly& it is #eculiar that 0e#ublic Act >L>! grants retirement benefits to officials -ho are not members
of the ;overnment 5ervice %nsurance 5ystem$ Most grantees of retirement benefits under the various
retirement la-s have to be members or must at least contribute a #ortion of their monthly salaries to the
5ystem$
The arguments advanced against the discriminatory features of 0e#ublic Act >L>!& as far as Members
of Congress are concerned& a##ly -ith e8ual force to the elected officers of each 4ouse& such as the
5ecretaries and the 5ergeants=at=arms$ :nder 0e#ublic Act >L>!& the 5ecretaries and 5ergeants=at=arms
of each 4ouse are given the benefits of retirement -ithout having served for t-enty years as re8uired
-ith other officers and em#loyees of the ;overnment$
Fourth <egal "oint E 3hether or not the title of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ >L>! is germane to the sub(ect
matter e2#ressed in the act$
Another Constitutional #oint to determine is -hether the title of 0e#ublic Act >L>! com#lies -ith the
re8uirement of #aragra#h 1& section +1& Article V% of the Constitution& -hich reads as follo-s:
'o bill -hich may be enacted into la- shall embrace more than one sub(ect -hich shall be e2#ressed in
the title of the bill$
3e are not unmindful of the fact that there has been a general dis#osition in all courts to construe the
constitutional #rovision -ith reference to the sub(ect and title of the Act& liberally$
%t is the contention of #etitioner that the said title of 0e#ublic Act >L>! gives no in*ling or notice
-hatsoever to the #ublic regarding the retirement gratuities and commutable vacation and sic* leave
#rivileges to members of Congress$ %t is claimed that #etitioner learned of this la- for the first time
only -hen .ose Velasco& disbursing officer of the 4ouse& testified on .anuary >9& 19!& before .ustice
<abrador& in connection -ith the hearing of the case& and he revealed that in 19!>& Congress enacted
the retirement la- for its members$ %n fact the A##ro#riation Act for the fiscal year 19!=!,& 0e#ublic
Act 'o$ 1!& #rovides:
1>$ For #ayment of retirement gratuities of members of the 5enate #ursuant to the #rovisions of
0e#ublic Act 'o$ >L>!: "0/V%DED& That no #ortion of this A##ro#riation shall be transferred to any
other item until all a##roved claims shall have been #aid E "+19&999$99$
%n the a##ro#riations for the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives the follo-ing items a##ear:
M$ For government share of #remiums on life insurance and retirement of Members and em#loyees of
the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives& as #rovided for under 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 1!1! E ">99&999$99
L$ For #ayment of the cash commutation of the accumulated vacation and sic* leaves as #rovided for
under 0e#ublic Act 'o$ !11& and retirement gratuities of Members and em#loyees of the 4ouse of
0e#resentatives under 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 1!1! E"1&>99&999$99$
%n the A##ro#riations Act of 19!,=19!! B0e#ublic Act 'o$ !+D& the follo-ing item a##ears in the
a##ro#riations for the 5enate:
1>$ For #ayment of retirement gratuities of 5enate #ersonnel #ursuant to the #rovisions of 0e#ublic Act
'o$ 1!1!: "0/V%DED& That no #ortion of this a##ro#riation shall be transferred to any other item until
all a##roved claims shall have been #aid E "199&999$99$
%t is thus clear that in the A##ro#riations Act for 19!,=19!!& the item in the 5enate for "+19&999$99 to
im#lement 0e#ublic Act >L>! -as eliminated$
%n the a##ro#riations for the 4ouse B19!,=19!!D& the follo-ing items a##ear:
M$ For government share of #remiums on life insurance and retirement of Members and em#loyees of
the 4ouse /f 0e#resentatives as #rovided for under 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 1!1! E "1&+99&999$99$
L$ For #ayment of the cash commutation of the accumulated vacation and sic* leaves as #rovided for
under 0e#ublic Act 'o$ !11& and retirement gratuities of Members and em#loyees of the 4ouse of
0e#resentatives under 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 1!1! E "1&M99&999$99$
%t is to be observed that under 0e#ublic Act >L>!& amending the first #aragra#h of section 1+&
subsection BcD of Common-ealth Act 1L!& as amended by 0e#ublic Acts 'os$ !!9 and$ >99!& the
retirement benefits are granted to members of the ;overnment 5ervice %nsurance 5ystem& -ho have
rendered at least t-enty years of service regardless of age$ This #aragra#h is related and germane to the
sub(ect of Common-ealth Act 'o$ 1L!$
/n the other hand& the succeeding #aragra#h of 0e#ublic Act >L>! refers to members of Congress and
to elective officers thereof -ho are not members of the ;overnment 5ervice %nsurance 5ystem$ To
#rovide retirement benefits& therefore& for these officials& -ould relate to sub(ect matter -hich is not
germane to Common-ealth Act 'o$ 1L!$ %n other -ords& this #ortion of the amendment Bre retirement
benefits for Members of Congress and elected officers& such as the 5ecretary and 5ergeants=at=arms for
each 4ouseD is not related in any manner to the sub(ect of Common-ealth Act 1L! establishing the
;overnment 5ervice %nsurance 5ystem and -hich #rovides for both retirement and insurance benefits
to its members$
"arenthetically& it may be added that the #ur#ose of the re8uirement that the sub(ect of an Act should be
e2#ressed in its title is fully e2#lained by Cooley& thus: B1D to #revent sur#rise or fraud u#on the
<egislatureG and B+D to fairly a##rise the #eo#le& through such #ublication of legislation that are being
considered& in order that they may have the o##ortunity of being heard thereon by #etition or other-ise&
if they shall so desire BCooley& Constitutional <imitations& Lth ed$& Vol$ 1& #$ 1!+G 5ee also Martin&
"olitical <a- 0evie-er& )oo* /ne N19!,O& #$ 119D
3ith res#ect to sufficiency of title this Court has ruled in t-o cases:
The Constitutional re8uirement -ith res#ect to titles of statutes as sufficient to reflect their contents is
satisfied if all #arts of a la- relate to the sub(ect e2#ressed in its title& and it is not necessary that the
title be a com#lete inde2 of the content$ B"eo#le v$ Carlos& ML "hil$ ,>,D
The Constitutional re8uirement that the sub(ect of an act shall be e2#ressed in its title should be
reasonably construed so as not to interfere unduly -ith the enactment of necessary legislation$ %t should
be given a #ractical& rather than technical& construction$ %t should be a sufficient com#liance -ith such
re8uirement if the title e2#resses the general sub(ect and all the #rovisions of the statute are germane to
that general sub(ect$ B5umulong v$ The Commission on Elections& M> "hil$ +LL& +91D
The re8uirement that the sub(ect of an act shall be e2#ressed in its title is -holly illustrated and
e2#lained in Central Ca#iH v$ 0amireH& 9 "hil$ LL>$ %n this case& the 8uestion raised -as -hether
Common-ealth Act +ML& *no-n as the "ublic <and Act& -as limited in its a##lication to lands of the
#ublic domain or -hether its #rovisions also e2tended to agricultural lands held in #rivate o-nershi#$
The Court held that the act -as limited to lands of the #ublic domain as indicated in its title& and did not
include #rivate agricultural lands$ The Court further stated that this #rovision of the Constitution
e2#ressing the sub(ect matter of an Act in its title is not a mere rule of legislative #rocedure& directory
to Congress& but it is mandatory$ %t is the duty of the Court to declare void any statute not conforming to
this constitutional #rovision$ B5ee 3al*er v$ 5tate& 9 Alabama >+9G Cooley& Constitutional <imitations&
##$ 1!+=1!G, 5ee also Agcaoili v$ 5uguitan& L "hil$ !M!G 5utherland on 5tatutory Construction& 5ec$
111$D
%n the light of the history and analysis of 0e#ublic Act >L>!& 3e conclude that the title of said 0e#ublic
Act >L>! is void as it is not germane to the sub(ect matter and is a violation of the aforementioned
#aragra#h 1& section +1& Article V% of the Constitution$
%n short& 0e#ublic Act >L>! violates three constitutional #rovisions& namely: first& the #rohibition
regarding increase in the salaries of Members of CongressG second& the e8ual #rotection clauseG and
third& the #rohibition that the title of a bill shall not embrace more than one sub(ect$
%' V%E3 /F T4E F/0E;/%'; C/'5%DE0AT%/'5& 0e#ublic Act 'o$ >L>! is hereby declared null
and void& in so far as it refers to the retirement of Members of Congress and the elected officials
thereof& as being unconstitutional$ The restraining order issued in our resolution on December !& 19!,
is hereby made #ermanent$ 'o costs$
)engHon& C$.$& )autista Angelo& Conce#cion& 0eyes& .$)$<$& DiHon& Ma*alintal& )engHon& .$"$ and
Aaldivar& ..$& concur$
)arrera& .$& too* no #art$
Footnotes
1 Rubbs v$ Thom#son& ,! '$E$ +d M!1G 0eid v$ 5mith& >M, %ll$ 1M& >9 '$E$ +d 99LG Fergus v$ 0ussel&
+M9 %ll$ >9& 119 '$E$ 1>9G )ur*e v$ 5nively& +9L 111$ >+LG .ones v$ Connel& +!! %ll$ >& 19M '$E$ M>1G
Dudic* v$ )aumann& >9 111$ !& 1L1 '$E !99$
+ Aruego& Rno- Pour Constitution& #$ ,L$
> 0eals v$ 5mith& ,! "$ !99& L 3y$ 1,9G A##le v$ Cra-ford Country& 19, "a$ >99& ,1 Am$ 0e#$ +9,G 1
5*ly$ 'otes Cas$ >++& 1 <eg$ %nt$ >++G Vansant v$ 5tate& ,> A$ M11& M1& ! Md$ 119G To-n of )ruce v$
Dic*ey& ! '$E$ >,$
%n the case of .ustices of the 5u#reme Court& .ustices of the Court of A##eals& .udges of courts of
record=all contribute a certain amount to the ;5%5& although under a different #lan of #remiums from
other members B5ee 0$A$ 919& as amended by 0$A$ 'os$ 19,M and +!1D$
%n the case of the Armed Forces& officers and enlisted men are also members of the 5ystem but their
retirement benefits are #rovided for under 0$A$ >9$
4o-ever& the Auditor ;eneral and the Chairman and Members of the Commission on Elections are
entitled to retirement benefits& under 0$A$ 1,!L& not-ithstanding the fact that they are not members of
the 5ystem& #rovided they have at least +9 years of service$
, 1Lth Edition& Vol$ %$
The <a-#hil "ro(ect = Arellano <a- Foundation

Today is Tuesday& 5e#tember 9+& +91
0e#ublic of the "hili##ines
5:"0EME C/:0T
Manila
E' )A'C
;$0$ 'o$ <=+9M9 .une >9& 19!
)/<%'A/ E<ECT0/'%C5 C/0"/0AT%/'& C40/'%C<E )0/ADCA5T%'; 'ET3/0R& %'C$&
and
M/'5E00AT )0/ADCA5T%'; 5P5TEM& %'C$& #etitioners&
vs$
)0%;%D/ VA<E'C%A& 5ecretary of the De#artment of "ublic 3or*s and Communications and
0/)E0T 5A' A'D0E5 of the 0adio Control Division& res#ondents$
V$ .$ Francisco& A$ Almeda and 5an .uan& Africa )enedicto for #etitioners$
/ffice of the 5olicitor ;eneral for res#ondents$
Enri8ue Fernando as amicus curiae$
)A00E0A& .$:
This is an original #etition for #rohibition& mandatory in(unction -ith #reliminary in(unction filed by
the )olinao Electronics Cor#oration& Chronicle )roadcasting 'et-or*& %nc$& and Monserrat
)roadcasting 5ystem& %nc$& o-ners and o#erators of radio and television stations enumerated therein&
against res#ondents 5ecretary of "ublic 3or*s and Communications and Acting Chief of the 0adio
Control Division$ <ater the 0e#ublic of the "hili##ines& as o#erator of the "hili##ine )roadcasting
5ervice& sought and -as allo-ed to intervene in this case& said intervenor having been granted a
construction #ermit to install and o#erate a television station in Manila$
From the various #leadings #resented by the #arties including their -ritten memoranda as -ell as the
oral arguments adduced during the hearing of this case& the issues #resented to the Court for resolution
are: B1D -hether the investigation being conducted by res#ondents& in connection -ith #etitioners@
a##lications for rene-al of their station licenses& has any legal basisG B+D -hether or not there -as
abandonment or renunciation by the Chronicle )roadcasting 'et-or* BC)'D of channel 9 in favor of
")5G and B>D -hether or not "hili##ine )roadcasting 5ervice can legally o#erate Channel 9 and is
entitled to damages& for C)'@s refusal to give u# o#erations thereof$ 1]-#h^1$?_t
5ection > of Act >L!& as amended by 0e#ublic Act ,L& on the #o-ers and duties of the 5ecretary of
"ublic 3or*s and Communications Bformerly Commerce And CommunicationsD& #rovides:
5EC$ >$
B1D 4e may a##rove or disa##rove any a##lication for rene-al of station or o#erator licenseG "rovided&
ho-ever& That no a##lication for rene-al shall be disa##roved -ithout giving the licensee a hearing$
%t is in the e2ercise of this #o-er that the res#ondents allegedly are no- conducting the investigation in
connection -ith the #etitions for rene-al$
The notices of hearing& sent by res#ondents to #etitioners& in connection -ith the a##lications involved
herein& are uniformly -orded& thus:
B'ame of station o#eratorD
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
BAddressD
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
;entlemen:
This has reference to your a##lication for rene-al of your radio station license 'o$ IIIIIIIIIIII
authoriHing you to o#erate B'ame of stationD& a Bbroadcast or TVD station& -hich e2#ired on BE2#iration
date of #revious license$D
%t is noted that said a##lication -as received in this /ffice on BDate of recei#t of a##licationD or Blength
of #eriod delayD month after said license has e2#ired -hich is a clear violation of 5ection 1+ and 1 of
De#artment /rder 'o$ 11& -hich is hereunder 8uoted:
F5EC$ 1+$ E <icense 0e8uired for /#eration of Transmitter& Transceiver& or 5tation$ E 'o radio
transmitter or radio station shall be o#erated -ithout first obtaining from the 5ecretary of "ublic 3or*s
T Communications a radio station license$
F5EC$ 1$ E 3hen to A##ly for 0ene-al$ E %f rene-al of a station license is desired& the licensee
shall submit an a##lication to the 5ecretary of "ublic 3or*s and Communications t-o B+D months
before the e2#iration date of the license to be rene-ed$ A##lication should be made on #rescribed
forms furnished for the #ur#ose$F
"lease ta*e notice that on .anuary +L& 19!>& at 9:99 a$m$& the matter -ill be heard before the duly
authoriHed re#resentative of the 5ecretary of "ublic 3or*s and Communications& at the Conference
0oom& /ffice of the 5ecretary& Third Floor& "ost /ffice )uilding& "laHa <a-ton& Manila
BCommon-ealth Act 'o$ >L!& 5ec$ >$ subsection hD$ Pour failure to a##ear at the said hearing -ill be
construed as a -aiver on your #art to be heard and this /ffice shall forth-ith act on said a##lication in
accordance -ith e2isting 0adio <a-s& 0ules and 0egulations$
Very truly yours&
sZ .ose <$ <achica
tZ ./5E <$ <AC4%CA
Acting :ndersecretary
Also& #assing u#on #etitioners@ motion for dismissal of the aforementioned investigation conducted by
res#ondents it -as ruled& thus:
The #resent hearing& as the notices 8uoted above sho-& is #recisely the hearing re8uired by 5ection >
B1D of Act >L!& as amended$ %t is an indis#ensable ste# in the #rocessing of a##lication of licenses
-hen and if summary a##roval for one reason or another& real or fancied& could not be given as in the
instant case$ Certainly& the res#ondents BmovantsD themselves -ould be the first ones to raise their
voice of #rotest if their a##lication for rene-al -ere to be summarily disa##roved& -ithout benefit of
any hearing$ BEm#hasis su##lied$D
Clearly& the intention of the investigation is to find out -hether there is ground to disa##rove the
a##lications for rene-al$
)ut the only reason relied u#on by the res#ondents to be the ground for the disa##roval of the
a##lications& is the alleged late& filing of the #etitions for rene-al$ The notices to #etitioners B-hich in
effect ta*e the #lace of com#laint in civil or administrative cases or an information in a criminal actionD
alleged only one su##osed violation -hich -ould (ustify& disa##roval$ )ut #etitioners claim that this
violation has ceased to e2ist -hen the act of late filing -as condoned or #ardoned by res#ondents by
the issuance of the circular dated .uly +& 19!+& -hich in its #ertinent #art& reads:
C%0C:<A0 T/:
A<< 0AD%/ 5TAT%/'5& 0AD%/ DEA<E05&
MA':FACT:0E05 A'D 0AD%/ T0A%'%';
5C4//<5
%t has come to the attention of this /ffice that a great number of radio station o#erators have been
conducting their o#erations resorting to #ractices -hich are in violation of e2isting radio la-s and
regulations& such as:
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
!$ <ate submission of a##lications for ne- and rene-al licenses$
%t is no the intention of this /ffice to correct -hatever la2ity -hich in the #ut has encouraged this
illegal #ractices& to strictly others the radio regulations and to ta*e drastic action against violators of
these regulations$
Pou are& therefore& re8uested to e2amine closely your o#erating #ractices& #ermits and licenses and ta*e
remedial measures as soon as #ossible but not later than August 19& 19!+$
B5;D$D 0/)E0T/ M$ 5A' A'D0E5
0adio 0egulation Chief
A""0/VED:
B5gd$D M$ V$ Feliciano
:ndersecretary
%t seems clear that the foregoing circular sustains #etitioners@ contention that the #revious non=
observance by station o#erators of radio la-s and regulations of the 0adio Control /ffice regarding
filing of #etitions for rene-al& among others& -as condoned if the necessary ste#s -ere ta*en to correct
their records and #ractices before August 19& 19!+$ %t is not denied that herein sub(ect a##lications for
rene-al -ere all made before said date& or even before the issuance of the circular itself on .uly +&
19!+$ The lone reason given for the investigation of #etitioners@ a##lications& i$e$& late filing thereof& is
therefore no longer tenable$ The violation& in legal effect& ceased to e2ist and& hence& there is no reason
nor need for the #resent investigation$ The raison d@etre for it has disa##eared$ %ts continuation -ill
serve no useful #ur#ose in contem#lation of the la- authoriHing investigations in connection -ith
a##lications for rene-al of #ermit$
0es#ondents@ claim that they have no authority to condone or #ardon violations of the radio control
regulations cannot be u#held$ Firstly& by s#ecific #rovision of la-&1 the res#ondent De#artment
5ecretary is given the discretion either to Fbring criminal action against violators of the radio la-s or
the regulations and confiscate the radio a##aratus in case of illegal or sim#ly sus#end or revo*e the
offender@s station or o#erator licenses or refuse to rene- such licensesG or (ust re#rimand and -arn the
offenders$F The cited circular s#ecifically a##roved by the :ndersecretary of "ublic 3or*s and
Communications B-ho has not been sho-n to have acted beyond his #o-ers as such in re#resentation
of the 5ecretary of the De#artmentD -arning the offenders& is an act authoriHed under the la-$ 5econdly&
the circular having been issued by res#ondents themselves& the latter can not no- claim its illegality to
evade the effect of its enforcement$
The ne2t issue is -hether there -as abandonment or renunciation by #etitioner C)' of its right to
o#erate on Channel 9$ %t is admitted that there -as no e2#ress agreement to this effect$ The only basis
of the contention of the res#ondents that there -as such renunciation is the statement FChannel 19
assigned in lieu of Channel 9F& a##earing in the construction #ermit to transfer television station
DAC<=TV from KueHon City to )aguio City& issued to #etitioner$ This statement alone& ho-ever& does
not establish any agreement bet-een the radio control authority and the station o#erator& on the s-itch
or change of o#erations of C)' from Channel 9 to Channel 19$ As e2#lained by #etitioner& it -as made
to understand that the assignment of Channel 19& in connection -ith the #lanned transfer of its station
to )aguio& -as to be effective u#on the final transfer of the said station$ This -as necessary to avoid
interference of its broadcast -ith that of the Clar* Air Force )ase station in "am#anga& -hich is
o#erating on Channel L$ %n other -ords& Channel 19 -ould be assigned to #etitioner only -hen the
)aguio station starts to o#erate$ 3hen the #lan to transfer DAC<=TV to )aguio had to be abandoned& it
did not mean abandonment by the station of its right to o#erate and broadcast on Channel 9 in KueHon
City$
0es#ondents also made reference to the remar*s a##earing in the construction #ermit 'o$ M9>& issued
to the "hili##ine )roadcasting 5ervice that Fconstruction of this station shall be begun after DAC<=TV
BChannel 9D Manila of Chronicle broadcasting 'et-or*@s #ermit to transfer is a##roved$F %t is claimed
that u#on the a##roval of the re8uest to transfer& the #etitioner -as deemed to have renounced or
abandoned on Channel 9$ This statement cannot bind #etitioner$ %n the first #lace& as admitted by
res#ondents& the clause FChronicle broadcasting 'et-or*@s #ermit to transfer is a##rovedF -as merely
#layed by res#ondent@s #ersonnel after erasing the original -ords -ritten therein$ And& it does not
a##ear -hat -ere really -ritten there before the erasure$ %n the second #lace& C)' had no #artici#ating
in the #re#aration of said #ermit$ %nsofar as #etitioner is concerned& it is an inter alios acta -hich can
not bind it$ And& finally& the fact that C)' -as allo-ed to continue and did continue o#erating on
Channel 9 even after the a##roval of its #ro#osed transfer& is #roof that there -as no renunciation or
abandonment of that channel u#on the a##roval of its #etition to transfer$ There being no #roof that
#etitioner had really -aived or renounced its right to o#erate on Channel 9& res#ondents committed
error in refusing to grant or a##rove #etitioner@s a##lication for rene-al of the license for station
DAC<=TV Channel 9$
As regard intervenor@s claim for damages& it -ould have been sufficient to state that it having failed to
#rove the alleged agreement bet-een C)' and said intervenor on the e2change of use of Channel 9
and 19& no right belonging to said intervenor had been violated by #etitioner@s refusal to give u# its
#resent o#eration of Channel 9$ 4o-ever& it may also be added that as the records sho-& the
a##ro#riation to o#erate "hili##ine )roadcasting 5ervice as a##roved by Congress and incor#orated in
the 19!+=19!> )udget of the 0e#ublic of the "hili##ines& -as #rovided as follo-s:
"4%<%""%'E )0/ADCA5T%'; 5E0V%CE
;E'E0A< F:'D
"A0T /'E C:00E'T ;E'E0A< EC"E'5E5
%V$ 5"EC%A< ":0"/5E5
1$ For contribution to the o#eration of the "hili##ine )roadcasting 5ervice& including #romotion&
#rogramming& o#erations and general administrationG "rovided& That no #ortion of this a##ro#riation
shall be used for the o#eration of television stations in <uHon or any #art of the "hili##ines -here there
are television stations$ $$$ ">99&999$99$
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
V% E 5"EC%A< "0/V%5%/'5
1$ $$$
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
,$ 'o amount a##ro#riated for televisions under 5#ecial Fund and ;eneral Fund shall be used for the
o#eration of television stations in <uHon or any #art of the "hili##ines -here there are television
stations$ BEm#hasis su##liedD$
Disallo-ing some of the items in the said A##ro#riations Act& the "resident included the follo-ing in
his veto message:
BeD "4%<%""%'E )0/ADCA5T%'; 5E0V%CE
%V E 5"EC%A< ":0"/5E
1$ For contribution to the o#eration of the "hili##ine )roadcasting 5ervice& $$$: "rovided& That no
#ortion of this a##ro#riation shall be used for the o#eration of television stations in <uHon or any #art
of the "hili##ines -here there are television stations$
,$ 'o amount a##ro#riated for televisions under 5#ecial Fund and ;eneral Fund shall be used for the
o#eration of television stations in <uHon or any #art of the "hili##ines -here there are television
stations$
These t-o #rovisions if a##roved -ill render ino#erative the television stations currently o#erated by
the "hili##ine )roadcasting 5ervice -hich started last 5e#tember& 19!1& in Manila$
:nder the Constitution& the "resident has the #o-er to veto any #articular item or items of an
a##ro#riation bill$ 4o-ever& -hen a #rovision of an a##ro#riation bill affects one or more items of the
same& the "resident cannot veto the #rovision -ithout at the same time vetoing the #articular item or
items to -hich it relates$ BArt$ V%& 5ec$ +9$D
%t may be observed from the -ordings of the A##ro#riations Act that the amount a##ro#riated for the
o#eration of the "hili##ine )roadcasting 5ervice -as made sub(ect to the condition that the same shall
not be used or e2#ended for o#eration of television stations in <uHon& -here there are already e2isting
commercial television stations$ This gives rise to the 8uestion of -hether the "resident may legally veto
a condition attached to an a##ro#riation or item in the a##ro#riation bill$ )ut this is not a novel
8uestion$ A little effort to research on the sub(ect -ould have yielded enough authority to guide action
on the matter For& in the leading case of 5tate v$ 4older&+ it -as already declared that such action by the
Chief E2ecutive -as illegal$ This ruling& that the e2ecutive@s veto #o-er does not carry -ith it the
#o-er to stri*e out conditions or restrictions& has been adhered to in subse8uent cases$> %f the veto is
unconstitutional& it follo-s that the same #roduced no effect -hatsoever& and the restriction im#osed
by the a##ro#riation bill& therefore& remains$ Any e2#enditure made by the intervenor ")5& for th
Today is Tuesday& 5e#tember 9+& +91
search
0e#ublic of the "hili##ines
5:"0EME C/:0T
Manila
E' )A'C
;$0$ 'o$ <=+9M9 .une >9& 19!
)/<%'A/ E<ECT0/'%C5 C/0"/0AT%/'& C40/'%C<E )0/ADCA5T%'; 'ET3/0R& %'C$&
and
M/'5E00AT )0/ADCA5T%'; 5P5TEM& %'C$& #etitioners&
vs$
)0%;%D/ VA<E'C%A& 5ecretary of the De#artment of "ublic 3or*s and Communications and
0/)E0T 5A' A'D0E5 of the 0adio Control Division& res#ondents$
V$ .$ Francisco& A$ Almeda and 5an .uan& Africa )enedicto for #etitioners$
/ffice of the 5olicitor ;eneral for res#ondents$
Enri8ue Fernando as amicus curiae$
)A00E0A& .$:
This is an original #etition for #rohibition& mandatory in(unction -ith #reliminary in(unction filed by
the )olinao Electronics Cor#oration& Chronicle )roadcasting 'et-or*& %nc$& and Monserrat
)roadcasting 5ystem& %nc$& o-ners and o#erators of radio and television stations enumerated therein&
against res#ondents 5ecretary of "ublic 3or*s and Communications and Acting Chief of the 0adio
Control Division$ <ater the 0e#ublic of the "hili##ines& as o#erator of the "hili##ine )roadcasting
5ervice& sought and -as allo-ed to intervene in this case& said intervenor having been granted a
construction #ermit to install and o#erate a television station in Manila$
From the various #leadings #resented by the #arties including their -ritten memoranda as -ell as the
oral arguments adduced during the hearing of this case& the issues #resented to the Court for resolution
are: B1D -hether the investigation being conducted by res#ondents& in connection -ith #etitioners@
a##lications for rene-al of their station licenses& has any legal basisG B+D -hether or not there -as
abandonment or renunciation by the Chronicle )roadcasting 'et-or* BC)'D of channel 9 in favor of
")5G and B>D -hether or not "hili##ine )roadcasting 5ervice can legally o#erate Channel 9 and is
entitled to damages& for C)'@s refusal to give u# o#erations thereof$ 1]-#h^1$?_t
5ection > of Act >L!& as amended by 0e#ublic Act ,L& on the #o-ers and duties of the 5ecretary of
"ublic 3or*s and Communications Bformerly Commerce And CommunicationsD& #rovides:
5EC$ >$
B1D 4e may a##rove or disa##rove any a##lication for rene-al of station or o#erator licenseG "rovided&
ho-ever& That no a##lication for rene-al shall be disa##roved -ithout giving the licensee a hearing$
%t is in the e2ercise of this #o-er that the res#ondents allegedly are no- conducting the investigation in
connection -ith the #etitions for rene-al$
The notices of hearing& sent by res#ondents to #etitioners& in connection -ith the a##lications involved
herein& are uniformly -orded& thus:
B'ame of station o#eratorD
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
BAddressD
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
;entlemen:
This has reference to your a##lication for rene-al of your radio station license 'o$ IIIIIIIIIIII
authoriHing you to o#erate B'ame of stationD& a Bbroadcast or TVD station& -hich e2#ired on BE2#iration
date of #revious license$D
%t is noted that said a##lication -as received in this /ffice on BDate of recei#t of a##licationD or Blength
of #eriod delayD month after said license has e2#ired -hich is a clear violation of 5ection 1+ and 1 of
De#artment /rder 'o$ 11& -hich is hereunder 8uoted:
F5EC$ 1+$ E <icense 0e8uired for /#eration of Transmitter& Transceiver& or 5tation$ E 'o radio
transmitter or radio station shall be o#erated -ithout first obtaining from the 5ecretary of "ublic 3or*s
T Communications a radio station license$
F5EC$ 1$ E 3hen to A##ly for 0ene-al$ E %f rene-al of a station license is desired& the licensee
shall submit an a##lication to the 5ecretary of "ublic 3or*s and Communications t-o B+D months
before the e2#iration date of the license to be rene-ed$ A##lication should be made on #rescribed
forms furnished for the #ur#ose$F
"lease ta*e notice that on .anuary +L& 19!>& at 9:99 a$m$& the matter -ill be heard before the duly
authoriHed re#resentative of the 5ecretary of "ublic 3or*s and Communications& at the Conference
0oom& /ffice of the 5ecretary& Third Floor& "ost /ffice )uilding& "laHa <a-ton& Manila
BCommon-ealth Act 'o$ >L!& 5ec$ >$ subsection hD$ Pour failure to a##ear at the said hearing -ill be
construed as a -aiver on your #art to be heard and this /ffice shall forth-ith act on said a##lication in
accordance -ith e2isting 0adio <a-s& 0ules and 0egulations$
Very truly yours&
sZ .ose <$ <achica
tZ ./5E <$ <AC4%CA
Acting :ndersecretary
Also& #assing u#on #etitioners@ motion for dismissal of the aforementioned investigation conducted by
res#ondents it -as ruled& thus:
The #resent hearing& as the notices 8uoted above sho-& is #recisely the hearing re8uired by 5ection >
B1D of Act >L!& as amended$ %t is an indis#ensable ste# in the #rocessing of a##lication of licenses
-hen and if summary a##roval for one reason or another& real or fancied& could not be given as in the
instant case$ Certainly& the res#ondents BmovantsD themselves -ould be the first ones to raise their
voice of #rotest if their a##lication for rene-al -ere to be summarily disa##roved& -ithout benefit of
any hearing$ BEm#hasis su##lied$D
Clearly& the intention of the investigation is to find out -hether there is ground to disa##rove the
a##lications for rene-al$
)ut the only reason relied u#on by the res#ondents to be the ground for the disa##roval of the
a##lications& is the alleged late& filing of the #etitions for rene-al$ The notices to #etitioners B-hich in
effect ta*e the #lace of com#laint in civil or administrative cases or an information in a criminal actionD
alleged only one su##osed violation -hich -ould (ustify& disa##roval$ )ut #etitioners claim that this
violation has ceased to e2ist -hen the act of late filing -as condoned or #ardoned by res#ondents by
the issuance of the circular dated .uly +& 19!+& -hich in its #ertinent #art& reads:
C%0C:<A0 T/:
A<< 0AD%/ 5TAT%/'5& 0AD%/ DEA<E05&
MA':FACT:0E05 A'D 0AD%/ T0A%'%';
5C4//<5
%t has come to the attention of this /ffice that a great number of radio station o#erators have been
conducting their o#erations resorting to #ractices -hich are in violation of e2isting radio la-s and
regulations& such as:
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
!$ <ate submission of a##lications for ne- and rene-al licenses$
%t is no the intention of this /ffice to correct -hatever la2ity -hich in the #ut has encouraged this
illegal #ractices& to strictly others the radio regulations and to ta*e drastic action against violators of
these regulations$
Pou are& therefore& re8uested to e2amine closely your o#erating #ractices& #ermits and licenses and ta*e
remedial measures as soon as #ossible but not later than August 19& 19!+$
B5;D$D 0/)E0T/ M$ 5A' A'D0E5
0adio 0egulation Chief
A""0/VED:
B5gd$D M$ V$ Feliciano
:ndersecretary
%t seems clear that the foregoing circular sustains #etitioners@ contention that the #revious non=
observance by station o#erators of radio la-s and regulations of the 0adio Control /ffice regarding
filing of #etitions for rene-al& among others& -as condoned if the necessary ste#s -ere ta*en to correct
their records and #ractices before August 19& 19!+$ %t is not denied that herein sub(ect a##lications for
rene-al -ere all made before said date& or even before the issuance of the circular itself on .uly +&
19!+$ The lone reason given for the investigation of #etitioners@ a##lications& i$e$& late filing thereof& is
therefore no longer tenable$ The violation& in legal effect& ceased to e2ist and& hence& there is no reason
nor need for the #resent investigation$ The raison d@etre for it has disa##eared$ %ts continuation -ill
serve no useful #ur#ose in contem#lation of the la- authoriHing investigations in connection -ith
a##lications for rene-al of #ermit$
0es#ondents@ claim that they have no authority to condone or #ardon violations of the radio control
regulations cannot be u#held$ Firstly& by s#ecific #rovision of la-&1 the res#ondent De#artment
5ecretary is given the discretion either to Fbring criminal action against violators of the radio la-s or
the regulations and confiscate the radio a##aratus in case of illegal or sim#ly sus#end or revo*e the
offender@s station or o#erator licenses or refuse to rene- such licensesG or (ust re#rimand and -arn the
offenders$F The cited circular s#ecifically a##roved by the :ndersecretary of "ublic 3or*s and
Communications B-ho has not been sho-n to have acted beyond his #o-ers as such in re#resentation
of the 5ecretary of the De#artmentD -arning the offenders& is an act authoriHed under the la-$ 5econdly&
the circular having been issued by res#ondents themselves& the latter can not no- claim its illegality to
evade the effect of its enforcement$
The ne2t issue is -hether there -as abandonment or renunciation by #etitioner C)' of its right to
o#erate on Channel 9$ %t is admitted that there -as no e2#ress agreement to this effect$ The only basis
of the contention of the res#ondents that there -as such renunciation is the statement FChannel 19
assigned in lieu of Channel 9F& a##earing in the construction #ermit to transfer television station
DAC<=TV from KueHon City to )aguio City& issued to #etitioner$ This statement alone& ho-ever& does
not establish any agreement bet-een the radio control authority and the station o#erator& on the s-itch
or change of o#erations of C)' from Channel 9 to Channel 19$ As e2#lained by #etitioner& it -as made
to understand that the assignment of Channel 19& in connection -ith the #lanned transfer of its station
to )aguio& -as to be effective u#on the final transfer of the said station$ This -as necessary to avoid
interference of its broadcast -ith that of the Clar* Air Force )ase station in "am#anga& -hich is
o#erating on Channel L$ %n other -ords& Channel 19 -ould be assigned to #etitioner only -hen the
)aguio station starts to o#erate$ 3hen the #lan to transfer DAC<=TV to )aguio had to be abandoned& it
did not mean abandonment by the station of its right to o#erate and broadcast on Channel 9 in KueHon
City$
0es#ondents also made reference to the remar*s a##earing in the construction #ermit 'o$ M9>& issued
to the "hili##ine )roadcasting 5ervice that Fconstruction of this station shall be begun after DAC<=TV
BChannel 9D Manila of Chronicle broadcasting 'et-or*@s #ermit to transfer is a##roved$F %t is claimed
that u#on the a##roval of the re8uest to transfer& the #etitioner -as deemed to have renounced or
abandoned on Channel 9$ This statement cannot bind #etitioner$ %n the first #lace& as admitted by
res#ondents& the clause FChronicle broadcasting 'et-or*@s #ermit to transfer is a##rovedF -as merely
#layed by res#ondent@s #ersonnel after erasing the original -ords -ritten therein$ And& it does not
a##ear -hat -ere really -ritten there before the erasure$ %n the second #lace& C)' had no #artici#ating
in the #re#aration of said #ermit$ %nsofar as #etitioner is concerned& it is an inter alios acta -hich can
not bind it$ And& finally& the fact that C)' -as allo-ed to continue and did continue o#erating on
Channel 9 even after the a##roval of its #ro#osed transfer& is #roof that there -as no renunciation or
abandonment of that channel u#on the a##roval of its #etition to transfer$ There being no #roof that
#etitioner had really -aived or renounced its right to o#erate on Channel 9& res#ondents committed
error in refusing to grant or a##rove #etitioner@s a##lication for rene-al of the license for station
DAC<=TV Channel 9$
As regard intervenor@s claim for damages& it -ould have been sufficient to state that it having failed to
#rove the alleged agreement bet-een C)' and said intervenor on the e2change of use of Channel 9
and 19& no right belonging to said intervenor had been violated by #etitioner@s refusal to give u# its
#resent o#eration of Channel 9$ 4o-ever& it may also be added that as the records sho-& the
a##ro#riation to o#erate "hili##ine )roadcasting 5ervice as a##roved by Congress and incor#orated in
the 19!+=19!> )udget of the 0e#ublic of the "hili##ines& -as #rovided as follo-s:
"4%<%""%'E )0/ADCA5T%'; 5E0V%CE
;E'E0A< F:'D
"A0T /'E C:00E'T ;E'E0A< EC"E'5E5
%V$ 5"EC%A< ":0"/5E5
1$ For contribution to the o#eration of the "hili##ine )roadcasting 5ervice& including #romotion&
#rogramming& o#erations and general administrationG "rovided& That no #ortion of this a##ro#riation
shall be used for the o#eration of television stations in <uHon or any #art of the "hili##ines -here there
are television stations$ $$$ ">99&999$99$
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
V% E 5"EC%A< "0/V%5%/'5
1$ $$$
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
,$ 'o amount a##ro#riated for televisions under 5#ecial Fund and ;eneral Fund shall be used for the
o#eration of television stations in <uHon or any #art of the "hili##ines -here there are television
stations$ BEm#hasis su##liedD$
Disallo-ing some of the items in the said A##ro#riations Act& the "resident included the follo-ing in
his veto message:
BeD "4%<%""%'E )0/ADCA5T%'; 5E0V%CE
%V E 5"EC%A< ":0"/5E
1$ For contribution to the o#eration of the "hili##ine )roadcasting 5ervice& $$$: "rovided& That no
#ortion of this a##ro#riation shall be used for the o#eration of television stations in <uHon or any #art
of the "hili##ines -here there are television stations$
,$ 'o amount a##ro#riated for televisions under 5#ecial Fund and ;eneral Fund shall be used for the
o#eration of television stations in <uHon or any #art of the "hili##ines -here there are television
stations$
These t-o #rovisions if a##roved -ill render ino#erative the television stations currently o#erated by
the "hili##ine )roadcasting 5ervice -hich started last 5e#tember& 19!1& in Manila$
:nder the Constitution& the "resident has the #o-er to veto any #articular item or items of an
a##ro#riation bill$ 4o-ever& -hen a #rovision of an a##ro#riation bill affects one or more items of the
same& the "resident cannot veto the #rovision -ithout at the same time vetoing the #articular item or
items to -hich it relates$ BArt$ V%& 5ec$ +9$D
%t may be observed from the -ordings of the A##ro#riations Act that the amount a##ro#riated for the
o#eration of the "hili##ine )roadcasting 5ervice -as made sub(ect to the condition that the same shall
not be used or e2#ended for o#eration of television stations in <uHon& -here there are already e2isting
commercial television stations$ This gives rise to the 8uestion of -hether the "resident may legally veto
a condition attached to an a##ro#riation or item in the a##ro#riation bill$ )ut this is not a novel
8uestion$ A little effort to research on the sub(ect -ould have yielded enough authority to guide action
on the matter For& in the leading case of 5tate v$ 4older&+ it -as already declared that such action by the
Chief E2ecutive -as illegal$ This ruling& that the e2ecutive@s veto #o-er does not carry -ith it the
#o-er to stri*e out conditions or restrictions& has been adhered to in subse8uent cases$> %f the veto is
unconstitutional& it follo-s that the same #roduced no effect -hatsoever& and the restriction im#osed
by the a##ro#riation bill& therefore& remains$ Any e2#enditure made by the intervenor ")5& for the
#ur#ose of installing or o#erating a television station in Manila& -here there are already television
stations in o#eration& -ould be in violation of the e2#ress condition for the release of the a##ro#riation
and& conse8uently& null and void$ %t is not difficult to see that even if it -ere able to #rove its right to
o#erate on Channel 9& said intervenor -ould not have been entitled to reimbursement of its illegal
e2#enditures$
%' V%E3 /F T4E F/0E;/%'; C/'5%DE0AT%/'5& the -rit #rayed for by #etitioners is hereby
granted$ The -rit of #reliminary in(unction heretofore issued by this Court is made #ermanent$ 3ithout
costs$ 5o ordered$
)engHon& C$.$& "adilla& )autista Angelo& <abrador& Conce#cion& 0eyes& .$)$<$& "aredes& 0egala and
Ma*alintal& ..$& concur$
DiHon& .$& too* no #art$
Footnotes
15ec$ > BmD& Act >L!& as by 0e#$ Act ,LL$
++> 5o$ !>G M! Miss$ 1,L$
>Fairfield vs$ "orter& +1 "$ >19G Com$ v$ Dodson& 11 5E +d 1+9G see also 5tate e2$ rel$ 3isconsin Tel$
Co$ v$ 4enry& +!9 '3 L!$
5tate v$ 4older& su#raG Fergus v$ 0ussel& 119 'E 1>9G 5trong v$ "eo#le& ++9 " 999G 3ood v$ 5tate
Administrative )oard& +>L 'EG <u*ens v$ 'ye& 19, " >9>$
The <a-#hil "ro(ect = Arellano <a- Foundation

Today is Tuesday& 5e#tember 9+& +91
0e#ublic of the "hili##ines
5:"0EME C/:0T
Manila
E' )A'C
0esolution March 1L& 19,
%n the Matter of the "etitions for Admission to the )ar of :nsuccessful Candidates of 19! to 19,>G
A<)%'/ C:'A'A'& ET A<$& #etitioners$
.ose M$ Aruego& M$4$ de .oya& Miguel 0$ Corne(o& and Antonio Enrile %nton for #etitioners$
/ffice of the 5olicitor ;eneral .uan 0$ <i-ag for res#ondent$
D%/R'/& .$:
%n recent years fe- controversial issues have aroused so much #ublic interest and concern as 0e#ublic
Act 'o$ 9M+& #o#ularly *no-n as the F)ar Flun*ers@ Act of 19,>$F :nder the 0ules of Court governing
admission to the bar& Fin order that a candidate Bfor admission to the )arD may be deemed to have
#assed his e2aminations successfully& he must have obtained a general average of M, #er cent in all
sub(ects& -ithout falling belo- ,9 #er cent in any sub(ect$F B0ule 1+M& sec$ 1& 0ules of CourtD$
'evertheless& considering the varying difficulties of the different bar e2aminations held since 19! and
the varying degree of strictness -ith -hich the e2amination #a#ers -ere graded& this court #assed and
admitted to the bar those candidates -ho had obtained an average of only M+ #er cent in 19!& !9 #er
cent in 19M& M9 #er cent in 19L& and M #er cent in 199$ %n 19,9 to 19,>& the M #er cent -as raised
to M, #er cent$
)elieving themselves as fully 8ualified to #ractice la- as those reconsidered and #assed by this court&
and feeling conscious of having been discriminated against B5ee E2#lanatory 'ote to 0$A$ 'o$ 9M+D&
unsuccessful candidates -ho obtained averages of a fe- #ercentage lo-er than those admitted to the
)ar agitated in Congress for& and secured in 19,1 the #assage of 5enate )ill 'o$ 1+ -hich& among
others& reduced the #assing general average in bar e2aminations to M9 #er cent effective since 19!$
The "resident re8uested the vie-s of this court on the bill$ Com#lying -ith that re8uest& seven
members of the court subscribed to and submitted -ritten comments adverse thereto& and shortly
thereafter the "resident vetoed it$ Congress did not override the veto$ %nstead& it a##roved 5enate )ill
'o$ >M1& embodying substantially the #rovisions of the vetoed bill$ Although the members of this court
reiterated their unfavorable vie-s on the matter& the "resident allo-ed the bill to become a la- on .une
+1& 19,> -ithout his signature$ The la-& -hich incidentally -as enacted in an election year& reads in
full as follo-s:
0E":)<%C ACT '/$ 9M+
A' ACT T/ F%C T4E "A55%'; MA0R5 F/0 )A0 ECAM%'AT%/'5 F0/M '%'ETEE'
4:'D0ED A'D F/0TP=5%C :" T/ A'D %'C<:D%'; '%'ETEE' 4:'D0ED A'D F%FTP=
F%VE$
)e it enacted by the 5enate and 4ouse of 0e#resentatives of the "hili##ines in Congress assembled:
5ECT%/' 1$ 'ot-ithstanding the #rovisions of section fourteen& 0ule numbered one hundred t-enty=
seven of the 0ules of Court& any bar candidate -ho obtained a general average of seventy #er cent in
any bar e2aminations after .uly fourth& nineteen hundred and forty=si2 u# to the August nineteen
hundred and fifty=one bar e2aminationsG seventy=one #er cent in the nineteen hundred and fifty=t-o bar
e2aminationsG seventy=t-o #er cent in the in the nineteen hundred and fifty=three bar e2aminationsG
seventy=three #er cent in the nineteen hundred and fifty=four bar e2aminationsG seventy=four #er cent in
the nineteen hundred and fifty=five bar e2aminations -ithout a candidate obtaining a grade belo- fifty
#er cent in any sub(ect& shall be allo-ed to ta*e and subscribe the corres#onding oath of office as
member of the "hili##ine )ar: "rovided& ho-ever& That for the #ur#ose of this Act& any e2act one=half
or more of a fraction& shall be considered as one and included as #art of the ne2t -hole number$
5EC$ +$ Any bar candidate -ho obtained a grade of seventy=five #er cent in any sub(ect in any bar
e2amination after .uly fourth& nineteen hundred and forty=si2 shall be deemed to have #assed in such
sub(ect or sub(ects and such grade or grades shall be included in com#uting the #assing general average
that said candidate may obtain in any subse8uent e2aminations that he may ta*e$
5EC$ >$ This Act shall ta*e effect u#on its a##roval$
Enacted on .une +1& 19,>& -ithout the E2ecutive a##roval$
After its a##roval& many of the unsuccessful #ost-ar candidates filed #etitions for admission to the bar
invo*ing its #rovisions& -hile others -hose motions for the revision of their e2amination #a#ers -ere
still #ending also invo*ed the aforesaid la- as an additional ground for admission$ There are also
others -ho have sought sim#ly the reconsideration of their grades -ithout& ho-ever& invo*ing the la-
in 8uestion$ To avoid in(ustice to individual #etitioners& the court first revie-ed the motions for
reconsideration& irres#ective of -hether or not they had invo*ed 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+$ :nfortunately&
the court has found no reason to revise their grades$ %f they are to be admitted to the bar& it must be
#ursuant to 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ -hich& if declared valid& should be a##lied e8ually to all concerned
-hether they have filed #etitions or not$ A com#lete list of the #etitioners& #ro#erly classified& affected
by this decision& as -ell as a more detailed account of the history of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+& are
a##ended to this decision as Anne2es % and %%$ And to realiHe more readily the effects of the la-& the
follo-ing statistical data are set forth:
B1D The unsuccessful bar candidates -ho are to be benefited by section 1 of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ total
1&1!L& classified as follo-s:
19! BAugustD
+9!
1+1
1L
19! B'ovemberD
MM
++L
>
19M
M9
>9
9
19L
L99
99
11
199
1&+1L
,>+
1!
19,9
1&>1!
L9>
+!
19,1
+&9!L
LM9
19!
19,+
+&M>L
1&9>>
+!
19,>
+&,,,
9!L
+L
T/TA<
1+&+>9
,&+1
1&1!L
/f the total 1&1!L candidates& 9+ have #assed in subse8uent e2amination& and only ,L! have filed either
motions for admission to the bar #ursuant to said 0e#ublic Act& or mere motions for reconsideration$
B+D %n addition& some other 19 unsuccessful candidates are to be benefited by section + of said 0e#ublic
Act$ These candidates had each ta*en from t-o to five different e2aminations& but failed to obtain a
#assing average in any of them$ Consolidating& ho-ever& their highest grades in different sub(ects in
#revious e2aminations& -ith their latest mar*s& they -ould be sufficient to reach the #assing average as
#rovided for by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+$
B>D The total number of candidates to be benefited by this 0e#ublic Acts is therefore 1&99& of -hich
only !9 have filed #etitions$ /f these !9 #etitioners& >> -ho failed in 19! to 19,1 had individually
#resented motions for reconsideration -hich -ere denied& -hile 1+, unsuccessful candidates of 19,+&
and ,! of 19,>& had #resented similar motions& -hich are still #ending because they could be favorably
affected by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+& E although as has been already stated& this tribunal finds no
sufficient reasons to reconsider their grades
:'C/'5T%T:T%/'A<%TP /F 0E":)<%C ACT '/$ 9M+
4aving been called u#on to enforce a la- of far=reaching effects on the #ractice of the legal #rofession
and the administration of (ustice& and because some doubts have been e2#ressed as to its validity& the
court set the hearing of the afore=mentioned #etitions for admission on the sole 8uestion of -hether or
not 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ is constitutional$
3e have been enlightened in the study of this 8uestion by the brilliant assistance of the members of the
bar -ho have am#ly argued& orally an in -riting& on the various as#ects in -hich the 8uestion may be
gleaned$ The valuable studies of Messrs$ E$ Voltaire ;arcia& Vicente .$ Francisco& Vicente "elaeH and
)uenaventura Evangelista& in favor of the validity of the la-& and of the :$"$ 3omen@s <a-yers@ Circle&
the 5olicitor ;eneral& Messrs$ Arturo A$ AlafriH& Enri8ue M$ Fernando& Vicente Abad 5antos& Carlos A$
)arrios& Vicente del 0osario& .uan de )lancaflor& Mamerto V$ ;onHales& and 0oman /Haeta against it&
aside from the memoranda of counsel for #etitioners& Messrs$ .ose M$ Aruego& M$4$ de .oya& Miguel 0$
Corne(o and Antonio Enrile %nton& and of #etitioners Cabrera& Macasaet and ;alema themselves& has
greatly hel#ed us in this tas*$ The legal researchers of the court have e2hausted almost all "hili##ine
and American (uris#rudence on the matter$ The 8uestion has been the ob(ect of intense deliberation for
a long time by the Tribunal& and finally& after the voting& the #re#aration of the ma(ority o#inion -as
assigned to a ne- member in order to #lace it as humanly as #ossible above all sus#icion of #re(udice
or #artiality$
0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ has for its ob(ect& according to its author& to admit to the )ar& those candidates
-ho suffered from insufficiency of reading materials and inade8uate #re#aration$ Kuoting a #ortion of
the E2#lanatory 'ote of the #ro#osed bill& its author 4onorable 5enator "ablo Angeles David stated:
The reason for rela2ing the standard M, #er cent #assing grade is the tremendous handica# -hich
students during the years immediately after the .a#anese occu#ation has to overcome such as the
insufficiency of reading materials and the inade8uacy of the #re#aration of students -ho too* u# la-
soon after the liberation$
/f the 9&!M, candidates -ho too* the e2aminations from 19! to 19,+& ,&+>! #assed$ And no- it is
claimed that in addition !9 candidates be admitted B-hich in reality total 1&99D& because they suffered
from Finsufficiency of reading materialsF and of Finade8uacy of #re#aration$F
)y its declared ob(ective& the la- is contrary to #ublic interest because it 8ualifies 1&99 la- graduates
-ho confessedly had inade8uate #re#aration for the #ractice of the #rofession& as -as e2actly found by
this Tribunal in the aforesaid e2aminations$ The #ublic interest demands of legal #rofession ade8uate
#re#aration and efficiency& #recisely more so as legal #roblem evolved by the times become more
difficult$ An ade8uate legal #re#aration is one of the vital re8uisites for the #ractice of la- that should
be develo#ed constantly and maintained firmly$ To the legal #rofession is entrusted the #rotection of
#ro#erty& life& honor and civil liberties$ To a##rove officially of those inade8uately #re#ared individuals
to dedicate themselves to such a delicate mission is to create a serious social danger$ Moreover& the
statement that there -as an insufficiency of legal reading materials is grossly e2aggerated$ There -ere
abundant materials$ Decisions of this court alone in mimeogra#hed co#ies -ere made available to the
#ublic during those years and #rivate enter#rises had also #ublished them in monthly magaHines and
annual digests$ The /fficial ;aHette had been #ublished continuously$ )oo*s and magaHines #ublished
abroad have entered -ithout restriction since 19,$ Many la- boo*s& some even -ith revised and
enlarged editions have been #rinted locally during those #eriods$ A ne- set of "hili##ine 0e#orts began
to be #ublished since 19!& -hich continued to be su##lemented by the addition of ne- volumes$
Those are facts of #ublic *no-ledge$
'ot-ithstanding all these& if the la- in 8uestion is valid& it has to be enforced$
The 8uestion is not ne- in its fundamental as#ect or from the #oint of vie- of a##licable #rinci#les& but
the resolution of the 8uestion -ould have been easier had an identical case of similar bac*ground been
#ic*ed out from the (uris#rudence -e daily consult$ %s there any #recedent in the long Anglo=5a2on
legal history& from -hich has been directly derived the (udicial system established here -ith its lofty
ideals by the Congress of the :nited 5tates& and -hich -e have #reserved and attem#ted to im#rove& or
in our contem#oraneous (udicial history of more than half a centuryQ From the citations of those
defending the la-& -e can not find a case in -hich the validity of a similar la- had been sustained&
-hile those against its validity cite& among others& the cases of Day B%n re Day& , 'E !!D& of Cannon
B5tate vs$ Cannon& +9 '3& 1D& the o#inion of the 5u#reme Court of Massachusetts in 19>+ BL1 A<0
19!1D& of ;uari?a B+ "hil$& >MD& aside from the o#inion of the "resident -hich is e2#ressed in his vote
of the original bill and -hich the #ost#onement of the contested la- res#ects$
This la- has no #recedent in its favor$ 3hen similar la-s in other countries had been #romulgated& the
(udiciary immediately declared them -ithout force or effect$ %t is not -ithin our #o-er to offer a
#recedent to u#hold the dis#uted la-$
To be e2act& -e ought to state here that -e have e2amined carefully the case that has been cited to us as
a favorable #recedent of the la- E that of Coo#er B++ 'P& L1D& -here the Court of A##eals of 'e-
Por* revo*ed the decision of the 5u#reme court of that 5tate& denying the #etition of Coo#er to be
admitted to the #ractice of la- under the #rovisions of a statute concerning the school of la- of
Columbia College #romulgated on A#ril M& 1L!9& -hich -as declared by the Court of A##eals to be
consistent -ith the Constitution of the state of 'e- Por*$
%t a##ears that the Constitution of 'e- Por* at that time #rovided:
They Bi$e$& the (udgesD shall not hold any other office of #ublic trust$ All votes for either of them for any
elective office e2ce#t that of the Court of A##eals& given by the <egislature or the #eo#le& shall be void$
They shall not e2ercise any #o-er of a##ointment to #ublic office$ Any male citiHen of the age of
t-enty=one years& of good moral character& and -ho #ossesses the re8uisite 8ualifications of learning
and ability& shall be entitled to admission to #ractice in all the courts of this 5tate$ B#$ 9>D$
According to the Court of A##eals& the ob(ect of the constitutional #rece#t is as follo-s:
Attorneys& solicitors& etc$& -ere #ublic officersG the #o-er of a##ointing them had #reviously rested
-ith the (udges& and this -as the #rinci#al a##ointing #o-er -hich they #ossessed$ The convention -as
evidently dissatisfied -ith the manner in -hich this #o-er had been e2ercised& and -ith the restrictions
-hich the (udges had im#osed u#on admission to #ractice before them$ The #rohibitory clause in the
section 8uoted -as aimed directly at this #o-er& and the insertion of the #rovisionF e2#ecting the
admission of attorneys& in this #articular section of the Constitution& evidently arose from its connection
-ith the ob(ect of this #rohibitory clause$ There is nothing indicative of confidence in the courts or of a
dis#osition to #reserve any #ortion of their #o-er over this sub(ect& unless the 5u#reme Court is right in
the inference it dra-s from the use of the -ord Uadmission@ in the action referred to$ %t is urged that the
admission s#o*en of must be by the courtG that to admit means to grant leave& and that the #o-er of
granting necessarily im#lies the #o-er of refusing& and of course the right of determining -hether the
a##licant #ossesses the re8uisite 8ualifications to entitle him to admission$
These #ositions may all be conceded& -ithout affecting the validity of the act$ B#$ 9>$D
'o-& -ith res#ect to the la- of A#ril M& 1L!9& the decision seems to indicate that it #rovided that the
#ossession of a di#loma of the school of la- of Columbia College conferring the degree of )achelor of
<a-s -as evidence of the legal 8ualifications that the constitution re8uired of a##licants for admission
to the )ar$ The decision does not ho-ever 8uote the te2t of the la-& -hich -e cannot find in any #ublic
or accessible #rivate library in the country$
%n the case of Coo#er& su#ra& to ma*e the la- consistent -ith the Constitution of 'e- Por*& the Court
of A##eals said of the ob(ect of the la-:
The motive for #assing the act in 8uestion is a##arent$ Columbia College being an institution of
established re#utation& and having a la- de#artment under the charge of able #rofessors& the students in
-hich de#artment -ere not only sub(ected to a formal e2amination by the la- committee of the
institution& but to a certain definite #eriod of study before being entitled to a di#loma of being
graduates& the <egislature evidently& and no doubt (ustly& considered this e2amination& together -ith the
#reliminary study re8uired by the act& as fully e8uivalent as a test of legal re8uirements& to the ordinary
e2amination by the courtG and as rendering the latter e2amination& to -hich no definite #eriod of
#reliminary study -as essential& unnecessary and burdensome$
The act -as obviously #assed -ith reference to the learning and ability of the a##licant& and for the
mere #ur#ose of substituting the e2amination by the la- committee of the college for that of the court$
%t could have had no other ob(ect& and hence no greater sco#e should be given to its #rovisions$ 3e
cannot su##ose that the <egislature designed entirely to dis#ense -ith the #lain and e2#licit
re8uirements of the ConstitutionG and the act contains nothing -hatever to indicate an intention that the
authorities of the college should in8uire as to the age& citiHenshi#& etc$& of the students before granting a
di#loma$ The only rational inter#retation of -hich the act admits is& that it -as intended to ma*e the
college di#loma com#etent evidence as to the legal attainments of the a##licant& and nothing else$ To
this e2tent alone it o#erates as a modification of #re=e2isting statutes& and it is to be read in connection
-ith these statutes and -ith the Constitution itself in order to determine the #resent condition of the la-
on the sub(ect$ B#$L9D
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
The <egislature has not ta*en from the court its (urisdiction over the 8uestion of admission& that has
sim#ly #rescribed -hat shall be com#etent evidence in certain cases u#on that 8uestion$ B#$9>D
From the foregoing& the com#lete ina##licability of the case of Coo#er -ith that at bar may be clearly
seen$ "lease note only the follo-ing distinctions:
B1D The la- of 'e- Por* does not re8uire that any candidate of Columbia College -ho failed in the bar
e2aminations be admitted to the #ractice of la-$
B+D The la- of 'e- Por* according to the very decision of Coo#er& has not ta*en from the court its
(urisdiction over the 8uestion of admission of attorney at la-G in effect& it does not decree the admission
of any la-yer$
B>D The Constitution of 'e- Por* at that time and that of the "hili##ines are entirely different on the
matter of admission of the #ractice of la-$
%n the (udicial system from -hich ours has been evolved& the admission& sus#ension& disbarment and
reinstatement of attorneys at la- in the #ractice of the #rofession and their su#ervision have been
dis#utably a (udicial function and res#onsibility$ )ecause of this attribute& its continuous and Healous
#ossession and e2ercise by the (udicial #o-er have been demonstrated during more than si2 centuries&
-hich certainly Fconstitutes the most solid of titles$F Even considering the #o-er granted to Congress
by our Constitution to re#eal& alter su##lement the rules #romulgated by this Court regarding the
admission to the #ractice of la-& to our (udgment and #ro#osition that the admission& sus#ension&
disbarment and reinstatement of the attorneys at la- is a legislative function& #ro#erly belonging to
Congress& is unacce#table$ The function re8uires B1D #reviously established rules and #rinci#les& B+D
concrete facts& -hether #ast or #resent& affecting determinate individuals$ and B>D decision as to -hether
these facts are governed by the rules and #rinci#lesG in effect& a (udicial function of the highest degree$
And it becomes more undis#utably (udicial& and not legislative& if #revious (udicial resolutions on the
#etitions of these same individuals are attem#ted to be revo*ed or modified$
3e have said that in the (udicial system from -hich ours has been derived& the act of admitting&
sus#ending& disbarring and reinstating attorneys at la- in the #ractice of the #rofession is concededly
(udicial$ A com#rehensive and conscientious study of this matter had been underta*en in the case of
5tate vs$ Cannon B19>+D +9 '3 1& in -hich the validity of a legislative enactment #roviding that
Cannon be #ermitted to #ractice before the courts -as discussed$ From the te2t of this decision -e
8uote the follo-ing #aragra#hs:
This statute #resents an assertion of legislative #o-er -ithout #arallel in the history of the English
s#ea*ing #eo#le so far as -e have been able to ascertain$ There has been much uncertainty as to the
e2tent of the #o-er of the <egislature to #rescribe the ultimate 8ualifications of attorney at la- has
been e2#ressly committed to the courts& and the act of admission has al-ays been regarded as a (udicial
function$ This act #ur#orts to constitute Mr$ Cannon an attorney at la-& and in this res#ect it stands
alone as an assertion of legislative #o-er$ B#$ D
:nder the Constitution all legislative #o-er is vested in a 5enate and Assembly$ B5ection 1& art$ $D %n
so far as the #rescribing of 8ualifications for admission to the bar are legislative in character& the
<egislature is acting -ithin its constitutional authority -hen it sets u# and #rescribes such
8ualifications$ B#$ D
)ut -hen the <egislature has #rescribed those 8ualifications -hich in its (udgment -ill serve the
#ur#ose of legitimate legislative solicitude& is the #o-er of the court to im#ose other and further
e2actions and 8ualifications foreclosed or e2haustedQ B#$ D
:nder our Constitution the (udicial and legislative de#artments are distinct& inde#endent& and
coordinate branches of the government$ 'either branch en(oys all the #o-ers of sovereignty -hich
#ro#erly belongs to its de#artment$ 'either de#artment should so act as to embarrass the other in the
discharge of its res#ective functions$ That -as the scheme and thought of the #eo#le setting u#on the
form of government under -hich -e e2ist$ 5tate vs$ 4astings& 19 3is$& ,+,G Attorney ;eneral e2 rel$
)ashford vs$ )arsto-& 3is$& ,!M$ B#$ ,D
The (udicial de#artment of government is res#onsible for the #lane u#on -hich the administration of
(ustice is maintained$ %ts res#onsibility in this res#ect is e2clusive$ )y committing a #ortion of the
#o-ers of sovereignty to the (udicial de#artment of our state government& under +a scheme -hich it
-as su##osed rendered it immune from embarrassment or interference by any other de#artment of
government& the courts cannot esca#e res#onsibility fir the manner in -hich the #o-ers of sovereignty
thus committed to the (udicial de#artment are e2ercised$ B#$ ,D
The relation at the bar to the courts is a #eculiar and intimate relationshi#$ The bar is an attache of the
courts$ The 8uality of (ustice dis#ense by the courts de#ends in no small degree u#on the integrity of its
bar$ An unfaithful bar may easily bring scandal and re#roach to the administration of (ustice and bring
the courts themselves into disre#ute$ B#$,D
Through all time courts have e2ercised a direct and severe su#ervision over their bars& at least in the
English s#ea*ing countries$ B#$ ,D
After e2#laining the history of the case& the Court ends thus:
/ur conclusion may be e#itomiHed as follo-s: For more than si2 centuries #rior to the ado#tion of our
Constitution& the courts of England& concededly subordinate to "arliament since the 0evolution of
1!LL& had e2ercise the right of determining -ho should be admitted to the #ractice of la-& -hich& as
-as said in Matter of the 5ergeant@s at <a-& ! )ingham@s 'e- Cases +>,& Fconstitutes the most solid of
all titles$F %f the courts and (udicial #o-er be regarded as an entity& the #o-er to determine -ho should
be admitted to #ractice la- is a constituent element of that entity$ %t may be difficult to isolate that
element and say -ith assurance that it is either a #art of the inherent #o-er of the court& or an essential
element of the (udicial #o-er e2ercised by the court& but that it is a #o-er belonging to the (udicial
entity and made of not only a sovereign institution& but made of it a se#arate inde#endent& and
coordinate branch of the government$ They too* this institution along -ith the #o-er traditionally
e2ercise to determine -ho should constitute its attorney at la-$ There is no e2#ress #rovision in the
Constitution -hich indicates an intent that this traditional #o-er of the (udicial de#artment should in
any manner be sub(ect to legislative control$ "erha#s the dominant thought of the framers of our
constitution -as to ma*e the three great de#artments of government se#arate and inde#endent of one
another$ The idea that the <egislature might embarrass the (udicial de#artment by #rescribing
inade8uate 8ualifications for attorneys at la- is inconsistent -ith the dominant #ur#ose of ma*ing the
(udicial inde#endent of the legislative de#artment& and such a #ur#ose should not be inferred in the
absence of e2#ress constitutional #rovisions$ 3hile the legislature may legislate -ith res#ect to the
8ualifications of attorneys& but is incidental merely to its general and un8uestioned #o-er to #rotect the
#ublic interest$ 3hen it does legislate a fi2ing a standard of 8ualifications re8uired of attorneys at la-
in order that #ublic interests may be #rotected& such 8ualifications do not constitute only a minimum
standard and limit the class from -hich the court must ma*e its selection$ 5uch legislative
8ualifications do not constitute the ultimate 8ualifications beyond -hich the court cannot go in fi2ing
additional 8ualifications deemed necessary by the course of the #ro#er administration of (udicial
functions$ There is no legislative #o-er to com#el courts to admit to their bars #ersons deemed by them
unfit to e2ercise the #rerogatives of an attorney at la-$ B#$ ,9D
Furthermore& it is an unla-ful attem#t to e2ercise the #o-er of a##ointment$ %t is 8uite li*ely true that
the legislature may e2ercise the #o-er of a##ointment -hen it is in #ursuance of a legislative functions$
4o-ever& the authorities are -ell=nigh unanimous that the #o-er to admit attorneys to the #ractice of
la- is a (udicial function$ %n all of the states& e2ce#t 'e- .ersey B%n re 0eisch& L> '$.$ E8$ L+& 99 A$
1+D& so far as our investigation reveals& attorneys receive their formal license to #ractice la- by their
admission as members of the bar of the court so admitting$ Cor$ .ur$ ,M+G E2 #arte 5ecombre& 19 4o-$
9&1, <$ Ed$ ,!,G E2 #arte ;arland& 3all$ >>>& 1L <$ Ed$ >!!G 0andall vs$ )righam& M 3all$ ,>& 19 <$
Ed$ +L,G 4anson vs$ ;rattan& L Ran& L>& 11, "$ !!& > <$0$A$ ,19G Danforth vs$ Egan& +> 5$ D$ >&
119 '$3$ 19+1& 1>9 Am$ 5t$ 0e#$ 19>9& +9 Ann$ Cas$ 1>$
The #o-er of admitting an attorney to #ractice having been #er#etually e2ercised by the courts& it
having been so generally held that the act of the court in admitting an attorney to #ractice is the
(udgment of the court& and an attem#t as this on the #art of the <egislature to confer such right u#on
any one being most e2ceedingly uncommon& it seems clear that the licensing of an attorney is and
al-ays has been a #urely (udicial function& no matter -here the #o-er to determine the 8ualifications
may reside$ B#$ ,1D
%n that same year of 19>+& the 5u#reme Court of Massachusetts& in ans-ering a consultation of the
5enate of that 5tate& 1L9 'E M+,& said:
%t is indis#ensible to the administration of (ustice and to inter#retation of the la-s that there be
members of the bar of sufficient ability& ade8uate learning and sound moral character$ This arises from
the need of enlightened assistance to the honest& and restraining authority over the *navish& litigant$ %t is
highly im#ortant& also that the #ublic be #rotected from incom#etent and vicious #ractitioners& -hose
o##ortunity for doing mischief is -ide$ %t -as said by CardoH& C$<$& in "eo#le e2 rel$ Rarlin vs$ Cul*in&
++ '$P$ ,!& M9& M1& 1!+ '$E$ LM& L9& !9 A$<$0$ L,1: FMembershi# in the bar is a #rivilege
burden -ith conditions$F /ne is admitted to the bar Ffor something more than #rivate gain$F 4e
becomes an Fofficer of the courtF& and &li*e the court itself& an instrument or agency to advance the end
of (ustice$ 4is coo#eration -ith the court is due F-henever (ustice -ould be im#eriled if coo#eration
-as -ithheld$F 3ithout such attorneys at la- the (udicial de#artment of government -ould be
ham#ered in the #erformance of its duties$ That has been the history of attorneys under the common
la-& both in this country and England$ Admission to #ractice as an attorney at la- is almost -ithout
e2ce#tion conceded to be a (udicial function$ "etition to that end is filed in courts& as are other
#roceedings invo*ing (udicial action$ Admission to the bar is accom#lish and made o#en and notorious
by a decision of the court entered u#on its records$ The establishment by the Constitution of the (udicial
de#artment conferred authority necessary to the e2ercise of its #o-ers as a coordinate de#artment of
government$ %t is an inherent #o-er of such a de#artment of government ultimately to determine the
8ualifications of those to be admitted to #ractice in its courts& for assisting in its -or*& and to #rotect
itself in this res#ect from the unfit& those lac*ing in sufficient learning& and those not #ossessing good
moral character$ Chief .ustice Taney stated succinctly and -ith finality in E2 #arte 5ecombe& 19 4o-$
9& 1>& 1, <$ Ed$ ,!,& F%t has been -ell settled& by the rules and #ractice of common=la- courts& that it
rests e2clusively -ith the court to determine -ho is 8ualified to become one of its officers& as an
attorney and counselor& and for -hat cause he ought to be removed$F B#$M+MD
%n the case of Day and others -ho collectively filed a #etition to secure license to #ractice the legal
#rofession by virtue of a la- of state B%n re Day& , 'E !!D& the court said in #art:
%n the case of E2 #arte ;arland& 3all& >>>& 1L <$ Ed$ >!!& the court& holding the test oath for attorneys
to be unconstitutional& e2#lained the nature of the attorney@s office as follo-s: FThey are officers of the
court& admitted as such by its order& u#on evidence of their #ossessing sufficient legal learning and fair
#rivate character$ %t has al-ays been the general #ractice in this country to obtain this evidence by an
e2amination of the #arties$ %n this court the fact of the admission of such officers in the highest court of
the states to -hich they& res#ectively& belong for& three years #receding their a##lication& is regarded as
sufficient evidence of the #ossession of the re8uisite legal learning& and the statement of counsel
moving their admission sufficient evidence that their #rivate and #rofessional character is fair$ The
order of admission is the (udgment of the court that the #arties #ossess the re8uisite 8ualifications as
attorneys and counselors& and are entitled to a##ear as such and conduct causes therein$ From its entry
the #arties become officers of the court& and are res#onsible to it for #rofessional misconduct$ They
hold their office during good behavior& and can only be de#rived of it for misconduct ascertained and
declared by the (udgment of the court after o##ortunity to be heard has been afforded$ E2 #arte
4oyfron& admission or their e2clusion is not the e2ercise of a mere ministerial #o-er$ %t is the e2ercise
of (udicial #o-er& and has been so held in numerous cases$ %t -as so held by the court of a##eals of
'e- Por* in the matter of the a##lication of Coo#er for admission$ 0e Coo#er ++ '$ P$ L1$ FAttorneys
and CounselorsF& said that court& Fare not only officers of the court& but officers -hose duties relate
almost e2clusively to #roceedings of a (udicial natureG and hence their a##ointment may& -ith #ro#riety&
be entrusted to the court& and the latter& in #erforming his duty& may very (ustly considered as engaged
in the e2ercise of their a##ro#riate (udicial functions$F B##$ !,9=!,1D$
3e 8uote from other cases& the follo-ing #ertinent #ortions:
Admission to #ractice of la- is almost -ithout e2ce#tion conceded every-here to be the e2ercise of a
(udicial function& and this o#inion need not be burdened -ith citations in this #oint$ Admission to
#ractice have also been held to be the e2ercise of one of the inherent #o-ers of the court$ E 0e )ruen&
19+ 3ash$ M+& 1M+ "ac$ 99!$
Admission to the #ractice of la- is the e2ercise of a (udicial function& and is an inherent #o-er of the
court$ E A$C$ )rydon(ac*& vs$ 5tate )ar of California& +L1 "ac$ 191LG 5ee Annotation on "o-er of
<egislature res#ecting admission to bar& !,& A$<$ 0$ 1,1+$
/n this matter there is certainly a clear distinction bet-een the functions of the (udicial and legislative
de#artments of the government$
The distinction bet-een the functions of the legislative and the (udicial de#artments is that it is the
#rovince of the legislature to establish rules that shall regulate and govern in matters of transactions
occurring subse8uent to the legislative action& -hile the (udiciary determines rights and obligations
-ith reference to transactions that are #ast or conditions that e2ist at the time of the e2ercise of (udicial
#o-er& and the distinction is a vital one and not sub(ect to alteration or change either by legislative
action or by (udicial decree$
The (udiciary cannot consent that its #rovince shall be invaded by either of the other de#artments of the
government$ E 1! C$.$5$& Constitutional <a-& #$ ++9$
%f the legislature cannot thus indirectly control the action of the courts by re8uiring of them
construction of the la- according to its o-n vie-s& it is very #lain it cannot do so directly& by settling
aside their (udgments& com#elling them to grant ne- trials& ordering the discharge of offenders& or
directing -hat #articular ste#s shall be ta*en in the #rogress of a (udicial in8uiry$ E Cooley@s
Constitutional <imitations& 19+$
%n decreeing the bar candidates -ho obtained in the bar e2aminations of 19! to 19,+& a general
average of M9 #er cent -ithout falling belo- ,9 #er cent in any sub(ect& be admitted in mass to the
#ractice of la-& the dis#uted la- is not a legislationG it is a (udgment E a (udgment revo*ing those
#romulgated by this Court during the aforecited year affecting the bar candidates concernedG and
although this Court certainly can revo*e these (udgments even no-& for (ustifiable reasons& it is no less
certain that only this Court& and not the legislative nor e2ecutive de#artment& that may be so$ Any
attem#t on the #art of any of these de#artments -ould be a clear usur#ation of its functions& as is the
case -ith the la- in 8uestion$
That the Constitution has conferred on Congress the #o-er to re#eal& alter or su##lement the rule
#romulgated by this Tribunal& concerning the admission to the #ractice of la-& is no valid argument$
5ection 1>& article V%%% of the Constitution #rovides:
5ection 1>$ The 5u#reme Court shall have the #o-er to #romulgate rules concerning #leading& #ractice&
and #rocedure in all courts& and the admission to the #ractice of la-$ 5aid rules shall be uniform for all
courts of the same grade and shall not diminish& increase or modify substantive rights$ The e2isting
la-s on #leading& #ractice and #rocedure are hereby re#ealed as statutes& and are declared 0ules of
Court& sub(ect to the #o-er of the 5u#reme Court to alter and modify the same$ The Congress shall
have the #o-er to re#eal& alter& or su##lement the rules concerning #leading& #ractice& and #rocedure&
and the admission to the #ractice of la- in the "hili##ines$ E Constitution of the "hili##ines& Art$ V%%%&
sec$ 1>$
%t -ill be noted that the Constitution has not conferred on Congress and this Tribunal e8ual
res#onsibilities concerning the admission to the #ractice of la-$ the #rimary #o-er and res#onsibility
-hich the Constitution recogniHes continue to reside in this Court$ 4ad Congress found that this Court
has not #romulgated any rule on the matter& it -ould have nothing over -hich to e2ercise the #o-er
granted to it$ Congress may re#eal& alter and su##lement the rules #romulgated by this Court& but the
authority and res#onsibility over the admission& sus#ension& disbarment and reinstatement of attorneys
at la- and their su#ervision remain vested in the 5u#reme Court$ The #o-er to re#eal& alter and
su##lement the rules does not signify nor #ermit that Congress substitute or ta*e the #lace of this
Tribunal in the e2ercise of its #rimary #o-er on the matter$ The Constitution does not say nor mean that
Congress may admit& sus#end& disbar or reinstate directly attorneys at la-& or a determinate grou# of
individuals to the #ractice of la-$ %ts #o-er is limited to re#eal& modify or su##lement the e2isting rules
on the matter& if according to its (udgment the need for a better service of the legal #rofession re8uires
it$ )ut this #o-er does not relieve this Court of its res#onsibility to admit& sus#end& disbar and reinstate
attorneys at la- and su#ervise the #ractice of the legal #rofession$
)eing coordinate and inde#endent branches& the #o-er to #romulgate and enforce rules for the
admission to the #ractice of la- and the concurrent #o-er to re#eal& alter and su##lement them may
and should be e2ercised -ith the res#ect that each o-es to the other& giving careful consideration to the
res#onsibility -hich the nature of each de#artment re8uires$ These #o-ers have e2isted together for
centuries -ithout diminution on each #artG the harmonious delimitation being found in that the
legislature may and should e2amine if the e2isting rules on the admission to the )ar res#ond to the
demands -hich #ublic interest re8uires of a )ar endo-ed -ith high virtues& culture& training and
res#onsibility$ The legislature may& by means of a##eal& amendment or su##lemental rules& fill u# any
deficiency that it may find& and the (udicial #o-er& -hich has the inherent res#onsibility for a good and
efficient administration of (ustice and the su#ervision of the #ractice of the legal #rofession& should
consider these reforms as the minimum standards for the elevation of the #rofession& and see to it that
-ith these reforms the lofty ob(ective that is desired in the e2ercise of its traditional duty of admitting&
sus#ending& disbarring and reinstating attorneys at la- is realiHed$ They are #o-ers -hich& e2ercise
-ithin their #ro#er constitutional limits& are not re#ugnant& but rather com#lementary to each other in
attaining the establishment of a )ar that -ould res#ond to the increasing and e2acting necessities of the
administration of (ustice$
The case of ;uari?a B191>D + "hil$& >M& illustrates our criterion$ ;uari?a too* e2amination and failed
by a fe- #oints to obtain the general average$ A recently enacted la- #rovided that one -ho had been
a##ointed to the #osition of Fiscal may be admitted to the #ractice of la- -ithout a #revious
e2amination$ The ;overnment a##ointed ;uari?a and he discharged the duties of Fiscal in a remote
#rovince$ This tribunal refused to give his license -ithout #revious e2aminations$ The court said:
0elying u#on the #rovisions of section + of Act 'o$ 1,9M& the a##licant in this case see*s admission to
the bar& -ithout ta*ing the #rescribed e2amination& on the ground that he holds the office of #rovincial
fiscal for the "rovince of )atanes$
5ection + of Act 'o$ 1,9M& enacted February +L& 199M& is as follo-s:
5ec$ +$ "aragra#h one of section thirteen of Act 'umbered /ne 4undred and ninety& entitled FAn Act
#roviding a Code of "rocedure in Civil Actions and 5#ecial "roceedings in the "hili##ine %slands&F is
hereby amended to read as follo-s:
1$ Those -ho have been duly licensed under the la-s and orders of the %slands under the sovereignty of
5#ain or of the :nited 5tates and are in good and regular standing as members of the bar of the
"hili##ine %slands at the time of the ado#tion of this codeG "rovided& That any #erson -ho& #rior to the
#assage of this act& or at any time thereafter& shall have held& under the authority of the :nited 5tates&
the #osition of (ustice of the 5u#reme Court& (udge of the Court of First %nstance& or (udge or associate
(udge of the Court of <and 0egistration& of the "hili##ine %slands& or the #osition of Attorney ;eneral&
5olicitor ;eneral& Assistant Attorney ;eneral& assistant attorney in the office of the Attorney ;eneral&
#rosecuting attorney for the City of Manila& city attorney of Manila& assistant city attorney of Manila&
#rovincial fiscal& attorney for the Moro "rovince& or assistant attorney for the Moro "rovince& may be
licensed to #ractice la- in the courts of the "hili##ine %slands -ithout an e2amination& u#on motion
before the 5u#reme Court and establishing such fact to the satisfaction of said court$
The records of this court disclose that on a former occasion this a##ellant too*& and failed to #ass the
#rescribed e2amination$ The re#ort of the e2amining board& dated March +>& 199M& sho-s that he
received an average of only M1 #er cent in the various branches of legal learning u#on -hich he -as
e2amined& thus falling four #oints short of the re8uired #ercentage of M,$ 3e -ould be delin8uent in the
#erformance of our duty to the #ublic and to the bar& if& in the face of this affirmative indication of the
deficiency of the a##licant in the re8uired 8ualifications of learning in the la- at the time -hen he
#resented his former a##lication for admission to the bar& -e should grant him license to #ractice la- in
the courts of these %slands& -ithout first satisfying ourselves that des#ite his failure to #ass the
e2amination on that occasion& he no- F#ossesses the necessary 8ualifications of learning and ability$F
)ut it is contented that under the #rovisions of the above=cited statute the a##licant is entitled as of
right to be admitted to the bar -ithout ta*ing the #rescribed e2amination Fu#on motion before the
5u#reme CourtF accom#anied by satisfactory #roof that he has held and no- holds the office of
#rovincial fiscal of the "rovince of )atanes$ %t is urged that having in mind the ob(ect -hich the
legislator a##arently sought to attain in enacting the above=cited amendment to the earlier statute& and
in vie- of the conte2t generally and es#ecially of the fact that the amendment -as inserted as a #roviso
in that section of the original Act -hich s#ecifically #rovides for the admission of certain candidates
-ithout e2amination$ %t is contented that this mandatory construction is im#eratively re8uired in order
to give effect to the a##arent intention of the legislator& and to the candidate@s claim de (ure to have the
#o-er e2ercised$
And after co#ying article 9 of Act of .uly 1& 199+ of the Congress of the :nited 5tates& articles +& 1!
and 1M of Act 'o$ 1>!& and articles 1> to 1! of Act 199& the Court continued:
Manifestly& the (urisdiction thus conferred u#on this court by the commission and confirmed to it by the
Act of Congress -ould be limited and restricted& and in a case such as that under consideration -holly
destroyed& by giving the -ord Fmay&F as used in the above citation from Act of Congress of .uly 1&
199+& or of any Act of Congress #rescribing& defining or limiting the #o-er conferred u#on the
commission is to that e2tent invalid and void& as transcending its rightful limits and authority$
5#ea*ing on the a##lication of the la- to those -ho -ere a##ointed to the #ositions enumerated& and
-ith #articular em#hasis in the case of ;uari?a& the Court held:
%n the various cases -herein a##lications for the admission to the bar under the #rovisions of this
statute have been considered heretofore& -e have acce#ted the fact that such a##ointments had been
made as satisfactory evidence of the 8ualifications of the a##licant$ )ut in all of those cases -e had
reason to believe that the a##licants had been #racticing attorneys #rior to the date of their
a##ointment$
%n the case under consideration& ho-ever& it affirmatively a##ears that the a##licant -as not and never
had been #racticing attorney in this or any other (urisdiction #rior to the date of his a##ointment as
#rovincial fiscal& and it further affirmatively a##ears that he -as deficient in the re8uired 8ualifications
at the time -hen he last a##lied for admission to the bar$
%n the light of this affirmative #roof of his defieciency on that occasion& -e do not thin* that his
a##ointment to the office of #rovincial fiscal is in itself satisfactory #roof if his #ossession of the
necessary 8ualifications of learning and ability$ 3e conclude therefore that this a##lication for license
to #ractice in the courts of the "hili##ines& should be denied$
%n vie-& ho-ever& of the fact that -hen he too* the e2amination he fell only four #oints short of the
necessary grade to entitle him to a license to #racticeG and in vie- also of the fact that since that time he
has held the res#onsible office of the governor of the "rovince of 5orsogon and #resumably gave
evidence of such mar*ed ability in the #erformance of the duties of that office that the Chief E2ecutive&
-ith the consent and a##roval of the "hili##ine Commission& sought to retain him in the ;overnment
service by a##ointing him to the office of #rovincial fiscal& -e thin* -e -ould be (ustified under the
above=cited #rovisions of Act 'o$ 1,9M in -aiving in his case the ordinary e2amination #rescribed by
general rule& #rovided he offers satisfactory evidence of his #roficiency in a s#ecial e2amination -hich
-ill be given him by a committee of the court u#on his a##lication therefor& -ithout #re(udice to his
right& if he desires so to do& to #resent himself at any of the ordinary e2aminations #rescribed by
general rule$ E B%n re ;uari?a& ##$ L=9$D
%t is obvious& therefore& that the ultimate #o-er to grant license for the #ractice of la- belongs
e2clusively to this Court& and the la- #assed by Congress on the matter is of #ermissive character& or as
other authorities say& merely to fi2 the minimum conditions for the license$
The la- in 8uestion& li*e those in the case of Day and Cannon& has been found also to suffer from the
fatal defect of being a class legislation& and that if it has intended to ma*e a classification& it is arbitrary
and unreasonable$
%n the case of Day& a la- enacted on February +1& 1L99 re8uired of the 5u#reme Court& until December
>1 of that year& to grant license for the #ractice of la- to those students -ho began studying before
'ovember & 1L9M& and had studied for t-o years and #resented a di#loma issued by a school of la-& or
to those -ho had studied in a la- office and -ould #ass an e2amination& or to those -ho had studied
for three years if they commenced their studies after the aforementioned date$ The 5u#reme Court
declared that this la- -as unconstitutional being& among others& a class legislation$ The Court said:
This is an a##lication to this court for admission to the bar of this state by virtue of di#lomas from la-
schools issued to the a##licants$ The act of the general assembly #assed in 1L99& under -hich the
a##lication is made& is entitled FAn act to amend section 1 of an act entitled FAn act to revise the la- in
relation to attorneys and counselors&F a##roved March +L& 1LL& in force .uly 1& 1LM$F The
amendment& so far as it a##ears in the enacting clause& consists in the addition to the section of the
follo-ing: FAnd every a##lication for a license -ho shall com#ly -ith the rules of the su#reme court in
regard to admission to the bar in force at the time such a##licant commend the study of la-& either in a
la- or office or a la- school or college& shall be granted a license under this act not-ithstanding any
subse8uent changes in said rulesF$ E %n re Day et al& , '$P$& #$ !!$
$ $ $ After said #rovision there is a double #roviso& one branch of -hich is that u# to December >1& 1L99&
this court shall grant a license of admittance to the bar to the holder of every di#loma regularly issued
by any la- school regularly organiHed under the la-s of this state& -hose regular course of la- studies
is t-o years& and re8uiring an attendance by the student of at least >! -ee*s in each of such years& and
sho-ing that the student began the study of la- #rior to 'ovember & 1L9M& and accom#anied -ith the
usual #roofs of good moral character$ The other branch of the #roviso is that any student -ho has
studied la- for t-o years in a la- office& or #art of such time in a la- office& Fand #art in the aforesaid
la- school&F and -hose course of study began #rior to 'ovember & 1L9M& shall be admitted u#on a
satisfactory e2amination by the e2amining board in the branches no- re8uired by the rules of this
court$ %f the right to admission e2ists at all& it is by virtue of the #roviso& -hich& it is claimed& confers
substantial rights and #rivileges u#on the #ersons named therein& and establishes rules of legislative
creation for their admission to the bar$ B#$ !M$D
Considering the #roviso& ho-ever& as an enactment& it is clearly a s#ecial legislation& #rohibited by the
constitution& and invalid as such$ %f the legislature had any right to admit attorneys to #ractice in the
courts and ta*e #art in the administration of (ustice& and could #rescribe the character of evidence
-hich should be received by the court as conclusive of the re8uisite learning and ability of #ersons to
#ractice la-& it could only be done by a general la-& #ersons or classes of #ersons$ Const$ art & section
+$ The right to #ractice la- is a #rivilege& and a license for that #ur#ose ma*es the holder an officer of
the court& and confers u#on him the right to a##ear for litigants& to argue causes& and to collect fees
therefor& and creates certain e2em#tions& such as from (ury services and arrest on civil #rocess -hile
attending court$ The la- conferring such #rivileges must be general in its o#eration$ 'o doubt the
legislature& in framing an enactment for that #ur#ose& may classify #ersons so long as the la-
establishing classes in general& and has some reasonable relation to the end sought$ There must be some
difference -hich furnishes a reasonable basis for different one& having no (ust relation to the sub(ect of
the legislation$ )raceville Coal Co$ vs$ "eo#le& 1M %ll$ !!& >, '$E$ !+G 0itchie vs$ "eo#le& 1,, %ll$ 9L&
9 '$E$ ,G 0ailroad Co$ vs$ Ellis& 1!, :$5$ 1,9& 1M 5u#$ Ct$ +,,$
The length of time a #hysician has #racticed& and the s*ill ac8uired by e2#erience& may furnish a basis
for classification B3illiams vs$ "eo#le 1+1 %ll$ L& %% '$E$ LL1DG but the #lace -here such #hysician has
resided and #racticed his #rofession cannot furnish such basis& and is an arbitrary discrimination&
ma*ing an enactment based u#on it void B5tate vs$ "ennyeor& !, '$E$ 11>& 1L Atl$ LMLD$ 4ere the
legislature underta*es to say -hat shall serve as a test of fitness for the #rofession of the la-& and
#lainly& any classification must have some reference to learning& character& or ability to engage in such
#ractice$ The #roviso is limited& first& to a class of #ersons -ho began the study of la- #rior to
'ovember & 1L9M$ This class is subdivided into t-o classes E First& those #resenting di#lomas issued
by any la- school of this state before December >1& 1L99G and& second& those -ho studied la- for the
#eriod of t-o years in a la- office& or #art of the time in a la- school and #art in a la- office& -ho are
to be admitted u#on e2amination in the sub(ects s#ecified in the #resent rules of this court& and as to
this latter subdivision there seems to be no limit of time for ma*ing a##lication for admission$ As to
both classes& the conditions of the rules are dis#ensed -ith& and as bet-een the t-o different conditions
and limits of time are fi2ed$ 'o course of study is #rescribed for the la- school& but a di#loma granted
u#on the com#letion of any sort of course its managers may #rescribe is made all=sufficient$ Can there
be anything -ith relation to the 8ualifications or fitness of #ersons to #ractice la- resting u#on the
mere date of 'ovember & 1L9M& -hich -ill furnish a basis of classification$ "lainly not$ Those -ho
began the study of la- 'ovember th could 8ualify themselves to #ractice in t-o years as -ell as those
-ho began on the >rd$ The classes named in the #roviso need s#end only t-o years in study& -hile
those -ho commenced the ne2t day must s#end three years& although they -ould com#lete t-o years
before the time limit$ The one -ho commenced on the >rd$ %f #ossessed of a di#loma& is to be admitted
-ithout e2amination before December >1& 1L99& and -ithout any #rescribed course of study& -hile as
to the other the #rescribed course must be #ursued& and the di#loma is utterly useless$ 5uch
classification cannot rest u#on any natural reason& or bear any (ust relation to the sub(ect sought& and
none is suggested$ The #roviso is for the sole #ur#ose of besto-ing #rivileges u#on certain defined
#ersons$ B##$ !M=!L$D
%n the case of Cannon above cited& 5tate vs$ Cannon& +9 '$3$ 1& -here the legislature attem#ted by
la- to reinstate Cannon to the #ractice of la-& the court also held -ith regards to its as#ect of being a
class legislation:
)ut the statute is invalid for another reason$ %f it be granted that the legislature has #o-er to #rescribe
ultimately and definitely the 8ualifications u#on -hich courts must admit and license those a##lying as
attorneys at la-& that #o-er can not be e2ercised in the manner here attem#ted$ That #o-er must be
e2ercised through general la-s -hich -ill a##ly to all ali*e and accord e8ual o##ortunity to all$
5#ea*ing of the right of the <egislature to e2act 8ualifications of those desiring to #ursue chosen
callings& Mr$ .ustice Field in the case of Dent$ vs$ 3est Virginia& 1+9 :$5$ 11& 1+1& 9 5$ Ct$ +>+& +>>&
>+ <$ Ed$ !+!& said: F%t is undoubtedly the right of every citiHen of the :nited 5tates to follo- any
la-ful calling& business or #rofession he may choose& sub(ect only to such restrictions as are im#osed
u#on all #ersons of li*e age& se2& and condition$F This right may in many res#ects be considered as a
distinguishing feature of our re#ublican institutions$ 4ere all vocations are all o#en to every one on li*e
conditions$ All may be #ursued as sources of livelihood& some re8uiring years of study and great
learning for their successful #rosecution$ The interest& or& as it is sometimes termed& the FestateF
ac8uired in them E that is& the right to continue their #rosecution E is often of great value to the
#ossessors and cannot be arbitrarily ta*en from them& any more than their real or #ersonal #ro#erty can
be thus ta*en$ %t is fundamental under our system of government that all similarly situated and
#ossessing e8ual 8ualifications shall en(oy e8ual o##ortunities$ Even statutes regulating the #ractice of
medicine& re8uiring medications to establish the #ossession on the #art of the a##lication of his #ro#er
8ualifications before he may be licensed to #ractice& have been challenged& and courts have seriously
considered -hether the e2em#tion from such e2aminations of those #racticing in the state at the time of
the enactment of the la- rendered such la- unconstitutional because of infringement u#on this general
#rinci#le$ 5tate vs$ Thomas Call& 1+1 '$C$ !>& +L 5$E$ ,1MG see& also& The 5tate e2 rel$ 3in*ler vs$
0osenberg& 191 3is$ 1M+& M! '$3$ >,G 5tate vs$ 3hitcom& 1++ 3is$ 119& 99 '$3$ !L$
This la- singles out Mr$ Cannon and assumes to confer u#on him the right to #ractice la- and to
constitute him an officer of this Court as a mere matter of legislative grace or favor$ %t is not material
that he had once established his right to #ractice la- and that one time he #ossessed the re8uisite
learning and other 8ualifications to entitle him to that right$ That fact in no matter affect the #o-er of
the <egislature to select from the great body of the #ublic an individual u#on -hom it -ould confer its
favors$
A statute of the state of Minnesota B<a-s 19+9& c$ +D commanded the 5u#reme Court to admit to the
#ractice of la- -ithout e2amination& all -ho had served in the military or naval forces of the :nited
5tates during the 3orld 3ar and received a honorable discharge therefrom and -ho B-ere disabled
therein or thereby -ithin the #urvie- of the Act of Congress a##roved .une Mth& 19+& *no-n as
F3orld 3ar Veteran@s Act& 19+ and -hose disability is rated at least ten #er cent thereunder at the time
of the #assage of this Act$F This Act -as held `unconstitutional on the ground that it clearly violated the
8uality clauses of the constitution of that state$ %n re A##lication of ;eorge 3$ 4um#hrey& 1ML Minn$
>>1& ++M '$3$ 1M9$
A good summary of a classification constitutionally acce#table is e2#lained in 1+ Am$ .ur$ 1,1=1,> as
follo-s:
The general rule is -ell settled by unanimity of the authorities that a classification to be valid must rest
u#on material differences bet-een the #erson included in it and those e2cluded and& furthermore& must
be based u#on substantial distinctions$ As the rule has sometimes avoided the constitutional
#rohibition& must be founded u#on #ertinent and real differences& as distinguished from irrelevant and
artificial ones$ Therefore& any la- that is made a##licable to one class of citiHens only must be based on
some substantial difference bet-een the situation of that class and other individuals to -hich it does not
a##ly and must rest on some reason on -hich it can be defended$ %n other -ords& there must be such a
difference bet-een the situation and circumstances of all the members of the class and the situation and
circumstances of all other members of the state in relation to the sub(ects of the discriminatory
legislation as #resents a (ust and natural cause for the difference made in their liabilities and burdens
and in their rights and #rivileges$ A la- is not general because it o#erates on all -ithin a clause unless
there is a substantial reason -hy it is made to o#erate on that class only& and not generally on all$ B1+
Am$ .ur$ ##$ 1,1=1,>$D
"ursuant to the la- in 8uestion& those -ho& -ithout a grade belo- ,9 #er cent in any sub(ect& have
obtained a general average of !9$, #er cent in the bar e2aminations in 19! to 19,1& M9$, #er cent in
19,+& M1$, #er cent in 19,>& and those -ill obtain M+$, #er cent in 19,& and M>$, #er cent in 19,,& -ill
be #ermitted to ta*e and subscribe the corres#onding oath of office as members of the )ar&
not-ithstanding that the rules re8uire a minimum general average of M, #er cent& -hich has been
invariably follo-ed since 19,9$ %s there any motive of the nature indicated by the abovementioned
authorities& for this classification Q %f there is none& and none has been given& then the classification is
fatally defective$
%t -as indicated that those -ho failed in 19& 191 or the years before& -ith the general average
indicated& -ere not included because the Tribunal has no record of the unsuccessful candidates of those
years$ This fact does not (ustify the une2#lained classification of unsuccessful candidates by years&
from 19!=19,1& 19,+& 19,>& 19,& 19,,$ 'either is the e2clusion of those -ho failed before said years
under the same conditions (ustified$ The fact that this Court has no record of e2aminations #rior to 19!
does not signify that no one concerned may #rove by some other means his right to an e8ual
consideration$
To defend the dis#uted la- from being declared unconstitutional on account of its retroactivity& it is
argued that it is curative& and that in such form it is constitutional$ 3hat does 0e#$ Act 9M+ intend to
cure Q /nly from 19! to 199 -ere there cases in -hich the Tribunal #ermitted admission to the bar of
candidates -ho did not obtain the general average of M, #er cent: in 19! those -ho obtained only M+
#er centG in the 19M and those -ho had !9 #er cent or moreG in 19L& M9 #er cent and in 199& M #er
centG and in 19,9 to 19,>& those -ho obtained M #er cent& -hich -as considered by the Court as
e8uivalent to M, #er cent as #rescribed by the 0ules& by reason of circumstances deemed to be
sufficiently (ustifiable$ These changes in the #assing averages during those years -ere all that could be
ob(ected to or criticiHed$ 'o-& it is desired to undo -hat had been done E cancel the license that -as
issued to those -ho did not obtain the #rescribed M, #er cent Q Certainly not$ The dis#uted la- clearly
does not #ro#ose to do so$ Concededly& it a##roves -hat has been done by this Tribunal$ 3hat
Congress lamented is that the Court did not consider !9$, #er cent obtained by those candidates -ho
failed in 19! to 19,+ as sufficient to 8ualify them to #ractice la-$ 4ence& it is the lac* of -ill or defect
of (udgment of the Court that is being cured& and to com#lete the cure of this infirmity& the effectivity of
the dis#uted la- is being e2tended u# to the years 19,>& 19, and 19,,& increasing each year the
general average by one #er cent& -ith the order that said candidates be admitted to the )ar$ This
#ur#ose& manifest in the said la-& is the best #roof that -hat the la- attem#ts to amend and correct are
not the rules #romulgated& but the -ill or (udgment of the Court& by means of sim#ly ta*ing its #lace$
This is doing directly -hat the Tribunal should have done during those years according to the (udgment
of Congress$ %n other -ords& the #o-er e2ercised -as not to re#eal& alter or su##lement the rules& -hich
continue in force$ 3hat -as done -as to sto# or sus#end them$ And this #o-er is not included in -hat
the Constitution has granted to Congress& because it falls -ithin the #o-er to a##ly the rules$ This
#o-er corres#onds to the (udiciary& to -hich such duty been confided$
Article + of the la- in 8uestion #ermits #artial #assing of e2aminations& at indefinite intervals$ The
grave defect of this system is that it does not ta*e into account that the la-s and (uris#rudence are not
stationary& and -hen a candidate finally receives his certificate& it may ha##en that the e2isting la-s
and (uris#rudence are already different& seriously affecting in this manner his usefulness$ The system
that the said la- #rescribes -as used in the first bar e2aminations of this country& but -as abandoned
for this and other disadvantages$ %n this case& ho-ever& the fatal defect is that the article is not
e2#ressed in the title -ill have tem#orary effect only from 19! to 19,,& the te2t of article + establishes
a #ermanent system for an indefinite time$ This is contrary to 5ection +1 B1D& article V% of the
Constitution& -hich vitiates and annuls article + com#letelyG and because it is inse#arable from article
1& it is obvious that its nullity affect the entire la-$
<a-s are unconstitutional on the follo-ing grounds: first& because they are not -ithin the legislative
#o-ers of Congress to enact& or Congress has e2ceeded its #o-ersG second& because they create or
establish arbitrary methods or forms that infringe constitutional #rinci#lesG and third& because their
#ur#oses or effects violate the Constitution or its basic #rinci#les$ As has already been seen& the
contested la- suffers from these fatal defects$
5ummariHing& -e are of the o#inion and hereby declare that 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ is unconstitutional
and therefore& void& and -ithout any force nor effect for the follo-ing reasons& to -it:
1$ )ecause its declared #ur#ose is to admit L19 candidates -ho failed in the bar e2aminations of 19!=
19,+& and -ho& it admits& are certainly inade8uately #re#ared to #ractice la-& as -as e2actly found by
this Court in the aforesaid years$ %t decrees the admission to the )ar of these candidates& de#riving this
Tribunal of the o##ortunity to determine if they are at #resent already #re#ared to become members of
the )ar$ %t obliges the Tribunal to #erform something contrary to reason and in an arbitrary manner$
This is a manifest encroachment on the constitutional res#onsibility of the 5u#reme Court$
+$ )ecause it is& in effect& a (udgment revo*ing the resolution of this Court on the #etitions of these L19
candidates& -ithout having e2amined their res#ective e2amination #a#ers& and although it is admitted
that this Tribunal may reconsider said resolution at any time for (ustifiable reasons& only this Court and
no other may revise and alter them$ %n attem#ting to do it directly 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ violated the
Constitution$
>$ )y the dis#uted la-& Congress has e2ceeded its legislative #o-er to re#eal& alter and su##lement the
rules on admission to the )ar$ 5uch additional or amendatory rules are& as they ought to be& intended to
regulate acts subse8uent to its #romulgation and should tend to im#rove and elevate the #ractice of la-&
and this Tribunal shall consider these rules as minimum norms to-ards that end in the admission&
sus#ension& disbarment and reinstatement of la-yers to the )ar& inasmuch as a good bar assists
immensely in the daily #erformance of (udicial functions and is essential to a -orthy administration of
(ustice$ %t is therefore the #rimary and inherent #rerogative of the 5u#reme Court to render the ultimate
decision on -ho may be admitted and may continue in the #ractice of la- according to e2isting rules$
$ The reason advanced for the #retended classification of candidates& -hich the la- ma*es& is contrary
to facts -hich are of general *no-ledge and does not (ustify the admission to the )ar of la- students
inade8uately #re#ared$ The #retended classification is arbitrary$ %t is undoubtedly a class legislation$
,$ Article + of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ is not embraced in the title of the la-& contrary to -hat the
Constitution en(oins& and being inse#arable from the #rovisions of article 1& the entire la- is void$
!$ <ac*ing in eight votes to declare the nullity of that #art of article 1 referring to the e2aminations of
19,> to 19,,& said #art of article 1& insofar as it concerns the e2aminations in those years& shall
continue in force$
0 E 5 / < : T % / '
:#on mature deliberation by this Court& after hearing and availing of the magnificent and im#assioned
discussion of the contested la- by our Chief .ustice at the o#ening and close of the debate among the
members of the Court& and after hearing the (udicious observations of t-o of our beloved colleagues
-ho since the beginning have announced their decision not to ta*e #art in voting& -e& the eight
members of the Court -ho subscribed to this decision have voted and resolved& and have decided for
the Court& and under the authority of the same:
1$ That BaD the #ortion of article 1 of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ referring to the e2aminations of 19! to
19,+& and BbD all of article + of said la- are unconstitutional and& therefore& void and -ithout force and
effect$
+$ That& for lac* of unanimity in the eight .ustices& that #art of article 1 -hich refers to the
e2aminations subse8uent to the a##roval of the la-& that is from 19,> to 19,, inclusive& is valid and
shall continue to be in force& in conformity -ith section 19& article V%% of the Constitution$
Conse8uently& B1D all the above=mentioned #etitions of the candidates -ho failed in the e2aminations of
19! to 19,+ inclusive are denied& and B+D all candidates -ho in the e2aminations of 19,> obtained a
general average of M1$, #er cent or more& -ithout having a grade belo- ,9 #er cent in any sub(ect& are
considered as having #assed& -hether they have filed #etitions for admission or not$ After this decision
has become final& they shall be #ermitted to ta*e and subscribe the corres#onding oath of office as
members of the )ar on the date or dates that the chief .ustice may set$ 5o ordered$
)engHon& Montemayor& .ugo& <abrador& "ablo& "adilla& and 0eyes& ..$& concur$
A''EC %
"ET%T%/'E05 :'DE0 0E":)<%C ACT '/$ 9M+
A resumea of #ertinent facts concerning the bar e2aminations of 19! to 19,> inclusive follo-s:
August& 19!1
)oard of E2aminers: 4on$ "edro Tuason& Chairman& "rof$ ;erardo Florendo& Atty$ )ernardino
;uerrero& Atty$ .oa8uin 0amireH& Atty$ Cris#in /ben& 4on$ .ose Teodoro& Atty$ Federico Agrava& Atty$
.ose "ereH Cardenas& and 4on$ )ienvenido A$ Tan& members$
'umber of candidates
+9!
'umber of candidates -hose grades -ere raised
1+
M>@5
!
M+@5
!
'umber of candidates -ho #assed
L,
'umber of candidates -ho failed
1+1
'umber of those affected by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+
1L
"ercentage of success
B#er centD
1$!+
"ercentage of failure
B#er centD
,L$M
"assing grade
B#er centD
M+
'ovember& 19!
)oard of E2aminers: The same as that of August& 19!& e2ce#t 4on$ .ose Teodoro -ho -as substituted
by Atty$ 4onesto R$ )ausan$
'umber of candidates
L1
'umber of candidates -hose grades -ere raised
19
BM+ #er cent and above M> #er cent ===
Minutes of March >1& 19MD
'umber of candidates -ho #assed
+9
'umber of candidates -ho failed
++L
'umber of those affected by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+
>
"ercentage of success
B#er centD
,+$+9
"ercentage of failure
B#er centD
M$L9
"assing grade
B)y resolution of the CourtD$
B#er centD
M+
/ctober& 19M
)oard of E2aminers: 4on$ Cesar )engHon& Chairman& 4on$ ;uillermo )$ ;uevara& Atty$ Antonio
Araneta& Atty$ 5imon CruH& 4on$ 5i2to de la Costa& Atty$ Celso )$ .amora& 4on$ Emilio "e?a& Atty$
Federico Agrava& Atty$ Carlos )$ 4ilado& Members$
'umber of candidates
M9
'umber of candidates -hose grades -ere raised
>
M9$,, #er cent -ith + sub(ect belo- ,9 #er cent
1
!9 #er cent
9
!L #er cent
+
'umber of candidates -ho #assed
99
'umber of candidates -ho failed
>9
'umber of those affected by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+
9M+
"ercentage of success
B#er centD
,$,9
"ercentage of failure
B#er centD
,$1
"assing grade
B#er centD
!9
Bby resolution of the CourtD$
'ote$==%n #assing the + -hose grades -ere !L$9, #er cent and !L$1 #er cent res#ectively& the Court
found out that they -ere not benefited at all by the bonus of 1+ #oints given by the E2aminer in Civil
<a-$
August& 19L
)oard of E2aminers: 4on$ Marceliano 0$ Montemayor& Chairman 4on$ <uis "$ Torres& 4on$ Feli#e
'atividad& 4on$ .ose Teodoro& 5r$& Atty$ Federico Agrava& Atty$ Macario "eralta& 5r$& 4on$ .esus ;$
)arrera& 4on$ 0afael Am#aro& Atty$ Alfonso "once Enrile& Members$
'umber of candidates
L99
'umber of candidates -hose grades -ere raised
!
M1@s
+9
M9@s
>,
'umber of candidates -ho #assed
99
'umber of candidates -ho failed
99
'umber of those affected by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+
11
"ercentage of success
B#er centD
!+$9
"ercentage of failure
B#er centD
>M$!9
"assing grade
B#er centD
M9
Bby resolution of the CourtD$
August& 199
)oard of E2aminers: 4on$ 5abino "adilla& Chairman& 4on$ Fernando .ugo& 4on$ Enri8ue Filamor& Atty$
5alvador Araneta& 4on$ "astor M$ Endencia& Atty$ Federico Agrava& 4on$ Mariano 4$ de .oya& 4on$
Feli#e 'atividad& Atty$ Emeterio )arcelon& Members$
'umber of candidates
1&+1L
'umber of candidates -hose grades -ere raised BM@sD
,,
'umber of candidates -ho #assed
!L!
'umber of candidates -ho failed
,>+
'umber of those affected by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+
1!
"ercentage of success
B#er centD
,!$+L
"ercentage of failure
B#er centD
>$M+
"assing grade
B#er centD
M
Bby resolution of the CourtD$
August& 19,9
)oard of E2aminers: 4on$ Fernando .ugo&+ Chairman& 4on$ ;uillermo )$ ;uevara& Atty$ Enri8ue
Altavas& Atty$ Marcial "$ <ichauco& Atty$ Carlos )$ 4ilado& Atty$ .$ Antonio Araneta& 4on$ Enri8ue V$
Filamor& 4on$ Francisco A$ Delgado& 4on$ Antonio 4orrilleno& Members$
'umber of candidates
1&>1!
'umber of candidates -hose grades -ere raised
>L
BThe grade of M -as raised to M, #er cent by recommendation and authority
of the e2aminer in 0emedial <a-& Atty$ Francisco DelgadoD$
'umber of candidates -ho #assed
>+
'umber of candidates -ho failed
L9
'umber of those affected by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+
+!
"ercentage of success
B#er centD
>+$1
"ercentage of failure
B#er centD
!M$L!
"assing grade
B#er centD
M,
August& 19,1
)oard of E2aminers: 4on$ ;uillermo F$ "ablo& Chairman& 4on$ "astor M$ Endencia& Atty$ Enri8ue
Altavas& 4on$ Manuel <im& 4on$ Feli#e 'atividad& 4on$ Vicente Albert& Atty$ Arturo AlafriH& 4on$
Enri8ue V$ Filamor& 4on$ Alfonso Feli2& Members$
'umber of candidates
+&9!L
'umber of candidates -hose grades -ere raised BM@sD
11+
'umber of candidates -ho #assed
1&1L9
'umber of candidates -ho failed
LM9
'umber of those affected by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+
19!
"ercentage of success
B#er centD
,M$9
"ercentage of failure
B#er centD
+$,1
"assing grade
B#er centD
M,
August& 19,+
)oard of E2aminers: 4on$ 5abino "adilla& Chairman& 4on$ "astor M$ Endencia& 4on$ Enri8ue V$
Filamor& Atty$ Francisco /rtigas& 4on$ Emilio "e?a& Atty$ Emilio "$ Virata& 4on$ Alfonso Feli2& 4on$
Feli#e 'atividad& Atty$ Macario "eralta& 5r$& Members$
'umber of candidates
+&M>L
'umber of candidates -hose grades -ere raised BM@sD
1!>
'umber of candidates -ho #assed
1&M9,
'umber of candidates -ho failed
1&9>>
'umber of those affected by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+
+!
"ercentage of success
B#er centD
!+$+M
"ercentage of failure
B#er centD
>M$M>
"assing grade
B#er centD
M,
August& 19,>
)oard of E2aminers: 4on$ Fernando .ugo& Chairman& 4on$ "astor M$ Endencia& Atty$ Enri8ue Altavas&
Atty$ Francisco /rtigas& .r$& 4on$ Emilio "e?a& Atty$ .ose 5$ de la CruH& 4on$ Alfonso Feli2& 4on$
Feli#e 'atividad& 4on$ Mariano <$ de la 0osa& Members$
'umber of candidates
+&,,,
'umber of candidates -hose grades -ere raised BM@sD
199
'umber of candidates -ho #assed
1&,M9
'umber of candidates -ho failed
9L!
'umber of those affected by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+
+L
"ercentage of success
B#er centD
!1$9
"ercentage of failure
B#er centD
>L$9!
"assing grade
B#er centD
M,
A list of #etitioners for admission to the )ar under 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+& grou#ed by the years in
-hich they too* the bar e2aminations& -ith annotations as to -ho had #resented motions for
reconsideration -hich -ere denied BM0DD& and -ho filed mere motions for reconsideration -ithout
invo*ing said la-& -hich are still #ending& follo-s:
"ET%T%/'E0 :'DE0 T4E )A0 F<:'RE05@ <A3
Civ$
<and
Merc$
%nt$
"ol$
Crim$
0em$
<eg$
;en$ Av$
M0D= 1$
Agunod& Filemon <$
!!
M1
!1
M!
L9
L>
M>
M,
M1$
M0D= +$
Cunanan& Albino
M!
M+
M
M,
M9
M9
!,
M+
M1$,
M0D= >$
Me(ia& Flaviano V$
!
!
!,
!L
L>
M
!L
L9
!9$L,
19L
M0D= $
/rlina& 5oledad 0$
M1
!L
!!
M,
!>
M,
M9
LL
!9$9
M0D= ,$
Vivero& Antonio <u$
M,
M>
M>
!,
!>
!!
!,
L9
!9$9,
M0D= !$
;atchalian& 5alud
M+
!!
M1
M,
ML
!L
!,
,9
!9$!,
199
M$
Abaya& .esus A$
!9
M9
M,
M,
M1
L9
,,
M,
M9$L
M0D= L$
Advincula& David D$
M!
L9
!+
L!
L1
M+
!9
!,
M9$,
9$
Agraviador& Alfredo <$
!>
L,
M9
MM
L9
L1
!,
L9
M1$L
19$
Alacar& "ascual C$
!1
!>
L>
M9
M1
L,
!,
L9
M+$9,
11$
Amog& "edro M$
M,
!!
M!
ML
L1
M
,,
L,
M+$+
1+$
A#olinario& Miguel 5$
M,
L
ML
ML
M9
M9
!9
M,
M1$9,
1>$
A8uino& Ma2imo ;$
L+
MM
M1
MM
M!
MM
!9
M,
M>$1,
1$
Asinas& Candido D$
M,
L>
!9
L9
L1
L>
,,
L,
M+$!,
1,$
)aldivino& .ose )$
M,
!,
M+
L+
L+
!9
!9
L9
M1$9,
1!$
)alintona& )ernardo
M,
L9
!
ML
M
!M
!,
M9
M9
1M$
)ana-a& Angel <$
ML
M9
M9
M,
L1
L>
!9
!9
M+$>
1L$
)andala& Anacleto A$
!!
L9
!!
M1
9>
M+
,,
M9
!9$!
19$
)andon& Ala-adin <$
M
M9
!9
MM
91
M>
!9
L9
M>$>,
+9$
)a8uero& )en(amin
M!
M9
!
MM
L,
M+
!,
M,
M+$,
+1$
)lanco& .ose
M,
M,
M9
M,
MM
M!
!9
99
M+$,
++$
)uenaluH& Victoriano T$
M,
M1
M+
ML
!M
L+
!9
M,
M9$L,
+>$
Canda& )en(amin 5$
M,
M+
M,
L+
M!
MM
!,
M,
M>$,,
+$
Canon& ;uillermo
MM
L!
!M
LL
M,
!9
M9
L,
M>$9
+,$
Carlos& Estela 5$
M,
L1
L1
M9
M+
M>
!,
M9
M>$L
+!$
CereHo& ;regorio /$
!9
M!
M!
M9
M1
L9
,,
L9
M9$
+M$
Clarin& Manuel <$
M,
L+
M!
L1
M>
!9
M9
M,
M>$9,
+L$
Claudo& Conrado /$
M!
!+
ML
MM
M>
M+
!9
M9
M1$
+9$
Condevillamar& Antonio V$
!L
!,
M
L9
L,
M,
!9
M,
M1$!,
M0D= >9$
Corne(o& Crisanto 0$
M+
M,
!9
L+
L>
M9
!,
L9
M>$
>1$
Corona& /lvido D$
!L
M!
M>
L1
L1
M+
!9
M,
M1$1,
>+$
DiHon& Marcial C$
M!
L!
!9
L>
M,
M
!,
L9
M>$1
>>$
Enri8ueH& Agustin "$
M,
MM
M9
L1
L1
MM
!,
L9
M>$M,
>$
Es#iritu& %rineo E$
L9
LL
!9
M,
M!
MM
!,
M,
M>$L
>,$
FernandeH& Macario .$
!>
L+
M!
M,
L1
L
!,
M,
M+$9,
>!$
;allardo& Amando C$
ML
M9
!M
MM
M!
M,
!9
!,
M9$9,
>M$
;arcia& Freidrich M$
M!
L9
!!
M,
M+
M9
!9
M,
!9$M
>L$
;arcia& .ulian <$
!
MM
!L
L+
L9
MM
!,
M,
M+$1,
>9$
;arcia& <eon Mo$
MM
L!
M1
L9
!9
L+
!,
M,
M1$L,
9$
;arcia& "edro V$
M!
L+
M>
L1
M
L>
!9
L,
M>$!
1$
;arcia& 5antiago C$
!+
91
M9
M,
M+
M,
!,
L9
M1$L
+$
;enoves& "edro
M,
L>
M9
ML
LM
M!
,,
L9
M+$M
>$
;onHales& Amado "$
M,
M1
M1
M,
L!
M,
!9
M,
M+$!,
$
;uia& /don 0$ de
MM
M!
!!
L1
M
M!
!9
M,
M9$9
,$
FernandeH& 5imeon
!+
!L
M1
L9
M
99
!,
M,
M9$L,
!$
.a*osalem& Filoteo
L+
L>
M>
L+
!1
LM
!,
M9
M>$!
M$
.esus& Feli#e D$ de
M,
L>
!M
M9
ML
L,
!9
M,
M+$,
L$
.ocom& .acobo M$
MM
MM
M
MM
M
!
,,
L,
M9$!,
9$
.uares& 'icolas
MM
L
,!
M!
M>
L+
!9
L,
M9
,9$
Ralalang& 0emigio
!,
M,
M
L9
M9
M9
!,
L,
M9$>
,1$
<ayumas& Vicente <$
!M
L
!,
M,
L9
!!
!9
L9
M9$>
,+$
<eyson& Amancio F$
!9
L>
M,
M!
L1
M,
!,
M,
M>$1,
,>$
<ibanan& Marcelino
M1
L>
!1
MM
L9
L1
!,
L,
M1$M,
,$
<im& .ose E$
MM
MM
M+
M!
M+
!
!,
M9
M1$1,
,,$
<im& .ose F$
M9
M,
!+
L>
L9
M1
!,
L9
M9$
,!$
<inao& Mariano M$
!!
L
M!
ML
L9
M,
!9
M,
M1$M,
,M$
<o#eH& Angelo "$
!M
L1
M,
M+
M9
L1
,,
L9
M1
,L$
<o#eH& ElieHar M$
MM
M,
!9
M,
MM
L,
!9
M,
M9$M
,9$
<o#eH& 'icanor 5$
M+
M1
M9
ML
MM
L
!9
M,
M1$,,
!9$
Manoleto& "roceso D$
M+
M9
!,
ML
L1
99
!9
L9
M1$9,
!1$
Mancao& Alfredo "$
!M
!
M1
L>
M!
M!
!,
L9
M9$9,
!+$
Manera& Mariano A$
M,
ML
M,
M,
!L
M9
!9
!,
M1
!>$
Mercado& Arsenio '$
!M
!
M1
L>
M!
M!
!,
L9
M9$9,
!$
Miranda& )en(amin ;$
M!
L1
!M
L+
M
MM
!,
L9
M+$,,
!,$
Manad& Andres )$
MM
M,
!L
L+
!9
M+
!,
M,
M1$1,
19L
!!$
/rosco& Casimiro "$
M+
L
!9
L1
M9
L+
!,
M,
M1$9
!M$
"adua& Manuel C$
M!
M!
!L
L9
M9
M9
,9
M,
M9$1
!L$
"alang& )asilio 5$
M1
M,
L+
M1
,,
LM
,,
M,
!9$!
!9$
"alma& Cuadrato
!+
M,
!9
9>
L9
M9
,,
L9
!9$,
M9$
"a?ganiban& .ose V$
!M
L>
!1
L1
91
M
!9
M,
M9$!
M1$
"are(a& Feli#e
!!
M1
M,
L1
!M
M
!9
M9
!L$M,
M+$
"atalin(ug& Eriberto
M>
MM
ML
M>
ML
M1
,,
M,
M1$+,
M>$
"aulin& .ose C$
!!
!9
M1
MM
L>
L+
!,
M,
M+$1
M$
"ido& 5erafin C$
M+
ML
!>
L9
M1
L,
M9
L9
M+$9,
M,$
"imentel& <uis "$
MM
M,
M!
L1
M!
!L
,,
L9
M1$!
M!$
"lantilla& 0odrigo C$
M+
ML
!L
L9
M9
L1
!,
L,
M>$,,
MM$
0egalario& )enito )$
M+
L9
!
L9
M,
L1
,,
L9
!9$,,
ML$
0obis& Casto "$
!+
MM
M
M>
!L
L9
M9
L9
M9$9
M9$
0odil& Francisco C$
!L
!9
M9
L1
M!
M,
!,
M,
M9$M,
L9$
0odrigueH& Mariano %$
L9
M,
!9
L9
M+
L9
!,
L9
M>$>,
L1$
0omero& Cris#ulo "$
ML
M,
!!
MM
M!
L>
!,
M,
M+$L,
L+$
5aeH& "orfirio D$
M,
M,
M+
L1
!9
MM
!9
M,
M1
L>$
5aliguma& Crisogono D$
M9
M9
M
ML
!9
!,
!,
M9
M1$L
L$
5amano& Fortunato A$
M,
L
M+
MM
M9
L+
!9
M,
M1$9
L,$
5antos& Faustina C$
M1
!L
!L
M!
M,
L,
,,
M,
!9$,
L!$
5antos& .osefina 0$
!L
!9
M!
M1
MM
L+
!,
M,
M+$>
LM$
5eludo& Ananias ;$
M,
L9
!9
M9
MM
L+
!,
M,
M>$+,
LL$
5emilia& 0afael %$
!L
L,
,,
L>
L9
M9
!,
L9
M1$+,
L9$
Telan& ;audencio
MM
M9
M9
M,
M9
M,
!9
M,
M9$L,
99$
Tesorero& <eocadio T$
M,
M1
!>
M,
L+
!+
!,
!>
!9$!,
91$
Torre& Valentin 5$ de la
L,
L1
M1
M!
!9
!,
,,
M9
M9$
9+$
Torres& Ariston <$
ML
M1
M+
L1
!1
L
,,
L,
M9$
9>$
Veyra& Aosimo C$ de
M9
M,
M1
M9
!,
L9
!,
L9
M9$!,
9$
Viado& .ose
!M
M9
M
M,
M,
99
,,
L9
M9$M
9,$
Villacarlos& Delfin A$
M>
LM
M1
L+
!9
M9
M,
L,
M>$L,
9!$
Villamil& <eonor 5$
M>
L1
M!
L!
L!
M>
,,
L,
M>$!
9M$
Aabala& Amando A$
M!
M9
!M
M,
M!
M!
!9
M,
M9$!
19,9
M0D=9L$
CruH& Filomeno de la
M9
M1
ML
L1
M!
M+
!
9!
M>$
99$
Es#a?ola& "ablo 5$
M1
ML
,,
M!
L,
!9
!,
9>
M9$+
199$
Foronda& Clarencio .$
!9
ML
!L
M9
L
LL
!+
9>
M1$9
191$
4echanova& Vicente
,9
M!
M,
M,
!9
!L
M,
9!
M1$>
M0D=19+$
"e?alosa& /sias 0$
L9
ML
!1
M!
!1
MM
!!
L,
M9$+
19>$
5armiento& Floro A$
!,
L!
!>
L+
L9
M+
!9
M+
M9$1,
M0D=19$
Torre& Catalino "$
M,
L,
!L
ML
!9
!M
!,
!9
M9$+,
19,$
:ngson& Fernando 5$
!1
LM
M,
M9
,M
L,
L>
L+
M+$L
19,1
19!$
Abasolo& 0omulo
MM
M9
!
!,
M!
M9
M!
!
M1$M
19M$
Adeva& Daniel ;$
M,
,9
M
!,
!9
,1
ML
!M
M9$
19L$
Aguilar& Vicente A$
M>
!>
!L
M,
M9
!9
M,
M,
M1$+,
199$
Amodia& .uan T$
M,
M!
!!
M,
M!
!9
MM
M!
M+$>,
M0D=119$
A?osa& "ablo 5$
M!
ML
!>
M,
M
!1
M,
M9
M1$!
111$
Antiola& Anastacio 0$
!L
M!
M,
M9
M1
M9
L1
!!
M>$9,
11+$
A8uino& 5$ 0ey A$
M9
M1
M1
!9
M
!+
M!
MM
M1$1
11>$
AtienHa& Manuel ;$
M1
ML
!L
L9
L!
,1
L+
M,
M>$L,
11$
Avance?a& Alfonso
M1
M1
!,
M,
M9
M+
ML
L9
M1$L
M0D=11,$
)alacuit& Camilo '$
M,
M>
M,
M9
M+
!,
M,
M!
M>$+,
11!$
)arinaga& .eremias <$
!L
!9
M>
M9
M
,9
L9
M9
M1$+
M0D=11M$
)arrientos& Ambrosio D$
M!
!9
!M
,,
M
!>
MM
!+
M9$+,
M0D=11L$
)eniteH& Tomas "$
!M
M,
M,
!9
M>
M+
M,
ML
M+$+
119$
)iason& 5i2to F$
M>
L+
!M
!,
!!
M+
MM
!L
M1$+,
M0D=1+9$
)ri?as& %sagani A$
M1
!9
M
M9
M!
,+
M9
M+
M1$9,
1+1$
)uela& Arcadio "$
M+
MM
!1
M9
M1
,L
M9
M1
!9$M,
1++$
Cabilao& <eonardo 5$
M>
,9
M,
M,
M,
!9
M1
M9
M1$+,
1+>$
Cabrera& %reneo M$
M,
!!
M9
!,
M+
L1
M9
M9
M+$
1+$
Cacacho& Emilio V$









1+,$
Calilung& 5oledad C$
!
M>
M>
L9
M>
,M
M,
,9
!9$!,
M0D=1+!$
Calimlim& .ose )$
!
M>
M>
L9
M>
,M
M,
,9
!9$!,
1+M$
Calimlim& "edro )$
!!
L+
!9
!9
!9
,+
L>
M,
M9
1+L$
Camello& 5otero 4$
M9
MM
!>
!,
M,
!!
L
!
M1$,,
1+9$
Cam#os& .uan A$
M1
LL
M9
M,
!
!9
M1
!+
M9$1,
1>9$
Castillo& Antonio del
ML
ML
M9
!9
M9
!M
!9
M!
M+$!,
M0D=1>1$
Castillo& Dominador Ad$
M,
!1
M+
M,
M
M1
!M
!!
M1$1
M0D=1>+$
Castro& .esus )$
M+
L!
M+
M,
!,
M,
M!
M1
M+$L,
1>>$
Casuga& )ienvenido )$
M,
M+
M+
M9
!9
!1
M,
!9
M9$9,
1>$
Cabangbang& 5antiago )$
MM
!M
!1
L9
M>
,9
L>
M!
M+$+
1>,$
CruH& Federico 5$
!9
M
M,
M,
!L
!,
M!
M9
M1$!,
1>!$
Dacanay& Eufemio "$
M9
M>
!+
M,
M+
!9
L,
M1
M+$9,
1>M$
Deysolong& Felisberto
!!
!+
M+
M,
M9
!+
L>
!+
M9$L,
M0D=1>L$
Dimaano& .r$& .ose '$
ML
M9
!>
M,
M>
M,
L1
,9
M>$,
1>9$
Es#inosa& Domingo <$
ML
!>
,L
M9
M9
!M
LM
!>
M1$!
M0D=19$
Farol& Evencia C$
L9
ML
!!
M,
L1
M+
!+
M>
M+$+,
11$
Feli2& Conrado 5$
M1
M1
M,
!,
M9
,L
M,
!9
M9$M,
1+$
Fernan& "ablo <$
!M
LL
!!
L,
M>
!L
ML
M,
M+$>,
1>$
;andioco& 5alvador ;$
!
,L
!!
!,
M!
M9
L9
M,
M+$1
1$
;astardo& Cris#in )$
M9
!9
!L
M,
ML
!!
L!
M+
M>$9
1,$
;enson& Angelo )$
M,
,M
M>
!,
!M
,
ML
,!
!9$,,
1!$
;uiani& ;uinald M$
!L
!9
M,
!,
M
!M
M,
MM
M1$,
1M$
;uina& ;raciano "$
!!
!9
!M
!9
ML
,+
L>
!1
!9$!
M0D=1L$
4omeres& "ra2edes "$
M
M
M,
M,
M1
!9
M,
M1
M>$>,
19$
%barra& Venancio M$
!9
M,
M
M9
M
M9
L9
M,
M1$9
1,9$
%m#erial& Monico <$
M+
ML
M,
M,
M+
,!
L+
MM
M>$M
M0D=1,1$
%basco& .r$& Emiliano M$
M1
M9
!>
L,
M1
!9
L,
,>
M9$L,
1,+$
%nandan& Fortunato C$
MM
MM
!M
,>
M>
M,
M9
,M
M+$,
1,>$
.imeneH& Florencio C$
M,
M9
M9
M,
M+
!1
M,
ML
M+$9,
1,$
Rintanar& 3oodro- M$
M9
L>
M+
!,
M!
M>
M,
!9
M+$9,
1,,$
<anguido& Cesar V$
!>
M1
!>
L,
M9
!1
L,
M9
M9$,,
1,!$
<avilles& Cesar <$
!1
L9
M,
,,
M>
!>
M,
ML
M9$,,
1,M$
<lenos& Francisco :$
!
M9
!,
!9
M+
!,
9+
M,
M1$M,
1,L$
<eon& Marcelo D$ de
!>
M>
!9
L,
M,
M,
99
M9
M+$M,
1,9$
<lanto& "riscilla
M+
!L
!9
!,
M!
!M
L
!L
M1$>,
1!9$
Machachor& /scar
!L
,9
ML
M9
!M
,M
M,
M,
M9$1,
M0D=1!1$
Magsino& Encarnacion
MM
!!
M9
M9
M!
M1
M,
!1
M+$M,
M0D=1!+$
Maligaya& Demetrio M$
M9
!1
M,
!,
M,
,9
91
,1
M+$>
1!>$
Manio& ;regorio
!M
!M
!9
L9
M1
!M
M,
M,
M9$!,
1!$
"uHon& Eduardo 5$
M+
L+
!9
!9
!9
M9
!L
M+
!+$9,
M0D=1!,$
Marcial& Meynardo 0$
!!
M,
M
M9
M,
!M
L1
M,
M>$1,
1!!$
Martin& )en(amin 5$
!L
M+
!>
M,
!9
!>
L
!+
M9$1
M0D=1!M$
Monterroyo& Catalina 5$
M9
L9
M,
L9
M!
!!
L+
,1
M>$9,
M0D=1!L$
Montero& <eodegario C$
M>
!M
!!
L9
L1
!,
L1
M,
M>$M,
1!9$
MonHon& Candido T$
M9
M+
M
M,
!M
M9
MM
!9
M+$9,
1M9$
'atividad& Alberto M$
M>
M9
!L
!,
M>
!9
M,
M9
M+$+
M0D=1M1$
'avallo& Ca#istrano C$
M9
M+
!L
L,
L1
!!
M1
M
M+$1
1M+$
'isce& Camilo A$
!!
!!
M,
!,
M9
!L
L,
!+
M>$,
M0D=1M>$
/cam#o& Antonio F$ de
M,
L1
M!
!,
M
!M
M,
!9
M>$M,
1M$
/laviar& .ose /$
M+
M9
!9
,,
!!
M9
MM
M,
M9$,
M0D=1M,$
"ereH& Cesario A$
M,
M!
!!
L9
M+
!>
L+
!9
M+$9,
1M!$
"ogado& Causin /$
M9
!!
!,
M9
M,
!
M,
M9
!9$9,
1MM$
0amos=)almori& Manuela
M,
M>
!+
!,
ML
,9
M,
!!
M9$+
1ML$
0ecinto& %reneo %$
M>
M!
!L
M,
M
!L
L9
,>
M+$>
M0D=1M9$
0edor& Francisco R$
!+
MM
M>
M,
!9
!
M!
!9
M9
M0D=1L9$
0egis& Deogracias A$
M!
M
!L
!,
!,
!,
LL
M,
M>$>,
1L1$
0igor& Estelita C$
!M
ML
!1
L9
M1
MM
M9
!,
M9$9
M0D=1L+$
0imorin=;ordo& Estela
M9
M+
!+
!9
LL
!!
!M
M9
M9$1,
1L>$
0osario& "risco del
M9
!
M9
M9
M+
M>
L,
,M
M+$!,
1L$
0osario& Vicente D$ del
M,
91
!,
M,
!L
!L
M9
!+
M+$+
1L,$
5aavedra& Feli#e
M>
L9
!>
M,
M!
M>
!L
!+
M9$>,
1L!$
5alaHar& Alfredo '$
!!
M+
M>
M,
!M
!L
MM
!9
M9$L,
1LM$
5alem& 0omulo 0$
MM
L1
M+
!,
M>
!9
M!
M,
M>
1LL$
FoH& .ulita A$
M,
M+
M,
M,
!,
M9
M!
!
M+$,
1L9$
5anta Ana& Candido T$
MM
!9
!,
M,
L1
M,
M9
M,
M>
199$
5antos& A8uilino
M+
!!
!9
!,
!L
M9
L1
M1
M1$M
191$
5antos& Valeriano V$
M!
M+
M,
M,
!L
!+
M!
M9
M>$1
19+$
5uico& 5amuel
M>
M9
M+
M,
M1
,9
L
!,
M>$>
19>$
5uson& Teodorico
M
!L
!!
L9
!!
,9
M9
!M
M9$>,
19$
Tado& Florentino "$
!
M!
!M
!,
M!
M+
M!
,>
!9$M
19,$
Ta#ayan& Domingo A$
!9
M+
!9
M9
M!
M>
L+
M9
M>$M,
M0D=19!$
Tiausas& Miguel V$
!M
!9
M1
M,
M9
!M
L
!9
M+$M
19M$
Torres& Carlos "$
!L
M1
M1
M9
M9
!>
L+
M1
M1$!
19L$
Tria& 4i#olito
!9
M+
M,
!9
!9
,
ML
!!
M9$9,
199$
Velasco& Avelino A$
!,
M+
M,
M,
M1
!M
ML
M!
M+$1
+99$
Villa& Francisco C$
!,
L9
M>
M,
!L
M9
!,
M,
M9$+
+91$
VillagonHalo& .ob 0$
ML
!M
M
!,
M+
,1
!9
M1
M9$+,
+9+$
Villarama& .r$& "edro
M,
M
M,
,,
M,
!!
!M
M,
M1$,
19,+
+9>$
Abacon& "ablo
M,
M+
ML
L1
ML
M+
!
,,
M+$M
M0"=+9$
Abad& Aga#ito
M>
M!
M>
L,
M,
!>
!+
M,
M9$9,
M0"=+9,$
Abella& <udovico )$
M9
L1
M!
L1
M9
!!
MM
,L
M+$M
M0"=+9!$
Abellera& ;eronimo F$
M,
M9
M9
LM
M!
,1
!>
M9
M1$M
M0"=+9M$
Abeno(ar& Aga#ito '$
M1
M+
ML
L
M9
M,
!9
M9
M+$9
+9L$
Alandy& Doroteo 0$
!
L>
9>
91
!L
,9
!9
!9
M1$+
+99$
Alano& Fabian T$
M9
L>
!1
L>
M+
LM
M+
M9
M1$9
M0"=+19$
Alcantara& "ablo V$
M1
M9
L9
L1
M>
M9
M+
!+
M>$!,
+11$
Arcangel& Agustin Ag$
M,
L,
M1
M>
M!
!,
!L
!,
M1$L,
+1+$
Acosta& Dionisio '$
M,
L1
ML
LM
,!
!,
MM
M9
M+$L
M0"=+1>$
Abinguna& Aga#ito C$
!!
L,
L9
L
M,
,L
M!
M,
M>$!,
+1$
Adove& 'ehemias C$
M!
L!
ML
MM
!!
ML
!9
!+
M>$,,
+1,$
Adrias& %nocencio C$
M,
L>
!1
LL
M!
!M
M9
M,
M>$
+1!$
Aglugub& Andres 0$
M,
L>
M>
LL
M+
!+
M+
!+
M+$!,
+1M$
Andrada& Mariano <$
M!
L,
!!
LM
!>
MM
M,
MM
M>$
M0"=+1L$
Almeda& 5erafin V$
M+
M+
M,
L1
!1
!M
M>
!,
M9$M,
+19$
Almonte="eralta& Felicidad
M>
M1
M+
91
M,
!M
!,
,>
M9$M
M0"=++9$
Amodia& .uan T$
M,
M9
!L
L,
!+
!
M,
ML
M1$
M0"=++1$
Antonio& Felino A$
M1
M!
L1
L>
M9
,+
M+
M9
M>$>
M0"=+++$
Antonio& .ose 5$
M,
9+
99
!L
!,
!
!L
!9
M>$M,
++>$
A?onuevo& 0amos )$
M1
LM
ML
L1
!
!>
M
M!
M+$M
++$
A8uino& 5$ 0ey A$
!M
MM
,M
ML
!9
M9
!9
L9
!M$M
++,$
Arteche& Filomeno D$
ML
L>
,9
L9
M!
MM
M9
M9
M9$L
M0"=++!$
Arribas& %saac M$
M,
ML
M9
L1
M>
M9
!M
ML
M+$+
M0"=++M$
AHucena& Ceferino D$
M+
!M
ML
L9
M+
!M
MM
!,
M>$9,
++L$
AtienHa& 0icardo
M+
LM
M9
M9
!!
,,
M,
M,
M9$L,
++9$
)alacuit& Camilo '$
M,
ML
L9
M,
M9
,
!!
M,
M>$>
M0"=+>9$
)aclig& Cayetano 5$
MM
L
L>
L9
!9
M9
!1
!,
M>
+>1$
)alcita& /scar C$
M,
MM
M9
99
!
!9
!M
,9
M9$!,
+>+$
)arilea& Dominador A$
M1
!M
L+
MM
!
!1
!,
L9
M9$,
M0"=+>>$
)anta& .ose P$
M,
L9
MM
L1
M,
!>
M1
M,
M>$9,
M0"=+>$
)arrientos& Ambrosio D$
M!
M9
!M
L9
!M
!,
M9
L1
M9$M
+>,$
)atucan& .ose M$
!!
M!
ML
LL
!+
M!
!M
ML
M1$+
+>!$
)autista& Atilano C$
M9
L+
L
L,
,L
!1
M1
!+
M1$+,
+>M$
)autista& Celso .$
M1
!L
!>
LM
L9
!M
L9
M9
M+$M,
+>L$
)elderon& .ose
M!
L1
M!
9+
M9
!!
!M
!+
M+$!,
M0"=+>9$
)elo& Victor )$
M!
MM
!
M>
M,
M1
M!
M!
M+$L,
M0"=+9$
)e(ec& Conceso D$
M9
L9
M>
L+
!>
MM
M,
,9
M>$1,
M0"=+1$
)eltran& ;ervasio M$
M+
M,
L1
M>
M,
,M
M,
L9
M>$9,
M0"=++$
)enao(an& 0obustiano /$
M
L
MM
L
M,
!>
!L
!+
M+$L,
M0"=+>$
)eri?a& 0oger C$
M9
L9
M9
M9
!L
M+
!
ML
M1$L,
M0"=+$
)ihis& Marcelo M$
M,
L!
!,
9+
!
!
L
M,
M>$,
M0"=+,$
)inaoro& Vicente M$
M>
!9
ML
L>
M>
,9
M9
L+
M+$M,
M0"=+!$
)obila& 0osalio )$
M!
L!
M!
L>
!L
,9
M1
ML
M>$9,
+M$
)uenafe& Avelina 0$
ML
L9
M,
M,
M9
,,
M+
L9
M+$M,
+L$
)ueno& Anastacio F$
M>
ML
M1
ML
M1
!M
M1
!9
M1$1,
+9$
)orres& Ma2imino <$
!M
L,
!+
91
M+
!>
M!
L9
M9$9
M0"=+,9$
Cabegin& Cesar V$
M+
M1
M!
M,
M
M9
M1
!9
M+$+
M0"=+,1$
Cabello& Melecio F$
M+
ML
ML
L9
,L
M9
!M
M1
M9$,
M0"=+,+$
Cabrera& %rineo M$
M9
LL
,>
91
M1
L,
M,
M!
M>$>
+,>$
Cabreros& "aulino '$
M1
M9
L>
L
!9
!+
M1
,9
M9$L,
+,$
Calayag& Florentino 0$
!9
M9
!!
LL
!9
M,
!L
M!
M9$!
M0"=+,,$
CalHada& Cesar de la
M!
M+
L9
!M
!+
M1
!!
!+
M9$L,
+,!$
Canabal& %sabel
M9
L+
L1
MM
ML
,1
M,
M,
M>$M
M0"=+,M$
Cabugao& "ablo '$
M!
LM
!9
L9
,L
!
ML
M,
M1$L
+,L$
Cala?gi& Mateo C$
M>
9>
M1
LM
M9
!!
!9
!+
M1$L
+,9$
Canda& )en(amin 5$
M+
M1
MM
99
!+
M,
!!
L+
M1$9,
+!9$
Cantoria& Eulogio
M1
L9
M1
L9
M9
,,
M+
M,
M1
+!1$
Ca#acio& .r$& Conrado
!M
ML
M1
99
!,
M,
M+
!9
M9$!,
+!+$
Ca#itulo& Ale(andro "$
M,
M9
,>
LM
ML
!>
M!
91
M1$+
M0"=+!>$
Calu#itan& .r$& Alfredo
M,
9>
L1
M!
!
M,
!L
,!
M>$1,
M0"=+!$
Caluya& Arsenio V$
M,
L!
M9
LM
MM
,+
MM
L+
M>$9
M0"=+!,$
Cam#anilla& Mariano )$
L9
M,
ML
MM
M>
M1
!>
M!
M>$!,
M0"=+!!$
Cam#os& .uan A$
!!
L,
L>
L
!M
!1
L9
,M
M>$+,
+!M$
Cardoso& Angelita ;$
ML
M1
M>
M!
M9
,!
!9
!9
M1$L
+!L$
Cartagena& 4erminio 0$
M1
M+
!,
L9
!
M>
L9
M9
M1$!,
M0"=+!9$
Castro& Daniel T$
!,
M,
MM
M!
L,
!9
M,
!9
M>$1,
+M9$
Cauntay& ;audencio V$
M9
ML
M+
M>
MM
!9
!
L9
M1$+
+M1$
Castro& "edro <$ de
M9
!L
!9
LM
M!
M,
M+
M9
M>$>,
+M+$
Cerio& .uan A$
M,
L+
M,
L!
!9
,
M!
M,
M1$M,
+M>$
Colorado& Alfonso 0$
!L
M,
L9
M
MM
!!
!M
L9
M+$!
+M$
ChaveH& Doroteo M$
M>
!,
M9
L
M>
!9
!!
L
M>$1
+M,$
ChaveH& 4onorato A$
MM
M!
M9
L!
M
,>
M1
M,
M>$!,
M0"=+M!$
Cobangbang& /rlando )$
!9
L1
M
L+
M!
!1
ML
L9
M>$L,
+MM$
CorteH& Armando 0$
ML
!9
LL
L!
!9
!!
!9
!
M>$1
+ML$
Crisostomo& .esus <$
M!
LM
M
M!
!+
,,
M!
!!
M1$,
M0"=+M9$
Corne(o& Crisanto 0$
!L
LM
ML
L!
M9
,9
L9
!9
M>$M
M0"=+L9$
CruH& 0aymundo
M,
L1
M9
L,
M+
,M
!L
M,
M+$9,
M0"=+L1$
Cunanan& .ose C$
ML
9+
!>
L>
M!
M+
!L
!,
M+$
+L+$
Cunanan& 5alvador F$
M9
L+
!
9+
!M
M,
M>
M!
M1$,
+L>$
Cimafranca& Agustin )$
M1
M!
M!
L9
M9
M1
M,
M1
M>$>,
+L$
Crisol& ;etulio 0$
M9
91
ML
L,
!L
,,
M1
,9
M9$L
M0"=+L,$
Dusi& Felicisimo 0$
M!
L+
!9
L+
!!
!+
L9
M1
M+$L,
M0"=+L!$
Datu& Alfredo .$
M9
M,
M+
L!
L9
,,
!L
M9
M1$,
+LM$
Dacuma& <uis )$
M1
!M
LM
L>
M1
,9
!,
M9
M1$+,
M0"=+LL$
Degamo& "edro 0$
M>
L9
L+
M
L9
!M
!M
,M
M>$!,
+L9$
Delgado& Vicente '$
M9
L
L+
L
MM
,+
M>
,9
M+$!,
M0"=+99$
DiolaHo& Ernesto A$
M,
L>
L!
M>
,
,
M,
M,
M+$+,
+91$
Dionisio& .r$& ;uillermo
M>
L
!
L9
M1
ML
M,
!!
M+$L
M0"=+9+$
Dichoso& Alberto M$
M1
MM
M1
L1
!9
M,
L9
M9
M>$!,
M0"=+9>$
Di#asu#il& Claudio 0$
M9
M!
L+
M>
M9
M9
M+
,!
M>$9
M0"=+9$
Delgado& Abner
M,
L
!>
!M
!
!9
M9
M+
!L$>,
M0"=+9,$
Domingo& Dominador T$
M9
!9
L1
L+
!L
!>
M1
M,
M+$+
+9!$
Ducusin& Aga#ito )$
M9
ML
,>
LL
M,
MM
!+
M!
!L$9,
M0"=+9M$
Du8ue& Antonio 5$
M,
MM
ML
L!
M!
M+
!
M,
M>$9
+9L$
Du8ue& Castulo
M,
L9
M>
L>
!!
!M
!,
!!
M9$!,
+99$
Ebbah& "ercival )$
M9
L9
L,
M!
!!
!>
M!
M,
M>$9,
>99$
Edisa& 5ul#icio
!,
MM
M,
L9
M,
!+
M,
!,
M+
>91$
Edradan& 0osa C$
M9
M,
L
L
M1
,9
!9
L!
M>$
M0"=>9+$
Enage& .acinto '$
!!
M9
LL
9>
M+
!M
!,
M,
M>$+
M0"=>9>$
Encarnacion& Alfonso )$
M,
L!
M>
L1
!>
MM
!9
M,
M+$!,
>9$
Encarnacion& Cesar
!,
ML
,L
!L
!!
!
M,
ML
!M$1
>9,$
Estoista& Agustin A$
ML
M!
M
L!
,L
!M
M9
M!
M1$M
M0"=>9!$
Fabros& .ose )$
!!
M,
L9
L+
L9
M1
!M
M9
M>$9,
M0"=>9M$
Fa(ardo& )albino "$
MM
!9
L+
L>
!,
!9
M,
M,
M>$9
>9L$
Fa(ardo& ;enaro "$
M9
M9
MM
M9
M9
,9
M>
M,
M+$,
>99$
Evangelista& Felicidad "$
M,
M,
M+
LM
!>
!>
MM
M9
M+$1,
>19$
Familara& 0aymundo A$
!L
M,
LM
L>
!
!,
!L
!,
M1$L,
>11$
Fari?as& Dionisio
M9
ML
L9
!!
!,
M,
M9
,9
M+$M,
>1+$
Favila& 4ilario )$
M1
L
M
M9
M,
!M
M>
,9
M+$+
M0"=>1>$
Feliciano& Alberto %$
M1
!9
M9
L,
!9
L1
M+
M9
M+$+,
M0"=>1$
Fernando& <o#e F$
M>
MM
L!
M9
M9
M!
!
,9
M>
M0"=>1,$
Flores& Dionisio 5$
ML
M+
MM
L>
!M
!9
!L
M>
M+$9,
M0"=>1!$
Fortich& )en(amin )$
M9
L+
M9
M9
ML
!,
!
M,
M9$>,
M0"=>1M$
Fuente& .ose 5$ de la
M!
LL
M+
M
!9
M1
M9
M9
M>$,,
>1L$
Fohmantes& 'aHario 5$
M+
M9
M1
MM
!L
!1
M!
!9
M9$9
M0"=>19$
Fuggan& <orenHo )$
M!
L1
M
!9
M1
M1
M>
!9
M+$L,
>+9$
;abuya& .esus 5$
M9
L>
L+
L>
M9
!>
M,
!,
M>$M,
>+1$
;alang& Victor '$
!9
L>
L
M!
M9
,M
M1
!9
M1$9,
>++$
;aerlan& Manuel <$
M>
LM
MM
99
!M
!1
M+
M,
M>$1,
>+>$
;alem& 'estor 0$
M+
M9
L!
ML
!9
!1
M,
M9
M>$9,
>+$
;allardo& .ose "e )$
M,
LL
M,
M,
!>
M9
M9
!,
M1$L,
M0"=>+,$
;allos& Cirilo )$
M9
ML
L
91
L9
,1
!,
M9
M+$L,
>+!$
;alindo& Eulalio D$
M9
L9
LM
!,
ML
M1
!+
!+
M>$
>+M$
;alman& "atrocinio ;$
M+
M+
L9
L,
M1
,!
M9
,>
M1$1,
>+L$
;amalinda& Carlos 5$
M!
M9
L1
L!
!M
!>
!9
,,
M+$,,
>+9$
;amboa& Antonio ;$
M1
!M
M9
M+
M!
!9
M,
!L
M9$9,
>>9$
;annod& .ose A$
!9
L9
M,
L1
!L
!+
M>
!L
M1$+,
M0"=>>1$
;arcia& Matias '$
!M
ML
M
99
M9
,9
M!
!,
M+$L
M0"=>>+$
;anete& Carmelo
M,
LM
MM
L+
M
,M
!L
L1
M>$>
>>>$
;ilbang& ;audioso 0$
M,
!M
L9
L+
!M
,M
!
M9
M9$,
>>$
;ofredo& Claro C$
!L
ML
M+
L!
ML
,+
M9
M!
M9$9
>>,$
;omeH& .ose 5$
M1
M!
M1
L1
M!
!>
!9
!+
M9$L,
M0"=>>!$
;osiaoco& <orenHo V$
!L
9>
L,
ML
!
!9
M9
,
M+$>,
M0"=>>M$
;onHales& 0afael C$
MM
M,
M1
L9
,,
M9
M9
!9
M9$9,
M0"=>>L$
;racia& Eulalia <$ de
!!
!L
99
L
MM
,9
!9
!,
M>$>
>>9$
;rageda& .ose M$ A$
M9
L,
M+
!M
M9
!9
M>
M>
M9$M,
>9$
;uHman& .uan de
M,
L!
!9
L
!
M9
M,
M!
M>$!
M0"=>1$
;uHman& Mateo de
M!
M9
M9
M>
M+
!9
!L
L9
M>$9
>+$
;uHman& 5alvador )$
M1
!1
M
M+
!1
!!
ML
M,
M9$M,
>>$
;uHman& 5alvador T$ de
M,
L
!
L1
M
!1
ML
,L
M1$M,
>$
4abelito& ;eronimo E$
M1
M!
M1
LM
M>
!9
!M
,,
!9$!,
>,$
4edriana& 'aterno ;$
M,
!L
L
M!
!!
,L
M!
!9
M+$9
>!$
4ernandeH& Kuintin )$
!M
M,
M+
L1
M+
M+
!!
M!
M9$!
19,+
>M$
4omeres& Agustin 0$
M>
L
!,
L!
M9
MM
!>
M!
M9$M
>L$
%nes& <eonilo F$
!,
LL
M1
LL
MM
M>
!1
M9
M9$,,
>9$
.amer& Ali#io 5$
!L
M,
L>
L9
L9
!1
!,
,9
M+
M0"=>,9$
%basco& .r$& Emiliano M$
M,
!,
!L
L,
M!
M9
L>
,
M>$L
M0"=>,1$
.ardinico& .r$& Emilio
M>
L!
M+
ML
L+
!M
!M
!
M+$L
M0"=>,+$
.aen& .ustiniano F$
M!
M,
ML
L
M1
!!
M9
MM
M>$L,
>,>$
.aring& Antonio 5$
M+
MM
M9
M9
M+
,M
M1
,9
M9$M,
M0"=>,$
.avier& A8uilino M$
M,
L
M9
ML
MM
!1
!!
!!
M>$9,
>,,$
.omuad& Francisco
M,
M,
M+
LL
ML
,L
M!
>
M+$
M0"=>,!$
.ose& 'estor <$
ML
!1
!
M>
!L
M!
!
L9
!9$M
>,M$
<a K& .ose M$
M,
M1
M,
M+
M9
!M
L1
,9
M>$,
>,L$
<eon& )rigido C$ de
!M
M,
ML
91
ML
,1
M+
L9
M+$,,
>,9$
<eones& Constante )$
!L
L1
M9
L
M>
!9
MM
!9
M>
>!9$
<iboro& 4oracio T$
M+
!9
L9
LM
M>
!+
M9
!1
M+$
>!1$
<lanera& Cesar <$
MM
L1
L9
ML
!
,9
M,
!>
M>
>!+$
<omontod& .ose "$
M,
M!
!9
M9
M>
M!
M
M,
M>$+
>!>$
<una& <ucito
M9
M,
!9
L>
,9
,>
M
M,
!L$
M0"=>!$
<uH& <auro <$
M!
99
ML
LL
!
,L
M,
MM
M>$9,
M0"=>!,$
Macasaet& Tomas 5$
M>
L1
M+
L>
!!
M,
M+
M9
M+$,
>!!$
Magbiray& ;odofredo V$
L9
!M
L
M!
M9
!+
!,
!L
M>$9,
>!M$
Ma(arais& 0odolfo "$
M9
!+
!
L+
LL
M,
M1
M9
M+$L,
M0"=>!L$
Ma*abenta& Eduardo
M,
99
MM
L>
,9
M1
M+
ML
M>$>
M0"=>!9$
Mala#it& .ustiniano 5$
M
L>
M
L9
,L
!9
M+
M!
M1$1
>M9$
Maloles& %luminado M$
M9
LM
M>
M!
MM
,9
M!
M!
M+$>
>M1$
Mani8uis& Daniel 0$
M,
L9
M>
91
!9
M1
!,
M9
M+$1
>M+$
Mara?a& Arsenio
!,
M9
!9
M+
M>
,1
M,
L!
!M$9
>M>$
Marasigan& 'a#oleon
M,
M1
L>
M,
!9
!+
!9
M9
M+$M,
M0"=>M$
Marco& .aime "$
M,
!M
M
M!
!
M,
M,
,M
M1$9
M0"=>M,$
Martir& /smundo "$
M9
L!
M!
ML
M+
M1
M,
,>
M+$9,
M0"=>M!$
Masancay& Amando E$
M>
LM
M,
MM
M+
,9
ML
L9
M>$+
M0"=>MM$
Mati=ong& %gnacio T$
!+
LM
M+
M9
M>
M!
!9
MM
M1$>
>ML$
Mara& ;uillermo <$
M9
ML
ML
L9
M,
!M
!!
!,
M+$>,
M0"=>M9$
Mercado& Feli#e A$
M>
MM
L+
L+
ML
,+
!9
L,
M>$9
M0"=>L9$
Miculob& Eugenio "$
M9
L+
M>
L!
MM
,+
M9
!,
M+$L
>L1$
Mison& 0afael M$ .r$&
M9
ML
M>
M,
M1
!L
!9
,>
M1$9,
M0"=>L+$
Mon#onbanua& Antonio D$
M9
M9
!L
LL
!
ML
!9
L>
M>$1
M0"=>L>$
Montero& <eodegario C$
M+
L9
!9
L9
M9
!L
M9
M,
M+$1,
>L$
Morada& 5ervillano 5$
M,
M!
!M
M1
!,
!!
M,
M!
M9$9
>L,$
Mocorro& ;eneroso
ML
L
ML
L
!9
M>
!L
M9
M>
M0"=>L!$
Mos8uera& Estanislao <$
M,
ML
M,
L,
M+
,,
MM
!!
M>$1,
>LM$
Motus& 0odentor "$
L9
ML
M9
9
M+
M,
M9
,M
M>$M,
>LL$
Macario& "edro 0$
M9
!M
M
L!
ML
!>
M+
!!
M+$1,
M0"=>L9$
'adela& ;eredion T$
M+
!
!
L1
M>
,9
M,
M,
!9$1,
M0"=>99$
'aHareno& 0omeo "$
!M
M9
M1
M!
M!
M9
M,
,M
M+$9,
>91$
'ieto& )enedicto 5$
!9
M9
MM
MM
M+
!+
M!
M!
M+$9
M0"=>9+$
'oguera& 0aymundo
M1
L!
L1
L9
M>
,!
M+
M9
M>$1,
M0"=>9>$
'odado& Domiciano 0$
M9
M9
!9
M>
,M
>M
!
M+
!>$!
>9$
'ono& "acifico ;$
!M
MM
ML
!M
M,
,9
M1
M!
M1$>,
M0"=>9,$
'uval& Manuel 0$
ML
M+
!M
99
M+
!L
ML
!M
M>$!,
>9!$
/cam#o& Augusto
M,
99
MM
M+
!9
,,
!,
!M
!9$M
>9M$
/liveros& Amado A$
M+
M,
!L
M+
L
,9
M,
M9
M1$9
>9L$
/#i?a& .r$& "edro
M!
MM
M
!M
M>
!!
!L
M9
M1$L,
M0"=>99$
/laviar& .ose /$
M9
!+
L,
L1
M
,9
!L
M9
M1$L
M0"=99$
/landesca& "er /$
M9
91
M!
LM
M+
!!
M9
M9
M>$,
91$
/rden& A#olonio .$
M+
!,
L
L!
!!
,9
M+
!L
M1$,
9+$
/rtiH& Melencio T$
M1
M,
ML
L1
!!
!M
M9
ML
M+$1
M0"=9>$
"ablo& Fedelino 5$
M+
!
M!
L!
M+
!1
M!
M,
M+$9,
9$
"acifico& Vicente V$
M!
M9
!9
L9
M!
,+
M+
L9
M1$9,
M0"=9,$
"aderna& "erfecto D$
M,
!9
M+
M,
ML
,L
M,
M9
M+$!
9!$
"adlan& Cris#in M$
M1
!!
M!
M9
!L
!M
M
!!
M1$!,
9M$
"adilla& .ose C$
M9
!,
!M
L+
ML
M,
ML
M,
M>$>
9L$
"adilla& .r$& Estanislao E$
M1
LL
ML
L!
,9
M,
ML
,9
M+$9,
M0"=99$
"alma& )artolome
!M
L1
L9
L+
M1
M,
!9
M,
M>$+,
M0"=19$
"a#a& Angel A$
M,
M+
L,
L,
MM
,9
!>
M1
M>$,
M0"=11$
"arayno& Mario V$
M1
LL
M
L9
!9
!!
M!
M>
M>$!,
1+$
"ari?a& 5antos <$
M9
LM
L,
MM
!
!M
!>
M!
M1$L,
M0"=1>$
"asion& Anastacio
!>
L9
!L
L1
L+
M9
M!
,L
M+$,,
1$
"astrana& 0iHal 0$
!9
M!
M1
M!
!L
!>
MM
L>
M1$!,
M0"=1,$
"aulin& .ose /$
M9
!!
L9
LM
M,
,9
!,
L9
M9$9
M0"=1!$
"elaeH& .r$& Vicente C$
M9
LM
M>
L>
!9
M1
!L
!,
M>$+
1M$
"e?a& .esus
M,
M,
M,
!+
M,
M9
!9
!!
M9$
1L$
"ereH& Toribio 0$
M1
!
L1
9+
!9
,L
!M
M9
M1$+,
19$
"esta?o& Mel8uiades
MM
L1
M
LM
,9
!L
M!
M,
M>$+
M0"=+9$
"ido& 5erafin C$
MM
L1
M+
L+
!9
M1
!9
M,
M1$1,
+1$
"inlac& Filemon
!M
M!
M
L!
!,
M9
!,
M+
M9$,,
++$
"oblete& Celso )$
M+
M9
L+
M!
!!
!
M
,9
M+$1,
M0"=+>$
"iHa& <uH
!L
M9
M,
LM
M
!M
!
M,
M9$L
+$
"uHon& Eduardo 5$
M+
L9
L1
!9
M+
,>
!M
M9
M1$9,
+,$
Kuetulio& .osefina D$
M,
99
!9
9>
!
ML
M!
L>
M+$9
M0"=+!$
Kui#anes& Melchor V$
!9
LL
M9
L+
!,
!+
M1
!!
M1$,,
M0"=+M$
Kuietson& )ayani 0$
M>
M,
M!
MM
M9
L1
M1
,>
M+$L,
+L$
0acho& Macario D$
!L
M,
L1
L+
ML
,>
!!
,
M9$,,
+9$
0amireH& 5abas "$
M1
L9
M>
LM
!+
!+
M,
L9
M1$!,
M0"=>9$
0affi?an& .ose A$
L9
L>
M9
M9
!+
M+
!L
!,
M>$+,
M0"=>1$
0amos& "atricio 5$
M,
LM
M!
M,
M+
M+
!1
M,
M+$+,
M0"=>+$
0amos=)almori& Manuela
ML
L
M!
99
L
M,
L9
!,
M>$,
M0"=>>$
0aro& Celso
M,
L1
M!
!M
M,
MM
,,
MM
M1$
M0"=>$
0ayos& Victor 5$
M,
L!
M9
91
M1
!M
!M
M9
M>$9
>,$
0evilla& Mariano 5$
M,
ML
L1
99
M9
,
!9
L1
M>$>,
>!$
0eyes& Abdon <$
M+
!
L1
ML
M!
M>
!9
,>
M+$L,
>M$
0eyes& Domingo )$
M+
LM
ML
L>
M+
M,
!+
M9
M+$M
>L$
0eyes& Francisco M$
M,
L,
L
!L
M,
M1
!L
,9
M>$9
>9$
0eyes& <oHano M$
L9
,M
ML
M9
ML
!,
!
M9
M>$>,
M0"=9$
0eyes& /scar 0$
M,
M,
L+
L+
M!
!
!L
!9
M>$!,
1$
0igonan& Cesar V$
M1
L,
!,
L!
M,
M9
M!
M9
M+$M
+$
0ivera& 4onorio
M1
,!
M9
99
M1
!,
M,
M1
M1$+
M0"=>$
0ivero& )uenaventura A$
M+
LL
M+
9
!L
M>
!!
L9
M+$!
M0"=$
0obles& Enri8ue
M,
MM
M,
MM
L+
!
!9
M9
M>$M
,$
0odrigueH& /restes Arellano
M!
M,
M!
!>
!9
MM
!,
ML
M+$+,
!$
0oldan& .ose V$
!M
L9
M9
L>
M>
M1
M,
M9
M>$9
M$
0osario& Adelaida 0$ del
L9
M,
!,
M9
!L
M+
L9
M9
M>$1,
L$
0osario& 0estituto F$ del
M,
M,
M9
99
!L
!,
!!
!>
M+$1
M0"=9$
5abelino& Conrado 5$
M1
L1
!9
M,
MM
M1
M,
M9
M+$9,
,9$
5an .uan& Damaso
MM
L!
M+
L9
,9
M!
!,
M+
M1$!
,1$
5a?iel& Feli2 <$
M+
9>
M!
L9
!M
M,
!!
!+
M+$1
,+$
5amaniego& .esus )$
M,
L9
M!
M+
!9
!M
!L
M9
M9$!
M0"=,>$
5andoval& Emmanuel M$
M,
L>
M9
L>
MM
!M
MM
!9
M>$9,
M0"=,$
5anidad& Emmanuel K$
M1
M,
L1
99
!+
!
M!
!L
M+$9,
,,$
5antiago& .r$& Cristobal
M,
M!
L
9>
!>
!,
,9
M9
M1$L
,!$
5antillan& .uanito <l$
M!
L9
L>
L>
!>
,L
!,
,+
M1$+,
M0"=,M$
5antos& 0odolfo C$
M,
M,
ML
L+
M>
M!
!!
M9
M>$M
M0"=,L$
5antos& 0u#erto M$
!M
,
!9
M!
!>
!
M1
!9
!!$M,
M0"=,9$
5antos& A8uilino C$
M+
M1
M>
M9
M>
M9
M1
L,
M>$L
M0"=!9$
5antos& 0ufino A$
M,
L1
M9
L,
M
M+
!!
,
M>$>
!1$
5uanding& )antas
M,
!M
!M
9+
M9
,9
M!
M!
M>$1
M0"=!+$
5ulit& FeliH M$
M!
M9
M!
ML
M+
M,
!L
!M
M>$,
!>$
5ongco& Felicisimo ;$
M9
!L
L+
L
!9
!9
M!
!,
M>$>,
!$
5oriano& Aniceto 5$
!
M9
MM
L9
L9
,>
M9
!,
M9$M
!,$
5uareH& "ablo D$
M>
L,
M9
LM
M!
M9
!
M9
M1$9
M0"=!!$
5ybico& .esus <$
M9
M9
M9
M+
M,
M,
M+
!9
M>$9,
!M$
Taba8ue& )en(amin 0$
!9
!L
MM
M9
M
!L
M+
!9
M1$L,
M0"=!L$
Tan Riang& Clarita
L1
M9
M+
L9
!+
M,
M>
L9
M>$9,
M0"=!9$
Tando& Amado T$
M1
L+
ML
L>
M1
!1
M1
!9
M+
M9$
Tasico& 5evero E$
M1
!9
M,
L9
M9
M,
!M
!>
M1$!,
M1$
Tiburcio& %smael "$
M>
L+
M+
9>
M!
,M
!L
,
M1$1,
M0"=M+$
Tiongson& Federico T$
M9
M9
M!
L
MM
M,
M,
,9
M>$,
M0"=M>$
Tolentino& .esus C$
M,
L9
!>
L
L,
M>
M>
,9
M>$
M$
Torri(as& Alfredo A$
MM
!!
!M
L>
!L
M,
M1
!>
M1$>
M0"=M,$
Tobias& Artemio M$
!9
,L
M
L1
M1
,,
!,
,M
!M$,,
M0"=M!$
Trillana& .r$& A#olonio
M!
L!
M!
L!
M9
!L
M,
,9
M>$L
M0"=MM$
Trinidad& Manuel /$
!!
91
L>
M,
!>
!!
!M
!,
M9$L
ML$
Trinidad& "edro /$
!!
ML
ML
L,
ML
,1
!
M,
M9$L
M0"=M9$
:darbe& Flavio .$
L9
L+
MM
L+
!M
,!
!L
M,
M+$!
L9$
:mali& /smundo C$
!L
M,
L1
L9
M1
!9
!L
!9
M1$M
L1$
:mayam& .uanito C$
MM
M,
LM
L,
,!
,!
!!
!9
M1
M0"=L+$
:sita& ;elacio :$
M,
M+
M,
M
M>
M!
M1
M9
M>$,,
L>$
Valino& Francisco M$
M+
L1
L9
L
!+
ML
M1
M,
M>$M
L$
Varela& Dominador M$
!M
M,
L1
L!
M+
,M
L1
M9
M>$L,
L,$
Vega& Macairog <$ de
ML
!+
M9
LM
M9
M9
M1
!,
M>$L
M0"=L!$
Velasco& Emmanuel D$
M1
L9
M
L,
!9
!!
M!
M!
M1$L,
LM$
VeleH& Maria E$
M>
M9
L9
L9
,!
,9
M+
!M
M1$9,
M0"=LL$
Venal& Artemio V$
ML
91
,L
!M
M!
,,
M,
M>
M>$!,
L9$
Venus& Conrado )$
!9
L1
M
L,
!+
!!
M+
MM
MM$9,
M0"=99$
VerHosa& Federico )$
M,
M9
M+
LL
M!
!L
M
,9
M>$M
M0"=91$
Villafuerte& Eduardo V$
M,
L>
M9
M!
!
!
M,
!,
M1$+
M0"=9+$
Villanueva& Cecilio C$
M,
L,
M9
LL
!!
MM
!M
M9
M>$9,
9>$
Villar& Custodio 0$
M>
!9
M9
LL
M!
!!
!9
,9
M9$M,
M0"=9$
Villase?or& <eonidas F$
L9
L,
!M
MM
!+
M,
M!
M>
M>$1,
9,$
Viterbo& .ose 4$
L9
MM
!,
9>
M9
!,
!,
!,
M9$!,
9!$
Paranon& "edro
M9
MM
M!
L,
M+
,9
M,
M,
M1$L,
M0"=9M$
Pasay& Mariano 0$
M,
M,
M+
M!
!>
MM
M9
!9
M1$1
M0"=9L$
Pgay& Venancio M$
M>
L9
L>
L
!+
,9
M+
MM
M+$!,
99$
Pulo& .r$& Teodoro
M>
L+
ML
M,
!9
L1
M,
M,
M>$9,
,99$
Aamora& Alberto
M9
!,
M!
M9
!+
MM
!9
L+
M1$>
,91$
0igonan& Feli#e C$
M9
M9
!9
L9
M!
!+
M1
!
M1$+
A list of those -ho #etitioned for the consolidation of their grades in sub(ects #assed in #revious
e2aminations& sho-ing the years in -hich they too* the e2aminations together -ith their grades and
averages& and those -ho had filed motions for reconsideration -hich -ere denied& indicated by the
initials M0D& follo-s:
"ET%T%/'E05 :'DE0 0E":)<%C ACT '/$ M+
Civ$
<and
Merc$
%nt$
"ol$
Crim$
0em$
<eg$
;en$ Av$
1$
Amao& 5ul#icio M$









19!
!L
!M
M!
M!
M>
M>
9
,9
!!$,
19,9
,9
L9
!M
MM
!+
L9
M1
,M
!M$
+$
)aldo& /legario ;a$









19,1
!,
M!
,L
,,
,9
!>
M,
M+
!$9
19,+
!,
!L
M,
L
M+
,9
M>
,M
!9$M,
19,>
,M
M
!L
!L
M!
,+
M1
M!
!!$M
>$
)lanco& .ose )$









M0D=199
M,
M,
M9
M,
MM
M!
!9
99
M+$1,
19,1
!
M1
,L
!,
!L
M9
M,
M1
!!$9,
$
Condeno& Mateo









19,9
M1
L9
!+
M,
M,
L1
,,
9+
!9$>
19,1
M9
!9
!1
!,
MM
!
!M
L1
!M$L,
,$
Ducusin& Aga#ito )$









M0D=199
!9
M9
M!
M>
M!
M1
,,
!9
!L$!,
19,9
!9
M1
,,
!M
!M
M,
,!
L9
!L$1
!$
;arcia& Manuel '$









M0D=199
!9
M9
L+
M9
M9
!9
!9
L9
!9$+,
19,9
,M
!,
,1
!9
,
L,
,!
L
!9$>
M$
<una& <ucito A$









19!
!>
,>
!9
M!
M,
M!
,M
!9
!!$,,
19,+
M9
M,
!9
L>
,9
,>
M
M,
!L$
L$
Mara?a& Arsenio s$









199
M+
!L
!L
M,
M,
M+
!9
M,
!9$>,
19,+
!,
M9
!9
M+
M>
,1
M,
L!
!M$9
9$
Montano& Manuel M$









19,1
!1
!9
,L
!9
M9
!>
M,
!
!$L
19,+
M9
MM
!,
M9
!!
,+
M9
,9
!!$
19,>
ML
!
!!
!L
L1
,9
M1
ML
M9$!,
19$
"e?a& .esus 5$









19,9
+,
M,
,
M,
,
,+
!
M1
!$+
19,1
M9
MM
!,
M9
!!
,+
M9
,9
!!$
19,+
M,
M,
M,
!+
M,
M9
!9
!!
M9$
11$
"lacido& 5r$& %sidro









19,9
!L
ML
M9
M,
!9
M9
,L
!9
!M$M,
19,1
!,
!+
M,
!9
M>
,M
M,
M1
!!$L
1+$
0ementiHo& Filemon 5$









199
!,
M,
M+
M,
!9
M,
,,
L,
!!$!,
19,1
!L
,M
L
!9
91
!!
,,
M,
!$9,
19,+
!L
,>
!L
!M
,L
,!
M,
!
!,$M
1>$
Amao& 5ul#icio M$









19,+
!M
L9
,1
!9
!9
MM
M>
,>
!!$>,
19,>
!,
!M
ML
M
M,
!+
!9
L9
M9$9
1$
0odulfa& .uan T$









19,1
!M
!9
M9
!,
!L
,!
M,
!!
!M$M,
19,+
M9
M1
!M
ML
!M
M,
M1
M9
M9$1
1,$
5ancheH& .uan .$









19L
>9
!9
L+
M,
M!
M+
,,
,9
!>$,
M0D=199
!M
,!
!9
M,
M+
MM
!9
M,
!L
19,1
M9
,9
,,
!9
!L
,M
ML
!M
!,$L
1!$
5antos& Constantino









19,+
!+
M!
,
L+
M+
MM
!!
!,
!!$!,
19,>
M>
M1
M9
!,
ML
!
!,
ML
M9$
1M$
5antos& 5alvador 4$









19,1
!9
!
,,
M9
!L
,+
M9
M,
!+$L,
19,+
M,
!
M9
L1
M!
,,
!1
M,
!9$1
19,>
M9
M1
M9
!,
M+
,
!!
L9
M9
1L$
5evilla& Macario C$









M0D=19L
,9
!
M!
!!
!!
!9
!9
,+
!>$1
M0D=199
M
!!
ML
!
M1
L!
!,
L,
!L
19,9
>,
!,
9
M,
!>
,M
+M
9
,
M0D=19,1
!L
,9
M+
,,
!9
!,
M,
M,
!9$>
19,>
M9
M>
M
M9
L1
,!
!9
M1
M1$9,
Finally& -ith regards to the e2aminations of 19,>& -hile some candidates==L, in all==#resented motions
for reconsideration of their grades& others invo*ed the #rovisions of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+$ A list of
those candidates se#arating those -ho filed mere motions for reconsideration B,!D from those -ho
invo*ed the aforesaid 0e#ublic act& is as follo-s:
19,> "ET%T%/'E05 F/0 0EC/'5%DE0AT%/'
Civ$
<and
Merc$
%nt$
"ol$
Crim$
0em$
<eg$
;en$ Av$
1$
Acenas& Cali2to 0$
M>
M9
!L
!+
L+
,1
!M
MM
M>$,
+$
Alcantara& "edro '$
!M
M9
M,
L,
LM
,
M1
L9
M+$L
>$
Ale(andro& E2e8uiel
!M
M+
M1
M,
L9
M!
M,
MM
M>$
$
Andres& ;regorio M$
M9
M>
L!
,L
M9
,9
M1
ML
M+$M
,$
ArnaiH& Antonio E$
!!
L9
M!
,L
M9
!L
MM
L1
M>$
!$
Asis& Floriano :$ de
!!
ML
M,
L1
MM
,,
M>
!9
M1$+,
M$
)acaiso& Celestino M$
M1
!,
M!
!L
M!
,9
M,
M9
M9$9,
L$
)ala& Florencio F$
!
L+
M
M9
L+
,L
M,
L+
!M
9$
)aldo& /legario A$
,M
M
!L
!L
M!
,+
M1
M!
!!$M
19$
)arrios& )en(amin /$
!,
M1
M!
M,
L9
!+
L>
M>
M>$9,
11$
)uhay& Eduardo <$
M>
M!
M1
91
M!
!1
M
ML
M>$>,
1+$
)urgos& Dominador C$
M+
L9
L9
!1
!!
>M
!9
!L
M9$9,
1>$
Cari?o& Eldo .$
M9
L1
!9
M,
M
M
M!
M
M>
1$
Casar& Dima#uro
!M
M>
L
M9
MM
!1
M1
M
M>$>,
1,$
Casta?eda& ;regorio
M9
M>
L9
M1
M,
M9
M>
ML
M>$9,
1!$
Estrellado& )en(amin 0$
!M
M9
!
M>
L+
!+
M1
M
M9$+
1M$
Fabunan& Edilberto C$
M9
M+
!L
!9
MM
!9
M!
M
M1$1
1L$
Feril& Domingo )$
M,
M1
L
!,
M9
!9
!,
M9
M1$!
19$
FernandeH& Ale(andro ;$
!,
M,
LM
L9
L1
!>
!1
L9
M+$L
+9$
;a#us& 0osita 5$ BMissD
M!
L9
L!
MM
!
M
!!
!9
M>$9
+1$
;arcia& 0afael )$
M9
L!
M9
M,
M>
!>
M>
M,
M1$!,
++$
;racia& Miguel <$ de
M>
!L
M,
,9
L9
,1
M+
M1
M1
+>$
;ungon& Armando ;$
!L
M!
M!
L
MM
,M
MM
L>
M>$!
+$
;utierreH& Antonio 5$
!L
MM
!!
M9
M+
,9
M1
M
!9$1
+,$
%le(ay& Abraham %$
MM
M9
M!
MM
L1
!+
M9
!L
M>$M
+!$
<eon& )en(amin <a$ De
!!
!!
M,
M9
MM
,,
M1
L+
M9$>,
+M$
<ugtu& Feli#e <$
!+
M9
ML
!,
ML
,!
!9
L1
!9$9
+L$
<u*man& Abdul=4amid
M!
!
!M
!9
M>
,9
M>
M,
M9$,
+9$
Maloles& .r$& )en(amin ;$
MM
M!
!L
!L
M1
,1
M,
ML
M9$L,
>9$
Maloles& .ulius ;$
MM
M1
!9
M1
M9
!+
!L
M+
!9$M,
>1$
Mandi& 5antiago "$
!,
M!
M9
!1
M9
!L
M,
M+
M1$1
>+$
Margete& 0ufino C$
M9
M!
!!
M,
L,
M>
M1
M,
M+$M,
>>$
Melocoton& 'estorio )$
M9
L1
M>
ML
L>
,+
M+
M,
M+$>,
>$
Molina& Manuel C$
M,
ML
M9
!1
M,
!>
!!
L,
M9$9,
>,$
Mu?oH& Mariano A$
M,
L9
L!
!M
M
,M
!L
M!
M>$M,
>!$
'avarro& )uenaventura M$
L9
M,
!,
M,
L>
,,
M>
M9
M>
>M$
'odado& Domiciano 0$
!9
!M
!M
,9
M9
,9
,!
M,
!1$M
>L$
"a#as& 5isenando )$
!,
!+
M1
!1
M9
,!
!!
!M
!!
>9$
"agulayan=5y& Fernando
!>
M,
M1
!+
L>
!M
M9
M+
M9$
9$
"adula& )en(amin C$
M9
MM
,
!+
M
ML
M,
!L
!9$9,
1$
"asno& Enri8ue M$
ML
M+
!!
,
M1
,L
M+
ML
!9$L,
+$
"e?a& .r$& 'arciso
M9
9,
L1
ML
!M
!!
!M
M>
M+$,,
>$
"eralta& 0odolfo "$
M9
M9
,+
L1
!L
!>
,9
!9
!>$M
$
"igar& <eo#oldo 0$
M!
M,
ML
!1
M+
M+
M1
M9
M>$M,
,$
"ublico& "aciano <$
!L
!9
M!
M!
M9
,9
M
!M
M9$!
!$
0adaHa& <eovigildo
M,
ML
M!
!1
MM
,9
M1
L!
M+$+
M$
0amos& )ernardo M$
!
!+
M,
9>
L1
,+
!!
L9
M9$1
L$
0abaino& Andres D$
!L
M+
M,
M>
ML
,,
!9
M!
M9$!,
9$
0avanera& /scar '$
M9
MM
L9
M1
L+
!+
!9
ML
M>$!
,9$
0enovilla& .ose M$
!,
M,
L9
!L
M9
,+
!+
ML
!9$,
,1$
5abaot& 5olomon )$
!9
M>
L9
!9
L+
!9
!9
M9
M>$L,
,+$
5uma-ay& 0icardo 5$
!!
M!
!9
M!
M
,!
M+
!L
!9$1
,>$
Torrefiel& 5ofronio /$
M9
MM
M
M,
M>
,9
!L
M+
!9$,,
,$
Vera& Federico V$ de
!9
!1
M
MM
!9
,9
!M
MM
!9$9
,,$
Viray& Venancio )ustos
!,
!M
!M
,+
M>
!
M1
!,
!M$1,
,!$
Playa& Angela "$ BMissD
!>
M9
,!
M,
!L
,
M9
MM
!$,
"ET%T%/'E05 :'DE0 0E":)<%C ACT '/$ 9M+
Civ$
<and
Merc$
%nt$
"ol$
Crim$
0em$
<eg$
;en$ Av$
1$
Ala& 'arciso
M9
M1
M>
,9
M>
M
L1
MM
M>$,
+$
Alcantara& "edro '$
!M
M9
M,
L,
LM
,
M1
L9
M+$L
>$
Arellano& Antonio <$
M
!!
M>
!9
ML
!>
ML
M+
M+$9
$
)uhay& Eduardo <$
M>
M!
M1
91
M!
!1
M
ML
M>$>,
,$
Calautit& Celestino 0$
M1
ML
L
M,
M,
!1
!L
M+
M>$+
!$
Casuncad& 5ulvio "$
!1
M>
L+
!9
L1
!L
M1
L
M>$9,
M$
Enri8ueH& "elagio y Conce#cion
L
!9
M!
M,
L+
,9
,L
M9
M+$9,
L$
Estonina& 5everino
L9
M
!
L9
L1
,!
!L
L+
M+$
9$
FernandeH& Ale(andro K$
!,
M,
LM
L9
L1
!>
!1
L9
M+$L
19$
FernandeH& <uis '$
M9
M,
MM
M,
ML
!M
M+
M>
M>$>,
11$
Figueroa& Alfredo A$
M9
M,
LM
ML
M,
,9
!L
!L
M+$>
1+$
FormilleHa& "edro
!,
M,
L9
!L
L>
,1
M9
M,
M>$+,
1>$
;arcia& Manuel M$
!9
!L
L>
L>
M>
!+
!+
M9
M1
1$
;ros#e& Vicente E$
!L
M,
ML
!!
M9
!1
!9
L+
M1$!
1,$
;alema& 'estor 0$ B19,+D
M+
M9
L!
ML
!9
!1
M,
M9
M>$9,
1!$
.acobo& 0afael F$
M!
M!
M,
M
M!
,9
M+
M!
M+$>
1M$
Macalindong& 0einerio <$
!M
MM
M9
M9
M
M+
!L
MM
M+$M,
1L$
Mangubat& Antonio M$
M9
M9
ML
!1
L9
M
!+
M9
M1$,
19$
Montano& Manuel M$
ML
!
!!
!L
L1
,9
M1
ML
M9$!,
+9$
"lomantes& Marcos
M>
!M
M
,L
!L
M9
M!
M1
M1$!
+1$
0amos& Eugenio 0$
M9
L9
M!
!M
M+
!9
M+
M9
M+$!
++$
0eyes& .uan 0$
M1
M>
MM
M!
L1
,9
M+
M
M>$+
+>$
0eyes& 5antiago 0$
!,
ML
L>
!9
M!
M,
M9
M9
M+$9
+$
0ivera& Eulogio .$
!,
!M
ML
M
M,
!+
!9
L9
M9$9
+,$
5antos& Constantino "$
M>
M1
M9
!,
ML
!
!,
ML
M9$
+!$
5antos& 5alvador 4$
M9
M1
M9
!,
M+
,
!!
L9
M9
+M$
5evilla& Macario C$
M9
M>
M
M9
L1
,!
!9
M1
M1$9,
+L$
Villavicencio& .ose A$
ML
M,
M9
!M
!9
MM
!
MM
M>$+
+9$
Viray& 0u#erto ;$
M!
M>
M!
M>
L9
,L
!L
L>
M>$+,
There are the unsuccessful candidates totaling !9 directly affected by this resolution$ Adding 99
candidates -ho have not #resented any #etition& they reach a total of 1&99$
The Enactment of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+
As -ill be observed from Anne2 %& this Court reduced to M+ #er cent the #assing general average in the
bar e2amination of august and 'ovember of 19!G !9 #er cent in 19MG M9 #er cent in 19LG M #er cent
in 199G maintaining the #rescribed M, #er cent since 19,9& but raising to M, #er cent those -ho
obtained M #er cent since 19,9$ This caused the introduction in 19,1& in the 5enate of the "hili##ines
of )ill 'o$ 1+ -hich -as intended to amend 5ections ,& 9& 1+& 1 and 1! of 0ule 1+M of the 0ules of
Court& concerning the admission of attorneys=at=la- to the #ractice of the #rofession$ The amendments
embrace many interesting matters& but those referring to sections 1 and 1! immediately concern us$
The #ro#osed amendment is as follo-s:
5EC$ 1$ "assing average$ E %n order that a candidate may be deemed to have #assed the e2aminations
successfully& he must have obtained a general average of M9 #er cent -ithout falling belo- ,9 #er cent
in any sub(ect$ %n determining the average& the foregoing sub(ects shall be given the follo-ing relative
-eights: Civil <a-& +9 #er centG <and 0egistration and Mortgages& , #er centG Mercantile <a-& 1, #er
centG Criminal <a-& 19 #er centG "olitical <a-& 19 #er centG %nternational <a-& , #er centG 0emedial
<a-& +9 #er centG <egal Ethics and "ractical E2ercises& , #er centG 5ocial <egislation& , #er centG
Ta2ation& , #er cent$ :nsuccessful candidates shall not be re8uired to ta*e another e2amination in any
sub(ect in -hich they have obtained a rating of M9 #er cent or higher and such rating shall be ta*en into
account in determining their general average in any subse8uent e2aminations: "rovided& ho-ever& That
if the candidate fails to get a general average of M9 #er cent in his third e2amination& he shall lose the
benefit of having already #assed some sub(ects and shall be re8uired to the e2amination in all the
sub(ects$
5EC$ 1!$ Admission and oath of successful a##licants$ E Any a##licant -ho has obtained a general
average of M9 #er cent in all sub(ects -ithout falling belo- ,9 #er cent in any e2amination held after
the th day of .uly& 19!& or -ho has been other-ise found to be entitled to admission to the bar& shall
be allo-ed to ta*e and subscribe before the 5u#reme Court the corres#onding oath of office$ BArts$
and ,& L& 'o$ 1+D$
3ith the bill -as an E2#lanatory 'ote& the #ortion #ertinent to the matter before us being:
%t seems to be unfair that unsuccessful candidates at bar e2aminations should be com#elled to re#eat
even those sub(ects -hich they have #reviously #assed$ This is not the case in any other government
e2amination$ The 0ules of Court have therefore been amended in this measure to give a candidate due
credit for any sub(ect -hich he has #reviously #assed -ith a rating of M, #er cent or higher$F
5enate )ill 'o$ 1+ having been a##roved by Congress on May >& 19,1& the "resident re8uested the
comments of this Tribunal before acting on the same$ The comment -as signed by seven .ustices -hile
three chose to refrain from ma*ing any and one too* no #art$ 3ith regards to the matter that interests
us& the Court said:
The ne2t amendment is of section 1 of 0ule 1+M$ /ne #art of this amendment #rovides that if a bar
candidate obtains M9 #er cent or higher in any sub(ect& although failing to #ass the e2amination& he need
not be e2amined in said sub(ect in his ne2t e2amination$ This is a sort of #assing the )ar E2amination
on the installment #lan& one or t-o or three sub(ects at a time$ The trouble -ith this #ro#osed system is
that although it ma*es it easier and more convenient for the candidate because he may in an
e2amination #re#are himself on only one or t-o sub(ects so as to insure #assing them& by the time that
he has #assed the last re8uired sub(ects& -hich may be several years a-ay from the time that he
revie-ed and #assed the firs sub(ects& he shall have forgotten the #rinci#les and theories contained in
those sub(ects and remembers only those of the one or t-o sub(ects that he had last revie-ed and
#assed$ This is highly #ossible because there is nothing in the la- -hich re8uires a candidate to
continue ta*ing the )ar e2aminations every year in succession$ The only condition im#osed is that a
candidate& on this #lan& must #ass the e2amination in no more that three installmentsG but there is no
limitation as to the time or number of years intervening bet-een each e2amination ta*en$ This -ould
defeat the ob(ect and the re8uirements of the la- and the Court in admitting #ersons to the #ractice of
la-$ 3hen a #erson is so admitted& it is to be #resumed and #resu##osed that he #ossesses the
*no-ledge and #roficiency in the la- and the *no-ledge of all la- sub(ects re8uired in bar
e2aminations& so as #resently to be able to #ractice the legal #rofession and ade8uately render the legal
service re8uired by #ros#ective clients$ )ut this -ould not hold true of the candidates -ho may have
obtained a #assing grade on any five sub(ects eight years ago& another three sub(ects one year later& and
the last t-o sub(ects the #resent year$ 3e believe that the #resent system of re8uiring a candidate to
obtain a #assing general average -ith no grade in any sub(ect belo- ,9 #er cent is more desirable and
satisfactory$ %t re8uires one to be all around& and #re#ared in all re8uired legal sub(ects at the time of
admission to the #ractice of la-$
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
3e no- come to the last amendment& that of section 1! of 0ule 1+M$ This amendment #rovides that any
a##lication -ho has obtained a general average of M9 #er cent in all sub(ects -ithout failing belo- ,9
#er cent in any sub(ect in any e2amination held after the th day of .uly& 19!& shall be allo-ed to ta*e
and subscribe the corres#onding oath of office$ %n other -ords& )ar candidates -ho obtained not less
than M9 #er cent in any e2amination since the year 19! -ithout failing belo- ,9 #er cent in any
sub(ect& des#ite their non=admission to the )ar by the 5u#reme Court because they failed to obtain a
#assing general average in any of those years& -ill be admitted to the )ar$ This #rovision is not only
#ros#ective but retroactive in its effects$
3e have already stated in our comment on the ne2t #receding amendment that -e are not e2actly in
favor of reducing the #assing general average from M, #er cent to M9 #er cent to govern even in the
future$ As to the validity of ma*ing such reduction retroactive& -e have serious legal doubts$ 3e should
not lose sight of the fact that after every bar e2aminations& the 5u#reme Court #asses the corres#onding
resolution not only admitting to the )ar those -ho have obtained a #assing general average grade& but
also re(ecting and denying the #etitions for reconsideration of those -ho have failed$ The #resent
amendment -ould have the effect of re#udiating& reversing and revo*ing the 5u#reme Court@s
resolution denying and re(ecting the #etitions of those -ho may have obtained an average of M9 #er
cent or more but less than the general #assing average fi2ed for that year$ %t is clear that this 8uestion
involves legal im#lications& and this #hase of the amendment if finally enacted into la- might have to
go thru a legal test$ As one member of the Court remar*ed during the discussion& -hen a court renders
a decision or #romulgate a resolution or order on the basis of and in accordance -ith a certain la- or
rule then in force& the subse8uent amendment or even re#eal of said la- or rule may not affect the final
decision& order& or resolution already #romulgated& in the sense of revo*ing or rendering it void and of
no effect$
Another as#ect of this 8uestion to be considered is the fact that members of the bar are officers of the
courts& including the 5u#reme Court$ 3hen a )ar candidate is admitted to the )ar& the 5u#reme Court
im#liedly regards him as a #erson fit& com#etent and 8ualified to be its officer$ Conversely& -hen it
refused and denied admission to the )ar to a candidate -ho in any year since 19! may have obtained
a general average of M9 #er cent but less than that re8uired for that year in order to #ass& the 5u#reme
Court e8ually and im#liedly considered and declared that he -as not #re#ared& ready& com#etent and
8ualified to be its officer$ The #resent amendment giving retroactivity to the reduction of the #assing
general average runs counter to all these acts and resolutions of the 5u#reme Court and #ractically and
in effect says that a candidate not acce#ted& and even re(ected by the Court to be its officer because he
-as un#re#ared& undeserving and un8ualified& nevertheless and in s#ite of all& must be admitted and
allo-ed by this Court to serve as its officer$ 3e re#eat& that this is another im#ortant as#ect of the
8uestion to be carefully and seriously considered$
The "resident vetoed the bill on .une 1!& 19,1& stating the follo-ing:
% am fully in accord -ith the avo-ed ob(ection of the bill& namely& to elevate the standard of the legal
#rofession and maintain it on a high level$ This is not achieved& ho-ever& by admitting to #ractice
#recisely a s#ecial class -ho have failed in the bar e2amination& Moreover& the bill contains #rovisions
to -hich % find serious fundamental ob(ections$
5ection , #rovides that any a##licant -ho has obtained a general average of M9 #er cent in all sub(ects
-ithout failing belo- ,9 #er cent in any sub(ect in any e2amination held after the th day of .uly& 19!&
shall be allo-ed to ta*e and subscribed the corres#onding oath of office$ This #rovision constitutes
class legislation& benefiting as it does s#ecifically one grou# of #ersons& namely& the unsuccessful
candidates in the 19!& 19M& 19L& 199 and 19,9 bar e2aminations$
The same #rovision underta*es to revo*e or set aside final resolutions of the 5u#reme Court made in
accordance -ith the la- then in force$ %t should be noted that after every bar e2amination the 5u#reme
Court #asses the corres#onding resolution not only admitting to the )ar those -ho have obtained a
#assing general average but also re(ecting and denying the #etitions for reconsideration of those -ho
have failed$ The #rovision under consideration -ould have the effect of revo*ing the 5u#reme Court@s
resolution denying and re(ecting the #etitions of those -ho may have failed to obtain the #assing
average fi2ed for that year$ 5aid #rovision also sets a bad #recedent in that the ;overnment -ould be
morally obliged to grant a similar #rivilege to those -ho have failed in the e2aminations for admission
to other #rofessions such as medicine& engineering& architecture and certified #ublic accountancy$
Conse8uently& the bill -as returned to the Congress of the "hili##ines& but it -as not re#assed by +Z>
vote of each 4ouse as #rescribed by section +9& article V% of the Constitution$ %nstead )ill 'o$ >M1 -as
#resented in the 5enate$ %t reads as follo-s:
A' ACT T/ F%C T4E "A55%'; MA0R5 F/0 )A0 ECAM%'AT%/'5 F0/M 19! :" T/ A'D
%'C<:D%'; 19,>
)e it enacted by the 5enate and 4ouse of 0e#resentatives of the "hili##ines in Congress assembled:
5ECT%/' 1$ 'ot-ithstanding the #rovisions of section 1& 0ule 1+M of the 0ules of Court& any bar
candidate -ho obtained a general average of M9 #er cent in any bar e2aminations after .uly & 19! u#
to the August 19,1 )ar e2aminationsG M1 #er cent in the 19,+ bar e2aminationsG M+ #er cent in the 19,>
bar e2aminationsG M> #er cent in the 19, bar e2aminationsG M #er cent in 19,, bar e2aminations
-ithout a candidate obtaining a grade belo- ,9 #er cent in any sub(ect& shall be allo-ed to ta*e and
subscribe the corres#onding oath of office as member of the "hili##ine )arG "rovided& ho-ever& That
M, #er cent #assing general average shall be restored in all succeeding e2aminationsG and "rovided&
finally& That for the #ur#ose of this Act& any e2act one=half or more of a fraction& shall be considered as
one and included as #art of the ne2t -hole number$
5EC$ +$ Any bar candidate -ho obtained a grade of M, #er cent in any sub(ect in any bar e2amination
after .uly & 19, shall be deemed to have #assed in such sub(ect or sub(ects and such grade or grades
shall be included in com#uting the #assing general average that said candidate may obtain in any
subse8uent e2aminations that he may ta*e$
5EC$ >$ This bill shall ta*e effect u#on its a##roval$
3ith the follo-ing e2#lanatory note:
This is a revised )ar bill to meet the ob(ections of the "resident and to afford another o##ortunity to
those -ho feel themselves discriminated by the 5u#reme Court from 19! to 19,1 -hen those -ho
-ould other-ise have #assed the bar e2amination but -ere arbitrarily not so considered by altering its
#revious decisions of the #assing mar*$ The 5u#reme Court has been altering the #assing mar* from !9
in 19M to M in 19,1$ %n order to cure the a##arent arbitrary fi2ing of #assing grades and to give
satisfaction to all #arties concerned& it is #ro#osed in this bill a gradual increase in the general averages
for #assing the bar e2aminations as follo-sG For 19! to 19,1 bar e2aminations& M9 #er centG for 19,+
bar e2amination& M1 #er centG for 19,> bar e2amination& M+ #er centG for 19, bar e2amination& M>
#ercentG and for 19,, bar e2amination& M #er cent$ Thus in 19,! the #assing mar* -ill be restored -ith
the condition that the candidate shall not obtain in any sub(ect a grade of belo- ,9 #er cent$ The reason
for rela2ing the standard M, #er cent #assing grade& is the tremendous handica# -hich students during
the years immediately after the .a#anese occu#ation has to overcome such as the insufficiency of
reading materials and the inade8uacy of the #re#aration of students -ho too* u# la- soon after the
liberation$ %t is believed that by 19,! the #re#aration of our students as -ell as the available reading
materials -ill be under normal conditions& if not im#roved from those years #receding the last -orld
-ar$
%n this -ill -e eliminated altogether the idea of having our 5u#reme Court assumed the su#ervision as
-ell as the administration of the study of la- -hich -as ob(ected to by the "resident in the )ar )ill of
19,1$
The "resident in vetoing the )ar )ill last year stated among his ob(ections that the bill -ould admit to
the #ractice of la- Fa s#ecial class -ho failed in the bar e2aminationF$ 4e considered the bill a class
legislation$ This contention& ho-ever& is not& in good conscience& correct because Congress is merely
su##lementing -hat the 5u#reme Court have already established as #recedent by ma*ing as lo- as !9
#er cent the #assing mar* of those -ho too* the )ar e2amination in 19M$ These bar candidates for
-ho this bill should be enacted& considered themselves as having #assed the bar e2amination on the
strength of the established #recedent of our 5u#reme Court and -ere fully a-are of the insurmountable
difficulties and handica#s -hich they -ere unavoidably #laced$ 3e believe that such #recedent cannot
or could not have been altered& constitutionally& by the 5u#reme Court& -ithout giving due
consideration to the rights already accrued or vested in the bar candidates -ho too* the e2amination
-hen the #recedent -as not yet altered& or in effect& -as still enforced and -ithout being inconsistent
-ith the #rinci#les of their #revious resolutions$
%f this bill -ould be enacted& it shall be considered as a sim#le curative act or corrective statute -hich
Congress has the #o-er to enact$ The re8uirement of a Fvalid classificationF as against class legislation&
is very e2#ressed in the follo-ing American .uris#rudence:
A valid classification must include all -ho naturally belong to the class& all -ho #ossess a common
disability& attribute& or classification& and there must be a FnaturalF and substantial differentiation
bet-een those included in the class and those it leaves untouched$ 3hen a class is acce#ted by the
Court as FnaturalF it cannot be again s#lit and then have the dissevered factions of the original unit
designated -ith different rules established for each$ BFountain "ar* Co$ vs$ 0ensier& 199 %nd$ 9,& '$ E$
!, B19+!D$
Another case #enned by .ustice CardoHo: FTime -ith its tides brings ne- conditions -hich must be
cared for by ne- la-s$ 5ometimes the ne- conditions affect the members of a class$ %f so& the
correcting statute must a##ly to all ali*e$ 5ometimes the condition affect only a fe-$ %f so& the
correcting statute may be as narro- as the mischief$ The constitution does not #rohibit s#ecial la-s
infle2ibly and al-ays$ %t #ermits them -hen there are s#ecial evils -ith -hich the general la-s are
incom#etent to co#e$ The s#ecial #ublic #ur#ose -ill sustain the s#ecial form$ $ $ $ The #roblem in the
last analysis is one of legislative #olicy& -ith a -ide margin of discretion conceded to the la-ma*ers$
/nly in the case of #lain abuse -ill there be revision by the court$ B%n 3illiams vs$ Mayor and City
Council of )altimore& +L! :$ 5$ >!& MM <$ Ed$ 191,& ,> 5u#$ Ct$ >1D$ B19>+D
This bill has all the earmar*s of a corrective statute -hich al-ays retroacts to the e2tent of the care of
correction only as in this case from 19! -hen the 5u#reme Court first deviated from the rule of M, #er
cent in the 0ules of Court$
For the foregoing #ur#oses the a##roval of this bill is earnestly recommended$
B5gd$D "A)</ A';E<E5 DAV%D
5enator
3ithout much debate& the revised bill -as #assed by Congress as above transcribed$ The "resident
again as*ed the comments of this Court& -hich endorsed the follo-ing:
0es#ectfully returned to the 4onorable& the Acting E2ecutive 5ecretary& Manila& -ith the information
that& -ith res#ect to 5enate )ill 'o$ >M1& the members of the Court are ta*ing the same vie-s they
e2#ressed on 5enate )ill 'o$ 1+ #assed by Congress in May& 19,1& contained in the first indorsement of
the undersigned dated .une ,& 19,1& to the Assistant E2ecutive 5ecretary$
B5gd$D 0%CA0D/ "A0A5
The "resident allo-ed the #eriod -ithin -hich the bill should be signed to #ass -ithout vetoing it& by
virtue of -hich it became a la- on .une +1& 19,> B5ec$ +9& Art$ V%& ConstitutionD numbered 9M+ Bmany
times erroneously cited as 'o$ 9MD$
%t may be mentioned in #assing that 19,> -as an election year& and that both the "resident and the
author of the )ill -ere candidates for re=election& together& ho-ever& they lost in the #olls$
5e#arate /#inions
<A)0AD/0& .$& concurring and dissenting:
The right to admit members to the )ar is& and has al-ays been& the e2clusive #rivilege of this Court&
because la-yers are members of the Court and only this Court should be allo-ed to determine
admission thereto in the interest of the #rinci#le of the se#aration of #o-ers$ The #o-er to admit is
(udicial in the sense that discretion is used in is e2ercise$ This #o-er should be distinguished from the
#o-er to #romulgate rules -hich regulate admission$ %t is only this #o-er Bto #romulgate amendments
to the rulesD that is given in the Constitution to the Congress& not the e2ercise of the discretion to admit
or not to admit$ Thus the rules on the holding of e2amination& the 8ualifications of a##licants& the
#assing grades& etc$ are -ithin the sco#e of the legislative #o-er$ )ut the #o-er to determine -hen a
candidate has made or has not made the re8uired grade is (udicial& and lies com#letely -ith this Court$
% hold that the act under consideration is an e2ercise of the (udicial function& and lies beyond the sco#e
of the congressional #rerogative of amending the rules$ To say that candidates -ho obtain a general
average of M+ #er cent in 19,>& M> #er cent in 19,& and M #er cent in 19,, should be considered as
having #assed the e2amination& is to mean e2ercise of the #rivilege and discretion (udged in this Court$
%t is a mandate to the tribunal to #ass candidates for different years -ith grades lo-er than the #assing
mar*$ 'o reasoning is necessary to sho- that it is an arrogation of the Court@s (udicial authority and
discretion$ %t is furthermore ob(ectionable as discriminatory$ 3hy should those ta*ing the e2aminations
in 19,>& 19, and 19,, be allo-ed to have the #rivilege of a lo-er #assing grade& -hile those ta*ing
earlier or later are notQ
% vote that the act in toto be declared unconstitutional& because it is not embraced -ithin the rule=
ma*ing #o-er of Congress& because it is an undue interference -ith the #o-er of this Court to admit
members thereof& and because it is discriminatory$
"A0A5& C$.$& dissenting:
:nder section 1, of 0ule of Court 'o$ 1+M& in order that a bar candidate Fmay be deemed to have
#assed his e2aminations successfully& he must have obtained a general average of M, #er cent in all
sub(ects& -ithout falling belo- ,9 #er cent in any sub(ect$@ This #assing mar* has al-ays been adhered
to& -ith certain e2ce#tion #resently to be s#ecified$
3ith reference to the bar e2aminations given in August& 19!& the original list of successful candidates
included only those -ho obtained a general average of M, #er cent or more$ :#on motion for
reconsideration& ho-ever& 1+ candidates -ith general averages ranging from M+ to M> #er cent -ere
raised to M, #er cent by resolution of December 1L& 19!$ %n the e2aminations of 'ovember& 19! the
list first released containing the names of successful candidates covered only those -ho obtained a
general average of M, #er cent or moreG but& u#on motion for reconsideration& 19 candidates -ith a
general average of M+ #er cent -ere raised to M, #er cent by resolution of March >1& 19M$ This -ould
indicate that in the original list of successful candidates those having a general average of M> #er cent
or more but belo- M, #er cent -ere included$ After the original list of 19M successful bar candidates
had been released& and on motion for reconsideration& all candidates -ith a general average of !9 #er
cent -ere allo-ed to #ass by resolution of .uly 1,& 19L$ 3ith res#ect to the bar e2aminations held in
August& 19L& in addition to the original list of successful bar candidates& all those -ho obtained a
general average of M9 #er cent or more& irres#ective of the grades in any one sub(ect and irres#ective of
-hether they filed #etitions for reconsideration& -ere allo-ed to #ass by resolution of A#ril +L& 199$
Thus& for the year 19M the Court in effect made !9 #er cent as the #assing average& and for the year
19L& M9 #er centG and this amounted& -ithout being noticed #erha#s& to an amendment of section 1 of
0ule 1+M$
'umerous flun*ers in the bar e2aminations held subse8uent to 19L& -hose general averages mostly
ranged from !9 to M> #er cent& filed motions for reconsideration invo*ing the #recedents set by this
Court in 19M and 19L& but said motions -ere uniformly denied$
%n the year 19,1& the Congress& after #ublic hearings -here la- deans and #rofessors& #ractising
attorneys& #residents of bar associations& and la- graduates a##eared and argued lengthily #ro or con&
a##roved a bill #roviding& among others& for the reduction of the #assing general average from M, #er
cent to M9 #er cent& retroactive to any bar e2amination held after .uly & 19!$ This bill -as vetoed by
the "resident mainly in vie- of an unfavorable comment of .ustices "adilla& Tuason& Montemayor&
0eyes& )autista and .ugo$ %n 19,>& the Congress #assed another bill similar to the #revious bill vetoed
by the "resident& -ith the im#ortant difference that in the later bill the #rovisions in the first bill
regarding B1D the su#ervision and regulation by the 5u#reme Court of the study of la-& B+D the inclusion
of 5ocial <egislation and Ta2ation as ne- bar sub(ects& B>D the #ublication of the bar e2aminers before
the holding of the e2amination& and BD the e8ual division among the e2aminers of all the admission
fees #aid by bar a##licants& -ere eliminated$ This second bill -as allo-ed to become a la-& 0e#ublic
Act 'o$ 9M+& by the "resident by merely not signing it -ithin the re8uired #eriodG and in doing so the
"resident gave due res#ect to the -ill of the Congress -hich& s#ea*ing for the #eo#le& chose to re#ass
the bill first vetoed by him$
:nder 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+& any bar candidates -ho obtained a general average of M9 #er cent in any
e2aminations after .uly & 19! u# to August 19,1G M1 #er cent in the 19,+ bar e2aminationsG M+ #er
cent in 19,> bar e2aminationsG M> #er cent in the 19, bar e2aminationsG and M #er cent in the 19,,
bar e2aminations& -ithout obtaining a grade belo- ,9 #er cent in any sub(ect& shall be allo-ed to #ass$
5aid Act also #rovides that any bar candidate -ho obtained a grade of M, #er cent in any sub(ect in any
e2amination after .uly & 19!& shall be deemed to have #assed in such sub(ect or sub(ects and such
grade or grades shall be included in com#uting the #assing in any subse8uent e2aminations$
'umerous candidates -ho had ta*en the bar e2aminations #revious to the a##roval of 0e#ublic Act 'o$
9M+ and failed to obtain the necessary #assing average& filed -ith this Court mass or se#arate #etitions&
#raying that they be admitted to the #ractice of la- under and by virtue of said Act& u#on the allegation
that they have obtained the general averages #rescribed therein$ %n virtue of the resolution of .uly !&
19,>& this Court held on .uly 11& 19,> a hearing on said #etitions& and members of the bar& es#ecially
authoriHed re#resentatives of bar associations& -ere invited to argue or submit memoranda as amici
curiae& the reason alleged for said hearing being that some doubt had Fbeen e2#ressed on the
constitutionality of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ in so far as it affects #ast bar e2aminations and the matterF
involved Fa ne- 8uestion of #ublic interest$F
All discussions in su##ort of the #ro#osition that the #o-er to regulate the admission to the #ractice of
la- is inherently (udicial& are immaterial& because the sub(ect is no- governed by the Constitution
-hich in Article V%%& section 1>& #rovides as follo-s:
The 5u#reme Court shall have the #o-er to #romulgate rules concerning #leading& #ractice& and
#rocedure in all courts& and the admission to the #ractice of la-$ 5aid rules shall be uniform for all
courts of the same grade and shall not diminish& increase or modify substantive right$ The e2isting la-s
on #leading& #ractice& and #rocedure are hereby re#ealed as statutes and are declared 0ules of Court&
sub(ect to the #o-er of the 5u#reme Court to alter and modify the same$ The Congress shall have the
#o-er to re#eal& alter& or su##lement the rules concerning #leading& #ractice& and #rocedure& and the
admission to the #ractice of la- in the "hili##ines$
:nder this constitutional #rovision& -hile the 5u#reme Court has the #o-er to #romulgate rules
concerning the admission to the #ractice of la-& the Congress has the #o-er to re#eal& alter or
su##lement said rules$ <ittle intelligence is necessary to see that the #o-er of the 5u#reme Court and
the Congress to regulate the admission to the #ractice of la- is concurrent$
The o##onents of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ argue that this Act& in so far as it covers bar e2aminations held
#rior to its a##roval& is unconstitutional& because it sets aside the final resolutions of the 5u#reme Court
refusing to admit to the #ractice of la- the various #etitioners& thereby resulting in a legislative
encroachment u#on the (udicial #o-er$ %n my o#inion this vie- is erroneous$ %n the first #lace&
resolutions on the re(ection of bar candidates do not have the finality of decisions in (usticiable cases
-here the 0ules of Court e2#ressly fi2 certain #eriods after -hich they become e2ecutory and
unalterable$ 0esolutions on bar matters& s#ecially on motions for reconsiderations filed by flun*ers in
any give year& are sub(ect to revision by this Court at any time& regardless of the #eriod -ithin -hich
the motion -ere filed& and this has been the #ractice heretofore$ The obvious reason is that bar
e2aminations and admission to the #ractice of la- may be deemed as a (udicial function only because
said matters ha##en to be entrusted& under the Constitution and our 0ules of Court& to the 5u#reme
Court$ There is no (udicial function involved& in the sub(ect and constitutional sense of the -ord&
because bar e2aminations and the admission to the #ractice of la-& unli*e (usticiable cases& do not
affect o##osing litigants$ %t is no more than the function of other e2amining boards$ %n the second #lace&
retroactive la-s are not #rohibited by the Constitution& e2ce#t only -hen they -ould be e2 #ost facto&
-ould im#air obligations and contracts or vested rights or -ould deny due #rocess and e8ual #rotection
of the la-$ 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ certainly is not an e2 #ost facto enactment& does not im#air any
obligation and contract or vested rights& and denies to no one the right to due #rocess and e8ual
#rotection of the la-$ /n the other hand& it is a mere curative statute intended to correct certain obvious
ine8ualities arising from the ado#tion by this Court of different #assing general averages in certain
years$
'either can it be said that bar candidates #rior to .uly & 19!& are being discriminated against& because
-e no longer have any record of those -ho might have failed before the -ar& a#art from the
circumstance that M, #er cent had al-ays been the #assing mar* during said #eriod$ %t may also be that
there are no #re=-ar bar candidates similarly situated as those benefited by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+$ At
any rate& in the matter of classification& the reasonableness must be determined by the legislative body$
%t is #ro#er to recall that the Congress held #ublic hearings& and -e can fairly su##ose that the
classification ado#ted in the Act reflects good legislative (udgment derived from the facts and
circumstances then brought out$
As regards the alleged interference in or encroachment u#on the (udgment of this Court by the
<egislative De#artment& it is sufficient to state that& if there is any interference at all& it is one e2#ressly
sanctioned by the Constitution$ )esides& interference in (udicial ad(udication #rohibited by the
Constitution is essentially aimed at #rotecting rights of litigants that have already been vested or
ac8uired in virtue of decisions of courts& not merely for the em#ty #ur#ose of creating a##earances of
se#aration and e8uality among the three branches of the ;overnment$ 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ has not
#roduced a case involving t-o #arties and decided by the Court in favor of one and against the other$
'eedless to say& the statute -ill not affect the #revious resolutions #assing bar candidates -ho had
obtained the general average #rescribed by section 1 of 0ule 1+M$ A la- -ould be ob(ectionable and
unconstitutional if& for instance& it -ould #rovide that those -ho have been admitted to the bar after
.uly & 19!& -hose general average is belo- L9 #er cent& -ill not be allo-ed to #ractice la-& because
said statute -ould then destroy a right already ac8uired under #revious resolutions of this Court&
namely& the bar admission of those -hose general averages -ere from M, to M9 #er cent$
3ithout fear of contradiction& % thin* the 5u#reme Court& in the e2ercise of its rule=ma*ing #o-er
conferred by the Constitution& may #ass a resolution amending section 1 of 0ule 1+M by reducing the
#assing average to M9 #er cent& effective several years before the date of the resolution$ %ndeed& -hen
this Court on .uly 1,& 19L allo-ed to #ass all candidates -ho obtained a general average of !9 #er
cent or more and on A#ril +L& 199 those -ho obtained a general average of M9 #er cent or more&
irres#ective of -hether they filed #etitions for reconsideration& it in effect amended section 1 of 0ule
1+M retroactively& because during the e2aminations held in August 19M and August 19L& said section
Bfi2ing the general average at M, #er centD -as su##osed to be in force$ %n stands to reason& if -e are to
admit that the 5u#reme Court and the Congress have concurrent #o-er to regulate the admission to the
#ractice of la-& that the latter may validly #ass a retroactive rule fi2ing the #assing general average$
0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ cannot be assailed on the ground that it is unreasonable& arbitrary or ca#ricious&
since this Court had already ado#ted as #assing averages !9 #er cent for the 19M bar e2aminations and
M9 #er cent for the 19L e2aminations$ Any-ay& -e should not in8uire into the -isdom of the la-&
since this is a matter that is addressed to the (udgment of the legislators$ This Court in many instances
had doubted the #ro#riety of legislative enactments& and yet it has consistently refrained from
nullifying them solely on that ground$
To say that the admission of the bar candidates benefited under 0e#ublic Act 9M+ is against #ublic
interest& is to assume that the matter of -hether said Act is beneficial or harmful to the general #ublic
-as not considered by the Congress$ As already stated& the Congress held #ublic hearings& and -e are
bound to assume that the legislators& loyal& as do the members of this Court& to their oath of office& had
ta*en all the circumstances into account before #assing the Act$ /n the 8uestion of #ublic interest % may
observe that the Congress& re#resenting the #eo#le -ho elected them& should be more 8ualified to ma*e
an a##raisal$ % am inclined to acce#t 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ as an e2#ression of the -ill of the #eo#le
through their duly elected re#resentatives$
% -ould& ho-ever& not go to the e2tent of admitting that the Congress& in the e2ercise of its concurrent
#o-er to re#eal& alter& or su##lement the 0ules of Court regarding the admission to the #ractice of la-&
may act in an arbitrary or ca#ricious manner& in the same -ay that this Court may not do so$ 3e are
thus left in the situation& incidental to a democracy& -here -e can and should only ho#e that the right
men are #ut in the right #laces in our ;overnment$
3herefore& % hold that 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ is constitutional and should therefore be given effect in its
entirety$
5e#arate /#inions
<A)0AD/0& .$& concurring and dissenting:
The right to admit members to the )ar is& and has al-ays been& the e2clusive #rivilege of this Court&
because la-yers are members of the Court and only this Court should be allo-ed to determine
admission thereto in the interest of the #rinci#le of the se#aration of #o-ers$ The #o-er to admit is
(udicial in the sense that discretion is used in is e2ercise$ This #o-er should be distinguished from the
#o-er to #romulgate rules -hich regulate admission$ %t is only this #o-er Bto #romulgate amendments
to the rulesD that is given in the Constitution to the Congress& not the e2ercise of the discretion to admit
or not to admit$ Thus the rules on the holding of e2amination& the 8ualifications of a##licants& the
#assing grades& etc$ are -ithin the sco#e of the legislative #o-er$ )ut the #o-er to determine -hen a
candidate has made or has not made the re8uired grade is (udicial& and lies com#letely -ith this Court$
% hold that the act under consideration is an e2ercise of the (udicial function& and lies beyond the sco#e
of the congressional #rerogative of amending the rules$ To say that candidates -ho obtain a general
average of M+ #er cent in 19,>& M> #er cent in 19,& and M #er cent in 19,, should be considered as
having #assed the e2amination& is to mean e2ercise of the #rivilege and discretion (udged in this Court$
%t is a mandate to the tribunal to #ass candidates for different years -ith grades lo-er than the #assing
mar*$ 'o reasoning is necessary to sho- that it is an arrogation of the Court@s (udicial authority and
discretion$ %t is furthermore ob(ectionable as discriminatory$ 3hy should those ta*ing the e2aminations
in 19,>& 19, and 19,, be allo-ed to have the #rivilege of a lo-er #assing grade& -hile those ta*ing
earlier or later are notQ
% vote that the act in toto be declared unconstitutional& because it is not embraced -ithin the rule=
ma*ing #o-er of Congress& because it is an undue interference -ith the #o-er of this Court to admit
members thereof& and because it is discriminatory$
"A0A5& C$.$& dissenting:
:nder section 1, of 0ule of Court 'o$ 1+M& in order that a bar candidate Fmay be deemed to have
#assed his e2aminations successfully& he must have obtained a general average of M, #er cent in all
sub(ects& -ithout falling belo- ,9 #er cent in any sub(ect$@ This #assing mar* has al-ays been adhered
to& -ith certain e2ce#tion #resently to be s#ecified$
3ith reference to the bar e2aminations given in August& 19!& the original list of successful candidates
included only those -ho obtained a general average of M, #er cent or more$ :#on motion for
reconsideration& ho-ever& 1+ candidates -ith general averages ranging from M+ to M> #er cent -ere
raised to M, #er cent by resolution of December 1L& 19!$ %n the e2aminations of 'ovember& 19! the
list first released containing the names of successful candidates covered only those -ho obtained a
general average of M, #er cent or moreG but& u#on motion for reconsideration& 19 candidates -ith a
general average of M+ #er cent -ere raised to M, #er cent by resolution of March >1& 19M$ This -ould
indicate that in the original list of successful candidates those having a general average of M> #er cent
or more but belo- M, #er cent -ere included$ After the original list of 19M successful bar candidates
had been released& and on motion for reconsideration& all candidates -ith a general average of !9 #er
cent -ere allo-ed to #ass by resolution of .uly 1,& 19L$ 3ith res#ect to the bar e2aminations held in
August& 19L& in addition to the original list of successful bar candidates& all those -ho obtained a
general average of M9 #er cent or more& irres#ective of the grades in any one sub(ect and irres#ective of
-hether they filed #etitions for reconsideration& -ere allo-ed to #ass by resolution of A#ril +L& 199$
Thus& for the year 19M the Court in effect made !9 #er cent as the #assing average& and for the year
19L& M9 #er centG and this amounted& -ithout being noticed #erha#s& to an amendment of section 1 of
0ule 1+M$
'umerous flun*ers in the bar e2aminations held subse8uent to 19L& -hose general averages mostly
ranged from !9 to M> #er cent& filed motions for reconsideration invo*ing the #recedents set by this
Court in 19M and 19L& but said motions -ere uniformly denied$
%n the year 19,1& the Congress& after #ublic hearings -here la- deans and #rofessors& #ractising
attorneys& #residents of bar associations& and la- graduates a##eared and argued lengthily #ro or con&
a##roved a bill #roviding& among others& for the reduction of the #assing general average from M, #er
cent to M9 #er cent& retroactive to any bar e2amination held after .uly & 19!$ This bill -as vetoed by
the "resident mainly in vie- of an unfavorable comment of .ustices "adilla& Tuason& Montemayor&
0eyes& )autista and .ugo$ %n 19,>& the Congress #assed another bill similar to the #revious bill vetoed
by the "resident& -ith the im#ortant difference that in the later bill the #rovisions in the first bill
regarding B1D the su#ervision and regulation by the 5u#reme Court of the study of la-& B+D the inclusion
of 5ocial <egislation and Ta2ation as ne- bar sub(ects& B>D the #ublication of the bar e2aminers before
the holding of the e2amination& and BD the e8ual division among the e2aminers of all the admission
fees #aid by bar a##licants& -ere eliminated$ This second bill -as allo-ed to become a la-& 0e#ublic
Act 'o$ 9M+& by the "resident by merely not signing it -ithin the re8uired #eriodG and in doing so the
"resident gave due res#ect to the -ill of the Congress -hich& s#ea*ing for the #eo#le& chose to re#ass
the bill first vetoed by him$
:nder 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+& any bar candidates -ho obtained a general average of M9 #er cent in any
e2aminations after .uly & 19! u# to August 19,1G M1 #er cent in the 19,+ bar e2aminationsG M+ #er
cent in 19,> bar e2aminationsG M> #er cent in the 19, bar e2aminationsG and M #er cent in the 19,,
bar e2aminations& -ithout obtaining a grade belo- ,9 #er cent in any sub(ect& shall be allo-ed to #ass$
5aid Act also #rovides that any bar candidate -ho obtained a grade of M, #er cent in any sub(ect in any
e2amination after .uly & 19!& shall be deemed to have #assed in such sub(ect o
Today is Tuesday& 5e#tember 9+& +91
search
0e#ublic of the "hili##ines
5:"0EME C/:0T
Manila
E' )A'C
0esolution March 1L& 19,
%n the Matter of the "etitions for Admission to the )ar of :nsuccessful Candidates of 19! to 19,>G
A<)%'/ C:'A'A'& ET A<$& #etitioners$
.ose M$ Aruego& M$4$ de .oya& Miguel 0$ Corne(o& and Antonio Enrile %nton for #etitioners$
/ffice of the 5olicitor ;eneral .uan 0$ <i-ag for res#ondent$
D%/R'/& .$:
%n recent years fe- controversial issues have aroused so much #ublic interest and concern as 0e#ublic
Act 'o$ 9M+& #o#ularly *no-n as the F)ar Flun*ers@ Act of 19,>$F :nder the 0ules of Court governing
admission to the bar& Fin order that a candidate Bfor admission to the )arD may be deemed to have
#assed his e2aminations successfully& he must have obtained a general average of M, #er cent in all
sub(ects& -ithout falling belo- ,9 #er cent in any sub(ect$F B0ule 1+M& sec$ 1& 0ules of CourtD$
'evertheless& considering the varying difficulties of the different bar e2aminations held since 19! and
the varying degree of strictness -ith -hich the e2amination #a#ers -ere graded& this court #assed and
admitted to the bar those candidates -ho had obtained an average of only M+ #er cent in 19!& !9 #er
cent in 19M& M9 #er cent in 19L& and M #er cent in 199$ %n 19,9 to 19,>& the M #er cent -as raised
to M, #er cent$
)elieving themselves as fully 8ualified to #ractice la- as those reconsidered and #assed by this court&
and feeling conscious of having been discriminated against B5ee E2#lanatory 'ote to 0$A$ 'o$ 9M+D&
unsuccessful candidates -ho obtained averages of a fe- #ercentage lo-er than those admitted to the
)ar agitated in Congress for& and secured in 19,1 the #assage of 5enate )ill 'o$ 1+ -hich& among
others& reduced the #assing general average in bar e2aminations to M9 #er cent effective since 19!$
The "resident re8uested the vie-s of this court on the bill$ Com#lying -ith that re8uest& seven
members of the court subscribed to and submitted -ritten comments adverse thereto& and shortly
thereafter the "resident vetoed it$ Congress did not override the veto$ %nstead& it a##roved 5enate )ill
'o$ >M1& embodying substantially the #rovisions of the vetoed bill$ Although the members of this court
reiterated their unfavorable vie-s on the matter& the "resident allo-ed the bill to become a la- on .une
+1& 19,> -ithout his signature$ The la-& -hich incidentally -as enacted in an election year& reads in
full as follo-s:
0E":)<%C ACT '/$ 9M+
A' ACT T/ F%C T4E "A55%'; MA0R5 F/0 )A0 ECAM%'AT%/'5 F0/M '%'ETEE'
4:'D0ED A'D F/0TP=5%C :" T/ A'D %'C<:D%'; '%'ETEE' 4:'D0ED A'D F%FTP=
F%VE$
)e it enacted by the 5enate and 4ouse of 0e#resentatives of the "hili##ines in Congress assembled:
5ECT%/' 1$ 'ot-ithstanding the #rovisions of section fourteen& 0ule numbered one hundred t-enty=
seven of the 0ules of Court& any bar candidate -ho obtained a general average of seventy #er cent in
any bar e2aminations after .uly fourth& nineteen hundred and forty=si2 u# to the August nineteen
hundred and fifty=one bar e2aminationsG seventy=one #er cent in the nineteen hundred and fifty=t-o bar
e2aminationsG seventy=t-o #er cent in the in the nineteen hundred and fifty=three bar e2aminationsG
seventy=three #er cent in the nineteen hundred and fifty=four bar e2aminationsG seventy=four #er cent in
the nineteen hundred and fifty=five bar e2aminations -ithout a candidate obtaining a grade belo- fifty
#er cent in any sub(ect& shall be allo-ed to ta*e and subscribe the corres#onding oath of office as
member of the "hili##ine )ar: "rovided& ho-ever& That for the #ur#ose of this Act& any e2act one=half
or more of a fraction& shall be considered as one and included as #art of the ne2t -hole number$
5EC$ +$ Any bar candidate -ho obtained a grade of seventy=five #er cent in any sub(ect in any bar
e2amination after .uly fourth& nineteen hundred and forty=si2 shall be deemed to have #assed in such
sub(ect or sub(ects and such grade or grades shall be included in com#uting the #assing general average
that said candidate may obtain in any subse8uent e2aminations that he may ta*e$
5EC$ >$ This Act shall ta*e effect u#on its a##roval$
Enacted on .une +1& 19,>& -ithout the E2ecutive a##roval$
After its a##roval& many of the unsuccessful #ost-ar candidates filed #etitions for admission to the bar
invo*ing its #rovisions& -hile others -hose motions for the revision of their e2amination #a#ers -ere
still #ending also invo*ed the aforesaid la- as an additional ground for admission$ There are also
others -ho have sought sim#ly the reconsideration of their grades -ithout& ho-ever& invo*ing the la-
in 8uestion$ To avoid in(ustice to individual #etitioners& the court first revie-ed the motions for
reconsideration& irres#ective of -hether or not they had invo*ed 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+$ :nfortunately&
the court has found no reason to revise their grades$ %f they are to be admitted to the bar& it must be
#ursuant to 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ -hich& if declared valid& should be a##lied e8ually to all concerned
-hether they have filed #etitions or not$ A com#lete list of the #etitioners& #ro#erly classified& affected
by this decision& as -ell as a more detailed account of the history of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+& are
a##ended to this decision as Anne2es % and %%$ And to realiHe more readily the effects of the la-& the
follo-ing statistical data are set forth:
B1D The unsuccessful bar candidates -ho are to be benefited by section 1 of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ total
1&1!L& classified as follo-s:
19! BAugustD
+9!
1+1
1L
19! B'ovemberD
MM
++L
>
19M
M9
>9
9
19L
L99
99
11
199
1&+1L
,>+
1!
19,9
1&>1!
L9>
+!
19,1
+&9!L
LM9
19!
19,+
+&M>L
1&9>>
+!
19,>
+&,,,
9!L
+L
T/TA<
1+&+>9
,&+1
1&1!L
/f the total 1&1!L candidates& 9+ have #assed in subse8uent e2amination& and only ,L! have filed either
motions for admission to the bar #ursuant to said 0e#ublic Act& or mere motions for reconsideration$
B+D %n addition& some other 19 unsuccessful candidates are to be benefited by section + of said 0e#ublic
Act$ These candidates had each ta*en from t-o to five different e2aminations& but failed to obtain a
#assing average in any of them$ Consolidating& ho-ever& their highest grades in different sub(ects in
#revious e2aminations& -ith their latest mar*s& they -ould be sufficient to reach the #assing average as
#rovided for by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+$
B>D The total number of candidates to be benefited by this 0e#ublic Acts is therefore 1&99& of -hich
only !9 have filed #etitions$ /f these !9 #etitioners& >> -ho failed in 19! to 19,1 had individually
#resented motions for reconsideration -hich -ere denied& -hile 1+, unsuccessful candidates of 19,+&
and ,! of 19,>& had #resented similar motions& -hich are still #ending because they could be favorably
affected by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+& E although as has been already stated& this tribunal finds no
sufficient reasons to reconsider their grades
:'C/'5T%T:T%/'A<%TP /F 0E":)<%C ACT '/$ 9M+
4aving been called u#on to enforce a la- of far=reaching effects on the #ractice of the legal #rofession
and the administration of (ustice& and because some doubts have been e2#ressed as to its validity& the
court set the hearing of the afore=mentioned #etitions for admission on the sole 8uestion of -hether or
not 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ is constitutional$
3e have been enlightened in the study of this 8uestion by the brilliant assistance of the members of the
bar -ho have am#ly argued& orally an in -riting& on the various as#ects in -hich the 8uestion may be
gleaned$ The valuable studies of Messrs$ E$ Voltaire ;arcia& Vicente .$ Francisco& Vicente "elaeH and
)uenaventura Evangelista& in favor of the validity of the la-& and of the :$"$ 3omen@s <a-yers@ Circle&
the 5olicitor ;eneral& Messrs$ Arturo A$ AlafriH& Enri8ue M$ Fernando& Vicente Abad 5antos& Carlos A$
)arrios& Vicente del 0osario& .uan de )lancaflor& Mamerto V$ ;onHales& and 0oman /Haeta against it&
aside from the memoranda of counsel for #etitioners& Messrs$ .ose M$ Aruego& M$4$ de .oya& Miguel 0$
Corne(o and Antonio Enrile %nton& and of #etitioners Cabrera& Macasaet and ;alema themselves& has
greatly hel#ed us in this tas*$ The legal researchers of the court have e2hausted almost all "hili##ine
and American (uris#rudence on the matter$ The 8uestion has been the ob(ect of intense deliberation for
a long time by the Tribunal& and finally& after the voting& the #re#aration of the ma(ority o#inion -as
assigned to a ne- member in order to #lace it as humanly as #ossible above all sus#icion of #re(udice
or #artiality$
0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ has for its ob(ect& according to its author& to admit to the )ar& those candidates
-ho suffered from insufficiency of reading materials and inade8uate #re#aration$ Kuoting a #ortion of
the E2#lanatory 'ote of the #ro#osed bill& its author 4onorable 5enator "ablo Angeles David stated:
The reason for rela2ing the standard M, #er cent #assing grade is the tremendous handica# -hich
students during the years immediately after the .a#anese occu#ation has to overcome such as the
insufficiency of reading materials and the inade8uacy of the #re#aration of students -ho too* u# la-
soon after the liberation$
/f the 9&!M, candidates -ho too* the e2aminations from 19! to 19,+& ,&+>! #assed$ And no- it is
claimed that in addition !9 candidates be admitted B-hich in reality total 1&99D& because they suffered
from Finsufficiency of reading materialsF and of Finade8uacy of #re#aration$F
)y its declared ob(ective& the la- is contrary to #ublic interest because it 8ualifies 1&99 la- graduates
-ho confessedly had inade8uate #re#aration for the #ractice of the #rofession& as -as e2actly found by
this Tribunal in the aforesaid e2aminations$ The #ublic interest demands of legal #rofession ade8uate
#re#aration and efficiency& #recisely more so as legal #roblem evolved by the times become more
difficult$ An ade8uate legal #re#aration is one of the vital re8uisites for the #ractice of la- that should
be develo#ed constantly and maintained firmly$ To the legal #rofession is entrusted the #rotection of
#ro#erty& life& honor and civil liberties$ To a##rove officially of those inade8uately #re#ared individuals
to dedicate themselves to such a delicate mission is to create a serious social danger$ Moreover& the
statement that there -as an insufficiency of legal reading materials is grossly e2aggerated$ There -ere
abundant materials$ Decisions of this court alone in mimeogra#hed co#ies -ere made available to the
#ublic during those years and #rivate enter#rises had also #ublished them in monthly magaHines and
annual digests$ The /fficial ;aHette had been #ublished continuously$ )oo*s and magaHines #ublished
abroad have entered -ithout restriction since 19,$ Many la- boo*s& some even -ith revised and
enlarged editions have been #rinted locally during those #eriods$ A ne- set of "hili##ine 0e#orts began
to be #ublished since 19!& -hich continued to be su##lemented by the addition of ne- volumes$
Those are facts of #ublic *no-ledge$
'ot-ithstanding all these& if the la- in 8uestion is valid& it has to be enforced$
The 8uestion is not ne- in its fundamental as#ect or from the #oint of vie- of a##licable #rinci#les& but
the resolution of the 8uestion -ould have been easier had an identical case of similar bac*ground been
#ic*ed out from the (uris#rudence -e daily consult$ %s there any #recedent in the long Anglo=5a2on
legal history& from -hich has been directly derived the (udicial system established here -ith its lofty
ideals by the Congress of the :nited 5tates& and -hich -e have #reserved and attem#ted to im#rove& or
in our contem#oraneous (udicial history of more than half a centuryQ From the citations of those
defending the la-& -e can not find a case in -hich the validity of a similar la- had been sustained&
-hile those against its validity cite& among others& the cases of Day B%n re Day& , 'E !!D& of Cannon
B5tate vs$ Cannon& +9 '3& 1D& the o#inion of the 5u#reme Court of Massachusetts in 19>+ BL1 A<0
19!1D& of ;uari?a B+ "hil$& >MD& aside from the o#inion of the "resident -hich is e2#ressed in his vote
of the original bill and -hich the #ost#onement of the contested la- res#ects$
This la- has no #recedent in its favor$ 3hen similar la-s in other countries had been #romulgated& the
(udiciary immediately declared them -ithout force or effect$ %t is not -ithin our #o-er to offer a
#recedent to u#hold the dis#uted la-$
To be e2act& -e ought to state here that -e have e2amined carefully the case that has been cited to us as
a favorable #recedent of the la- E that of Coo#er B++ 'P& L1D& -here the Court of A##eals of 'e-
Por* revo*ed the decision of the 5u#reme court of that 5tate& denying the #etition of Coo#er to be
admitted to the #ractice of la- under the #rovisions of a statute concerning the school of la- of
Columbia College #romulgated on A#ril M& 1L!9& -hich -as declared by the Court of A##eals to be
consistent -ith the Constitution of the state of 'e- Por*$
%t a##ears that the Constitution of 'e- Por* at that time #rovided:
They Bi$e$& the (udgesD shall not hold any other office of #ublic trust$ All votes for either of them for any
elective office e2ce#t that of the Court of A##eals& given by the <egislature or the #eo#le& shall be void$
They shall not e2ercise any #o-er of a##ointment to #ublic office$ Any male citiHen of the age of
t-enty=one years& of good moral character& and -ho #ossesses the re8uisite 8ualifications of learning
and ability& shall be entitled to admission to #ractice in all the courts of this 5tate$ B#$ 9>D$
According to the Court of A##eals& the ob(ect of the constitutional #rece#t is as follo-s:
Attorneys& solicitors& etc$& -ere #ublic officersG the #o-er of a##ointing them had #reviously rested
-ith the (udges& and this -as the #rinci#al a##ointing #o-er -hich they #ossessed$ The convention -as
evidently dissatisfied -ith the manner in -hich this #o-er had been e2ercised& and -ith the restrictions
-hich the (udges had im#osed u#on admission to #ractice before them$ The #rohibitory clause in the
section 8uoted -as aimed directly at this #o-er& and the insertion of the #rovisionF e2#ecting the
admission of attorneys& in this #articular section of the Constitution& evidently arose from its connection
-ith the ob(ect of this #rohibitory clause$ There is nothing indicative of confidence in the courts or of a
dis#osition to #reserve any #ortion of their #o-er over this sub(ect& unless the 5u#reme Court is right in
the inference it dra-s from the use of the -ord Uadmission@ in the action referred to$ %t is urged that the
admission s#o*en of must be by the courtG that to admit means to grant leave& and that the #o-er of
granting necessarily im#lies the #o-er of refusing& and of course the right of determining -hether the
a##licant #ossesses the re8uisite 8ualifications to entitle him to admission$
These #ositions may all be conceded& -ithout affecting the validity of the act$ B#$ 9>$D
'o-& -ith res#ect to the la- of A#ril M& 1L!9& the decision seems to indicate that it #rovided that the
#ossession of a di#loma of the school of la- of Columbia College conferring the degree of )achelor of
<a-s -as evidence of the legal 8ualifications that the constitution re8uired of a##licants for admission
to the )ar$ The decision does not ho-ever 8uote the te2t of the la-& -hich -e cannot find in any #ublic
or accessible #rivate library in the country$
%n the case of Coo#er& su#ra& to ma*e the la- consistent -ith the Constitution of 'e- Por*& the Court
of A##eals said of the ob(ect of the la-:
The motive for #assing the act in 8uestion is a##arent$ Columbia College being an institution of
established re#utation& and having a la- de#artment under the charge of able #rofessors& the students in
-hich de#artment -ere not only sub(ected to a formal e2amination by the la- committee of the
institution& but to a certain definite #eriod of study before being entitled to a di#loma of being
graduates& the <egislature evidently& and no doubt (ustly& considered this e2amination& together -ith the
#reliminary study re8uired by the act& as fully e8uivalent as a test of legal re8uirements& to the ordinary
e2amination by the courtG and as rendering the latter e2amination& to -hich no definite #eriod of
#reliminary study -as essential& unnecessary and burdensome$
The act -as obviously #assed -ith reference to the learning and ability of the a##licant& and for the
mere #ur#ose of substituting the e2amination by the la- committee of the college for that of the court$
%t could have had no other ob(ect& and hence no greater sco#e should be given to its #rovisions$ 3e
cannot su##ose that the <egislature designed entirely to dis#ense -ith the #lain and e2#licit
re8uirements of the ConstitutionG and the act contains nothing -hatever to indicate an intention that the
authorities of the college should in8uire as to the age& citiHenshi#& etc$& of the students before granting a
di#loma$ The only rational inter#retation of -hich the act admits is& that it -as intended to ma*e the
college di#loma com#etent evidence as to the legal attainments of the a##licant& and nothing else$ To
this e2tent alone it o#erates as a modification of #re=e2isting statutes& and it is to be read in connection
-ith these statutes and -ith the Constitution itself in order to determine the #resent condition of the la-
on the sub(ect$ B#$L9D
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
The <egislature has not ta*en from the court its (urisdiction over the 8uestion of admission& that has
sim#ly #rescribed -hat shall be com#etent evidence in certain cases u#on that 8uestion$ B#$9>D
From the foregoing& the com#lete ina##licability of the case of Coo#er -ith that at bar may be clearly
seen$ "lease note only the follo-ing distinctions:
B1D The la- of 'e- Por* does not re8uire that any candidate of Columbia College -ho failed in the bar
e2aminations be admitted to the #ractice of la-$
B+D The la- of 'e- Por* according to the very decision of Coo#er& has not ta*en from the court its
(urisdiction over the 8uestion of admission of attorney at la-G in effect& it does not decree the admission
of any la-yer$
B>D The Constitution of 'e- Por* at that time and that of the "hili##ines are entirely different on the
matter of admission of the #ractice of la-$
%n the (udicial system from -hich ours has been evolved& the admission& sus#ension& disbarment and
reinstatement of attorneys at la- in the #ractice of the #rofession and their su#ervision have been
dis#utably a (udicial function and res#onsibility$ )ecause of this attribute& its continuous and Healous
#ossession and e2ercise by the (udicial #o-er have been demonstrated during more than si2 centuries&
-hich certainly Fconstitutes the most solid of titles$F Even considering the #o-er granted to Congress
by our Constitution to re#eal& alter su##lement the rules #romulgated by this Court regarding the
admission to the #ractice of la-& to our (udgment and #ro#osition that the admission& sus#ension&
disbarment and reinstatement of the attorneys at la- is a legislative function& #ro#erly belonging to
Congress& is unacce#table$ The function re8uires B1D #reviously established rules and #rinci#les& B+D
concrete facts& -hether #ast or #resent& affecting determinate individuals$ and B>D decision as to -hether
these facts are governed by the rules and #rinci#lesG in effect& a (udicial function of the highest degree$
And it becomes more undis#utably (udicial& and not legislative& if #revious (udicial resolutions on the
#etitions of these same individuals are attem#ted to be revo*ed or modified$
3e have said that in the (udicial system from -hich ours has been derived& the act of admitting&
sus#ending& disbarring and reinstating attorneys at la- in the #ractice of the #rofession is concededly
(udicial$ A com#rehensive and conscientious study of this matter had been underta*en in the case of
5tate vs$ Cannon B19>+D +9 '3 1& in -hich the validity of a legislative enactment #roviding that
Cannon be #ermitted to #ractice before the courts -as discussed$ From the te2t of this decision -e
8uote the follo-ing #aragra#hs:
This statute #resents an assertion of legislative #o-er -ithout #arallel in the history of the English
s#ea*ing #eo#le so far as -e have been able to ascertain$ There has been much uncertainty as to the
e2tent of the #o-er of the <egislature to #rescribe the ultimate 8ualifications of attorney at la- has
been e2#ressly committed to the courts& and the act of admission has al-ays been regarded as a (udicial
function$ This act #ur#orts to constitute Mr$ Cannon an attorney at la-& and in this res#ect it stands
alone as an assertion of legislative #o-er$ B#$ D
:nder the Constitution all legislative #o-er is vested in a 5enate and Assembly$ B5ection 1& art$ $D %n
so far as the #rescribing of 8ualifications for admission to the bar are legislative in character& the
<egislature is acting -ithin its constitutional authority -hen it sets u# and #rescribes such
8ualifications$ B#$ D
)ut -hen the <egislature has #rescribed those 8ualifications -hich in its (udgment -ill serve the
#ur#ose of legitimate legislative solicitude& is the #o-er of the court to im#ose other and further
e2actions and 8ualifications foreclosed or e2haustedQ B#$ D
:nder our Constitution the (udicial and legislative de#artments are distinct& inde#endent& and
coordinate branches of the government$ 'either branch en(oys all the #o-ers of sovereignty -hich
#ro#erly belongs to its de#artment$ 'either de#artment should so act as to embarrass the other in the
discharge of its res#ective functions$ That -as the scheme and thought of the #eo#le setting u#on the
form of government under -hich -e e2ist$ 5tate vs$ 4astings& 19 3is$& ,+,G Attorney ;eneral e2 rel$
)ashford vs$ )arsto-& 3is$& ,!M$ B#$ ,D
The (udicial de#artment of government is res#onsible for the #lane u#on -hich the administration of
(ustice is maintained$ %ts res#onsibility in this res#ect is e2clusive$ )y committing a #ortion of the
#o-ers of sovereignty to the (udicial de#artment of our state government& under +a scheme -hich it
-as su##osed rendered it immune from embarrassment or interference by any other de#artment of
government& the courts cannot esca#e res#onsibility fir the manner in -hich the #o-ers of sovereignty
thus committed to the (udicial de#artment are e2ercised$ B#$ ,D
The relation at the bar to the courts is a #eculiar and intimate relationshi#$ The bar is an attache of the
courts$ The 8uality of (ustice dis#ense by the courts de#ends in no small degree u#on the integrity of its
bar$ An unfaithful bar may easily bring scandal and re#roach to the administration of (ustice and bring
the courts themselves into disre#ute$ B#$,D
Through all time courts have e2ercised a direct and severe su#ervision over their bars& at least in the
English s#ea*ing countries$ B#$ ,D
After e2#laining the history of the case& the Court ends thus:
/ur conclusion may be e#itomiHed as follo-s: For more than si2 centuries #rior to the ado#tion of our
Constitution& the courts of England& concededly subordinate to "arliament since the 0evolution of
1!LL& had e2ercise the right of determining -ho should be admitted to the #ractice of la-& -hich& as
-as said in Matter of the 5ergeant@s at <a-& ! )ingham@s 'e- Cases +>,& Fconstitutes the most solid of
all titles$F %f the courts and (udicial #o-er be regarded as an entity& the #o-er to determine -ho should
be admitted to #ractice la- is a constituent element of that entity$ %t may be difficult to isolate that
element and say -ith assurance that it is either a #art of the inherent #o-er of the court& or an essential
element of the (udicial #o-er e2ercised by the court& but that it is a #o-er belonging to the (udicial
entity and made of not only a sovereign institution& but made of it a se#arate inde#endent& and
coordinate branch of the government$ They too* this institution along -ith the #o-er traditionally
e2ercise to determine -ho should constitute its attorney at la-$ There is no e2#ress #rovision in the
Constitution -hich indicates an intent that this traditional #o-er of the (udicial de#artment should in
any manner be sub(ect to legislative control$ "erha#s the dominant thought of the framers of our
constitution -as to ma*e the three great de#artments of government se#arate and inde#endent of one
another$ The idea that the <egislature might embarrass the (udicial de#artment by #rescribing
inade8uate 8ualifications for attorneys at la- is inconsistent -ith the dominant #ur#ose of ma*ing the
(udicial inde#endent of the legislative de#artment& and such a #ur#ose should not be inferred in the
absence of e2#ress constitutional #rovisions$ 3hile the legislature may legislate -ith res#ect to the
8ualifications of attorneys& but is incidental merely to its general and un8uestioned #o-er to #rotect the
#ublic interest$ 3hen it does legislate a fi2ing a standard of 8ualifications re8uired of attorneys at la-
in order that #ublic interests may be #rotected& such 8ualifications do not constitute only a minimum
standard and limit the class from -hich the court must ma*e its selection$ 5uch legislative
8ualifications do not constitute the ultimate 8ualifications beyond -hich the court cannot go in fi2ing
additional 8ualifications deemed necessary by the course of the #ro#er administration of (udicial
functions$ There is no legislative #o-er to com#el courts to admit to their bars #ersons deemed by them
unfit to e2ercise the #rerogatives of an attorney at la-$ B#$ ,9D
Furthermore& it is an unla-ful attem#t to e2ercise the #o-er of a##ointment$ %t is 8uite li*ely true that
the legislature may e2ercise the #o-er of a##ointment -hen it is in #ursuance of a legislative functions$
4o-ever& the authorities are -ell=nigh unanimous that the #o-er to admit attorneys to the #ractice of
la- is a (udicial function$ %n all of the states& e2ce#t 'e- .ersey B%n re 0eisch& L> '$.$ E8$ L+& 99 A$
1+D& so far as our investigation reveals& attorneys receive their formal license to #ractice la- by their
admission as members of the bar of the court so admitting$ Cor$ .ur$ ,M+G E2 #arte 5ecombre& 19 4o-$
9&1, <$ Ed$ ,!,G E2 #arte ;arland& 3all$ >>>& 1L <$ Ed$ >!!G 0andall vs$ )righam& M 3all$ ,>& 19 <$
Ed$ +L,G 4anson vs$ ;rattan& L Ran& L>& 11, "$ !!& > <$0$A$ ,19G Danforth vs$ Egan& +> 5$ D$ >&
119 '$3$ 19+1& 1>9 Am$ 5t$ 0e#$ 19>9& +9 Ann$ Cas$ 1>$
The #o-er of admitting an attorney to #ractice having been #er#etually e2ercised by the courts& it
having been so generally held that the act of the court in admitting an attorney to #ractice is the
(udgment of the court& and an attem#t as this on the #art of the <egislature to confer such right u#on
any one being most e2ceedingly uncommon& it seems clear that the licensing of an attorney is and
al-ays has been a #urely (udicial function& no matter -here the #o-er to determine the 8ualifications
may reside$ B#$ ,1D
%n that same year of 19>+& the 5u#reme Court of Massachusetts& in ans-ering a consultation of the
5enate of that 5tate& 1L9 'E M+,& said:
%t is indis#ensible to the administration of (ustice and to inter#retation of the la-s that there be
members of the bar of sufficient ability& ade8uate learning and sound moral character$ This arises from
the need of enlightened assistance to the honest& and restraining authority over the *navish& litigant$ %t is
highly im#ortant& also that the #ublic be #rotected from incom#etent and vicious #ractitioners& -hose
o##ortunity for doing mischief is -ide$ %t -as said by CardoH& C$<$& in "eo#le e2 rel$ Rarlin vs$ Cul*in&
++ '$P$ ,!& M9& M1& 1!+ '$E$ LM& L9& !9 A$<$0$ L,1: FMembershi# in the bar is a #rivilege
burden -ith conditions$F /ne is admitted to the bar Ffor something more than #rivate gain$F 4e
becomes an Fofficer of the courtF& and &li*e the court itself& an instrument or agency to advance the end
of (ustice$ 4is coo#eration -ith the court is due F-henever (ustice -ould be im#eriled if coo#eration
-as -ithheld$F 3ithout such attorneys at la- the (udicial de#artment of government -ould be
ham#ered in the #erformance of its duties$ That has been the history of attorneys under the common
la-& both in this country and England$ Admission to #ractice as an attorney at la- is almost -ithout
e2ce#tion conceded to be a (udicial function$ "etition to that end is filed in courts& as are other
#roceedings invo*ing (udicial action$ Admission to the bar is accom#lish and made o#en and notorious
by a decision of the court entered u#on its records$ The establishment by the Constitution of the (udicial
de#artment conferred authority necessary to the e2ercise of its #o-ers as a coordinate de#artment of
government$ %t is an inherent #o-er of such a de#artment of government ultimately to determine the
8ualifications of those to be admitted to #ractice in its courts& for assisting in its -or*& and to #rotect
itself in this res#ect from the unfit& those lac*ing in sufficient learning& and those not #ossessing good
moral character$ Chief .ustice Taney stated succinctly and -ith finality in E2 #arte 5ecombe& 19 4o-$
9& 1>& 1, <$ Ed$ ,!,& F%t has been -ell settled& by the rules and #ractice of common=la- courts& that it
rests e2clusively -ith the court to determine -ho is 8ualified to become one of its officers& as an
attorney and counselor& and for -hat cause he ought to be removed$F B#$M+MD
%n the case of Day and others -ho collectively filed a #etition to secure license to #ractice the legal
#rofession by virtue of a la- of state B%n re Day& , 'E !!D& the court said in #art:
%n the case of E2 #arte ;arland& 3all& >>>& 1L <$ Ed$ >!!& the court& holding the test oath for attorneys
to be unconstitutional& e2#lained the nature of the attorney@s office as follo-s: FThey are officers of the
court& admitted as such by its order& u#on evidence of their #ossessing sufficient legal learning and fair
#rivate character$ %t has al-ays been the general #ractice in this country to obtain this evidence by an
e2amination of the #arties$ %n this court the fact of the admission of such officers in the highest court of
the states to -hich they& res#ectively& belong for& three years #receding their a##lication& is regarded as
sufficient evidence of the #ossession of the re8uisite legal learning& and the statement of counsel
moving their admission sufficient evidence that their #rivate and #rofessional character is fair$ The
order of admission is the (udgment of the court that the #arties #ossess the re8uisite 8ualifications as
attorneys and counselors& and are entitled to a##ear as such and conduct causes therein$ From its entry
the #arties become officers of the court& and are res#onsible to it for #rofessional misconduct$ They
hold their office during good behavior& and can only be de#rived of it for misconduct ascertained and
declared by the (udgment of the court after o##ortunity to be heard has been afforded$ E2 #arte
4oyfron& admission or their e2clusion is not the e2ercise of a mere ministerial #o-er$ %t is the e2ercise
of (udicial #o-er& and has been so held in numerous cases$ %t -as so held by the court of a##eals of
'e- Por* in the matter of the a##lication of Coo#er for admission$ 0e Coo#er ++ '$ P$ L1$ FAttorneys
and CounselorsF& said that court& Fare not only officers of the court& but officers -hose duties relate
almost e2clusively to #roceedings of a (udicial natureG and hence their a##ointment may& -ith #ro#riety&
be entrusted to the court& and the latter& in #erforming his duty& may very (ustly considered as engaged
in the e2ercise of their a##ro#riate (udicial functions$F B##$ !,9=!,1D$
3e 8uote from other cases& the follo-ing #ertinent #ortions:
Admission to #ractice of la- is almost -ithout e2ce#tion conceded every-here to be the e2ercise of a
(udicial function& and this o#inion need not be burdened -ith citations in this #oint$ Admission to
#ractice have also been held to be the e2ercise of one of the inherent #o-ers of the court$ E 0e )ruen&
19+ 3ash$ M+& 1M+ "ac$ 99!$
Admission to the #ractice of la- is the e2ercise of a (udicial function& and is an inherent #o-er of the
court$ E A$C$ )rydon(ac*& vs$ 5tate )ar of California& +L1 "ac$ 191LG 5ee Annotation on "o-er of
<egislature res#ecting admission to bar& !,& A$<$ 0$ 1,1+$
/n this matter there is certainly a clear distinction bet-een the functions of the (udicial and legislative
de#artments of the government$
The distinction bet-een the functions of the legislative and the (udicial de#artments is that it is the
#rovince of the legislature to establish rules that shall regulate and govern in matters of transactions
occurring subse8uent to the legislative action& -hile the (udiciary determines rights and obligations
-ith reference to transactions that are #ast or conditions that e2ist at the time of the e2ercise of (udicial
#o-er& and the distinction is a vital one and not sub(ect to alteration or change either by legislative
action or by (udicial decree$
The (udiciary cannot consent that its #rovince shall be invaded by either of the other de#artments of the
government$ E 1! C$.$5$& Constitutional <a-& #$ ++9$
%f the legislature cannot thus indirectly control the action of the courts by re8uiring of them
construction of the la- according to its o-n vie-s& it is very #lain it cannot do so directly& by settling
aside their (udgments& com#elling them to grant ne- trials& ordering the discharge of offenders& or
directing -hat #articular ste#s shall be ta*en in the #rogress of a (udicial in8uiry$ E Cooley@s
Constitutional <imitations& 19+$
%n decreeing the bar candidates -ho obtained in the bar e2aminations of 19! to 19,+& a general
average of M9 #er cent -ithout falling belo- ,9 #er cent in any sub(ect& be admitted in mass to the
#ractice of la-& the dis#uted la- is not a legislationG it is a (udgment E a (udgment revo*ing those
#romulgated by this Court during the aforecited year affecting the bar candidates concernedG and
although this Court certainly can revo*e these (udgments even no-& for (ustifiable reasons& it is no less
certain that only this Court& and not the legislative nor e2ecutive de#artment& that may be so$ Any
attem#t on the #art of any of these de#artments -ould be a clear usur#ation of its functions& as is the
case -ith the la- in 8uestion$
That the Constitution has conferred on Congress the #o-er to re#eal& alter or su##lement the rule
#romulgated by this Tribunal& concerning the admission to the #ractice of la-& is no valid argument$
5ection 1>& article V%%% of the Constitution #rovides:
5ection 1>$ The 5u#reme Court shall have the #o-er to #romulgate rules concerning #leading& #ractice&
and #rocedure in all courts& and the admission to the #ractice of la-$ 5aid rules shall be uniform for all
courts of the same grade and shall not diminish& increase or modify substantive rights$ The e2isting
la-s on #leading& #ractice and #rocedure are hereby re#ealed as statutes& and are declared 0ules of
Court& sub(ect to the #o-er of the 5u#reme Court to alter and modify the same$ The Congress shall
have the #o-er to re#eal& alter& or su##lement the rules concerning #leading& #ractice& and #rocedure&
and the admission to the #ractice of la- in the "hili##ines$ E Constitution of the "hili##ines& Art$ V%%%&
sec$ 1>$
%t -ill be noted that the Constitution has not conferred on Congress and this Tribunal e8ual
res#onsibilities concerning the admission to the #ractice of la-$ the #rimary #o-er and res#onsibility
-hich the Constitution recogniHes continue to reside in this Court$ 4ad Congress found that this Court
has not #romulgated any rule on the matter& it -ould have nothing over -hich to e2ercise the #o-er
granted to it$ Congress may re#eal& alter and su##lement the rules #romulgated by this Court& but the
authority and res#onsibility over the admission& sus#ension& disbarment and reinstatement of attorneys
at la- and their su#ervision remain vested in the 5u#reme Court$ The #o-er to re#eal& alter and
su##lement the rules does not signify nor #ermit that Congress substitute or ta*e the #lace of this
Tribunal in the e2ercise of its #rimary #o-er on the matter$ The Constitution does not say nor mean that
Congress may admit& sus#end& disbar or reinstate directly attorneys at la-& or a determinate grou# of
individuals to the #ractice of la-$ %ts #o-er is limited to re#eal& modify or su##lement the e2isting rules
on the matter& if according to its (udgment the need for a better service of the legal #rofession re8uires
it$ )ut this #o-er does not relieve this Court of its res#onsibility to admit& sus#end& disbar and reinstate
attorneys at la- and su#ervise the #ractice of the legal #rofession$
)eing coordinate and inde#endent branches& the #o-er to #romulgate and enforce rules for the
admission to the #ractice of la- and the concurrent #o-er to re#eal& alter and su##lement them may
and should be e2ercised -ith the res#ect that each o-es to the other& giving careful consideration to the
res#onsibility -hich the nature of each de#artment re8uires$ These #o-ers have e2isted together for
centuries -ithout diminution on each #artG the harmonious delimitation being found in that the
legislature may and should e2amine if the e2isting rules on the admission to the )ar res#ond to the
demands -hich #ublic interest re8uires of a )ar endo-ed -ith high virtues& culture& training and
res#onsibility$ The legislature may& by means of a##eal& amendment or su##lemental rules& fill u# any
deficiency that it may find& and the (udicial #o-er& -hich has the inherent res#onsibility for a good and
efficient administration of (ustice and the su#ervision of the #ractice of the legal #rofession& should
consider these reforms as the minimum standards for the elevation of the #rofession& and see to it that
-ith these reforms the lofty ob(ective that is desired in the e2ercise of its traditional duty of admitting&
sus#ending& disbarring and reinstating attorneys at la- is realiHed$ They are #o-ers -hich& e2ercise
-ithin their #ro#er constitutional limits& are not re#ugnant& but rather com#lementary to each other in
attaining the establishment of a )ar that -ould res#ond to the increasing and e2acting necessities of the
administration of (ustice$
The case of ;uari?a B191>D + "hil$& >M& illustrates our criterion$ ;uari?a too* e2amination and failed
by a fe- #oints to obtain the general average$ A recently enacted la- #rovided that one -ho had been
a##ointed to the #osition of Fiscal may be admitted to the #ractice of la- -ithout a #revious
e2amination$ The ;overnment a##ointed ;uari?a and he discharged the duties of Fiscal in a remote
#rovince$ This tribunal refused to give his license -ithout #revious e2aminations$ The court said:
0elying u#on the #rovisions of section + of Act 'o$ 1,9M& the a##licant in this case see*s admission to
the bar& -ithout ta*ing the #rescribed e2amination& on the ground that he holds the office of #rovincial
fiscal for the "rovince of )atanes$
5ection + of Act 'o$ 1,9M& enacted February +L& 199M& is as follo-s:
5ec$ +$ "aragra#h one of section thirteen of Act 'umbered /ne 4undred and ninety& entitled FAn Act
#roviding a Code of "rocedure in Civil Actions and 5#ecial "roceedings in the "hili##ine %slands&F is
hereby amended to read as follo-s:
1$ Those -ho have been duly licensed under the la-s and orders of the %slands under the sovereignty of
5#ain or of the :nited 5tates and are in good and regular standing as members of the bar of the
"hili##ine %slands at the time of the ado#tion of this codeG "rovided& That any #erson -ho& #rior to the
#assage of this act& or at any time thereafter& shall have held& under the authority of the :nited 5tates&
the #osition of (ustice of the 5u#reme Court& (udge of the Court of First %nstance& or (udge or associate
(udge of the Court of <and 0egistration& of the "hili##ine %slands& or the #osition of Attorney ;eneral&
5olicitor ;eneral& Assistant Attorney ;eneral& assistant attorney in the office of the Attorney ;eneral&
#rosecuting attorney for the City of Manila& city attorney of Manila& assistant city attorney of Manila&
#rovincial fiscal& attorney for the Moro "rovince& or assistant attorney for the Moro "rovince& may be
licensed to #ractice la- in the courts of the "hili##ine %slands -ithout an e2amination& u#on motion
before the 5u#reme Court and establishing such fact to the satisfaction of said court$
The records of this court disclose that on a former occasion this a##ellant too*& and failed to #ass the
#rescribed e2amination$ The re#ort of the e2amining board& dated March +>& 199M& sho-s that he
received an average of only M1 #er cent in the various branches of legal learning u#on -hich he -as
e2amined& thus falling four #oints short of the re8uired #ercentage of M,$ 3e -ould be delin8uent in the
#erformance of our duty to the #ublic and to the bar& if& in the face of this affirmative indication of the
deficiency of the a##licant in the re8uired 8ualifications of learning in the la- at the time -hen he
#resented his former a##lication for admission to the bar& -e should grant him license to #ractice la- in
the courts of these %slands& -ithout first satisfying ourselves that des#ite his failure to #ass the
e2amination on that occasion& he no- F#ossesses the necessary 8ualifications of learning and ability$F
)ut it is contented that under the #rovisions of the above=cited statute the a##licant is entitled as of
right to be admitted to the bar -ithout ta*ing the #rescribed e2amination Fu#on motion before the
5u#reme CourtF accom#anied by satisfactory #roof that he has held and no- holds the office of
#rovincial fiscal of the "rovince of )atanes$ %t is urged that having in mind the ob(ect -hich the
legislator a##arently sought to attain in enacting the above=cited amendment to the earlier statute& and
in vie- of the conte2t generally and es#ecially of the fact that the amendment -as inserted as a #roviso
in that section of the original Act -hich s#ecifically #rovides for the admission of certain candidates
-ithout e2amination$ %t is contented that this mandatory construction is im#eratively re8uired in order
to give effect to the a##arent intention of the legislator& and to the candidate@s claim de (ure to have the
#o-er e2ercised$
And after co#ying article 9 of Act of .uly 1& 199+ of the Congress of the :nited 5tates& articles +& 1!
and 1M of Act 'o$ 1>!& and articles 1> to 1! of Act 199& the Court continued:
Manifestly& the (urisdiction thus conferred u#on this court by the commission and confirmed to it by the
Act of Congress -ould be limited and restricted& and in a case such as that under consideration -holly
destroyed& by giving the -ord Fmay&F as used in the above citation from Act of Congress of .uly 1&
199+& or of any Act of Congress #rescribing& defining or limiting the #o-er conferred u#on the
commission is to that e2tent invalid and void& as transcending its rightful limits and authority$
5#ea*ing on the a##lication of the la- to those -ho -ere a##ointed to the #ositions enumerated& and
-ith #articular em#hasis in the case of ;uari?a& the Court held:
%n the various cases -herein a##lications for the admission to the bar under the #rovisions of this
statute have been considered heretofore& -e have acce#ted the fact that such a##ointments had been
made as satisfactory evidence of the 8ualifications of the a##licant$ )ut in all of those cases -e had
reason to believe that the a##licants had been #racticing attorneys #rior to the date of their
a##ointment$
%n the case under consideration& ho-ever& it affirmatively a##ears that the a##licant -as not and never
had been #racticing attorney in this or any other (urisdiction #rior to the date of his a##ointment as
#rovincial fiscal& and it further affirmatively a##ears that he -as deficient in the re8uired 8ualifications
at the time -hen he last a##lied for admission to the bar$
%n the light of this affirmative #roof of his defieciency on that occasion& -e do not thin* that his
a##ointment to the office of #rovincial fiscal is in itself satisfactory #roof if his #ossession of the
necessary 8ualifications of learning and ability$ 3e conclude therefore that this a##lication for license
to #ractice in the courts of the "hili##ines& should be denied$
%n vie-& ho-ever& of the fact that -hen he too* the e2amination he fell only four #oints short of the
necessary grade to entitle him to a license to #racticeG and in vie- also of the fact that since that time he
has held the res#onsible office of the governor of the "rovince of 5orsogon and #resumably gave
evidence of such mar*ed ability in the #erformance of the duties of that office that the Chief E2ecutive&
-ith the consent and a##roval of the "hili##ine Commission& sought to retain him in the ;overnment
service by a##ointing him to the office of #rovincial fiscal& -e thin* -e -ould be (ustified under the
above=cited #rovisions of Act 'o$ 1,9M in -aiving in his case the ordinary e2amination #rescribed by
general rule& #rovided he offers satisfactory evidence of his #roficiency in a s#ecial e2amination -hich
-ill be given him by a committee of the court u#on his a##lication therefor& -ithout #re(udice to his
right& if he desires so to do& to #resent himself at any of the ordinary e2aminations #rescribed by
general rule$ E B%n re ;uari?a& ##$ L=9$D
%t is obvious& therefore& that the ultimate #o-er to grant license for the #ractice of la- belongs
e2clusively to this Court& and the la- #assed by Congress on the matter is of #ermissive character& or as
other authorities say& merely to fi2 the minimum conditions for the license$
The la- in 8uestion& li*e those in the case of Day and Cannon& has been found also to suffer from the
fatal defect of being a class legislation& and that if it has intended to ma*e a classification& it is arbitrary
and unreasonable$
%n the case of Day& a la- enacted on February +1& 1L99 re8uired of the 5u#reme Court& until December
>1 of that year& to grant license for the #ractice of la- to those students -ho began studying before
'ovember & 1L9M& and had studied for t-o years and #resented a di#loma issued by a school of la-& or
to those -ho had studied in a la- office and -ould #ass an e2amination& or to those -ho had studied
for three years if they commenced their studies after the aforementioned date$ The 5u#reme Court
declared that this la- -as unconstitutional being& among others& a class legislation$ The Court said:
This is an a##lication to this court for admission to the bar of this state by virtue of di#lomas from la-
schools issued to the a##licants$ The act of the general assembly #assed in 1L99& under -hich the
a##lication is made& is entitled FAn act to amend section 1 of an act entitled FAn act to revise the la- in
relation to attorneys and counselors&F a##roved March +L& 1LL& in force .uly 1& 1LM$F The
amendment& so far as it a##ears in the enacting clause& consists in the addition to the section of the
follo-ing: FAnd every a##lication for a license -ho shall com#ly -ith the rules of the su#reme court in
regard to admission to the bar in force at the time such a##licant commend the study of la-& either in a
la- or office or a la- school or college& shall be granted a license under this act not-ithstanding any
subse8uent changes in said rulesF$ E %n re Day et al& , '$P$& #$ !!$
$ $ $ After said #rovision there is a double #roviso& one branch of -hich is that u# to December >1& 1L99&
this court shall grant a license of admittance to the bar to the holder of every di#loma regularly issued
by any la- school regularly organiHed under the la-s of this state& -hose regular course of la- studies
is t-o years& and re8uiring an attendance by the student of at least >! -ee*s in each of such years& and
sho-ing that the student began the study of la- #rior to 'ovember & 1L9M& and accom#anied -ith the
usual #roofs of good moral character$ The other branch of the #roviso is that any student -ho has
studied la- for t-o years in a la- office& or #art of such time in a la- office& Fand #art in the aforesaid
la- school&F and -hose course of study began #rior to 'ovember & 1L9M& shall be admitted u#on a
satisfactory e2amination by the e2amining board in the branches no- re8uired by the rules of this
court$ %f the right to admission e2ists at all& it is by virtue of the #roviso& -hich& it is claimed& confers
substantial rights and #rivileges u#on the #ersons named therein& and establishes rules of legislative
creation for their admission to the bar$ B#$ !M$D
Considering the #roviso& ho-ever& as an enactment& it is clearly a s#ecial legislation& #rohibited by the
constitution& and invalid as such$ %f the legislature had any right to admit attorneys to #ractice in the
courts and ta*e #art in the administration of (ustice& and could #rescribe the character of evidence
-hich should be received by the court as conclusive of the re8uisite learning and ability of #ersons to
#ractice la-& it could only be done by a general la-& #ersons or classes of #ersons$ Const$ art & section
+$ The right to #ractice la- is a #rivilege& and a license for that #ur#ose ma*es the holder an officer of
the court& and confers u#on him the right to a##ear for litigants& to argue causes& and to collect fees
therefor& and creates certain e2em#tions& such as from (ury services and arrest on civil #rocess -hile
attending court$ The la- conferring such #rivileges must be general in its o#eration$ 'o doubt the
legislature& in framing an enactment for that #ur#ose& may classify #ersons so long as the la-
establishing classes in general& and has some reasonable relation to the end sought$ There must be some
difference -hich furnishes a reasonable basis for different one& having no (ust relation to the sub(ect of
the legislation$ )raceville Coal Co$ vs$ "eo#le& 1M %ll$ !!& >, '$E$ !+G 0itchie vs$ "eo#le& 1,, %ll$ 9L&
9 '$E$ ,G 0ailroad Co$ vs$ Ellis& 1!, :$5$ 1,9& 1M 5u#$ Ct$ +,,$
The length of time a #hysician has #racticed& and the s*ill ac8uired by e2#erience& may furnish a basis
for classification B3illiams vs$ "eo#le 1+1 %ll$ L& %% '$E$ LL1DG but the #lace -here such #hysician has
resided and #racticed his #rofession cannot furnish such basis& and is an arbitrary discrimination&
ma*ing an enactment based u#on it void B5tate vs$ "ennyeor& !, '$E$ 11>& 1L Atl$ LMLD$ 4ere the
legislature underta*es to say -hat shall serve as a test of fitness for the #rofession of the la-& and
#lainly& any classification must have some reference to learning& character& or ability to engage in such
#ractice$ The #roviso is limited& first& to a class of #ersons -ho began the study of la- #rior to
'ovember & 1L9M$ This class is subdivided into t-o classes E First& those #resenting di#lomas issued
by any la- school of this state before December >1& 1L99G and& second& those -ho studied la- for the
#eriod of t-o years in a la- office& or #art of the time in a la- school and #art in a la- office& -ho are
to be admitted u#on e2amination in the sub(ects s#ecified in the #resent rules of this court& and as to
this latter subdivision there seems to be no limit of time for ma*ing a##lication for admission$ As to
both classes& the conditions of the rules are dis#ensed -ith& and as bet-een the t-o different conditions
and limits of time are fi2ed$ 'o course of study is #rescribed for the la- school& but a di#loma granted
u#on the com#letion of any sort of course its managers may #rescribe is made all=sufficient$ Can there
be anything -ith relation to the 8ualifications or fitness of #ersons to #ractice la- resting u#on the
mere date of 'ovember & 1L9M& -hich -ill furnish a basis of classification$ "lainly not$ Those -ho
began the study of la- 'ovember th could 8ualify themselves to #ractice in t-o years as -ell as those
-ho began on the >rd$ The classes named in the #roviso need s#end only t-o years in study& -hile
those -ho commenced the ne2t day must s#end three years& although they -ould com#lete t-o years
before the time limit$ The one -ho commenced on the >rd$ %f #ossessed of a di#loma& is to be admitted
-ithout e2amination before December >1& 1L99& and -ithout any #rescribed course of study& -hile as
to the other the #rescribed course must be #ursued& and the di#loma is utterly useless$ 5uch
classification cannot rest u#on any natural reason& or bear any (ust relation to the sub(ect sought& and
none is suggested$ The #roviso is for the sole #ur#ose of besto-ing #rivileges u#on certain defined
#ersons$ B##$ !M=!L$D
%n the case of Cannon above cited& 5tate vs$ Cannon& +9 '$3$ 1& -here the legislature attem#ted by
la- to reinstate Cannon to the #ractice of la-& the court also held -ith regards to its as#ect of being a
class legislation:
)ut the statute is invalid for another reason$ %f it be granted that the legislature has #o-er to #rescribe
ultimately and definitely the 8ualifications u#on -hich courts must admit and license those a##lying as
attorneys at la-& that #o-er can not be e2ercised in the manner here attem#ted$ That #o-er must be
e2ercised through general la-s -hich -ill a##ly to all ali*e and accord e8ual o##ortunity to all$
5#ea*ing of the right of the <egislature to e2act 8ualifications of those desiring to #ursue chosen
callings& Mr$ .ustice Field in the case of Dent$ vs$ 3est Virginia& 1+9 :$5$ 11& 1+1& 9 5$ Ct$ +>+& +>>&
>+ <$ Ed$ !+!& said: F%t is undoubtedly the right of every citiHen of the :nited 5tates to follo- any
la-ful calling& business or #rofession he may choose& sub(ect only to such restrictions as are im#osed
u#on all #ersons of li*e age& se2& and condition$F This right may in many res#ects be considered as a
distinguishing feature of our re#ublican institutions$ 4ere all vocations are all o#en to every one on li*e
conditions$ All may be #ursued as sources of livelihood& some re8uiring years of study and great
learning for their successful #rosecution$ The interest& or& as it is sometimes termed& the FestateF
ac8uired in them E that is& the right to continue their #rosecution E is often of great value to the
#ossessors and cannot be arbitrarily ta*en from them& any more than their real or #ersonal #ro#erty can
be thus ta*en$ %t is fundamental under our system of government that all similarly situated and
#ossessing e8ual 8ualifications shall en(oy e8ual o##ortunities$ Even statutes regulating the #ractice of
medicine& re8uiring medications to establish the #ossession on the #art of the a##lication of his #ro#er
8ualifications before he may be licensed to #ractice& have been challenged& and courts have seriously
considered -hether the e2em#tion from such e2aminations of those #racticing in the state at the time of
the enactment of the la- rendered such la- unconstitutional because of infringement u#on this general
#rinci#le$ 5tate vs$ Thomas Call& 1+1 '$C$ !>& +L 5$E$ ,1MG see& also& The 5tate e2 rel$ 3in*ler vs$
0osenberg& 191 3is$ 1M+& M! '$3$ >,G 5tate vs$ 3hitcom& 1++ 3is$ 119& 99 '$3$ !L$
This la- singles out Mr$ Cannon and assumes to confer u#on him the right to #ractice la- and to
constitute him an officer of this Court as a mere matter of legislative grace or favor$ %t is not material
that he had once established his right to #ractice la- and that one time he #ossessed the re8uisite
learning and other 8ualifications to entitle him to that right$ That fact in no matter affect the #o-er of
the <egislature to select from the great body of the #ublic an individual u#on -hom it -ould confer its
favors$
A statute of the state of Minnesota B<a-s 19+9& c$ +D commanded the 5u#reme Court to admit to the
#ractice of la- -ithout e2amination& all -ho had served in the military or naval forces of the :nited
5tates during the 3orld 3ar and received a honorable discharge therefrom and -ho B-ere disabled
therein or thereby -ithin the #urvie- of the Act of Congress a##roved .une Mth& 19+& *no-n as
F3orld 3ar Veteran@s Act& 19+ and -hose disability is rated at least ten #er cent thereunder at the time
of the #assage of this Act$F This Act -as held `unconstitutional on the ground that it clearly violated the
8uality clauses of the constitution of that state$ %n re A##lication of ;eorge 3$ 4um#hrey& 1ML Minn$
>>1& ++M '$3$ 1M9$
A good summary of a classification constitutionally acce#table is e2#lained in 1+ Am$ .ur$ 1,1=1,> as
follo-s:
The general rule is -ell settled by unanimity of the authorities that a classification to be valid must rest
u#on material differences bet-een the #erson included in it and those e2cluded and& furthermore& must
be based u#on substantial distinctions$ As the rule has sometimes avoided the constitutional
#rohibition& must be founded u#on #ertinent and real differences& as distinguished from irrelevant and
artificial ones$ Therefore& any la- that is made a##licable to one class of citiHens only must be based on
some substantial difference bet-een the situation of that class and other individuals to -hich it does not
a##ly and must rest on some reason on -hich it can be defended$ %n other -ords& there must be such a
difference bet-een the situation and circumstances of all the members of the class and the situation and
circumstances of all other members of the state in relation to the sub(ects of the discriminatory
legislation as #resents a (ust and natural cause for the difference made in their liabilities and burdens
and in their rights and #rivileges$ A la- is not general because it o#erates on all -ithin a clause unless
there is a substantial reason -hy it is made to o#erate on that class only& and not generally on all$ B1+
Am$ .ur$ ##$ 1,1=1,>$D
"ursuant to the la- in 8uestion& those -ho& -ithout a grade belo- ,9 #er cent in any sub(ect& have
obtained a general average of !9$, #er cent in the bar e2aminations in 19! to 19,1& M9$, #er cent in
19,+& M1$, #er cent in 19,>& and those -ill obtain M+$, #er cent in 19,& and M>$, #er cent in 19,,& -ill
be #ermitted to ta*e and subscribe the corres#onding oath of office as members of the )ar&
not-ithstanding that the rules re8uire a minimum general average of M, #er cent& -hich has been
invariably follo-ed since 19,9$ %s there any motive of the nature indicated by the abovementioned
authorities& for this classification Q %f there is none& and none has been given& then the classification is
fatally defective$
%t -as indicated that those -ho failed in 19& 191 or the years before& -ith the general average
indicated& -ere not included because the Tribunal has no record of the unsuccessful candidates of those
years$ This fact does not (ustify the une2#lained classification of unsuccessful candidates by years&
from 19!=19,1& 19,+& 19,>& 19,& 19,,$ 'either is the e2clusion of those -ho failed before said years
under the same conditions (ustified$ The fact that this Court has no record of e2aminations #rior to 19!
does not signify that no one concerned may #rove by some other means his right to an e8ual
consideration$
To defend the dis#uted la- from being declared unconstitutional on account of its retroactivity& it is
argued that it is curative& and that in such form it is constitutional$ 3hat does 0e#$ Act 9M+ intend to
cure Q /nly from 19! to 199 -ere there cases in -hich the Tribunal #ermitted admission to the bar of
candidates -ho did not obtain the general average of M, #er cent: in 19! those -ho obtained only M+
#er centG in the 19M and those -ho had !9 #er cent or moreG in 19L& M9 #er cent and in 199& M #er
centG and in 19,9 to 19,>& those -ho obtained M #er cent& -hich -as considered by the Court as
e8uivalent to M, #er cent as #rescribed by the 0ules& by reason of circumstances deemed to be
sufficiently (ustifiable$ These changes in the #assing averages during those years -ere all that could be
ob(ected to or criticiHed$ 'o-& it is desired to undo -hat had been done E cancel the license that -as
issued to those -ho did not obtain the #rescribed M, #er cent Q Certainly not$ The dis#uted la- clearly
does not #ro#ose to do so$ Concededly& it a##roves -hat has been done by this Tribunal$ 3hat
Congress lamented is that the Court did not consider !9$, #er cent obtained by those candidates -ho
failed in 19! to 19,+ as sufficient to 8ualify them to #ractice la-$ 4ence& it is the lac* of -ill or defect
of (udgment of the Court that is being cured& and to com#lete the cure of this infirmity& the effectivity of
the dis#uted la- is being e2tended u# to the years 19,>& 19, and 19,,& increasing each year the
general average by one #er cent& -ith the order that said candidates be admitted to the )ar$ This
#ur#ose& manifest in the said la-& is the best #roof that -hat the la- attem#ts to amend and correct are
not the rules #romulgated& but the -ill or (udgment of the Court& by means of sim#ly ta*ing its #lace$
This is doing directly -hat the Tribunal should have done during those years according to the (udgment
of Congress$ %n other -ords& the #o-er e2ercised -as not to re#eal& alter or su##lement the rules& -hich
continue in force$ 3hat -as done -as to sto# or sus#end them$ And this #o-er is not included in -hat
the Constitution has granted to Congress& because it falls -ithin the #o-er to a##ly the rules$ This
#o-er corres#onds to the (udiciary& to -hich such duty been confided$
Article + of the la- in 8uestion #ermits #artial #assing of e2aminations& at indefinite intervals$ The
grave defect of this system is that it does not ta*e into account that the la-s and (uris#rudence are not
stationary& and -hen a candidate finally receives his certificate& it may ha##en that the e2isting la-s
and (uris#rudence are already different& seriously affecting in this manner his usefulness$ The system
that the said la- #rescribes -as used in the first bar e2aminations of this country& but -as abandoned
for this and other disadvantages$ %n this case& ho-ever& the fatal defect is that the article is not
e2#ressed in the title -ill have tem#orary effect only from 19! to 19,,& the te2t of article + establishes
a #ermanent system for an indefinite time$ This is contrary to 5ection +1 B1D& article V% of the
Constitution& -hich vitiates and annuls article + com#letelyG and because it is inse#arable from article
1& it is obvious that its nullity affect the entire la-$
<a-s are unconstitutional on the follo-ing grounds: first& because they are not -ithin the legislative
#o-ers of Congress to enact& or Congress has e2ceeded its #o-ersG second& because they create or
establish arbitrary methods or forms that infringe constitutional #rinci#lesG and third& because their
#ur#oses or effects violate the Constitution or its basic #rinci#les$ As has already been seen& the
contested la- suffers from these fatal defects$
5ummariHing& -e are of the o#inion and hereby declare that 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ is unconstitutional
and therefore& void& and -ithout any force nor effect for the follo-ing reasons& to -it:
1$ )ecause its declared #ur#ose is to admit L19 candidates -ho failed in the bar e2aminations of 19!=
19,+& and -ho& it admits& are certainly inade8uately #re#ared to #ractice la-& as -as e2actly found by
this Court in the aforesaid years$ %t decrees the admission to the )ar of these candidates& de#riving this
Tribunal of the o##ortunity to determine if they are at #resent already #re#ared to become members of
the )ar$ %t obliges the Tribunal to #erform something contrary to reason and in an arbitrary manner$
This is a manifest encroachment on the constitutional res#onsibility of the 5u#reme Court$
+$ )ecause it is& in effect& a (udgment revo*ing the resolution of this Court on the #etitions of these L19
candidates& -ithout having e2amined their res#ective e2amination #a#ers& and although it is admitted
that this Tribunal may reconsider said resolution at any time for (ustifiable reasons& only this Court and
no other may revise and alter them$ %n attem#ting to do it directly 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ violated the
Constitution$
>$ )y the dis#uted la-& Congress has e2ceeded its legislative #o-er to re#eal& alter and su##lement the
rules on admission to the )ar$ 5uch additional or amendatory rules are& as they ought to be& intended to
regulate acts subse8uent to its #romulgation and should tend to im#rove and elevate the #ractice of la-&
and this Tribunal shall consider these rules as minimum norms to-ards that end in the admission&
sus#ension& disbarment and reinstatement of la-yers to the )ar& inasmuch as a good bar assists
immensely in the daily #erformance of (udicial functions and is essential to a -orthy administration of
(ustice$ %t is therefore the #rimary and inherent #rerogative of the 5u#reme Court to render the ultimate
decision on -ho may be admitted and may continue in the #ractice of la- according to e2isting rules$
$ The reason advanced for the #retended classification of candidates& -hich the la- ma*es& is contrary
to facts -hich are of general *no-ledge and does not (ustify the admission to the )ar of la- students
inade8uately #re#ared$ The #retended classification is arbitrary$ %t is undoubtedly a class legislation$
,$ Article + of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ is not embraced in the title of the la-& contrary to -hat the
Constitution en(oins& and being inse#arable from the #rovisions of article 1& the entire la- is void$
!$ <ac*ing in eight votes to declare the nullity of that #art of article 1 referring to the e2aminations of
19,> to 19,,& said #art of article 1& insofar as it concerns the e2aminations in those years& shall
continue in force$
0 E 5 / < : T % / '
:#on mature deliberation by this Court& after hearing and availing of the magnificent and im#assioned
discussion of the contested la- by our Chief .ustice at the o#ening and close of the debate among the
members of the Court& and after hearing the (udicious observations of t-o of our beloved colleagues
-ho since the beginning have announced their decision not to ta*e #art in voting& -e& the eight
members of the Court -ho subscribed to this decision have voted and resolved& and have decided for
the Court& and under the authority of the same:
1$ That BaD the #ortion of article 1 of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ referring to the e2aminations of 19! to
19,+& and BbD all of article + of said la- are unconstitutional and& therefore& void and -ithout force and
effect$
+$ That& for lac* of unanimity in the eight .ustices& that #art of article 1 -hich refers to the
e2aminations subse8uent to the a##roval of the la-& that is from 19,> to 19,, inclusive& is valid and
shall continue to be in force& in conformity -ith section 19& article V%% of the Constitution$
Conse8uently& B1D all the above=mentioned #etitions of the candidates -ho failed in the e2aminations of
19! to 19,+ inclusive are denied& and B+D all candidates -ho in the e2aminations of 19,> obtained a
general average of M1$, #er cent or more& -ithout having a grade belo- ,9 #er cent in any sub(ect& are
considered as having #assed& -hether they have filed #etitions for admission or not$ After this decision
has become final& they shall be #ermitted to ta*e and subscribe the corres#onding oath of office as
members of the )ar on the date or dates that the chief .ustice may set$ 5o ordered$
)engHon& Montemayor& .ugo& <abrador& "ablo& "adilla& and 0eyes& ..$& concur$
A''EC %
"ET%T%/'E05 :'DE0 0E":)<%C ACT '/$ 9M+
A resumea of #ertinent facts concerning the bar e2aminations of 19! to 19,> inclusive follo-s:
August& 19!1
)oard of E2aminers: 4on$ "edro Tuason& Chairman& "rof$ ;erardo Florendo& Atty$ )ernardino
;uerrero& Atty$ .oa8uin 0amireH& Atty$ Cris#in /ben& 4on$ .ose Teodoro& Atty$ Federico Agrava& Atty$
.ose "ereH Cardenas& and 4on$ )ienvenido A$ Tan& members$
'umber of candidates
+9!
'umber of candidates -hose grades -ere raised
1+
M>@5
!
M+@5
!
'umber of candidates -ho #assed
L,
'umber of candidates -ho failed
1+1
'umber of those affected by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+
1L
"ercentage of success
B#er centD
1$!+
"ercentage of failure
B#er centD
,L$M
"assing grade
B#er centD
M+
'ovember& 19!
)oard of E2aminers: The same as that of August& 19!& e2ce#t 4on$ .ose Teodoro -ho -as substituted
by Atty$ 4onesto R$ )ausan$
'umber of candidates
L1
'umber of candidates -hose grades -ere raised
19
BM+ #er cent and above M> #er cent ===
Minutes of March >1& 19MD
'umber of candidates -ho #assed
+9
'umber of candidates -ho failed
++L
'umber of those affected by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+
>
"ercentage of success
B#er centD
,+$+9
"ercentage of failure
B#er centD
M$L9
"assing grade
B)y resolution of the CourtD$
B#er centD
M+
/ctober& 19M
)oard of E2aminers: 4on$ Cesar )engHon& Chairman& 4on$ ;uillermo )$ ;uevara& Atty$ Antonio
Araneta& Atty$ 5imon CruH& 4on$ 5i2to de la Costa& Atty$ Celso )$ .amora& 4on$ Emilio "e?a& Atty$
Federico Agrava& Atty$ Carlos )$ 4ilado& Members$
'umber of candidates
M9
'umber of candidates -hose grades -ere raised
>
M9$,, #er cent -ith + sub(ect belo- ,9 #er cent
1
!9 #er cent
9
!L #er cent
+
'umber of candidates -ho #assed
99
'umber of candidates -ho failed
>9
'umber of those affected by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+
9M+
"ercentage of success
B#er centD
,$,9
"ercentage of failure
B#er centD
,$1
"assing grade
B#er centD
!9
Bby resolution of the CourtD$
'ote$==%n #assing the + -hose grades -ere !L$9, #er cent and !L$1 #er cent res#ectively& the Court
found out that they -ere not benefited at all by the bonus of 1+ #oints given by the E2aminer in Civil
<a-$
August& 19L
)oard of E2aminers: 4on$ Marceliano 0$ Montemayor& Chairman 4on$ <uis "$ Torres& 4on$ Feli#e
'atividad& 4on$ .ose Teodoro& 5r$& Atty$ Federico Agrava& Atty$ Macario "eralta& 5r$& 4on$ .esus ;$
)arrera& 4on$ 0afael Am#aro& Atty$ Alfonso "once Enrile& Members$
'umber of candidates
L99
'umber of candidates -hose grades -ere raised
!
M1@s
+9
M9@s
>,
'umber of candidates -ho #assed
99
'umber of candidates -ho failed
99
'umber of those affected by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+
11
"ercentage of success
B#er centD
!+$9
"ercentage of failure
B#er centD
>M$!9
"assing grade
B#er centD
M9
Bby resolution of the CourtD$
August& 199
)oard of E2aminers: 4on$ 5abino "adilla& Chairman& 4on$ Fernando .ugo& 4on$ Enri8ue Filamor& Atty$
5alvador Araneta& 4on$ "astor M$ Endencia& Atty$ Federico Agrava& 4on$ Mariano 4$ de .oya& 4on$
Feli#e 'atividad& Atty$ Emeterio )arcelon& Members$
'umber of candidates
1&+1L
'umber of candidates -hose grades -ere raised BM@sD
,,
'umber of candidates -ho #assed
!L!
'umber of candidates -ho failed
,>+
'umber of those affected by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+
1!
"ercentage of success
B#er centD
,!$+L
"ercentage of failure
B#er centD
>$M+
"assing grade
B#er centD
M
Bby resolution of the CourtD$
August& 19,9
)oard of E2aminers: 4on$ Fernando .ugo&+ Chairman& 4on$ ;uillermo )$ ;uevara& Atty$ Enri8ue
Altavas& Atty$ Marcial "$ <ichauco& Atty$ Carlos )$ 4ilado& Atty$ .$ Antonio Araneta& 4on$ Enri8ue V$
Filamor& 4on$ Francisco A$ Delgado& 4on$ Antonio 4orrilleno& Members$
'umber of candidates
1&>1!
'umber of candidates -hose grades -ere raised
>L
BThe grade of M -as raised to M, #er cent by recommendation and authority
of the e2aminer in 0emedial <a-& Atty$ Francisco DelgadoD$
'umber of candidates -ho #assed
>+
'umber of candidates -ho failed
L9
'umber of those affected by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+
+!
"ercentage of success
B#er centD
>+$1
"ercentage of failure
B#er centD
!M$L!
"assing grade
B#er centD
M,
August& 19,1
)oard of E2aminers: 4on$ ;uillermo F$ "ablo& Chairman& 4on$ "astor M$ Endencia& Atty$ Enri8ue
Altavas& 4on$ Manuel <im& 4on$ Feli#e 'atividad& 4on$ Vicente Albert& Atty$ Arturo AlafriH& 4on$
Enri8ue V$ Filamor& 4on$ Alfonso Feli2& Members$
'umber of candidates
+&9!L
'umber of candidates -hose grades -ere raised BM@sD
11+
'umber of candidates -ho #assed
1&1L9
'umber of candidates -ho failed
LM9
'umber of those affected by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+
19!
"ercentage of success
B#er centD
,M$9
"ercentage of failure
B#er centD
+$,1
"assing grade
B#er centD
M,
August& 19,+
)oard of E2aminers: 4on$ 5abino "adilla& Chairman& 4on$ "astor M$ Endencia& 4on$ Enri8ue V$
Filamor& Atty$ Francisco /rtigas& 4on$ Emilio "e?a& Atty$ Emilio "$ Virata& 4on$ Alfonso Feli2& 4on$
Feli#e 'atividad& Atty$ Macario "eralta& 5r$& Members$
'umber of candidates
+&M>L
'umber of candidates -hose grades -ere raised BM@sD
1!>
'umber of candidates -ho #assed
1&M9,
'umber of candidates -ho failed
1&9>>
'umber of those affected by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+
+!
"ercentage of success
B#er centD
!+$+M
"ercentage of failure
B#er centD
>M$M>
"assing grade
B#er centD
M,
August& 19,>
)oard of E2aminers: 4on$ Fernando .ugo& Chairman& 4on$ "astor M$ Endencia& Atty$ Enri8ue Altavas&
Atty$ Francisco /rtigas& .r$& 4on$ Emilio "e?a& Atty$ .ose 5$ de la CruH& 4on$ Alfonso Feli2& 4on$
Feli#e 'atividad& 4on$ Mariano <$ de la 0osa& Members$
'umber of candidates
+&,,,
'umber of candidates -hose grades -ere raised BM@sD
199
'umber of candidates -ho #assed
1&,M9
'umber of candidates -ho failed
9L!
'umber of those affected by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+
+L
"ercentage of success
B#er centD
!1$9
"ercentage of failure
B#er centD
>L$9!
"assing grade
B#er centD
M,
A list of #etitioners for admission to the )ar under 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+& grou#ed by the years in
-hich they too* the bar e2aminations& -ith annotations as to -ho had #resented motions for
reconsideration -hich -ere denied BM0DD& and -ho filed mere motions for reconsideration -ithout
invo*ing said la-& -hich are still #ending& follo-s:
"ET%T%/'E0 :'DE0 T4E )A0 F<:'RE05@ <A3
Civ$
<and
Merc$
%nt$
"ol$
Crim$
0em$
<eg$
;en$ Av$
M0D= 1$
Agunod& Filemon <$
!!
M1
!1
M!
L9
L>
M>
M,
M1$
M0D= +$
Cunanan& Albino
M!
M+
M
M,
M9
M9
!,
M+
M1$,
M0D= >$
Me(ia& Flaviano V$
!
!
!,
!L
L>
M
!L
L9
!9$L,
19L
M0D= $
/rlina& 5oledad 0$
M1
!L
!!
M,
!>
M,
M9
LL
!9$9
M0D= ,$
Vivero& Antonio <u$
M,
M>
M>
!,
!>
!!
!,
L9
!9$9,
M0D= !$
;atchalian& 5alud
M+
!!
M1
M,
ML
!L
!,
,9
!9$!,
199
M$
Abaya& .esus A$
!9
M9
M,
M,
M1
L9
,,
M,
M9$L
M0D= L$
Advincula& David D$
M!
L9
!+
L!
L1
M+
!9
!,
M9$,
9$
Agraviador& Alfredo <$
!>
L,
M9
MM
L9
L1
!,
L9
M1$L
19$
Alacar& "ascual C$
!1
!>
L>
M9
M1
L,
!,
L9
M+$9,
11$
Amog& "edro M$
M,
!!
M!
ML
L1
M
,,
L,
M+$+
1+$
A#olinario& Miguel 5$
M,
L
ML
ML
M9
M9
!9
M,
M1$9,
1>$
A8uino& Ma2imo ;$
L+
MM
M1
MM
M!
MM
!9
M,
M>$1,
1$
Asinas& Candido D$
M,
L>
!9
L9
L1
L>
,,
L,
M+$!,
1,$
)aldivino& .ose )$
M,
!,
M+
L+
L+
!9
!9
L9
M1$9,
1!$
)alintona& )ernardo
M,
L9
!
ML
M
!M
!,
M9
M9
1M$
)ana-a& Angel <$
ML
M9
M9
M,
L1
L>
!9
!9
M+$>
1L$
)andala& Anacleto A$
!!
L9
!!
M1
9>
M+
,,
M9
!9$!
19$
)andon& Ala-adin <$
M
M9
!9
MM
91
M>
!9
L9
M>$>,
+9$
)a8uero& )en(amin
M!
M9
!
MM
L,
M+
!,
M,
M+$,
+1$
)lanco& .ose
M,
M,
M9
M,
MM
M!
!9
99
M+$,
++$
)uenaluH& Victoriano T$
M,
M1
M+
ML
!M
L+
!9
M,
M9$L,
+>$
Canda& )en(amin 5$
M,
M+
M,
L+
M!
MM
!,
M,
M>$,,
+$
Canon& ;uillermo
MM
L!
!M
LL
M,
!9
M9
L,
M>$9
+,$
Carlos& Estela 5$
M,
L1
L1
M9
M+
M>
!,
M9
M>$L
+!$
CereHo& ;regorio /$
!9
M!
M!
M9
M1
L9
,,
L9
M9$
+M$
Clarin& Manuel <$
M,
L+
M!
L1
M>
!9
M9
M,
M>$9,
+L$
Claudo& Conrado /$
M!
!+
ML
MM
M>
M+
!9
M9
M1$
+9$
Condevillamar& Antonio V$
!L
!,
M
L9
L,
M,
!9
M,
M1$!,
M0D= >9$
Corne(o& Crisanto 0$
M+
M,
!9
L+
L>
M9
!,
L9
M>$
>1$
Corona& /lvido D$
!L
M!
M>
L1
L1
M+
!9
M,
M1$1,
>+$
DiHon& Marcial C$
M!
L!
!9
L>
M,
M
!,
L9
M>$1
>>$
Enri8ueH& Agustin "$
M,
MM
M9
L1
L1
MM
!,
L9
M>$M,
>$
Es#iritu& %rineo E$
L9
LL
!9
M,
M!
MM
!,
M,
M>$L
>,$
FernandeH& Macario .$
!>
L+
M!
M,
L1
L
!,
M,
M+$9,
>!$
;allardo& Amando C$
ML
M9
!M
MM
M!
M,
!9
!,
M9$9,
>M$
;arcia& Freidrich M$
M!
L9
!!
M,
M+
M9
!9
M,
!9$M
>L$
;arcia& .ulian <$
!
MM
!L
L+
L9
MM
!,
M,
M+$1,
>9$
;arcia& <eon Mo$
MM
L!
M1
L9
!9
L+
!,
M,
M1$L,
9$
;arcia& "edro V$
M!
L+
M>
L1
M
L>
!9
L,
M>$!
1$
;arcia& 5antiago C$
!+
91
M9
M,
M+
M,
!,
L9
M1$L
+$
;enoves& "edro
M,
L>
M9
ML
LM
M!
,,
L9
M+$M
>$
;onHales& Amado "$
M,
M1
M1
M,
L!
M,
!9
M,
M+$!,
$
;uia& /don 0$ de
MM
M!
!!
L1
M
M!
!9
M,
M9$9
,$
FernandeH& 5imeon
!+
!L
M1
L9
M
99
!,
M,
M9$L,
!$
.a*osalem& Filoteo
L+
L>
M>
L+
!1
LM
!,
M9
M>$!
M$
.esus& Feli#e D$ de
M,
L>
!M
M9
ML
L,
!9
M,
M+$,
L$
.ocom& .acobo M$
MM
MM
M
MM
M
!
,,
L,
M9$!,
9$
.uares& 'icolas
MM
L
,!
M!
M>
L+
!9
L,
M9
,9$
Ralalang& 0emigio
!,
M,
M
L9
M9
M9
!,
L,
M9$>
,1$
<ayumas& Vicente <$
!M
L
!,
M,
L9
!!
!9
L9
M9$>
,+$
<eyson& Amancio F$
!9
L>
M,
M!
L1
M,
!,
M,
M>$1,
,>$
<ibanan& Marcelino
M1
L>
!1
MM
L9
L1
!,
L,
M1$M,
,$
<im& .ose E$
MM
MM
M+
M!
M+
!
!,
M9
M1$1,
,,$
<im& .ose F$
M9
M,
!+
L>
L9
M1
!,
L9
M9$
,!$
<inao& Mariano M$
!!
L
M!
ML
L9
M,
!9
M,
M1$M,
,M$
<o#eH& Angelo "$
!M
L1
M,
M+
M9
L1
,,
L9
M1
,L$
<o#eH& ElieHar M$
MM
M,
!9
M,
MM
L,
!9
M,
M9$M
,9$
<o#eH& 'icanor 5$
M+
M1
M9
ML
MM
L
!9
M,
M1$,,
!9$
Manoleto& "roceso D$
M+
M9
!,
ML
L1
99
!9
L9
M1$9,
!1$
Mancao& Alfredo "$
!M
!
M1
L>
M!
M!
!,
L9
M9$9,
!+$
Manera& Mariano A$
M,
ML
M,
M,
!L
M9
!9
!,
M1
!>$
Mercado& Arsenio '$
!M
!
M1
L>
M!
M!
!,
L9
M9$9,
!$
Miranda& )en(amin ;$
M!
L1
!M
L+
M
MM
!,
L9
M+$,,
!,$
Manad& Andres )$
MM
M,
!L
L+
!9
M+
!,
M,
M1$1,
19L
!!$
/rosco& Casimiro "$
M+
L
!9
L1
M9
L+
!,
M,
M1$9
!M$
"adua& Manuel C$
M!
M!
!L
L9
M9
M9
,9
M,
M9$1
!L$
"alang& )asilio 5$
M1
M,
L+
M1
,,
LM
,,
M,
!9$!
!9$
"alma& Cuadrato
!+
M,
!9
9>
L9
M9
,,
L9
!9$,
M9$
"a?ganiban& .ose V$
!M
L>
!1
L1
91
M
!9
M,
M9$!
M1$
"are(a& Feli#e
!!
M1
M,
L1
!M
M
!9
M9
!L$M,
M+$
"atalin(ug& Eriberto
M>
MM
ML
M>
ML
M1
,,
M,
M1$+,
M>$
"aulin& .ose C$
!!
!9
M1
MM
L>
L+
!,
M,
M+$1
M$
"ido& 5erafin C$
M+
ML
!>
L9
M1
L,
M9
L9
M+$9,
M,$
"imentel& <uis "$
MM
M,
M!
L1
M!
!L
,,
L9
M1$!
M!$
"lantilla& 0odrigo C$
M+
ML
!L
L9
M9
L1
!,
L,
M>$,,
MM$
0egalario& )enito )$
M+
L9
!
L9
M,
L1
,,
L9
!9$,,
ML$
0obis& Casto "$
!+
MM
M
M>
!L
L9
M9
L9
M9$9
M9$
0odil& Francisco C$
!L
!9
M9
L1
M!
M,
!,
M,
M9$M,
L9$
0odrigueH& Mariano %$
L9
M,
!9
L9
M+
L9
!,
L9
M>$>,
L1$
0omero& Cris#ulo "$
ML
M,
!!
MM
M!
L>
!,
M,
M+$L,
L+$
5aeH& "orfirio D$
M,
M,
M+
L1
!9
MM
!9
M,
M1
L>$
5aliguma& Crisogono D$
M9
M9
M
ML
!9
!,
!,
M9
M1$L
L$
5amano& Fortunato A$
M,
L
M+
MM
M9
L+
!9
M,
M1$9
L,$
5antos& Faustina C$
M1
!L
!L
M!
M,
L,
,,
M,
!9$,
L!$
5antos& .osefina 0$
!L
!9
M!
M1
MM
L+
!,
M,
M+$>
LM$
5eludo& Ananias ;$
M,
L9
!9
M9
MM
L+
!,
M,
M>$+,
LL$
5emilia& 0afael %$
!L
L,
,,
L>
L9
M9
!,
L9
M1$+,
L9$
Telan& ;audencio
MM
M9
M9
M,
M9
M,
!9
M,
M9$L,
99$
Tesorero& <eocadio T$
M,
M1
!>
M,
L+
!+
!,
!>
!9$!,
91$
Torre& Valentin 5$ de la
L,
L1
M1
M!
!9
!,
,,
M9
M9$
9+$
Torres& Ariston <$
ML
M1
M+
L1
!1
L
,,
L,
M9$
9>$
Veyra& Aosimo C$ de
M9
M,
M1
M9
!,
L9
!,
L9
M9$!,
9$
Viado& .ose
!M
M9
M
M,
M,
99
,,
L9
M9$M
9,$
Villacarlos& Delfin A$
M>
LM
M1
L+
!9
M9
M,
L,
M>$L,
9!$
Villamil& <eonor 5$
M>
L1
M!
L!
L!
M>
,,
L,
M>$!
9M$
Aabala& Amando A$
M!
M9
!M
M,
M!
M!
!9
M,
M9$!
19,9
M0D=9L$
CruH& Filomeno de la
M9
M1
ML
L1
M!
M+
!
9!
M>$
99$
Es#a?ola& "ablo 5$
M1
ML
,,
M!
L,
!9
!,
9>
M9$+
199$
Foronda& Clarencio .$
!9
ML
!L
M9
L
LL
!+
9>
M1$9
191$
4echanova& Vicente
,9
M!
M,
M,
!9
!L
M,
9!
M1$>
M0D=19+$
"e?alosa& /sias 0$
L9
ML
!1
M!
!1
MM
!!
L,
M9$+
19>$
5armiento& Floro A$
!,
L!
!>
L+
L9
M+
!9
M+
M9$1,
M0D=19$
Torre& Catalino "$
M,
L,
!L
ML
!9
!M
!,
!9
M9$+,
19,$
:ngson& Fernando 5$
!1
LM
M,
M9
,M
L,
L>
L+
M+$L
19,1
19!$
Abasolo& 0omulo
MM
M9
!
!,
M!
M9
M!
!
M1$M
19M$
Adeva& Daniel ;$
M,
,9
M
!,
!9
,1
ML
!M
M9$
19L$
Aguilar& Vicente A$
M>
!>
!L
M,
M9
!9
M,
M,
M1$+,
199$
Amodia& .uan T$
M,
M!
!!
M,
M!
!9
MM
M!
M+$>,
M0D=119$
A?osa& "ablo 5$
M!
ML
!>
M,
M
!1
M,
M9
M1$!
111$
Antiola& Anastacio 0$
!L
M!
M,
M9
M1
M9
L1
!!
M>$9,
11+$
A8uino& 5$ 0ey A$
M9
M1
M1
!9
M
!+
M!
MM
M1$1
11>$
AtienHa& Manuel ;$
M1
ML
!L
L9
L!
,1
L+
M,
M>$L,
11$
Avance?a& Alfonso
M1
M1
!,
M,
M9
M+
ML
L9
M1$L
M0D=11,$
)alacuit& Camilo '$
M,
M>
M,
M9
M+
!,
M,
M!
M>$+,
11!$
)arinaga& .eremias <$
!L
!9
M>
M9
M
,9
L9
M9
M1$+
M0D=11M$
)arrientos& Ambrosio D$
M!
!9
!M
,,
M
!>
MM
!+
M9$+,
M0D=11L$
)eniteH& Tomas "$
!M
M,
M,
!9
M>
M+
M,
ML
M+$+
119$
)iason& 5i2to F$
M>
L+
!M
!,
!!
M+
MM
!L
M1$+,
M0D=1+9$
)ri?as& %sagani A$
M1
!9
M
M9
M!
,+
M9
M+
M1$9,
1+1$
)uela& Arcadio "$
M+
MM
!1
M9
M1
,L
M9
M1
!9$M,
1++$
Cabilao& <eonardo 5$
M>
,9
M,
M,
M,
!9
M1
M9
M1$+,
1+>$
Cabrera& %reneo M$
M,
!!
M9
!,
M+
L1
M9
M9
M+$
1+$
Cacacho& Emilio V$









1+,$
Calilung& 5oledad C$
!
M>
M>
L9
M>
,M
M,
,9
!9$!,
M0D=1+!$
Calimlim& .ose )$
!
M>
M>
L9
M>
,M
M,
,9
!9$!,
1+M$
Calimlim& "edro )$
!!
L+
!9
!9
!9
,+
L>
M,
M9
1+L$
Camello& 5otero 4$
M9
MM
!>
!,
M,
!!
L
!
M1$,,
1+9$
Cam#os& .uan A$
M1
LL
M9
M,
!
!9
M1
!+
M9$1,
1>9$
Castillo& Antonio del
ML
ML
M9
!9
M9
!M
!9
M!
M+$!,
M0D=1>1$
Castillo& Dominador Ad$
M,
!1
M+
M,
M
M1
!M
!!
M1$1
M0D=1>+$
Castro& .esus )$
M+
L!
M+
M,
!,
M,
M!
M1
M+$L,
1>>$
Casuga& )ienvenido )$
M,
M+
M+
M9
!9
!1
M,
!9
M9$9,
1>$
Cabangbang& 5antiago )$
MM
!M
!1
L9
M>
,9
L>
M!
M+$+
1>,$
CruH& Federico 5$
!9
M
M,
M,
!L
!,
M!
M9
M1$!,
1>!$
Dacanay& Eufemio "$
M9
M>
!+
M,
M+
!9
L,
M1
M+$9,
1>M$
Deysolong& Felisberto
!!
!+
M+
M,
M9
!+
L>
!+
M9$L,
M0D=1>L$
Dimaano& .r$& .ose '$
ML
M9
!>
M,
M>
M,
L1
,9
M>$,
1>9$
Es#inosa& Domingo <$
ML
!>
,L
M9
M9
!M
LM
!>
M1$!
M0D=19$
Farol& Evencia C$
L9
ML
!!
M,
L1
M+
!+
M>
M+$+,
11$
Feli2& Conrado 5$
M1
M1
M,
!,
M9
,L
M,
!9
M9$M,
1+$
Fernan& "ablo <$
!M
LL
!!
L,
M>
!L
ML
M,
M+$>,
1>$
;andioco& 5alvador ;$
!
,L
!!
!,
M!
M9
L9
M,
M+$1
1$
;astardo& Cris#in )$
M9
!9
!L
M,
ML
!!
L!
M+
M>$9
1,$
;enson& Angelo )$
M,
,M
M>
!,
!M
,
ML
,!
!9$,,
1!$
;uiani& ;uinald M$
!L
!9
M,
!,
M
!M
M,
MM
M1$,
1M$
;uina& ;raciano "$
!!
!9
!M
!9
ML
,+
L>
!1
!9$!
M0D=1L$
4omeres& "ra2edes "$
M
M
M,
M,
M1
!9
M,
M1
M>$>,
19$
%barra& Venancio M$
!9
M,
M
M9
M
M9
L9
M,
M1$9
1,9$
%m#erial& Monico <$
M+
ML
M,
M,
M+
,!
L+
MM
M>$M
M0D=1,1$
%basco& .r$& Emiliano M$
M1
M9
!>
L,
M1
!9
L,
,>
M9$L,
1,+$
%nandan& Fortunato C$
MM
MM
!M
,>
M>
M,
M9
,M
M+$,
1,>$
.imeneH& Florencio C$
M,
M9
M9
M,
M+
!1
M,
ML
M+$9,
1,$
Rintanar& 3oodro- M$
M9
L>
M+
!,
M!
M>
M,
!9
M+$9,
1,,$
<anguido& Cesar V$
!>
M1
!>
L,
M9
!1
L,
M9
M9$,,
1,!$
<avilles& Cesar <$
!1
L9
M,
,,
M>
!>
M,
ML
M9$,,
1,M$
<lenos& Francisco :$
!
M9
!,
!9
M+
!,
9+
M,
M1$M,
1,L$
<eon& Marcelo D$ de
!>
M>
!9
L,
M,
M,
99
M9
M+$M,
1,9$
<lanto& "riscilla
M+
!L
!9
!,
M!
!M
L
!L
M1$>,
1!9$
Machachor& /scar
!L
,9
ML
M9
!M
,M
M,
M,
M9$1,
M0D=1!1$
Magsino& Encarnacion
MM
!!
M9
M9
M!
M1
M,
!1
M+$M,
M0D=1!+$
Maligaya& Demetrio M$
M9
!1
M,
!,
M,
,9
91
,1
M+$>
1!>$
Manio& ;regorio
!M
!M
!9
L9
M1
!M
M,
M,
M9$!,
1!$
"uHon& Eduardo 5$
M+
L+
!9
!9
!9
M9
!L
M+
!+$9,
M0D=1!,$
Marcial& Meynardo 0$
!!
M,
M
M9
M,
!M
L1
M,
M>$1,
1!!$
Martin& )en(amin 5$
!L
M+
!>
M,
!9
!>
L
!+
M9$1
M0D=1!M$
Monterroyo& Catalina 5$
M9
L9
M,
L9
M!
!!
L+
,1
M>$9,
M0D=1!L$
Montero& <eodegario C$
M>
!M
!!
L9
L1
!,
L1
M,
M>$M,
1!9$
MonHon& Candido T$
M9
M+
M
M,
!M
M9
MM
!9
M+$9,
1M9$
'atividad& Alberto M$
M>
M9
!L
!,
M>
!9
M,
M9
M+$+
M0D=1M1$
'avallo& Ca#istrano C$
M9
M+
!L
L,
L1
!!
M1
M
M+$1
1M+$
'isce& Camilo A$
!!
!!
M,
!,
M9
!L
L,
!+
M>$,
M0D=1M>$
/cam#o& Antonio F$ de
M,
L1
M!
!,
M
!M
M,
!9
M>$M,
1M$
/laviar& .ose /$
M+
M9
!9
,,
!!
M9
MM
M,
M9$,
M0D=1M,$
"ereH& Cesario A$
M,
M!
!!
L9
M+
!>
L+
!9
M+$9,
1M!$
"ogado& Causin /$
M9
!!
!,
M9
M,
!
M,
M9
!9$9,
1MM$
0amos=)almori& Manuela
M,
M>
!+
!,
ML
,9
M,
!!
M9$+
1ML$
0ecinto& %reneo %$
M>
M!
!L
M,
M
!L
L9
,>
M+$>
M0D=1M9$
0edor& Francisco R$
!+
MM
M>
M,
!9
!
M!
!9
M9
M0D=1L9$
0egis& Deogracias A$
M!
M
!L
!,
!,
!,
LL
M,
M>$>,
1L1$
0igor& Estelita C$
!M
ML
!1
L9
M1
MM
M9
!,
M9$9
M0D=1L+$
0imorin=;ordo& Estela
M9
M+
!+
!9
LL
!!
!M
M9
M9$1,
1L>$
0osario& "risco del
M9
!
M9
M9
M+
M>
L,
,M
M+$!,
1L$
0osario& Vicente D$ del
M,
91
!,
M,
!L
!L
M9
!+
M+$+
1L,$
5aavedra& Feli#e
M>
L9
!>
M,
M!
M>
!L
!+
M9$>,
1L!$
5alaHar& Alfredo '$
!!
M+
M>
M,
!M
!L
MM
!9
M9$L,
1LM$
5alem& 0omulo 0$
MM
L1
M+
!,
M>
!9
M!
M,
M>
1LL$
FoH& .ulita A$
M,
M+
M,
M,
!,
M9
M!
!
M+$,
1L9$
5anta Ana& Candido T$
MM
!9
!,
M,
L1
M,
M9
M,
M>
199$
5antos& A8uilino
M+
!!
!9
!,
!L
M9
L1
M1
M1$M
191$
5antos& Valeriano V$
M!
M+
M,
M,
!L
!+
M!
M9
M>$1
19+$
5uico& 5amuel
M>
M9
M+
M,
M1
,9
L
!,
M>$>
19>$
5uson& Teodorico
M
!L
!!
L9
!!
,9
M9
!M
M9$>,
19$
Tado& Florentino "$
!
M!
!M
!,
M!
M+
M!
,>
!9$M
19,$
Ta#ayan& Domingo A$
!9
M+
!9
M9
M!
M>
L+
M9
M>$M,
M0D=19!$
Tiausas& Miguel V$
!M
!9
M1
M,
M9
!M
L
!9
M+$M
19M$
Torres& Carlos "$
!L
M1
M1
M9
M9
!>
L+
M1
M1$!
19L$
Tria& 4i#olito
!9
M+
M,
!9
!9
,
ML
!!
M9$9,
199$
Velasco& Avelino A$
!,
M+
M,
M,
M1
!M
ML
M!
M+$1
+99$
Villa& Francisco C$
!,
L9
M>
M,
!L
M9
!,
M,
M9$+
+91$
VillagonHalo& .ob 0$
ML
!M
M
!,
M+
,1
!9
M1
M9$+,
+9+$
Villarama& .r$& "edro
M,
M
M,
,,
M,
!!
!M
M,
M1$,
19,+
+9>$
Abacon& "ablo
M,
M+
ML
L1
ML
M+
!
,,
M+$M
M0"=+9$
Abad& Aga#ito
M>
M!
M>
L,
M,
!>
!+
M,
M9$9,
M0"=+9,$
Abella& <udovico )$
M9
L1
M!
L1
M9
!!
MM
,L
M+$M
M0"=+9!$
Abellera& ;eronimo F$
M,
M9
M9
LM
M!
,1
!>
M9
M1$M
M0"=+9M$
Abeno(ar& Aga#ito '$
M1
M+
ML
L
M9
M,
!9
M9
M+$9
+9L$
Alandy& Doroteo 0$
!
L>
9>
91
!L
,9
!9
!9
M1$+
+99$
Alano& Fabian T$
M9
L>
!1
L>
M+
LM
M+
M9
M1$9
M0"=+19$
Alcantara& "ablo V$
M1
M9
L9
L1
M>
M9
M+
!+
M>$!,
+11$
Arcangel& Agustin Ag$
M,
L,
M1
M>
M!
!,
!L
!,
M1$L,
+1+$
Acosta& Dionisio '$
M,
L1
ML
LM
,!
!,
MM
M9
M+$L
M0"=+1>$
Abinguna& Aga#ito C$
!!
L,
L9
L
M,
,L
M!
M,
M>$!,
+1$
Adove& 'ehemias C$
M!
L!
ML
MM
!!
ML
!9
!+
M>$,,
+1,$
Adrias& %nocencio C$
M,
L>
!1
LL
M!
!M
M9
M,
M>$
+1!$
Aglugub& Andres 0$
M,
L>
M>
LL
M+
!+
M+
!+
M+$!,
+1M$
Andrada& Mariano <$
M!
L,
!!
LM
!>
MM
M,
MM
M>$
M0"=+1L$
Almeda& 5erafin V$
M+
M+
M,
L1
!1
!M
M>
!,
M9$M,
+19$
Almonte="eralta& Felicidad
M>
M1
M+
91
M,
!M
!,
,>
M9$M
M0"=++9$
Amodia& .uan T$
M,
M9
!L
L,
!+
!
M,
ML
M1$
M0"=++1$
Antonio& Felino A$
M1
M!
L1
L>
M9
,+
M+
M9
M>$>
M0"=+++$
Antonio& .ose 5$
M,
9+
99
!L
!,
!
!L
!9
M>$M,
++>$
A?onuevo& 0amos )$
M1
LM
ML
L1
!
!>
M
M!
M+$M
++$
A8uino& 5$ 0ey A$
!M
MM
,M
ML
!9
M9
!9
L9
!M$M
++,$
Arteche& Filomeno D$
ML
L>
,9
L9
M!
MM
M9
M9
M9$L
M0"=++!$
Arribas& %saac M$
M,
ML
M9
L1
M>
M9
!M
ML
M+$+
M0"=++M$
AHucena& Ceferino D$
M+
!M
ML
L9
M+
!M
MM
!,
M>$9,
++L$
AtienHa& 0icardo
M+
LM
M9
M9
!!
,,
M,
M,
M9$L,
++9$
)alacuit& Camilo '$
M,
ML
L9
M,
M9
,
!!
M,
M>$>
M0"=+>9$
)aclig& Cayetano 5$
MM
L
L>
L9
!9
M9
!1
!,
M>
+>1$
)alcita& /scar C$
M,
MM
M9
99
!
!9
!M
,9
M9$!,
+>+$
)arilea& Dominador A$
M1
!M
L+
MM
!
!1
!,
L9
M9$,
M0"=+>>$
)anta& .ose P$
M,
L9
MM
L1
M,
!>
M1
M,
M>$9,
M0"=+>$
)arrientos& Ambrosio D$
M!
M9
!M
L9
!M
!,
M9
L1
M9$M
+>,$
)atucan& .ose M$
!!
M!
ML
LL
!+
M!
!M
ML
M1$+
+>!$
)autista& Atilano C$
M9
L+
L
L,
,L
!1
M1
!+
M1$+,
+>M$
)autista& Celso .$
M1
!L
!>
LM
L9
!M
L9
M9
M+$M,
+>L$
)elderon& .ose
M!
L1
M!
9+
M9
!!
!M
!+
M+$!,
M0"=+>9$
)elo& Victor )$
M!
MM
!
M>
M,
M1
M!
M!
M+$L,
M0"=+9$
)e(ec& Conceso D$
M9
L9
M>
L+
!>
MM
M,
,9
M>$1,
M0"=+1$
)eltran& ;ervasio M$
M+
M,
L1
M>
M,
,M
M,
L9
M>$9,
M0"=++$
)enao(an& 0obustiano /$
M
L
MM
L
M,
!>
!L
!+
M+$L,
M0"=+>$
)eri?a& 0oger C$
M9
L9
M9
M9
!L
M+
!
ML
M1$L,
M0"=+$
)ihis& Marcelo M$
M,
L!
!,
9+
!
!
L
M,
M>$,
M0"=+,$
)inaoro& Vicente M$
M>
!9
ML
L>
M>
,9
M9
L+
M+$M,
M0"=+!$
)obila& 0osalio )$
M!
L!
M!
L>
!L
,9
M1
ML
M>$9,
+M$
)uenafe& Avelina 0$
ML
L9
M,
M,
M9
,,
M+
L9
M+$M,
+L$
)ueno& Anastacio F$
M>
ML
M1
ML
M1
!M
M1
!9
M1$1,
+9$
)orres& Ma2imino <$
!M
L,
!+
91
M+
!>
M!
L9
M9$9
M0"=+,9$
Cabegin& Cesar V$
M+
M1
M!
M,
M
M9
M1
!9
M+$+
M0"=+,1$
Cabello& Melecio F$
M+
ML
ML
L9
,L
M9
!M
M1
M9$,
M0"=+,+$
Cabrera& %rineo M$
M9
LL
,>
91
M1
L,
M,
M!
M>$>
+,>$
Cabreros& "aulino '$
M1
M9
L>
L
!9
!+
M1
,9
M9$L,
+,$
Calayag& Florentino 0$
!9
M9
!!
LL
!9
M,
!L
M!
M9$!
M0"=+,,$
CalHada& Cesar de la
M!
M+
L9
!M
!+
M1
!!
!+
M9$L,
+,!$
Canabal& %sabel
M9
L+
L1
MM
ML
,1
M,
M,
M>$M
M0"=+,M$
Cabugao& "ablo '$
M!
LM
!9
L9
,L
!
ML
M,
M1$L
+,L$
Cala?gi& Mateo C$
M>
9>
M1
LM
M9
!!
!9
!+
M1$L
+,9$
Canda& )en(amin 5$
M+
M1
MM
99
!+
M,
!!
L+
M1$9,
+!9$
Cantoria& Eulogio
M1
L9
M1
L9
M9
,,
M+
M,
M1
+!1$
Ca#acio& .r$& Conrado
!M
ML
M1
99
!,
M,
M+
!9
M9$!,
+!+$
Ca#itulo& Ale(andro "$
M,
M9
,>
LM
ML
!>
M!
91
M1$+
M0"=+!>$
Calu#itan& .r$& Alfredo
M,
9>
L1
M!
!
M,
!L
,!
M>$1,
M0"=+!$
Caluya& Arsenio V$
M,
L!
M9
LM
MM
,+
MM
L+
M>$9
M0"=+!,$
Cam#anilla& Mariano )$
L9
M,
ML
MM
M>
M1
!>
M!
M>$!,
M0"=+!!$
Cam#os& .uan A$
!!
L,
L>
L
!M
!1
L9
,M
M>$+,
+!M$
Cardoso& Angelita ;$
ML
M1
M>
M!
M9
,!
!9
!9
M1$L
+!L$
Cartagena& 4erminio 0$
M1
M+
!,
L9
!
M>
L9
M9
M1$!,
M0"=+!9$
Castro& Daniel T$
!,
M,
MM
M!
L,
!9
M,
!9
M>$1,
+M9$
Cauntay& ;audencio V$
M9
ML
M+
M>
MM
!9
!
L9
M1$+
+M1$
Castro& "edro <$ de
M9
!L
!9
LM
M!
M,
M+
M9
M>$>,
+M+$
Cerio& .uan A$
M,
L+
M,
L!
!9
,
M!
M,
M1$M,
+M>$
Colorado& Alfonso 0$
!L
M,
L9
M
MM
!!
!M
L9
M+$!
+M$
ChaveH& Doroteo M$
M>
!,
M9
L
M>
!9
!!
L
M>$1
+M,$
ChaveH& 4onorato A$
MM
M!
M9
L!
M
,>
M1
M,
M>$!,
M0"=+M!$
Cobangbang& /rlando )$
!9
L1
M
L+
M!
!1
ML
L9
M>$L,
+MM$
CorteH& Armando 0$
ML
!9
LL
L!
!9
!!
!9
!
M>$1
+ML$
Crisostomo& .esus <$
M!
LM
M
M!
!+
,,
M!
!!
M1$,
M0"=+M9$
Corne(o& Crisanto 0$
!L
LM
ML
L!
M9
,9
L9
!9
M>$M
M0"=+L9$
CruH& 0aymundo
M,
L1
M9
L,
M+
,M
!L
M,
M+$9,
M0"=+L1$
Cunanan& .ose C$
ML
9+
!>
L>
M!
M+
!L
!,
M+$
+L+$
Cunanan& 5alvador F$
M9
L+
!
9+
!M
M,
M>
M!
M1$,
+L>$
Cimafranca& Agustin )$
M1
M!
M!
L9
M9
M1
M,
M1
M>$>,
+L$
Crisol& ;etulio 0$
M9
91
ML
L,
!L
,,
M1
,9
M9$L
M0"=+L,$
Dusi& Felicisimo 0$
M!
L+
!9
L+
!!
!+
L9
M1
M+$L,
M0"=+L!$
Datu& Alfredo .$
M9
M,
M+
L!
L9
,,
!L
M9
M1$,
+LM$
Dacuma& <uis )$
M1
!M
LM
L>
M1
,9
!,
M9
M1$+,
M0"=+LL$
Degamo& "edro 0$
M>
L9
L+
M
L9
!M
!M
,M
M>$!,
+L9$
Delgado& Vicente '$
M9
L
L+
L
MM
,+
M>
,9
M+$!,
M0"=+99$
DiolaHo& Ernesto A$
M,
L>
L!
M>
,
,
M,
M,
M+$+,
+91$
Dionisio& .r$& ;uillermo
M>
L
!
L9
M1
ML
M,
!!
M+$L
M0"=+9+$
Dichoso& Alberto M$
M1
MM
M1
L1
!9
M,
L9
M9
M>$!,
M0"=+9>$
Di#asu#il& Claudio 0$
M9
M!
L+
M>
M9
M9
M+
,!
M>$9
M0"=+9$
Delgado& Abner
M,
L
!>
!M
!
!9
M9
M+
!L$>,
M0"=+9,$
Domingo& Dominador T$
M9
!9
L1
L+
!L
!>
M1
M,
M+$+
+9!$
Ducusin& Aga#ito )$
M9
ML
,>
LL
M,
MM
!+
M!
!L$9,
M0"=+9M$
Du8ue& Antonio 5$
M,
MM
ML
L!
M!
M+
!
M,
M>$9
+9L$
Du8ue& Castulo
M,
L9
M>
L>
!!
!M
!,
!!
M9$!,
+99$
Ebbah& "ercival )$
M9
L9
L,
M!
!!
!>
M!
M,
M>$9,
>99$
Edisa& 5ul#icio
!,
MM
M,
L9
M,
!+
M,
!,
M+
>91$
Edradan& 0osa C$
M9
M,
L
L
M1
,9
!9
L!
M>$
M0"=>9+$
Enage& .acinto '$
!!
M9
LL
9>
M+
!M
!,
M,
M>$+
M0"=>9>$
Encarnacion& Alfonso )$
M,
L!
M>
L1
!>
MM
!9
M,
M+$!,
>9$
Encarnacion& Cesar
!,
ML
,L
!L
!!
!
M,
ML
!M$1
>9,$
Estoista& Agustin A$
ML
M!
M
L!
,L
!M
M9
M!
M1$M
M0"=>9!$
Fabros& .ose )$
!!
M,
L9
L+
L9
M1
!M
M9
M>$9,
M0"=>9M$
Fa(ardo& )albino "$
MM
!9
L+
L>
!,
!9
M,
M,
M>$9
>9L$
Fa(ardo& ;enaro "$
M9
M9
MM
M9
M9
,9
M>
M,
M+$,
>99$
Evangelista& Felicidad "$
M,
M,
M+
LM
!>
!>
MM
M9
M+$1,
>19$
Familara& 0aymundo A$
!L
M,
LM
L>
!
!,
!L
!,
M1$L,
>11$
Fari?as& Dionisio
M9
ML
L9
!!
!,
M,
M9
,9
M+$M,
>1+$
Favila& 4ilario )$
M1
L
M
M9
M,
!M
M>
,9
M+$+
M0"=>1>$
Feliciano& Alberto %$
M1
!9
M9
L,
!9
L1
M+
M9
M+$+,
M0"=>1$
Fernando& <o#e F$
M>
MM
L!
M9
M9
M!
!
,9
M>
M0"=>1,$
Flores& Dionisio 5$
ML
M+
MM
L>
!M
!9
!L
M>
M+$9,
M0"=>1!$
Fortich& )en(amin )$
M9
L+
M9
M9
ML
!,
!
M,
M9$>,
M0"=>1M$
Fuente& .ose 5$ de la
M!
LL
M+
M
!9
M1
M9
M9
M>$,,
>1L$
Fohmantes& 'aHario 5$
M+
M9
M1
MM
!L
!1
M!
!9
M9$9
M0"=>19$
Fuggan& <orenHo )$
M!
L1
M
!9
M1
M1
M>
!9
M+$L,
>+9$
;abuya& .esus 5$
M9
L>
L+
L>
M9
!>
M,
!,
M>$M,
>+1$
;alang& Victor '$
!9
L>
L
M!
M9
,M
M1
!9
M1$9,
>++$
;aerlan& Manuel <$
M>
LM
MM
99
!M
!1
M+
M,
M>$1,
>+>$
;alem& 'estor 0$
M+
M9
L!
ML
!9
!1
M,
M9
M>$9,
>+$
;allardo& .ose "e )$
M,
LL
M,
M,
!>
M9
M9
!,
M1$L,
M0"=>+,$
;allos& Cirilo )$
M9
ML
L
91
L9
,1
!,
M9
M+$L,
>+!$
;alindo& Eulalio D$
M9
L9
LM
!,
ML
M1
!+
!+
M>$
>+M$
;alman& "atrocinio ;$
M+
M+
L9
L,
M1
,!
M9
,>
M1$1,
>+L$
;amalinda& Carlos 5$
M!
M9
L1
L!
!M
!>
!9
,,
M+$,,
>+9$
;amboa& Antonio ;$
M1
!M
M9
M+
M!
!9
M,
!L
M9$9,
>>9$
;annod& .ose A$
!9
L9
M,
L1
!L
!+
M>
!L
M1$+,
M0"=>>1$
;arcia& Matias '$
!M
ML
M
99
M9
,9
M!
!,
M+$L
M0"=>>+$
;anete& Carmelo
M,
LM
MM
L+
M
,M
!L
L1
M>$>
>>>$
;ilbang& ;audioso 0$
M,
!M
L9
L+
!M
,M
!
M9
M9$,
>>$
;ofredo& Claro C$
!L
ML
M+
L!
ML
,+
M9
M!
M9$9
>>,$
;omeH& .ose 5$
M1
M!
M1
L1
M!
!>
!9
!+
M9$L,
M0"=>>!$
;osiaoco& <orenHo V$
!L
9>
L,
ML
!
!9
M9
,
M+$>,
M0"=>>M$
;onHales& 0afael C$
MM
M,
M1
L9
,,
M9
M9
!9
M9$9,
M0"=>>L$
;racia& Eulalia <$ de
!!
!L
99
L
MM
,9
!9
!,
M>$>
>>9$
;rageda& .ose M$ A$
M9
L,
M+
!M
M9
!9
M>
M>
M9$M,
>9$
;uHman& .uan de
M,
L!
!9
L
!
M9
M,
M!
M>$!
M0"=>1$
;uHman& Mateo de
M!
M9
M9
M>
M+
!9
!L
L9
M>$9
>+$
;uHman& 5alvador )$
M1
!1
M
M+
!1
!!
ML
M,
M9$M,
>>$
;uHman& 5alvador T$ de
M,
L
!
L1
M
!1
ML
,L
M1$M,
>$
4abelito& ;eronimo E$
M1
M!
M1
LM
M>
!9
!M
,,
!9$!,
>,$
4edriana& 'aterno ;$
M,
!L
L
M!
!!
,L
M!
!9
M+$9
>!$
4ernandeH& Kuintin )$
!M
M,
M+
L1
M+
M+
!!
M!
M9$!
19,+
>M$
4omeres& Agustin 0$
M>
L
!,
L!
M9
MM
!>
M!
M9$M
>L$
%nes& <eonilo F$
!,
LL
M1
LL
MM
M>
!1
M9
M9$,,
>9$
.amer& Ali#io 5$
!L
M,
L>
L9
L9
!1
!,
,9
M+
M0"=>,9$
%basco& .r$& Emiliano M$
M,
!,
!L
L,
M!
M9
L>
,
M>$L
M0"=>,1$
.ardinico& .r$& Emilio
M>
L!
M+
ML
L+
!M
!M
!
M+$L
M0"=>,+$
.aen& .ustiniano F$
M!
M,
ML
L
M1
!!
M9
MM
M>$L,
>,>$
.aring& Antonio 5$
M+
MM
M9
M9
M+
,M
M1
,9
M9$M,
M0"=>,$
.avier& A8uilino M$
M,
L
M9
ML
MM
!1
!!
!!
M>$9,
>,,$
.omuad& Francisco
M,
M,
M+
LL
ML
,L
M!
>
M+$
M0"=>,!$
.ose& 'estor <$
ML
!1
!
M>
!L
M!
!
L9
!9$M
>,M$
<a K& .ose M$
M,
M1
M,
M+
M9
!M
L1
,9
M>$,
>,L$
<eon& )rigido C$ de
!M
M,
ML
91
ML
,1
M+
L9
M+$,,
>,9$
<eones& Constante )$
!L
L1
M9
L
M>
!9
MM
!9
M>
>!9$
<iboro& 4oracio T$
M+
!9
L9
LM
M>
!+
M9
!1
M+$
>!1$
<lanera& Cesar <$
MM
L1
L9
ML
!
,9
M,
!>
M>
>!+$
<omontod& .ose "$
M,
M!
!9
M9
M>
M!
M
M,
M>$+
>!>$
<una& <ucito
M9
M,
!9
L>
,9
,>
M
M,
!L$
M0"=>!$
<uH& <auro <$
M!
99
ML
LL
!
,L
M,
MM
M>$9,
M0"=>!,$
Macasaet& Tomas 5$
M>
L1
M+
L>
!!
M,
M+
M9
M+$,
>!!$
Magbiray& ;odofredo V$
L9
!M
L
M!
M9
!+
!,
!L
M>$9,
>!M$
Ma(arais& 0odolfo "$
M9
!+
!
L+
LL
M,
M1
M9
M+$L,
M0"=>!L$
Ma*abenta& Eduardo
M,
99
MM
L>
,9
M1
M+
ML
M>$>
M0"=>!9$
Mala#it& .ustiniano 5$
M
L>
M
L9
,L
!9
M+
M!
M1$1
>M9$
Maloles& %luminado M$
M9
LM
M>
M!
MM
,9
M!
M!
M+$>
>M1$
Mani8uis& Daniel 0$
M,
L9
M>
91
!9
M1
!,
M9
M+$1
>M+$
Mara?a& Arsenio
!,
M9
!9
M+
M>
,1
M,
L!
!M$9
>M>$
Marasigan& 'a#oleon
M,
M1
L>
M,
!9
!+
!9
M9
M+$M,
M0"=>M$
Marco& .aime "$
M,
!M
M
M!
!
M,
M,
,M
M1$9
M0"=>M,$
Martir& /smundo "$
M9
L!
M!
ML
M+
M1
M,
,>
M+$9,
M0"=>M!$
Masancay& Amando E$
M>
LM
M,
MM
M+
,9
ML
L9
M>$+
M0"=>MM$
Mati=ong& %gnacio T$
!+
LM
M+
M9
M>
M!
!9
MM
M1$>
>ML$
Mara& ;uillermo <$
M9
ML
ML
L9
M,
!M
!!
!,
M+$>,
M0"=>M9$
Mercado& Feli#e A$
M>
MM
L+
L+
ML
,+
!9
L,
M>$9
M0"=>L9$
Miculob& Eugenio "$
M9
L+
M>
L!
MM
,+
M9
!,
M+$L
>L1$
Mison& 0afael M$ .r$&
M9
ML
M>
M,
M1
!L
!9
,>
M1$9,
M0"=>L+$
Mon#onbanua& Antonio D$
M9
M9
!L
LL
!
ML
!9
L>
M>$1
M0"=>L>$
Montero& <eodegario C$
M+
L9
!9
L9
M9
!L
M9
M,
M+$1,
>L$
Morada& 5ervillano 5$
M,
M!
!M
M1
!,
!!
M,
M!
M9$9
>L,$
Mocorro& ;eneroso
ML
L
ML
L
!9
M>
!L
M9
M>
M0"=>L!$
Mos8uera& Estanislao <$
M,
ML
M,
L,
M+
,,
MM
!!
M>$1,
>LM$
Motus& 0odentor "$
L9
ML
M9
9
M+
M,
M9
,M
M>$M,
>LL$
Macario& "edro 0$
M9
!M
M
L!
ML
!>
M+
!!
M+$1,
M0"=>L9$
'adela& ;eredion T$
M+
!
!
L1
M>
,9
M,
M,
!9$1,
M0"=>99$
'aHareno& 0omeo "$
!M
M9
M1
M!
M!
M9
M,
,M
M+$9,
>91$
'ieto& )enedicto 5$
!9
M9
MM
MM
M+
!+
M!
M!
M+$9
M0"=>9+$
'oguera& 0aymundo
M1
L!
L1
L9
M>
,!
M+
M9
M>$1,
M0"=>9>$
'odado& Domiciano 0$
M9
M9
!9
M>
,M
>M
!
M+
!>$!
>9$
'ono& "acifico ;$
!M
MM
ML
!M
M,
,9
M1
M!
M1$>,
M0"=>9,$
'uval& Manuel 0$
ML
M+
!M
99
M+
!L
ML
!M
M>$!,
>9!$
/cam#o& Augusto
M,
99
MM
M+
!9
,,
!,
!M
!9$M
>9M$
/liveros& Amado A$
M+
M,
!L
M+
L
,9
M,
M9
M1$9
>9L$
/#i?a& .r$& "edro
M!
MM
M
!M
M>
!!
!L
M9
M1$L,
M0"=>99$
/laviar& .ose /$
M9
!+
L,
L1
M
,9
!L
M9
M1$L
M0"=99$
/landesca& "er /$
M9
91
M!
LM
M+
!!
M9
M9
M>$,
91$
/rden& A#olonio .$
M+
!,
L
L!
!!
,9
M+
!L
M1$,
9+$
/rtiH& Melencio T$
M1
M,
ML
L1
!!
!M
M9
ML
M+$1
M0"=9>$
"ablo& Fedelino 5$
M+
!
M!
L!
M+
!1
M!
M,
M+$9,
9$
"acifico& Vicente V$
M!
M9
!9
L9
M!
,+
M+
L9
M1$9,
M0"=9,$
"aderna& "erfecto D$
M,
!9
M+
M,
ML
,L
M,
M9
M+$!
9!$
"adlan& Cris#in M$
M1
!!
M!
M9
!L
!M
M
!!
M1$!,
9M$
"adilla& .ose C$
M9
!,
!M
L+
ML
M,
ML
M,
M>$>
9L$
"adilla& .r$& Estanislao E$
M1
LL
ML
L!
,9
M,
ML
,9
M+$9,
M0"=99$
"alma& )artolome
!M
L1
L9
L+
M1
M,
!9
M,
M>$+,
M0"=19$
"a#a& Angel A$
M,
M+
L,
L,
MM
,9
!>
M1
M>$,
M0"=11$
"arayno& Mario V$
M1
LL
M
L9
!9
!!
M!
M>
M>$!,
1+$
"ari?a& 5antos <$
M9
LM
L,
MM
!
!M
!>
M!
M1$L,
M0"=1>$
"asion& Anastacio
!>
L9
!L
L1
L+
M9
M!
,L
M+$,,
1$
"astrana& 0iHal 0$
!9
M!
M1
M!
!L
!>
MM
L>
M1$!,
M0"=1,$
"aulin& .ose /$
M9
!!
L9
LM
M,
,9
!,
L9
M9$9
M0"=1!$
"elaeH& .r$& Vicente C$
M9
LM
M>
L>
!9
M1
!L
!,
M>$+
1M$
"e?a& .esus
M,
M,
M,
!+
M,
M9
!9
!!
M9$
1L$
"ereH& Toribio 0$
M1
!
L1
9+
!9
,L
!M
M9
M1$+,
19$
"esta?o& Mel8uiades
MM
L1
M
LM
,9
!L
M!
M,
M>$+
M0"=+9$
"ido& 5erafin C$
MM
L1
M+
L+
!9
M1
!9
M,
M1$1,
+1$
"inlac& Filemon
!M
M!
M
L!
!,
M9
!,
M+
M9$,,
++$
"oblete& Celso )$
M+
M9
L+
M!
!!
!
M
,9
M+$1,
M0"=+>$
"iHa& <uH
!L
M9
M,
LM
M
!M
!
M,
M9$L
+$
"uHon& Eduardo 5$
M+
L9
L1
!9
M+
,>
!M
M9
M1$9,
+,$
Kuetulio& .osefina D$
M,
99
!9
9>
!
ML
M!
L>
M+$9
M0"=+!$
Kui#anes& Melchor V$
!9
LL
M9
L+
!,
!+
M1
!!
M1$,,
M0"=+M$
Kuietson& )ayani 0$
M>
M,
M!
MM
M9
L1
M1
,>
M+$L,
+L$
0acho& Macario D$
!L
M,
L1
L+
ML
,>
!!
,
M9$,,
+9$
0amireH& 5abas "$
M1
L9
M>
LM
!+
!+
M,
L9
M1$!,
M0"=>9$
0affi?an& .ose A$
L9
L>
M9
M9
!+
M+
!L
!,
M>$+,
M0"=>1$
0amos& "atricio 5$
M,
LM
M!
M,
M+
M+
!1
M,
M+$+,
M0"=>+$
0amos=)almori& Manuela
ML
L
M!
99
L
M,
L9
!,
M>$,
M0"=>>$
0aro& Celso
M,
L1
M!
!M
M,
MM
,,
MM
M1$
M0"=>$
0ayos& Victor 5$
M,
L!
M9
91
M1
!M
!M
M9
M>$9
>,$
0evilla& Mariano 5$
M,
ML
L1
99
M9
,
!9
L1
M>$>,
>!$
0eyes& Abdon <$
M+
!
L1
ML
M!
M>
!9
,>
M+$L,
>M$
0eyes& Domingo )$
M+
LM
ML
L>
M+
M,
!+
M9
M+$M
>L$
0eyes& Francisco M$
M,
L,
L
!L
M,
M1
!L
,9
M>$9
>9$
0eyes& <oHano M$
L9
,M
ML
M9
ML
!,
!
M9
M>$>,
M0"=9$
0eyes& /scar 0$
M,
M,
L+
L+
M!
!
!L
!9
M>$!,
1$
0igonan& Cesar V$
M1
L,
!,
L!
M,
M9
M!
M9
M+$M
+$
0ivera& 4onorio
M1
,!
M9
99
M1
!,
M,
M1
M1$+
M0"=>$
0ivero& )uenaventura A$
M+
LL
M+
9
!L
M>
!!
L9
M+$!
M0"=$
0obles& Enri8ue
M,
MM
M,
MM
L+
!
!9
M9
M>$M
,$
0odrigueH& /restes Arellano
M!
M,
M!
!>
!9
MM
!,
ML
M+$+,
!$
0oldan& .ose V$
!M
L9
M9
L>
M>
M1
M,
M9
M>$9
M$
0osario& Adelaida 0$ del
L9
M,
!,
M9
!L
M+
L9
M9
M>$1,
L$
0osario& 0estituto F$ del
M,
M,
M9
99
!L
!,
!!
!>
M+$1
M0"=9$
5abelino& Conrado 5$
M1
L1
!9
M,
MM
M1
M,
M9
M+$9,
,9$
5an .uan& Damaso
MM
L!
M+
L9
,9
M!
!,
M+
M1$!
,1$
5a?iel& Feli2 <$
M+
9>
M!
L9
!M
M,
!!
!+
M+$1
,+$
5amaniego& .esus )$
M,
L9
M!
M+
!9
!M
!L
M9
M9$!
M0"=,>$
5andoval& Emmanuel M$
M,
L>
M9
L>
MM
!M
MM
!9
M>$9,
M0"=,$
5anidad& Emmanuel K$
M1
M,
L1
99
!+
!
M!
!L
M+$9,
,,$
5antiago& .r$& Cristobal
M,
M!
L
9>
!>
!,
,9
M9
M1$L
,!$
5antillan& .uanito <l$
M!
L9
L>
L>
!>
,L
!,
,+
M1$+,
M0"=,M$
5antos& 0odolfo C$
M,
M,
ML
L+
M>
M!
!!
M9
M>$M
M0"=,L$
5antos& 0u#erto M$
!M
,
!9
M!
!>
!
M1
!9
!!$M,
M0"=,9$
5antos& A8uilino C$
M+
M1
M>
M9
M>
M9
M1
L,
M>$L
M0"=!9$
5antos& 0ufino A$
M,
L1
M9
L,
M
M+
!!
,
M>$>
!1$
5uanding& )antas
M,
!M
!M
9+
M9
,9
M!
M!
M>$1
M0"=!+$
5ulit& FeliH M$
M!
M9
M!
ML
M+
M,
!L
!M
M>$,
!>$
5ongco& Felicisimo ;$
M9
!L
L+
L
!9
!9
M!
!,
M>$>,
!$
5oriano& Aniceto 5$
!
M9
MM
L9
L9
,>
M9
!,
M9$M
!,$
5uareH& "ablo D$
M>
L,
M9
LM
M!
M9
!
M9
M1$9
M0"=!!$
5ybico& .esus <$
M9
M9
M9
M+
M,
M,
M+
!9
M>$9,
!M$
Taba8ue& )en(amin 0$
!9
!L
MM
M9
M
!L
M+
!9
M1$L,
M0"=!L$
Tan Riang& Clarita
L1
M9
M+
L9
!+
M,
M>
L9
M>$9,
M0"=!9$
Tando& Amado T$
M1
L+
ML
L>
M1
!1
M1
!9
M+
M9$
Tasico& 5evero E$
M1
!9
M,
L9
M9
M,
!M
!>
M1$!,
M1$
Tiburcio& %smael "$
M>
L+
M+
9>
M!
,M
!L
,
M1$1,
M0"=M+$
Tiongson& Federico T$
M9
M9
M!
L
MM
M,
M,
,9
M>$,
M0"=M>$
Tolentino& .esus C$
M,
L9
!>
L
L,
M>
M>
,9
M>$
M$
Torri(as& Alfredo A$
MM
!!
!M
L>
!L
M,
M1
!>
M1$>
M0"=M,$
Tobias& Artemio M$
!9
,L
M
L1
M1
,,
!,
,M
!M$,,
M0"=M!$
Trillana& .r$& A#olonio
M!
L!
M!
L!
M9
!L
M,
,9
M>$L
M0"=MM$
Trinidad& Manuel /$
!!
91
L>
M,
!>
!!
!M
!,
M9$L
ML$
Trinidad& "edro /$
!!
ML
ML
L,
ML
,1
!
M,
M9$L
M0"=M9$
:darbe& Flavio .$
L9
L+
MM
L+
!M
,!
!L
M,
M+$!
L9$
:mali& /smundo C$
!L
M,
L1
L9
M1
!9
!L
!9
M1$M
L1$
:mayam& .uanito C$
MM
M,
LM
L,
,!
,!
!!
!9
M1
M0"=L+$
:sita& ;elacio :$
M,
M+
M,
M
M>
M!
M1
M9
M>$,,
L>$
Valino& Francisco M$
M+
L1
L9
L
!+
ML
M1
M,
M>$M
L$
Varela& Dominador M$
!M
M,
L1
L!
M+
,M
L1
M9
M>$L,
L,$
Vega& Macairog <$ de
ML
!+
M9
LM
M9
M9
M1
!,
M>$L
M0"=L!$
Velasco& Emmanuel D$
M1
L9
M
L,
!9
!!
M!
M!
M1$L,
LM$
VeleH& Maria E$
M>
M9
L9
L9
,!
,9
M+
!M
M1$9,
M0"=LL$
Venal& Artemio V$
ML
91
,L
!M
M!
,,
M,
M>
M>$!,
L9$
Venus& Conrado )$
!9
L1
M
L,
!+
!!
M+
MM
MM$9,
M0"=99$
VerHosa& Federico )$
M,
M9
M+
LL
M!
!L
M
,9
M>$M
M0"=91$
Villafuerte& Eduardo V$
M,
L>
M9
M!
!
!
M,
!,
M1$+
M0"=9+$
Villanueva& Cecilio C$
M,
L,
M9
LL
!!
MM
!M
M9
M>$9,
9>$
Villar& Custodio 0$
M>
!9
M9
LL
M!
!!
!9
,9
M9$M,
M0"=9$
Villase?or& <eonidas F$
L9
L,
!M
MM
!+
M,
M!
M>
M>$1,
9,$
Viterbo& .ose 4$
L9
MM
!,
9>
M9
!,
!,
!,
M9$!,
9!$
Paranon& "edro
M9
MM
M!
L,
M+
,9
M,
M,
M1$L,
M0"=9M$
Pasay& Mariano 0$
M,
M,
M+
M!
!>
MM
M9
!9
M1$1
M0"=9L$
Pgay& Venancio M$
M>
L9
L>
L
!+
,9
M+
MM
M+$!,
99$
Pulo& .r$& Teodoro
M>
L+
ML
M,
!9
L1
M,
M,
M>$9,
,99$
Aamora& Alberto
M9
!,
M!
M9
!+
MM
!9
L+
M1$>
,91$
0igonan& Feli#e C$
M9
M9
!9
L9
M!
!+
M1
!
M1$+
A list of those -ho #etitioned for the consolidation of their grades in sub(ects #assed in #revious
e2aminations& sho-ing the years in -hich they too* the e2aminations together -ith their grades and
averages& and those -ho had filed motions for reconsideration -hich -ere denied& indicated by the
initials M0D& follo-s:
"ET%T%/'E05 :'DE0 0E":)<%C ACT '/$ M+
Civ$
<and
Merc$
%nt$
"ol$
Crim$
0em$
<eg$
;en$ Av$
1$
Amao& 5ul#icio M$









19!
!L
!M
M!
M!
M>
M>
9
,9
!!$,
19,9
,9
L9
!M
MM
!+
L9
M1
,M
!M$
+$
)aldo& /legario ;a$









19,1
!,
M!
,L
,,
,9
!>
M,
M+
!$9
19,+
!,
!L
M,
L
M+
,9
M>
,M
!9$M,
19,>
,M
M
!L
!L
M!
,+
M1
M!
!!$M
>$
)lanco& .ose )$









M0D=199
M,
M,
M9
M,
MM
M!
!9
99
M+$1,
19,1
!
M1
,L
!,
!L
M9
M,
M1
!!$9,
$
Condeno& Mateo









19,9
M1
L9
!+
M,
M,
L1
,,
9+
!9$>
19,1
M9
!9
!1
!,
MM
!
!M
L1
!M$L,
,$
Ducusin& Aga#ito )$









M0D=199
!9
M9
M!
M>
M!
M1
,,
!9
!L$!,
19,9
!9
M1
,,
!M
!M
M,
,!
L9
!L$1
!$
;arcia& Manuel '$









M0D=199
!9
M9
L+
M9
M9
!9
!9
L9
!9$+,
19,9
,M
!,
,1
!9
,
L,
,!
L
!9$>
M$
<una& <ucito A$









19!
!>
,>
!9
M!
M,
M!
,M
!9
!!$,,
19,+
M9
M,
!9
L>
,9
,>
M
M,
!L$
L$
Mara?a& Arsenio s$









199
M+
!L
!L
M,
M,
M+
!9
M,
!9$>,
19,+
!,
M9
!9
M+
M>
,1
M,
L!
!M$9
9$
Montano& Manuel M$









19,1
!1
!9
,L
!9
M9
!>
M,
!
!$L
19,+
M9
MM
!,
M9
!!
,+
M9
,9
!!$
19,>
ML
!
!!
!L
L1
,9
M1
ML
M9$!,
19$
"e?a& .esus 5$









19,9
+,
M,
,
M,
,
,+
!
M1
!$+
19,1
M9
MM
!,
M9
!!
,+
M9
,9
!!$
19,+
M,
M,
M,
!+
M,
M9
!9
!!
M9$
11$
"lacido& 5r$& %sidro









19,9
!L
ML
M9
M,
!9
M9
,L
!9
!M$M,
19,1
!,
!+
M,
!9
M>
,M
M,
M1
!!$L
1+$
0ementiHo& Filemon 5$









199
!,
M,
M+
M,
!9
M,
,,
L,
!!$!,
19,1
!L
,M
L
!9
91
!!
,,
M,
!$9,
19,+
!L
,>
!L
!M
,L
,!
M,
!
!,$M
1>$
Amao& 5ul#icio M$









19,+
!M
L9
,1
!9
!9
MM
M>
,>
!!$>,
19,>
!,
!M
ML
M
M,
!+
!9
L9
M9$9
1$
0odulfa& .uan T$









19,1
!M
!9
M9
!,
!L
,!
M,
!!
!M$M,
19,+
M9
M1
!M
ML
!M
M,
M1
M9
M9$1
1,$
5ancheH& .uan .$









19L
>9
!9
L+
M,
M!
M+
,,
,9
!>$,
M0D=199
!M
,!
!9
M,
M+
MM
!9
M,
!L
19,1
M9
,9
,,
!9
!L
,M
ML
!M
!,$L
1!$
5antos& Constantino









19,+
!+
M!
,
L+
M+
MM
!!
!,
!!$!,
19,>
M>
M1
M9
!,
ML
!
!,
ML
M9$
1M$
5antos& 5alvador 4$









19,1
!9
!
,,
M9
!L
,+
M9
M,
!+$L,
19,+
M,
!
M9
L1
M!
,,
!1
M,
!9$1
19,>
M9
M1
M9
!,
M+
,
!!
L9
M9
1L$
5evilla& Macario C$









M0D=19L
,9
!
M!
!!
!!
!9
!9
,+
!>$1
M0D=199
M
!!
ML
!
M1
L!
!,
L,
!L
19,9
>,
!,
9
M,
!>
,M
+M
9
,
M0D=19,1
!L
,9
M+
,,
!9
!,
M,
M,
!9$>
19,>
M9
M>
M
M9
L1
,!
!9
M1
M1$9,
Finally& -ith regards to the e2aminations of 19,>& -hile some candidates==L, in all==#resented motions
for reconsideration of their grades& others invo*ed the #rovisions of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+$ A list of
those candidates se#arating those -ho filed mere motions for reconsideration B,!D from those -ho
invo*ed the aforesaid 0e#ublic act& is as follo-s:
19,> "ET%T%/'E05 F/0 0EC/'5%DE0AT%/'
Civ$
<and
Merc$
%nt$
"ol$
Crim$
0em$
<eg$
;en$ Av$
1$
Acenas& Cali2to 0$
M>
M9
!L
!+
L+
,1
!M
MM
M>$,
+$
Alcantara& "edro '$
!M
M9
M,
L,
LM
,
M1
L9
M+$L
>$
Ale(andro& E2e8uiel
!M
M+
M1
M,
L9
M!
M,
MM
M>$
$
Andres& ;regorio M$
M9
M>
L!
,L
M9
,9
M1
ML
M+$M
,$
ArnaiH& Antonio E$
!!
L9
M!
,L
M9
!L
MM
L1
M>$
!$
Asis& Floriano :$ de
!!
ML
M,
L1
MM
,,
M>
!9
M1$+,
M$
)acaiso& Celestino M$
M1
!,
M!
!L
M!
,9
M,
M9
M9$9,
L$
)ala& Florencio F$
!
L+
M
M9
L+
,L
M,
L+
!M
9$
)aldo& /legario A$
,M
M
!L
!L
M!
,+
M1
M!
!!$M
19$
)arrios& )en(amin /$
!,
M1
M!
M,
L9
!+
L>
M>
M>$9,
11$
)uhay& Eduardo <$
M>
M!
M1
91
M!
!1
M
ML
M>$>,
1+$
)urgos& Dominador C$
M+
L9
L9
!1
!!
>M
!9
!L
M9$9,
1>$
Cari?o& Eldo .$
M9
L1
!9
M,
M
M
M!
M
M>
1$
Casar& Dima#uro
!M
M>
L
M9
MM
!1
M1
M
M>$>,
1,$
Casta?eda& ;regorio
M9
M>
L9
M1
M,
M9
M>
ML
M>$9,
1!$
Estrellado& )en(amin 0$
!M
M9
!
M>
L+
!+
M1
M
M9$+
1M$
Fabunan& Edilberto C$
M9
M+
!L
!9
MM
!9
M!
M
M1$1
1L$
Feril& Domingo )$
M,
M1
L
!,
M9
!9
!,
M9
M1$!
19$
FernandeH& Ale(andro ;$
!,
M,
LM
L9
L1
!>
!1
L9
M+$L
+9$
;a#us& 0osita 5$ BMissD
M!
L9
L!
MM
!
M
!!
!9
M>$9
+1$
;arcia& 0afael )$
M9
L!
M9
M,
M>
!>
M>
M,
M1$!,
++$
;racia& Miguel <$ de
M>
!L
M,
,9
L9
,1
M+
M1
M1
+>$
;ungon& Armando ;$
!L
M!
M!
L
MM
,M
MM
L>
M>$!
+$
;utierreH& Antonio 5$
!L
MM
!!
M9
M+
,9
M1
M
!9$1
+,$
%le(ay& Abraham %$
MM
M9
M!
MM
L1
!+
M9
!L
M>$M
+!$
<eon& )en(amin <a$ De
!!
!!
M,
M9
MM
,,
M1
L+
M9$>,
+M$
<ugtu& Feli#e <$
!+
M9
ML
!,
ML
,!
!9
L1
!9$9
+L$
<u*man& Abdul=4amid
M!
!
!M
!9
M>
,9
M>
M,
M9$,
+9$
Maloles& .r$& )en(amin ;$
MM
M!
!L
!L
M1
,1
M,
ML
M9$L,
>9$
Maloles& .ulius ;$
MM
M1
!9
M1
M9
!+
!L
M+
!9$M,
>1$
Mandi& 5antiago "$
!,
M!
M9
!1
M9
!L
M,
M+
M1$1
>+$
Margete& 0ufino C$
M9
M!
!!
M,
L,
M>
M1
M,
M+$M,
>>$
Melocoton& 'estorio )$
M9
L1
M>
ML
L>
,+
M+
M,
M+$>,
>$
Molina& Manuel C$
M,
ML
M9
!1
M,
!>
!!
L,
M9$9,
>,$
Mu?oH& Mariano A$
M,
L9
L!
!M
M
,M
!L
M!
M>$M,
>!$
'avarro& )uenaventura M$
L9
M,
!,
M,
L>
,,
M>
M9
M>
>M$
'odado& Domiciano 0$
!9
!M
!M
,9
M9
,9
,!
M,
!1$M
>L$
"a#as& 5isenando )$
!,
!+
M1
!1
M9
,!
!!
!M
!!
>9$
"agulayan=5y& Fernando
!>
M,
M1
!+
L>
!M
M9
M+
M9$
9$
"adula& )en(amin C$
M9
MM
,
!+
M
ML
M,
!L
!9$9,
1$
"asno& Enri8ue M$
ML
M+
!!
,
M1
,L
M+
ML
!9$L,
+$
"e?a& .r$& 'arciso
M9
9,
L1
ML
!M
!!
!M
M>
M+$,,
>$
"eralta& 0odolfo "$
M9
M9
,+
L1
!L
!>
,9
!9
!>$M
$
"igar& <eo#oldo 0$
M!
M,
ML
!1
M+
M+
M1
M9
M>$M,
,$
"ublico& "aciano <$
!L
!9
M!
M!
M9
,9
M
!M
M9$!
!$
0adaHa& <eovigildo
M,
ML
M!
!1
MM
,9
M1
L!
M+$+
M$
0amos& )ernardo M$
!
!+
M,
9>
L1
,+
!!
L9
M9$1
L$
0abaino& Andres D$
!L
M+
M,
M>
ML
,,
!9
M!
M9$!,
9$
0avanera& /scar '$
M9
MM
L9
M1
L+
!+
!9
ML
M>$!
,9$
0enovilla& .ose M$
!,
M,
L9
!L
M9
,+
!+
ML
!9$,
,1$
5abaot& 5olomon )$
!9
M>
L9
!9
L+
!9
!9
M9
M>$L,
,+$
5uma-ay& 0icardo 5$
!!
M!
!9
M!
M
,!
M+
!L
!9$1
,>$
Torrefiel& 5ofronio /$
M9
MM
M
M,
M>
,9
!L
M+
!9$,,
,$
Vera& Federico V$ de
!9
!1
M
MM
!9
,9
!M
MM
!9$9
,,$
Viray& Venancio )ustos
!,
!M
!M
,+
M>
!
M1
!,
!M$1,
,!$
Playa& Angela "$ BMissD
!>
M9
,!
M,
!L
,
M9
MM
!$,
"ET%T%/'E05 :'DE0 0E":)<%C ACT '/$ 9M+
Civ$
<and
Merc$
%nt$
"ol$
Crim$
0em$
<eg$
;en$ Av$
1$
Ala& 'arciso
M9
M1
M>
,9
M>
M
L1
MM
M>$,
+$
Alcantara& "edro '$
!M
M9
M,
L,
LM
,
M1
L9
M+$L
>$
Arellano& Antonio <$
M
!!
M>
!9
ML
!>
ML
M+
M+$9
$
)uhay& Eduardo <$
M>
M!
M1
91
M!
!1
M
ML
M>$>,
,$
Calautit& Celestino 0$
M1
ML
L
M,
M,
!1
!L
M+
M>$+
!$
Casuncad& 5ulvio "$
!1
M>
L+
!9
L1
!L
M1
L
M>$9,
M$
Enri8ueH& "elagio y Conce#cion
L
!9
M!
M,
L+
,9
,L
M9
M+$9,
L$
Estonina& 5everino
L9
M
!
L9
L1
,!
!L
L+
M+$
9$
FernandeH& Ale(andro K$
!,
M,
LM
L9
L1
!>
!1
L9
M+$L
19$
FernandeH& <uis '$
M9
M,
MM
M,
ML
!M
M+
M>
M>$>,
11$
Figueroa& Alfredo A$
M9
M,
LM
ML
M,
,9
!L
!L
M+$>
1+$
FormilleHa& "edro
!,
M,
L9
!L
L>
,1
M9
M,
M>$+,
1>$
;arcia& Manuel M$
!9
!L
L>
L>
M>
!+
!+
M9
M1
1$
;ros#e& Vicente E$
!L
M,
ML
!!
M9
!1
!9
L+
M1$!
1,$
;alema& 'estor 0$ B19,+D
M+
M9
L!
ML
!9
!1
M,
M9
M>$9,
1!$
.acobo& 0afael F$
M!
M!
M,
M
M!
,9
M+
M!
M+$>
1M$
Macalindong& 0einerio <$
!M
MM
M9
M9
M
M+
!L
MM
M+$M,
1L$
Mangubat& Antonio M$
M9
M9
ML
!1
L9
M
!+
M9
M1$,
19$
Montano& Manuel M$
ML
!
!!
!L
L1
,9
M1
ML
M9$!,
+9$
"lomantes& Marcos
M>
!M
M
,L
!L
M9
M!
M1
M1$!
+1$
0amos& Eugenio 0$
M9
L9
M!
!M
M+
!9
M+
M9
M+$!
++$
0eyes& .uan 0$
M1
M>
MM
M!
L1
,9
M+
M
M>$+
+>$
0eyes& 5antiago 0$
!,
ML
L>
!9
M!
M,
M9
M9
M+$9
+$
0ivera& Eulogio .$
!,
!M
ML
M
M,
!+
!9
L9
M9$9
+,$
5antos& Constantino "$
M>
M1
M9
!,
ML
!
!,
ML
M9$
+!$
5antos& 5alvador 4$
M9
M1
M9
!,
M+
,
!!
L9
M9
+M$
5evilla& Macario C$
M9
M>
M
M9
L1
,!
!9
M1
M1$9,
+L$
Villavicencio& .ose A$
ML
M,
M9
!M
!9
MM
!
MM
M>$+
+9$
Viray& 0u#erto ;$
M!
M>
M!
M>
L9
,L
!L
L>
M>$+,
There are the unsuccessful candidates totaling !9 directly affected by this resolution$ Adding 99
candidates -ho have not #resented any #etition& they reach a total of 1&99$
The Enactment of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+
As -ill be observed from Anne2 %& this Court reduced to M+ #er cent the #assing general average in the
bar e2amination of august and 'ovember of 19!G !9 #er cent in 19MG M9 #er cent in 19LG M #er cent
in 199G maintaining the #rescribed M, #er cent since 19,9& but raising to M, #er cent those -ho
obtained M #er cent since 19,9$ This caused the introduction in 19,1& in the 5enate of the "hili##ines
of )ill 'o$ 1+ -hich -as intended to amend 5ections ,& 9& 1+& 1 and 1! of 0ule 1+M of the 0ules of
Court& concerning the admission of attorneys=at=la- to the #ractice of the #rofession$ The amendments
embrace many interesting matters& but those referring to sections 1 and 1! immediately concern us$
The #ro#osed amendment is as follo-s:
5EC$ 1$ "assing average$ E %n order that a candidate may be deemed to have #assed the e2aminations
successfully& he must have obtained a general average of M9 #er cent -ithout falling belo- ,9 #er cent
in any sub(ect$ %n determining the average& the foregoing sub(ects shall be given the follo-ing relative
-eights: Civil <a-& +9 #er centG <and 0egistration and Mortgages& , #er centG Mercantile <a-& 1, #er
centG Criminal <a-& 19 #er centG "olitical <a-& 19 #er centG %nternational <a-& , #er centG 0emedial
<a-& +9 #er centG <egal Ethics and "ractical E2ercises& , #er centG 5ocial <egislation& , #er centG
Ta2ation& , #er cent$ :nsuccessful candidates shall not be re8uired to ta*e another e2amination in any
sub(ect in -hich they have obtained a rating of M9 #er cent or higher and such rating shall be ta*en into
account in determining their general average in any subse8uent e2aminations: "rovided& ho-ever& That
if the candidate fails to get a general average of M9 #er cent in his third e2amination& he shall lose the
benefit of having already #assed some sub(ects and shall be re8uired to the e2amination in all the
sub(ects$
5EC$ 1!$ Admission and oath of successful a##licants$ E Any a##licant -ho has obtained a general
average of M9 #er cent in all sub(ects -ithout falling belo- ,9 #er cent in any e2amination held after
the th day of .uly& 19!& or -ho has been other-ise found to be entitled to admission to the bar& shall
be allo-ed to ta*e and subscribe before the 5u#reme Court the corres#onding oath of office$ BArts$
and ,& L& 'o$ 1+D$
3ith the bill -as an E2#lanatory 'ote& the #ortion #ertinent to the matter before us being:
%t seems to be unfair that unsuccessful candidates at bar e2aminations should be com#elled to re#eat
even those sub(ects -hich they have #reviously #assed$ This is not the case in any other government
e2amination$ The 0ules of Court have therefore been amended in this measure to give a candidate due
credit for any sub(ect -hich he has #reviously #assed -ith a rating of M, #er cent or higher$F
5enate )ill 'o$ 1+ having been a##roved by Congress on May >& 19,1& the "resident re8uested the
comments of this Tribunal before acting on the same$ The comment -as signed by seven .ustices -hile
three chose to refrain from ma*ing any and one too* no #art$ 3ith regards to the matter that interests
us& the Court said:
The ne2t amendment is of section 1 of 0ule 1+M$ /ne #art of this amendment #rovides that if a bar
candidate obtains M9 #er cent or higher in any sub(ect& although failing to #ass the e2amination& he need
not be e2amined in said sub(ect in his ne2t e2amination$ This is a sort of #assing the )ar E2amination
on the installment #lan& one or t-o or three sub(ects at a time$ The trouble -ith this #ro#osed system is
that although it ma*es it easier and more convenient for the candidate because he may in an
e2amination #re#are himself on only one or t-o sub(ects so as to insure #assing them& by the time that
he has #assed the last re8uired sub(ects& -hich may be several years a-ay from the time that he
revie-ed and #assed the firs sub(ects& he shall have forgotten the #rinci#les and theories contained in
those sub(ects and remembers only those of the one or t-o sub(ects that he had last revie-ed and
#assed$ This is highly #ossible because there is nothing in the la- -hich re8uires a candidate to
continue ta*ing the )ar e2aminations every year in succession$ The only condition im#osed is that a
candidate& on this #lan& must #ass the e2amination in no more that three installmentsG but there is no
limitation as to the time or number of years intervening bet-een each e2amination ta*en$ This -ould
defeat the ob(ect and the re8uirements of the la- and the Court in admitting #ersons to the #ractice of
la-$ 3hen a #erson is so admitted& it is to be #resumed and #resu##osed that he #ossesses the
*no-ledge and #roficiency in the la- and the *no-ledge of all la- sub(ects re8uired in bar
e2aminations& so as #resently to be able to #ractice the legal #rofession and ade8uately render the legal
service re8uired by #ros#ective clients$ )ut this -ould not hold true of the candidates -ho may have
obtained a #assing grade on any five sub(ects eight years ago& another three sub(ects one year later& and
the last t-o sub(ects the #resent year$ 3e believe that the #resent system of re8uiring a candidate to
obtain a #assing general average -ith no grade in any sub(ect belo- ,9 #er cent is more desirable and
satisfactory$ %t re8uires one to be all around& and #re#ared in all re8uired legal sub(ects at the time of
admission to the #ractice of la-$
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
3e no- come to the last amendment& that of section 1! of 0ule 1+M$ This amendment #rovides that any
a##lication -ho has obtained a general average of M9 #er cent in all sub(ects -ithout failing belo- ,9
#er cent in any sub(ect in any e2amination held after the th day of .uly& 19!& shall be allo-ed to ta*e
and subscribe the corres#onding oath of office$ %n other -ords& )ar candidates -ho obtained not less
than M9 #er cent in any e2amination since the year 19! -ithout failing belo- ,9 #er cent in any
sub(ect& des#ite their non=admission to the )ar by the 5u#reme Court because they failed to obtain a
#assing general average in any of those years& -ill be admitted to the )ar$ This #rovision is not only
#ros#ective but retroactive in its effects$
3e have already stated in our comment on the ne2t #receding amendment that -e are not e2actly in
favor of reducing the #assing general average from M, #er cent to M9 #er cent to govern even in the
future$ As to the validity of ma*ing such reduction retroactive& -e have serious legal doubts$ 3e should
not lose sight of the fact that after every bar e2aminations& the 5u#reme Court #asses the corres#onding
resolution not only admitting to the )ar those -ho have obtained a #assing general average grade& but
also re(ecting and denying the #etitions for reconsideration of those -ho have failed$ The #resent
amendment -ould have the effect of re#udiating& reversing and revo*ing the 5u#reme Court@s
resolution denying and re(ecting the #etitions of those -ho may have obtained an average of M9 #er
cent or more but less than the general #assing average fi2ed for that year$ %t is clear that this 8uestion
involves legal im#lications& and this #hase of the amendment if finally enacted into la- might have to
go thru a legal test$ As one member of the Court remar*ed during the discussion& -hen a court renders
a decision or #romulgate a resolution or order on the basis of and in accordance -ith a certain la- or
rule then in force& the subse8uent amendment or even re#eal of said la- or rule may not affect the final
decision& order& or resolution already #romulgated& in the sense of revo*ing or rendering it void and of
no effect$
Another as#ect of this 8uestion to be considered is the fact that members of the bar are officers of the
courts& including the 5u#reme Court$ 3hen a )ar candidate is admitted to the )ar& the 5u#reme Court
im#liedly regards him as a #erson fit& com#etent and 8ualified to be its officer$ Conversely& -hen it
refused and denied admission to the )ar to a candidate -ho in any year since 19! may have obtained
a general average of M9 #er cent but less than that re8uired for that year in order to #ass& the 5u#reme
Court e8ually and im#liedly considered and declared that he -as not #re#ared& ready& com#etent and
8ualified to be its officer$ The #resent amendment giving retroactivity to the reduction of the #assing
general average runs counter to all these acts and resolutions of the 5u#reme Court and #ractically and
in effect says that a candidate not acce#ted& and even re(ected by the Court to be its officer because he
-as un#re#ared& undeserving and un8ualified& nevertheless and in s#ite of all& must be admitted and
allo-ed by this Court to serve as its officer$ 3e re#eat& that this is another im#ortant as#ect of the
8uestion to be carefully and seriously considered$
The "resident vetoed the bill on .une 1!& 19,1& stating the follo-ing:
% am fully in accord -ith the avo-ed ob(ection of the bill& namely& to elevate the standard of the legal
#rofession and maintain it on a high level$ This is not achieved& ho-ever& by admitting to #ractice
#recisely a s#ecial class -ho have failed in the bar e2amination& Moreover& the bill contains #rovisions
to -hich % find serious fundamental ob(ections$
5ection , #rovides that any a##licant -ho has obtained a general average of M9 #er cent in all sub(ects
-ithout failing belo- ,9 #er cent in any sub(ect in any e2amination held after the th day of .uly& 19!&
shall be allo-ed to ta*e and subscribed the corres#onding oath of office$ This #rovision constitutes
class legislation& benefiting as it does s#ecifically one grou# of #ersons& namely& the unsuccessful
candidates in the 19!& 19M& 19L& 199 and 19,9 bar e2aminations$
The same #rovision underta*es to revo*e or set aside final resolutions of the 5u#reme Court made in
accordance -ith the la- then in force$ %t should be noted that after every bar e2amination the 5u#reme
Court #asses the corres#onding resolution not only admitting to the )ar those -ho have obtained a
#assing general average but also re(ecting and denying the #etitions for reconsideration of those -ho
have failed$ The #rovision under consideration -ould have the effect of revo*ing the 5u#reme Court@s
resolution denying and re(ecting the #etitions of those -ho may have failed to obtain the #assing
average fi2ed for that year$ 5aid #rovision also sets a bad #recedent in that the ;overnment -ould be
morally obliged to grant a similar #rivilege to those -ho have failed in the e2aminations for admission
to other #rofessions such as medicine& engineering& architecture and certified #ublic accountancy$
Conse8uently& the bill -as returned to the Congress of the "hili##ines& but it -as not re#assed by +Z>
vote of each 4ouse as #rescribed by section +9& article V% of the Constitution$ %nstead )ill 'o$ >M1 -as
#resented in the 5enate$ %t reads as follo-s:
A' ACT T/ F%C T4E "A55%'; MA0R5 F/0 )A0 ECAM%'AT%/'5 F0/M 19! :" T/ A'D
%'C<:D%'; 19,>
)e it enacted by the 5enate and 4ouse of 0e#resentatives of the "hili##ines in Congress assembled:
5ECT%/' 1$ 'ot-ithstanding the #rovisions of section 1& 0ule 1+M of the 0ules of Court& any bar
candidate -ho obtained a general average of M9 #er cent in any bar e2aminations after .uly & 19! u#
to the August 19,1 )ar e2aminationsG M1 #er cent in the 19,+ bar e2aminationsG M+ #er cent in the 19,>
bar e2aminationsG M> #er cent in the 19, bar e2aminationsG M #er cent in 19,, bar e2aminations
-ithout a candidate obtaining a grade belo- ,9 #er cent in any sub(ect& shall be allo-ed to ta*e and
subscribe the corres#onding oath of office as member of the "hili##ine )arG "rovided& ho-ever& That
M, #er cent #assing general average shall be restored in all succeeding e2aminationsG and "rovided&
finally& That for the #ur#ose of this Act& any e2act one=half or more of a fraction& shall be considered as
one and included as #art of the ne2t -hole number$
5EC$ +$ Any bar candidate -ho obtained a grade of M, #er cent in any sub(ect in any bar e2amination
after .uly & 19, shall be deemed to have #assed in such sub(ect or sub(ects and such grade or grades
shall be included in com#uting the #assing general average that said candidate may obtain in any
subse8uent e2aminations that he may ta*e$
5EC$ >$ This bill shall ta*e effect u#on its a##roval$
3ith the follo-ing e2#lanatory note:
This is a revised )ar bill to meet the ob(ections of the "resident and to afford another o##ortunity to
those -ho feel themselves discriminated by the 5u#reme Court from 19! to 19,1 -hen those -ho
-ould other-ise have #assed the bar e2amination but -ere arbitrarily not so considered by altering its
#revious decisions of the #assing mar*$ The 5u#reme Court has been altering the #assing mar* from !9
in 19M to M in 19,1$ %n order to cure the a##arent arbitrary fi2ing of #assing grades and to give
satisfaction to all #arties concerned& it is #ro#osed in this bill a gradual increase in the general averages
for #assing the bar e2aminations as follo-sG For 19! to 19,1 bar e2aminations& M9 #er centG for 19,+
bar e2amination& M1 #er centG for 19,> bar e2amination& M+ #er centG for 19, bar e2amination& M>
#ercentG and for 19,, bar e2amination& M #er cent$ Thus in 19,! the #assing mar* -ill be restored -ith
the condition that the candidate shall not obtain in any sub(ect a grade of belo- ,9 #er cent$ The reason
for rela2ing the standard M, #er cent #assing grade& is the tremendous handica# -hich students during
the years immediately after the .a#anese occu#ation has to overcome such as the insufficiency of
reading materials and the inade8uacy of the #re#aration of students -ho too* u# la- soon after the
liberation$ %t is believed that by 19,! the #re#aration of our students as -ell as the available reading
materials -ill be under normal conditions& if not im#roved from those years #receding the last -orld
-ar$
%n this -ill -e eliminated altogether the idea of having our 5u#reme Court assumed the su#ervision as
-ell as the administration of the study of la- -hich -as ob(ected to by the "resident in the )ar )ill of
19,1$
The "resident in vetoing the )ar )ill last year stated among his ob(ections that the bill -ould admit to
the #ractice of la- Fa s#ecial class -ho failed in the bar e2aminationF$ 4e considered the bill a class
legislation$ This contention& ho-ever& is not& in good conscience& correct because Congress is merely
su##lementing -hat the 5u#reme Court have already established as #recedent by ma*ing as lo- as !9
#er cent the #assing mar* of those -ho too* the )ar e2amination in 19M$ These bar candidates for
-ho this bill should be enacted& considered themselves as having #assed the bar e2amination on the
strength of the established #recedent of our 5u#reme Court and -ere fully a-are of the insurmountable
difficulties and handica#s -hich they -ere unavoidably #laced$ 3e believe that such #recedent cannot
or could not have been altered& constitutionally& by the 5u#reme Court& -ithout giving due
consideration to the rights already accrued or vested in the bar candidates -ho too* the e2amination
-hen the #recedent -as not yet altered& or in effect& -as still enforced and -ithout being inconsistent
-ith the #rinci#les of their #revious resolutions$
%f this bill -ould be enacted& it shall be considered as a sim#le curative act or corrective statute -hich
Congress has the #o-er to enact$ The re8uirement of a Fvalid classificationF as against class legislation&
is very e2#ressed in the follo-ing American .uris#rudence:
A valid classification must include all -ho naturally belong to the class& all -ho #ossess a common
disability& attribute& or classification& and there must be a FnaturalF and substantial differentiation
bet-een those included in the class and those it leaves untouched$ 3hen a class is acce#ted by the
Court as FnaturalF it cannot be again s#lit and then have the dissevered factions of the original unit
designated -ith different rules established for each$ BFountain "ar* Co$ vs$ 0ensier& 199 %nd$ 9,& '$ E$
!, B19+!D$
Another case #enned by .ustice CardoHo: FTime -ith its tides brings ne- conditions -hich must be
cared for by ne- la-s$ 5ometimes the ne- conditions affect the members of a class$ %f so& the
correcting statute must a##ly to all ali*e$ 5ometimes the condition affect only a fe-$ %f so& the
correcting statute may be as narro- as the mischief$ The constitution does not #rohibit s#ecial la-s
infle2ibly and al-ays$ %t #ermits them -hen there are s#ecial evils -ith -hich the general la-s are
incom#etent to co#e$ The s#ecial #ublic #ur#ose -ill sustain the s#ecial form$ $ $ $ The #roblem in the
last analysis is one of legislative #olicy& -ith a -ide margin of discretion conceded to the la-ma*ers$
/nly in the case of #lain abuse -ill there be revision by the court$ B%n 3illiams vs$ Mayor and City
Council of )altimore& +L! :$ 5$ >!& MM <$ Ed$ 191,& ,> 5u#$ Ct$ >1D$ B19>+D
This bill has all the earmar*s of a corrective statute -hich al-ays retroacts to the e2tent of the care of
correction only as in this case from 19! -hen the 5u#reme Court first deviated from the rule of M, #er
cent in the 0ules of Court$
For the foregoing #ur#oses the a##roval of this bill is earnestly recommended$
B5gd$D "A)</ A';E<E5 DAV%D
5enator
3ithout much debate& the revised bill -as #assed by Congress as above transcribed$ The "resident
again as*ed the comments of this Court& -hich endorsed the follo-ing:
0es#ectfully returned to the 4onorable& the Acting E2ecutive 5ecretary& Manila& -ith the information
that& -ith res#ect to 5enate )ill 'o$ >M1& the members of the Court are ta*ing the same vie-s they
e2#ressed on 5enate )ill 'o$ 1+ #assed by Congress in May& 19,1& contained in the first indorsement of
the undersigned dated .une ,& 19,1& to the Assistant E2ecutive 5ecretary$
B5gd$D 0%CA0D/ "A0A5
The "resident allo-ed the #eriod -ithin -hich the bill should be signed to #ass -ithout vetoing it& by
virtue of -hich it became a la- on .une +1& 19,> B5ec$ +9& Art$ V%& ConstitutionD numbered 9M+ Bmany
times erroneously cited as 'o$ 9MD$
%t may be mentioned in #assing that 19,> -as an election year& and that both the "resident and the
author of the )ill -ere candidates for re=election& together& ho-ever& they lost in the #olls$
5e#arate /#inions
<A)0AD/0& .$& concurring and dissenting:
The right to admit members to the )ar is& and has al-ays been& the e2clusive #rivilege of this Court&
because la-yers are members of the Court and only this Court should be allo-ed to determine
admission thereto in the interest of the #rinci#le of the se#aration of #o-ers$ The #o-er to admit is
(udicial in the sense that discretion is used in is e2ercise$ This #o-er should be distinguished from the
#o-er to #romulgate rules -hich regulate admission$ %t is only this #o-er Bto #romulgate amendments
to the rulesD that is given in the Constitution to the Congress& not the e2ercise of the discretion to admit
or not to admit$ Thus the rules on the holding of e2amination& the 8ualifications of a##licants& the
#assing grades& etc$ are -ithin the sco#e of the legislative #o-er$ )ut the #o-er to determine -hen a
candidate has made or has not made the re8uired grade is (udicial& and lies com#letely -ith this Court$
% hold that the act under consideration is an e2ercise of the (udicial function& and lies beyond the sco#e
of the congressional #rerogative of amending the rules$ To say that candidates -ho obtain a general
average of M+ #er cent in 19,>& M> #er cent in 19,& and M #er cent in 19,, should be considered as
having #assed the e2amination& is to mean e2ercise of the #rivilege and discretion (udged in this Court$
%t is a mandate to the tribunal to #ass candidates for different years -ith grades lo-er than the #assing
mar*$ 'o reasoning is necessary to sho- that it is an arrogation of the Court@s (udicial authority and
discretion$ %t is furthermore ob(ectionable as discriminatory$ 3hy should those ta*ing the e2aminations
in 19,>& 19, and 19,, be allo-ed to have the #rivilege of a lo-er #assing grade& -hile those ta*ing
earlier or later are notQ
% vote that the act in toto be declared unconstitutional& because it is not embraced -ithin the rule=
ma*ing #o-er of Congress& because it is an undue interference -ith the #o-er of this Court to admit
members thereof& and because it is discriminatory$
"A0A5& C$.$& dissenting:
:nder section 1, of 0ule of Court 'o$ 1+M& in order that a bar candidate Fmay be deemed to have
#assed his e2aminations successfully& he must have obtained a general average of M, #er cent in all
sub(ects& -ithout falling belo- ,9 #er cent in any sub(ect$@ This #assing mar* has al-ays been adhered
to& -ith certain e2ce#tion #resently to be s#ecified$
3ith reference to the bar e2aminations given in August& 19!& the original list of successful candidates
included only those -ho obtained a general average of M, #er cent or more$ :#on motion for
reconsideration& ho-ever& 1+ candidates -ith general averages ranging from M+ to M> #er cent -ere
raised to M, #er cent by resolution of December 1L& 19!$ %n the e2aminations of 'ovember& 19! the
list first released containing the names of successful candidates covered only those -ho obtained a
general average of M, #er cent or moreG but& u#on motion for reconsideration& 19 candidates -ith a
general average of M+ #er cent -ere raised to M, #er cent by resolution of March >1& 19M$ This -ould
indicate that in the original list of successful candidates those having a general average of M> #er cent
or more but belo- M, #er cent -ere included$ After the original list of 19M successful bar candidates
had been released& and on motion for reconsideration& all candidates -ith a general average of !9 #er
cent -ere allo-ed to #ass by resolution of .uly 1,& 19L$ 3ith res#ect to the bar e2aminations held in
August& 19L& in addition to the original list of successful bar candidates& all those -ho obtained a
general average of M9 #er cent or more& irres#ective of the grades in any one sub(ect and irres#ective of
-hether they filed #etitions for reconsideration& -ere allo-ed to #ass by resolution of A#ril +L& 199$
Thus& for the year 19M the Court in effect made !9 #er cent as the #assing average& and for the year
19L& M9 #er centG and this amounted& -ithout being noticed #erha#s& to an amendment of section 1 of
0ule 1+M$
'umerous flun*ers in the bar e2aminations held subse8uent to 19L& -hose general averages mostly
ranged from !9 to M> #er cent& filed motions for reconsideration invo*ing the #recedents set by this
Court in 19M and 19L& but said motions -ere uniformly denied$
%n the year 19,1& the Congress& after #ublic hearings -here la- deans and #rofessors& #ractising
attorneys& #residents of bar associations& and la- graduates a##eared and argued lengthily #ro or con&
a##roved a bill #roviding& among others& for the reduction of the #assing general average from M, #er
cent to M9 #er cent& retroactive to any bar e2amination held after .uly & 19!$ This bill -as vetoed by
the "resident mainly in vie- of an unfavorable comment of .ustices "adilla& Tuason& Montemayor&
0eyes& )autista and .ugo$ %n 19,>& the Congress #assed another bill similar to the #revious bill vetoed
by the "resident& -ith the im#ortant difference that in the later bill the #rovisions in the first bill
regarding B1D the su#ervision and regulation by the 5u#reme Court of the study of la-& B+D the inclusion
of 5ocial <egislation and Ta2ation as ne- bar sub(ects& B>D the #ublication of the bar e2aminers before
the holding of the e2amination& and BD the e8ual division among the e2aminers of all the admission
fees #aid by bar a##licants& -ere eliminated$ This second bill -as allo-ed to become a la-& 0e#ublic
Act 'o$ 9M+& by the "resident by merely not signing it -ithin the re8uired #eriodG and in doing so the
"resident gave due res#ect to the -ill of the Congress -hich& s#ea*ing for the #eo#le& chose to re#ass
the bill first vetoed by him$
:nder 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+& any bar candidates -ho obtained a general average of M9 #er cent in any
e2aminations after .uly & 19! u# to August 19,1G M1 #er cent in the 19,+ bar e2aminationsG M+ #er
cent in 19,> bar e2aminationsG M> #er cent in the 19, bar e2aminationsG and M #er cent in the 19,,
bar e2aminations& -ithout obtaining a grade belo- ,9 #er cent in any sub(ect& shall be allo-ed to #ass$
5aid Act also #rovides that any bar candidate -ho obtained a grade of M, #er cent in any sub(ect in any
e2amination after .uly & 19!& shall be deemed to have #assed in such sub(ect or sub(ects and such
grade or grades shall be included in com#uting the #assing in any subse8uent e2aminations$
'umerous candidates -ho had ta*en the bar e2aminations #revious to the a##roval of 0e#ublic Act 'o$
9M+ and failed to obtain the necessary #assing average& filed -ith this Court mass or se#arate #etitions&
#raying that they be admitted to the #ractice of la- under and by virtue of said Act& u#on the allegation
that they have obtained the general averages #rescribed therein$ %n virtue of the resolution of .uly !&
19,>& this Court held on .uly 11& 19,> a hearing on said #etitions& and members of the bar& es#ecially
authoriHed re#resentatives of bar associations& -ere invited to argue or submit memoranda as amici
curiae& the reason alleged for said hearing being that some doubt had Fbeen e2#ressed on the
constitutionality of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ in so far as it affects #ast bar e2aminations and the matterF
involved Fa ne- 8uestion of #ublic interest$F
All discussions in su##ort of the #ro#osition that the #o-er to regulate the admission to the #ractice of
la- is inherently (udicial& are immaterial& because the sub(ect is no- governed by the Constitution
-hich in Article V%%& section 1>& #rovides as follo-s:
The 5u#reme Court shall have the #o-er to #romulgate rules concerning #leading& #ractice& and
#rocedure in all courts& and the admission to the #ractice of la-$ 5aid rules shall be uniform for all
courts of the same grade and shall not diminish& increase or modify substantive right$ The e2isting la-s
on #leading& #ractice& and #rocedure are hereby re#ealed as statutes and are declared 0ules of Court&
sub(ect to the #o-er of the 5u#reme Court to alter and modify the same$ The Congress shall have the
#o-er to re#eal& alter& or su##lement the rules concerning #leading& #ractice& and #rocedure& and the
admission to the #ractice of la- in the "hili##ines$
:nder this constitutional #rovision& -hile the 5u#reme Court has the #o-er to #romulgate rules
concerning the admission to the #ractice of la-& the Congress has the #o-er to re#eal& alter or
su##lement said rules$ <ittle intelligence is necessary to see that the #o-er of the 5u#reme Court and
the Congress to regulate the admission to the #ractice of la- is concurrent$
The o##onents of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ argue that this Act& in so far as it covers bar e2aminations held
#rior to its a##roval& is unconstitutional& because it sets aside the final resolutions of the 5u#reme Court
refusing to admit to the #ractice of la- the various #etitioners& thereby resulting in a legislative
encroachment u#on the (udicial #o-er$ %n my o#inion this vie- is erroneous$ %n the first #lace&
resolutions on the re(ection of bar candidates do not have the finality of decisions in (usticiable cases
-here the 0ules of Court e2#ressly fi2 certain #eriods after -hich they become e2ecutory and
unalterable$ 0esolutions on bar matters& s#ecially on motions for reconsiderations filed by flun*ers in
any give year& are sub(ect to revision by this Court at any time& regardless of the #eriod -ithin -hich
the motion -ere filed& and this has been the #ractice heretofore$ The obvious reason is that bar
e2aminations and admission to the #ractice of la- may be deemed as a (udicial function only because
said matters ha##en to be entrusted& under the Constitution and our 0ules of Court& to the 5u#reme
Court$ There is no (udicial function involved& in the sub(ect and constitutional sense of the -ord&
because bar e2aminations and the admission to the #ractice of la-& unli*e (usticiable cases& do not
affect o##osing litigants$ %t is no more than the function of other e2amining boards$ %n the second #lace&
retroactive la-s are not #rohibited by the Constitution& e2ce#t only -hen they -ould be e2 #ost facto&
-ould im#air obligations and contracts or vested rights or -ould deny due #rocess and e8ual #rotection
of the la-$ 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ certainly is not an e2 #ost facto enactment& does not im#air any
obligation and contract or vested rights& and denies to no one the right to due #rocess and e8ual
#rotection of the la-$ /n the other hand& it is a mere curative statute intended to correct certain obvious
ine8ualities arising from the ado#tion by this Court of different #assing general averages in certain
years$
'either can it be said that bar candidates #rior to .uly & 19!& are being discriminated against& because
-e no longer have any record of those -ho might have failed before the -ar& a#art from the
circumstance that M, #er cent had al-ays been the #assing mar* during said #eriod$ %t may also be that
there are no #re=-ar bar candidates similarly situated as those benefited by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+$ At
any rate& in the matter of classification& the reasonableness must be determined by the legislative body$
%t is #ro#er to recall that the Congress held #ublic hearings& and -e can fairly su##ose that the
classification ado#ted in the Act reflects good legislative (udgment derived from the facts and
circumstances then brought out$
As regards the alleged interference in or encroachment u#on the (udgment of this Court by the
<egislative De#artment& it is sufficient to state that& if there is any interference at all& it is one e2#ressly
sanctioned by the Constitution$ )esides& interference in (udicial ad(udication #rohibited by the
Constitution is essentially aimed at #rotecting rights of litigants that have already been vested or
ac8uired in virtue of decisions of courts& not merely for the em#ty #ur#ose of creating a##earances of
se#aration and e8uality among the three branches of the ;overnment$ 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ has not
#roduced a case involving t-o #arties and decided by the Court in favor of one and against the other$
'eedless to say& the statute -ill not affect the #revious resolutions #assing bar candidates -ho had
obtained the general average #rescribed by section 1 of 0ule 1+M$ A la- -ould be ob(ectionable and
unconstitutional if& for instance& it -ould #rovide that those -ho have been admitted to the bar after
.uly & 19!& -hose general average is belo- L9 #er cent& -ill not be allo-ed to #ractice la-& because
said statute -ould then destroy a right already ac8uired under #revious resolutions of this Court&
namely& the bar admission of those -hose general averages -ere from M, to M9 #er cent$
3ithout fear of contradiction& % thin* the 5u#reme Court& in the e2ercise of its rule=ma*ing #o-er
conferred by the Constitution& may #ass a resolution amending section 1 of 0ule 1+M by reducing the
#assing average to M9 #er cent& effective several years before the date of the resolution$ %ndeed& -hen
this Court on .uly 1,& 19L allo-ed to #ass all candidates -ho obtained a general average of !9 #er
cent or more and on A#ril +L& 199 those -ho obtained a general average of M9 #er cent or more&
irres#ective of -hether they filed #etitions for reconsideration& it in effect amended section 1 of 0ule
1+M retroactively& because during the e2aminations held in August 19M and August 19L& said section
Bfi2ing the general average at M, #er centD -as su##osed to be in force$ %n stands to reason& if -e are to
admit that the 5u#reme Court and the Congress have concurrent #o-er to regulate the admission to the
#ractice of la-& that the latter may validly #ass a retroactive rule fi2ing the #assing general average$
0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ cannot be assailed on the ground that it is unreasonable& arbitrary or ca#ricious&
since this Court had already ado#ted as #assing averages !9 #er cent for the 19M bar e2aminations and
M9 #er cent for the 19L e2aminations$ Any-ay& -e should not in8uire into the -isdom of the la-&
since this is a matter that is addressed to the (udgment of the legislators$ This Court in many instances
had doubted the #ro#riety of legislative enactments& and yet it has consistently refrained from
nullifying them solely on that ground$
To say that the admission of the bar candidates benefited under 0e#ublic Act 9M+ is against #ublic
interest& is to assume that the matter of -hether said Act is beneficial or harmful to the general #ublic
-as not considered by the Congress$ As already stated& the Congress held #ublic hearings& and -e are
bound to assume that the legislators& loyal& as do the members of this Court& to their oath of office& had
ta*en all the circumstances into account before #assing the Act$ /n the 8uestion of #ublic interest % may
observe that the Congress& re#resenting the #eo#le -ho elected them& should be more 8ualified to ma*e
an a##raisal$ % am inclined to acce#t 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ as an e2#ression of the -ill of the #eo#le
through their duly elected re#resentatives$
% -ould& ho-ever& not go to the e2tent of admitting that the Congress& in the e2ercise of its concurrent
#o-er to re#eal& alter& or su##lement the 0ules of Court regarding the admission to the #ractice of la-&
may act in an arbitrary or ca#ricious manner& in the same -ay that this Court may not do so$ 3e are
thus left in the situation& incidental to a democracy& -here -e can and should only ho#e that the right
men are #ut in the right #laces in our ;overnment$
3herefore& % hold that 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ is constitutional and should therefore be given effect in its
entirety$
5e#arate /#inions
<A)0AD/0& .$& concurring and dissenting:
The right to admit members to the )ar is& and has al-ays been& the e2clusive #rivilege of this Court&
because la-yers are members of the Court and only this Court should be allo-ed to determine
admission thereto in the interest of the #rinci#le of the se#aration of #o-ers$ The #o-er to admit is
(udicial in the sense that discretion is used in is e2ercise$ This #o-er should be distinguished from the
#o-er to #romulgate rules -hich regulate admission$ %t is only this #o-er Bto #romulgate amendments
to the rulesD that is given in the Constitution to the Congress& not the e2ercise of the discretion to admit
or not to admit$ Thus the rules on the holding of e2amination& the 8ualifications of a##licants& the
#assing grades& etc$ are -ithin the sco#e of the legislative #o-er$ )ut the #o-er to determine -hen a
candidate has made or has not made the re8uired grade is (udicial& and lies com#letely -ith this Court$
% hold that the act under consideration is an e2ercise of the (udicial function& and lies beyond the sco#e
of the congressional #rerogative of amending the rules$ To say that candidates -ho obtain a general
average of M+ #er cent in 19,>& M> #er cent in 19,& and M #er cent in 19,, should be considered as
having #assed the e2amination& is to mean e2ercise of the #rivilege and discretion (udged in this Court$
%t is a mandate to the tribunal to #ass candidates for different years -ith grades lo-er than the #assing
mar*$ 'o reasoning is necessary to sho- that it is an arrogation of the Court@s (udicial authority and
discretion$ %t is furthermore ob(ectionable as discriminatory$ 3hy should those ta*ing the e2aminations
in 19,>& 19, and 19,, be allo-ed to have the #rivilege of a lo-er #assing grade& -hile those ta*ing
earlier or later are notQ
% vote that the act in toto be declared unconstitutional& because it is not embraced -ithin the rule=
ma*ing #o-er of Congress& because it is an undue interference -ith the #o-er of this Court to admit
members thereof& and because it is discriminatory$
"A0A5& C$.$& dissenting:
:nder section 1, of 0ule of Court 'o$ 1+M& in order that a bar candidate Fmay be deemed to have
#assed his e2aminations successfully& he must have obtained a general average of M, #er cent in all
sub(ects& -ithout falling belo- ,9 #er cent in any sub(ect$@ This #assing mar* has al-ays been adhered
to& -ith certain e2ce#tion #resently to be s#ecified$
3ith reference to the bar e2aminations given in August& 19!& the original list of successful candidates
included only those -ho obtained a general average of M, #er cent or more$ :#on motion for
reconsideration& ho-ever& 1+ candidates -ith general averages ranging from M+ to M> #er cent -ere
raised to M, #er cent by resolution of December 1L& 19!$ %n the e2aminations of 'ovember& 19! the
list first released containing the names of successful candidates covered only those -ho obtained a
general average of M, #er cent or moreG but& u#on motion for reconsideration& 19 candidates -ith a
general average of M+ #er cent -ere raised to M, #er cent by resolution of March >1& 19M$ This -ould
indicate that in the original list of successful candidates those having a general average of M> #er cent
or more but belo- M, #er cent -ere included$ After the original list of 19M successful bar candidates
had been released& and on motion for reconsideration& all candidates -ith a general average of !9 #er
cent -ere allo-ed to #ass by resolution of .uly 1,& 19L$ 3ith res#ect to the bar e2aminations held in
August& 19L& in addition to the original list of successful bar candidates& all those -ho obtained a
general average of M9 #er cent or more& irres#ective of the grades in any one sub(ect and irres#ective of
-hether they filed #etitions for reconsideration& -ere allo-ed to #ass by resolution of A#ril +L& 199$
Thus& for the year 19M the Court in effect made !9 #er cent as the #assing average& and for the year
19L& M9 #er centG and this amounted& -ithout being noticed #erha#s& to an amendment of section 1 of
0ule 1+M$
'umerous flun*ers in the bar e2aminations held subse8uent to 19L& -hose general averages mostly
ranged from !9 to M> #er cent& filed motions for reconsideration invo*ing the #recedents set by this
Court in 19M and 19L& but said motions -ere uniformly denied$
%n the year 19,1& the Congress& after #ublic hearings -here la- deans and #rofessors& #ractising
attorneys& #residents of bar associations& and la- graduates a##eared and argued lengthily #ro or con&
a##roved a bill #roviding& among others& for the reduction of the #assing general average from M, #er
cent to M9 #er cent& retroactive to any bar e2amination held after .uly & 19!$ This bill -as vetoed by
the "resident mainly in vie- of an unfavorable comment of .ustices "adilla& Tuason& Montemayor&
0eyes& )autista and .ugo$ %n 19,>& the Congress #assed another bill similar to the #revious bill vetoed
by the "resident& -ith the im#ortant difference that in the later bill the #rovisions in the first bill
regarding B1D the su#ervision and regulation by the 5u#reme Court of the study of la-& B+D the inclusion
of 5ocial <egislation and Ta2ation as ne- bar sub(ects& B>D the #ublication of the bar e2aminers before
the holding of the e2amination& and BD the e8ual division among the e2aminers of all the admission
fees #aid by bar a##licants& -ere eliminated$ This second bill -as allo-ed to become a la-& 0e#ublic
Act 'o$ 9M+& by the "resident by merely not signing it -ithin the re8uired #eriodG and in doing so the
"resident gave due res#ect to the -ill of the Congress -hich& s#ea*ing for the #eo#le& chose to re#ass
the bill first vetoed by him$
:nder 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+& any bar candidates -ho obtained a general average of M9 #er cent in any
e2aminations after .uly & 19! u# to August 19,1G M1 #er cent in the 19,+ bar e2aminationsG M+ #er
cent in 19,> bar e2aminationsG M> #er cent in the 19, bar e2aminationsG and M #er cent in the 19,,
bar e2aminations& -ithout obtaining a grade belo- ,9 #er cent in any sub(ect& shall be allo-ed to #ass$
5aid Act also #rovides that any bar candidate -ho obtained a grade of M, #er cent in any sub(ect in any
e2amination after .uly & 19!& shall be deemed to have #assed in such sub(ect or sub(ects and such
grade or grades shall be included in com#uting the #assing in any subse8uent e2aminations$
'umerous candidates -ho had ta*en the bar e2aminations #revious to the a##roval of 0e#ublic Act 'o$
9M+ and failed to obtain the necessary #assing average& filed -ith this Court mass or se#arate #etitions&
#raying that they be admitted to the #ractice of la- under and by virtue of said Act& u#on the allegation
that they have obtained the general averages #rescribed therein$ %n virtue of the resolution of .uly !&
19,>& this Court held on .uly 11& 19,> a hearing on said #etitions& and members of the bar& es#ecially
authoriHed re#resentatives of bar associations& -ere invited to argue or submit memoranda as amici
curiae& the reason alleged for said hearing being that some doubt had Fbeen e2#ressed on the
constitutionality of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ in so far as it affects #ast bar e2aminations and the matterF
involved Fa ne- 8uestion of #ublic interest$F
All discussions in su##ort of the #ro#osition that the #o-er to regulate the admission to the #ractice of
la- is inherently (udicial& are immaterial& because the sub(ect is no- governed by the Constitution
-hich in Article V%%& section 1>& #rovides as follo-s:
The 5u#reme Court shall have the #o-er to #romulgate rules concerning #leading& #ractice& and
#rocedure in all courts& and the admission to the #ractice of la-$ 5aid rules shall be uniform for all
courts of the same grade and shall not diminish& increase or modify substantive right$ The e2isting la-s
on #leading& #ractice& and #rocedure are hereby re#ealed as statutes and are declared 0ules of Court&
sub(ect to the #o-er of the 5u#reme Court to alter and modify the same$ The Congress shall have the
#o-er to re#eal& alter& or su##lement the rules concerning #leading& #ractice& and #rocedure& and the
admission to the #ractice of la- in the "hili##ines$
:nder this constitutional #rovision& -hile the 5u#reme Court has the #o-er to #romulgate rules
concerning the admission to the #ractice of la-& the Congress has the #o-er to re#eal& alter or
su##lement said rules$ <ittle intelligence is necessary to see that the #o-er of the 5u#reme Court and
the Congress to regulate the admission to the #ractice of la- is concurrent$
The o##onents of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ argue that this Act& in so far as it covers bar e2aminations held
#rior to its a##roval& is unconstitutional& because it sets aside the final resolutions of the 5u#reme Court
refusing to admit to the #ractice of la- the various #etitioners& thereby resulting in a legislative
encroachment u#on the (udicial #o-er$ %n my o#inion this vie- is erroneous$ %n the first #lace&
resolutions on the re(ection of bar candidates do not have the finality of decisions in (usticiable cases
-here the 0ules of Court e2#ressly fi2 certain #eriods after -hich they become e2ecutory and
unalterable$ 0esolutions on bar matters& s#ecially on motions for reconsiderations filed by flun*ers in
any give year& are sub(ect to revision by this Court at any time& regardless of the #eriod -ithin -hich
the motion -ere filed& and this has been the #ractice heretofore$ The obvious reason is that bar
e2aminations and admission to the #ractice of la- may be deemed as a (udicial function only because
said matters ha##en to be entrusted& under the Constitution and our 0ules of Court& to the 5u#reme
Court$ There is no (udicial function involved& in the sub(ect and constitutional sense of the -ord&
because bar e2aminations and the admission to the #ractice of la-& unli*e (usticiable cases& do not
affect o##osing litigants$ %t is no more than the function of other e2amining boards$ %n the second #lace&
retroactive la-s are not #rohibited by the Constitution& e2ce#t only -hen they -ould be e2 #ost facto&
-ould im#air obligations and contracts or vested rights or -ould deny due #rocess and e8ual #rotection
of the la-$ 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ certainly is not an e2 #ost facto enactment& does not im#air any
obligation and contract or vested rights& and denies to no one the right to due #rocess and e8ual
#rotection of the la-$ /n the other hand& it is a mere curative statute intended to correct certain obvious
ine8ualities arising from the ado#tion by this Court of different #assing general averages in certain
years$
'either can it be said that bar candidates #rior to .uly & 19!& are being discriminated against& because
-e no longer have any record of those -ho might have failed before the -ar& a#art from the
circumstance that M, #er cent had al-ays been the #assing mar* during said #eriod$ %t may also be that
there are no #re=-ar bar candidates similarly situated as those benefited by 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+$ At
any rate& in the matter of classification& the reasonableness must be determined by the legislative body$
%t is #ro#er to recall that the Congress held #ublic hearings& and -e can fairly su##ose that the
classification ado#ted in the Act reflects good legislative (udgment derived from the facts and
circumstances then brought out$
As regards the alleged interference in or encroachment u#on the (udgment of this Court by the
<egislative De#artment& it is sufficient to state that& if there is any interference at all& it is one e2#ressly
sanctioned by the Constitution$ )esides& interference in (udicial ad(udication #rohibited by the
Constitution is essentially aimed at #rotecting rights of litigants that have already been vested or
ac8uired in virtue of decisions of courts& not merely for the em#ty #ur#ose of creating a##earances of
se#aration and e8uality among the three branches of the ;overnment$ 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ has not
#roduced a case involving t-o #arties and decided by the Court in favor of one and against the other$
'eedless to say& the statute -ill not affect the #revious resolutions #assing bar candidates -ho had
obtained the general average #rescribed by section 1 of 0ule 1+M$ A la- -ould be ob(ectionable and
unconstitutional if& for instance& it -ould #rovide that those -ho have been admitted to the bar after
.uly & 19!& -hose general average is belo- L9 #er cent& -ill not be allo-ed to #ractice la-& because
said statute -ould then destroy a right already ac8uired under #revious resolutions of this Court&
namely& the bar admission of those -hose general averages -ere from M, to M9 #er cent$
3ithout fear of contradiction& % thin* the 5u#reme Court& in the e2ercise of its rule=ma*ing #o-er
conferred by the Constitution& may #ass a resolution amending section 1 of 0ule 1+M by reducing the
#assing average to M9 #er cent& effective several years before the date of the resolution$ %ndeed& -hen
this Court on .uly 1,& 19L allo-ed to #ass all candidates -ho obtained a general average of !9 #er
cent or more and on A#ril +L& 199 those -ho obtained a general average of M9 #er cent or more&
irres#ective of -hether they filed #etitions for reconsideration& it in effect amended section 1 of 0ule
1+M retroactively& because during the e2aminations held in August 19M and August 19L& said section
Bfi2ing the general average at M, #er centD -as su##osed to be in force$ %n stands to reason& if -e are to
admit that the 5u#reme Court and the Congress have concurrent #o-er to regulate the admission to the
#ractice of la-& that the latter may validly #ass a retroactive rule fi2ing the #assing general average$
0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ cannot be assailed on the ground that it is unreasonable& arbitrary or ca#ricious&
since this Court had already ado#ted as #assing averages !9 #er cent for the 19M bar e2aminations and
M9 #er cent for the 19L e2aminations$ Any-ay& -e should not in8uire into the -isdom of the la-&
since this is a matter that is addressed to the (udgment of the legislators$ This Court in many instances
had doubted the #ro#riety of legislative enactments& and yet it has consistently refrained from
nullifying them solely on that ground$
To say that the admission of the bar candidates benefited under 0e#ublic Act 9M+ is against #ublic
interest& is to assume that the matter of -hether said Act is beneficial or harmful to the general #ublic
-as not considered by the Congress$ As already stated& the Congress held #ublic hearings& and -e are
bound to assume that the legislators& loyal& as do the members of this Court& to their oath of office& had
ta*en all the circumstances into account before #assing the Act$ /n the 8uestion of #ublic interest % may
observe that the Congress& re#resenting the #eo#le -ho elected them& should be more 8ualified to ma*e
an a##raisal$ % am inclined to acce#t 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ as an e2#ression of the -ill of the #eo#le
through their duly elected re#resentatives$
% -ould& ho-ever& not go to the e2tent of admitting that the Congress& in the e2ercise of its concurrent
#o-er to re#eal& alter& or su##lement the 0ules of Court regarding the admission to the #ractice of la-&
may act in an arbitrary or ca#ricious manner& in the same -ay that this Court may not do so$ 3e are
thus left in the situation& incidental to a democracy& -here -e can and should only ho#e that the right
men are #ut in the right #laces in our ;overnment$
3herefore& % hold that 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9M+ is constitutional and should therefore be given effect in its
entirety$
Footnotes
1 Designed as Chairman of the Committee of )ar E2aminers vice Mr$ .ustice 0oman /Haeta& resigned$
+ %n 19! and 19M& the members of the 5u#reme Court -ere 4on$ Manuel V$ Moran& Chief .ustice&
4o$ 0icardo "aras& 4on$ Felicisimo Feria& 4on$ ;uillermo F$ "ablo& 4on$ ;regorio "erfecto& 4o$
Carlos 4ilado& 4on$ Cesar )engHon& 4on$ Manuel C$ )riones& 4on$ .ose 4ontiveros& 4on$ 5abino
"adilla& and 4on$ "edro Tuason& Associate .ustices$ %n 19L& .ustices Marcelino 0$ Montemayor and
Ale2$ 0eyes too* the #lace of .ustice 4ilado& resigned& and 4ontiveros& retired$ .ustice 0oman /Haeta
-as returned to the Court and .ustice 5abino "adilla -as a##ointed 5ecretary of .ustice$ %n .une& 199&
.ustice "adilla -as returned to the Tribunal& as .ustice )riones resigned$ %n /ctober& 19,9& .ustices
Fernando .ugo and Feli2 )autista Angelo -ere a##ointed to t he Court& as .ustice "erfecto .ugo and
Feli2 )autista Angelo -ere a##ointed to the Court& as .ustice "erfecto had died& and .ustice /Haeta had
resigned$ %n 19,1& Chief .ustice Manuel V$ Moran resigned and .ustice 0icardo "aras -as a##ointed
Chief .ustice$ %n 19,>& .ustice Felicisimo 0$ Feria retired$
The <a-#hil "ro(ect = Arellano <a- Foundation

b
;$0$ 'o$ <=>>M1>& ;arcia v$ "hili##ines& !, 5C0A ,1M
0e#ublic of the "hili##ines
5:"0EME C/:0T
Manila
E' )A'C
DEC%5%/'
.uly >9& 19M,
;$0$ 'o$ <=>>M1>
E:5E)%/ )$ ;A0C%A& #etitioner=a##ellant&
vs$
4/'$ E0'E5T/ 5$ MATA& 5ecretary of 'ational Defense& and ;E'E0A< MA':E< T$ PA'& Chief
of 5taff& Armed Forces of the "hili##ines& res#ondents=a##ellees$
Emilio "urugganan for #etitioner=a##ellant$ /ffice of the 5olicitor ;eneral Estelito "$ MendoHa&
Assistant 5olicitor ;eneral 0osalio A$ de <eon and 5olicitor Eulogio 0a8uel=5antos for res#ondents=
a##ellees$
Castro& .$:
This is a #etition for certiorari to revie- the decision of the Court of First %nstance of KueHon City&
)ranch %C& in civil case K=1>!!& entitled FEusebio )$ ;arcia& #etitioner& versus 4on$ Ernesto Mata
B.uan "once EnrileD& et al$& res#ondents&F declaring #aragra#h 11 of the F5#ecial "rovisions for the
Armed Forces of the "hili##inesF of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 1!99 1 unconstitutional and therefore invalid
and ino#erative$
3e affirm the (udgment a 8uo$
The facts material to this case are embodied in the follo-ing sti#ulation submitted (ointly by both
#arties to the lo-er court:
"etitioner -as a reserve officer on active duty -ith the Armed Forces of the "hili##ines until his
reversion to inactive status on 1, 'ovember 19!9& #ursuant to the #rovisions of 0e#ublic Act 'o$
+>>+$ At the time of reversion& "etitioner held the ran* of Ca#tain -ith a monthly emolument of
"ML$99& com#rising his base and longevity #ay& 8uarters and subsistence allo-ancesG
/n .une 1L& 19,,& the date -hen 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 1>L+ too* effect& #etitioner had a total of 9 years&
months and 1+ days of accumulated active commissioned service in the Armed Forces of the
"hili##inesG
/n .uly 11& 19,!& the date -hen 0e#ublic Act 1!99 too* effect& #etitioner had an accumulated active
commissioned service of 19 years& , months and , days in the Armed Forces of the "hili##inesG
"etitioner@s reversion to inactive status on 1, 'ovember 19!9 -as #ursuant to the #rovisions of
0e#ublic Act +>>& and such reversion -as neither for cause& at his o-n re8uest& nor after court=martial
#roceedingsG
From 1, 'ovember 19!9 u# to the #resent& #etitioner has been on inactive status and as such& he has
neither received any emoluments from the Armed Forces of the "hili##ines& nor -as he ever em#loyed
in the ;overnment in any ca#acityG
As a conse8uence of his reversion to inactive status& #etitioner filed the necessary #etitions -ith the
offices of the AF" Chief of 5taff& the 5ecretary of 'ational Defense& and the "resident& res#ectively& but
received re#ly only from the Chief of 5taff through the AF" Ad(utant ;eneral$
/n 5e#tember 1M& 19!9 the #etitioner brought an action for FMandamus and 0ecovery of a 5um of
MoneyF in the court a 8uo to com#el the res#ondents 5ecretary of 'ational Defense and Chief of 5taff
of the Armed Forces of the "hili##ines + to reinstate him in the active commissioned service of the
Armed Forces of the "hili##ines& to read(ust his ran*& and to #ay all the emoluments and allo-ances
due to him from the time of his reversion to inactive status$ /n December +& 19M9 the trial court
dismissed the #etition$ The court ruled that #aragra#h 11 of the F5#ecial "rovisions for the Armed
Forces of the "hili##inesF in 0e#ublic Act 1!99 is Finvalid& unconstitutional and ino#erative$F
The #etitioner had a total of 9 years& months and 1+ days of accumulated active commissioned
service in the AF" -hen 0e#ublic Act 1>L+ too* effect on .une 1L& 19,,$ 5ection % of this la-
#rovided:
0eserve officers -ith at least ten years of active accumulated commissioned service -ho are still on
active duty at the time of the a##roval of this Act shall not be reverted into inactive status e2ce#t for
cause after #ro#er court=martial #roceedings or u#on their o-n re8uest: "rovided& That for #ur#oses of
com#uting the length of service& si2 months or more of active service shall be considered one year$
Bem#hasis su##liedD
The #etitioner@s accumulated active commissioned service -as thus short of the minimum service
re8uirement #rescribed in the afore8uoted #rovision of 0$A$ 1>L+$
/n .uly 11& 19,!& > -hile the #etitioner -as yet in the active service& 0e#ublic Act 1!99 -as enacted
into la-$ "aragra#h 11 of the 5"EC%A< "0/V%5%/'5 F/0 T4E A0MED F/0CE5 /F T4E
"4%<%""%'E5 Bon #age L9+ of the ActD #rovided as follo-s:
11$ After the a##roval of this Act& and -hen there is no emergency& no reserve officer of the Armed
Forces of the "hili##ines may be called to a tour of active duty for more than t-o years during any
#eriod of five consecutive years: "0/V%DED& That hereafter reserve officers of the Armed Forces of
the "hili##ines on active duty for more than t-o years on the date of the a##roval of this Act e2ce#t
those -hose military and educational training& e2#erience and 8ualifications are deemed essential to the
needs of the service& shall be reverted to inactive status -ithin one year from the a##roval of this Act:
"0/V%DED& F:0T4E0& That reserve officers -ith at least ten years of active accumulated
commissioned service -ho are still on active duty at the time of the a##roval of this Act shall not be
reverted to inactive status e2ce#t for cause after #ro#er court=martial #roceedings or u#on their re8uestG
"0/V%DED& F:0T4E0& That any such reserve officer reverted to inactive status -ho has at least five
of active commissioned service shall be entitled to a gratuity e8uivalent to one month@s authoriHed base
and longevity #ay in the ran* held at the time of such reversion for every year of active commissioned
serviceG "0/V%DED& F:0T4E0& That any reserve officer -ho receives a gratuity under the #rovisions
of this Act shall not e2ce#t during a 'ational emergency or mobiliHation& be called to a tour of active
duty -ithin five years from the date of reversion: "0/V%DED& F:0T4E0& That the 5ecretary of
'ational Defense is authoriHed to e2tend the tour of active duty of reserve officers -ho are 8ualified
military #ilots and doctorsG "0/V%DED& F:0T4E0& That any savings in the a##ro#riations authoriHed
in this Act for the De#artment of 'ational Defense not-ithstanding any #rovision of this Act to the
contrary and any une2#ended balance of certification to accounts #ayable since 1 .uly 199 regardless
of #ur#ose of the a##ro#riation shall be made available for the #ur#ose of this #aragra#h: A'D
"0/V%DED& F%'A<<P& That the 5ecretary of 'ational Defense shall render a 8uarterly re#ort to
Congress as to the im#lementation of the #rovisions of this #aragra#h$ B ##$ L9+=L9>& 0A 1!99D
Bem#hasis su##liedD
The #etitioner conse8uently argues that his reversion to inactive status on 'ovember 1,& 19!9 -as in
violation of the above8uoted #rovision -hich #rohibits the reversion to inactive status of reserve
officers on active duty -ith at least ten years of accumulated active commissioned service$
/n the other hand& the res#ondents contend that the said #rovision has no relevance or #ertinence
-hatsoever to the budget in 8uestion or to any a##ro#riation item contained therein& and is therefore
#roscribed by Art$ V%& 5ec$ 19& #ar$ + of the 19>, Constitution of the "hili##ines& -hich reads:
'o #rovision or enactment shall be embraced in the general a##ro#riation bill unless it relates
s#ecifically to some #articular a##ro#riation thereinG and any such #rovision or enactment shall be
limited in its o#eration to such a##ro#riation$
A #erusal of the challenged #rovision of 0$A$ 1!99 fails to disclose its relevance or relation to any
a##ro#riation item therein& or to the A##ro#riation Act as a -hole$ From the very first clause of
#aragra#h 11 itself& -hich reads&
After the a##roval of this Act& and -hen there is no emergency& no reserve officer of the Armed Forces
of the "hili##ines may be called to a tour of active duty for more than t-o years during any #eriod of
five consecutive years:
the incongruity and irrelevancy are already evident$ 3hile 0$A$ 1!99 a##ro#riated money for the
o#eration of the ;overnment for the fiscal year 19,!=19,M& the said #aragra#h 11 refers to the
fundamental government #olicy matters of the calling to active duty and the reversion to inactive status
of reserve officers in the AF"$ The incongruity and irrelevancy continue throughout the entire
#aragra#h$
%n the language of the res#ondents=a##ellees& Fit -as indeed a non=a##ro#riation item inserted in an
a##ro#riation measure in violation of the constitutional inhibition against FridersF to the general
a##ro#riation act$F %t -as indeed a ne- and com#letely unrelated #rovision attached to the
A##ro#riation Act$
The #aragra#h in 8uestion also violated Art$ V%& 5ec$ +1& #ar$ 1 , of the 19>, Constitution of the
"hili##ines -hich #rovided that F'o bill -hich may be enacted into la- shall embrace more than one
sub(ect -hich shall be e2#ressed in the title of the bill$F This constitutional re8uirement nullified and
rendered ino#erative any #rovision contained in the body of an act that -as not fairly included in the
sub(ect e2#ressed in the title or -as not germane to or #ro#erly connected -ith that sub(ect$
%n determining -hether a #rovision contained in an act is embraced in the sub(ect and is #ro#erly
connected there-ith& the sub(ect to be considered is the one e2#ressed in the title of the act& and every
fair intendment and reasonable doubt should be indulged in favor of the validity of the legislative
enactment$ )ut -hen an act contains #rovisions -hich are clearly not embraced in the sub(ect of the
act& as e2#ressed in the title& such #rovisions are ino#erative and -ithout effect$
3e are mindful that the title of an act is not re8uired to be an inde2 to the body of the act$ Thus& in
5umulong vs$ Comelec& M> "hil$ +LL& +91& this Court held that it is Fa sufficient com#liance -ith such
re8uirement if the title e2#resses the general sub(ect and all the #rovisions of the statute are germane to
that general sub(ect$F The constitutional #rovision -as intended to #reclude the insertion of riders in
legislation& a rider being a #rovision not germane to the sub(ect=matter of the bill$ !
The sub(ect of 0$A$ 1!99& as e2#ressed in its title& is restricted to Fa##ro#riating funds for the o#eration
of the government$F Any #rovision contained in the body of the act that is fairly included in this
restricted sub(ect or any matter #ro#erly connected there-ith is valid and o#erative$ )ut& if a #rovision
in the body of the act is not fairly included in this restricted sub(ect& li*e the #rovision relating to the
#olicy matters of calling to active duty and reversion to inactive duty of reserve officers of the AF"&
such #rovision is ino#erative and of no effect$
To 8uote the res#ondents=a##ellees on this #oint:
%t is obvious that the statutory #rovision in 8uestion refers to security of reserve officers from reversion
to inactive status& -hereas the sub(ect or title of the statute from -hich it derives its e2istence refers to
a##ro#riations$ Verily& it runs contrary to or is re#ugnant to the above=8uoted in(unctive #rovision of the
Constitution$ 3here a conflict arises bet-een a statute and the Constitution& the latter #revails$ %t
should be em#hasiHed that a Constitution is su#erior to a statute and is #recisely called the Fsu#reme
la- of the landF because it is the fundamental or organic la- -hich states the general #rinci#les and
builds the substantial foundation and general frame-or* of la- and government& and for that reason a
statute contrary to or in violation of the Constitution is null and void BTalabon vs$ %loilo "rovincial
3arden& ML "hil$ ,99D$ %f a la-& therefore& ha##ens to infringe u#on or violate the fundamental la-&
courts of (ustice may ste# in to nullify its effectiveness BMabanag vs$ <o#eH Vito& ML "hil$ 1D$
:#on the foregoing dissertation& -e declare "aragra#h 11 of the 5"EC%A< "0/V%5%/'5 F/0 T4E
A0MED F/0CE5 /F T4E "4%<%""%'E5 as unconstitutional& invalid and ino#erative$ )eing
unconstitutional& it confers no right and affords no #rotection$ %n legal contem#lation it is as though it
has never been #assed$ M
Verily& not having sho-n a clear legal right to the #osition to -hich he desires to be restored& the
#etitioner cannot com#el the res#ondents to reinstate andZor call him to active duty& #romote or read(ust
his ran*& much less #ay him bac* emoluments and allo-ances$
ACC/0D%';<P& the instant #etition is denied& and the decision of the lo-er court dismissing the
com#laint is hereby affirmed$ 'o #ronouncement as to costs$
Ma*alintal& C$.$& Fernando& Ma*asiar& Es8uerra& MuQoH "alma& A8uino& Conce#cion& .r$ and Martin& ..$&
concur$
Antonio& .$& too* no #art$
Teehan*ee& .$& is on leave$
5e#arate /#inions
)A00ED/& .$& concurring:
% cannot but concur in the able and scholarly o#inion of Mr$ .ustice Castro$ There is indeed constant
need to ma*e it em#hatically clear that the Constitution #roscribes the insertion of riders in the )udget&
the #ernicious im#lications of -hich are too #lain and -ell=*no-n to call for further elucidation$ % am
adding a fe- -ords here& only to bolster& if % may& the conclusion that #etitioner@s #ose -ould still be
unsustainable even if it could be assumed that the 5#ecial "rovisions invo*ed by him -ere
constitutional$
According to the sti#ulation of facts submitted (ointly by both #arties to the lo-er court& FB#Detitioner@s
reversion to inactive status on 1, 'ovember 19!9 -as #ursuant to #rovisions of 0e#ublic Act +>>&
and such reversion -as neither for cause& at his o-n re8uest& nor after court martial #roceedingsF and
that FBoDn .une 1L& 19,,& the date -hen 0e#ublic Act 1>L+ too* effect& #etitioner had a total of BonlyD 9
years& months and 1+ days of accumulated active commission service in the Armed Forces of the
"hili##ines$F %n other -ords& indis#utably #etitioner is not in a #osition to invo*e 0e#ublic Act 1>L+
-hich #rovides as follo-s:
5ECT%/' 1$ 0eserve /fficers -ith at least ten years of active accumulated commissioned service -ho
are still on active duty at the time of the a##roval of this Act shall not be reverted into inactive status
e2ce#t for cause after #ro#er court martial #roceedings or u#on their o-n re8uest: "rovided& That for
#ur#oses of com#uting the length of service& si2 months or more of active service shall be considered
one year$
for the sim#le reason that he lac*ed& as of the date of the a##roval of this la-& the 19=year accumulated
active commissioned service re8uired thereby$
/n .une 19& 19,9& 0e#ublic Act +>> -as enacted containing the follo-ing #ertinent #rovisions:
5EC$ +$ After the a##roval of this Act& and e2ce#t in time of emergency& no reserve officer shall be
called to e2tended tours of active duty e2ceeding a total of t-o years -ithin any #eriod of five
consecutive years: "rovided& That reserve officers on active duty for more than t-o years on the date of
a##roval of this Act& -ith the e2ce#tion of those covered by section three of this Act& shall be reverted
to inactive status -ithin three years from the a##roval of this Act: "rovided& further& That hereafter calls
to e2tended tours of active duty of reserve officers shall be in #ro#ortion to the officers re8uirement of
each ma(or service in the reserve force build=u# #rogram of the Armed Forces of the "hili##ines and
the #riority for selecting such reserve officers -ithin each ma(or service shall follo- the order of age
grou#ings for the reserve force as defined in section fifty=t-o of the 'ational Defense Act& as amended$
5EC$ >$ The #rovisions of section t-o of this Act shall not a##ly to reserve officers covered by the
#rovisions of 0e#ublic Act 'umbered Thirteen hundred eighty=t-o nor to those #ossessing technical
8ualifications& s*ills& and com#etence -hich are indis#ensable to the needs of the Armed Forces of the
"hili##ines and for -hom there are no satisfactory re#lacements from among reserve officers in the
inactive status: "rovided& That the selection of such officers shall be as determined by a )oard of
/fficers to be a##ointed by the Chief of 5taff$
4aving the foregoing #rovisions in mind& it is clear to me that in reverting #etitioner to inactive status
on 'ovember 1,& 19!9& the Armed Forces authorities and original res#ondents herein& no- substituted
res#ectively by the #resent incumbents& acted #ro#erly and -ere merely com#lying -ith the in(unction
of 5ection + above that FBrDeserve officers on active duty for more than t-o years on the date of the
a##roval of this Act& -ith the e2ce#tion of those covered by section three of this Act& shall be reverted
to inactive status -ithin three years from the a##roval of this Act$F As already stated& it is definite that
#etitioner is not covered by the #rovisions of 0e#ublic Act 1>L+ and there is no evidence here
-hatsoever that #etitioner comes -ithin the other e2ce#tion of the Act$ 3e have not been sho-n that& if
he #ossesses the indis#ensable technical 8ualifications& s*ills& etc$ mentioned in 5ection >& he has been
selected by the )oard of /fficers a##ointed by the Chief of 5taff for the #ur#ose$
'o-& under the 5#ecial "rovision in 8uestion contained in the 'ational )udget for the fiscal year 19,,=
,! B0e#ublic Act 1!99D& reserve officers -ith at least ten years of active accumulated commissioned
service u# to .uly 11& 19,!& the date of its enactment& and -ho -ere still on active duty on said date
Fshall not be reverted to inactive status e2ce#t for cause after #ro#er court martial #roceedings or u#on
their re8uest$F :#on the other hand& as already stated& under the subse8uent la-& 0e#ublic Act +>>&
FBrDeserve officers on active duty for more than t-o years on the date of the a##roval of this ActF B.une
19& 19,9D& -ith the e2ce#tions already noted -hich do not a##ly to #etitioner& Fshall be reverted to
inactive status -ithin three years from the a##roval of this Act$F To my mind& there is irreconcilable
re#ugnance bet-een these t-o legal #rovisions$ The first #rohibited reversion -hile the second ordains
it under #ractically identical circumstances$ Accordingly& it is my considered vie- that 0e#ublic Act
+>> has re#ealed the 5#ecial "rovision relied u#on by #etitioner& assuming its validity&
not-ithstanding the absence of any s#ecific re#ealing clause in this later legislation$ As % see it& the
inconsistency bet-een the t-o is so clear and definite that one cannot stand together -ith the other$
3hat the first says should not be done BreversionD& the later one en(oins mandatorily to be
accom#lished$
As to the #ossible contention that #etitioner had ac8uired a vested right to a #ermanent status under the
#rior la-& % believe it is #lainly -ithin the #o-er of the legislature to ad(ust the rights and status of
reserve officers of the Armed Forces$ 'o member of the army has a vested right in his em#loyment&
status or ran* therein$ /ne can easily imagine the difficulties and com#lications& -hich can affect the
national security or the fiscal resources of the government& if the legislature -ere de#rived of the
authority to ad(ust the tours of duty of reserve officers according to the demands of the #revailing
situation$ After all& from the very nature of things& every member of the reserve force should be under
constant notice that this status as such member is sub(ect to legislative control$ Moreover& reversion
cannot be considered as de#riving the& officer concerned totally of his em#loyment and benefits& for
5ection of 0e#ublic Act +>> #rovides in this connection as follo-s:
5EC$ $ Any reserve officer -ho is reverted to inactive duty under the #rovisions of this Act after
having com#leted an accumulated #eriod of active commissioned service of bet-een five years and
t-enty years shall& unless he is already entitled to the retirement benefits under 0e#ublic Act 'umbered
Three hundred forty& as amended& be entitled u#on reversion to receive a gratuity e8uivalent to one
month@s authoriHed base and longevity #ay in the #ermanent ran* held at the time of such reversion
multi#lied by his years of active commissioned service: "rovided& That such reversion is not as a result
of court martial action or due to the officer@s gross misconduct& the intem#arate use of drugs or
alcoholics& or inefficiency: "rovided& ho-ever& That if a reserve officer is reem#loyed in a civilian
office of the government or government o-ned or controlled cor#oration& he shall not be made to
reimburse the amounts received by him as gratuity under this Act: "rovided& further& That if a reserve
officer -ho has received gratuity under this Act reenters the active service& he shall not be eligible for a
ne- gratuity until he has com#leted at least five years of active commissioned service from the date of
such reentry& and no subse8uent gratuity shall be #aid covering any #eriod of active commissioned
service for -hich he has already received gratuity under this Act: "rovided& further& That in case a
reserve officer -ho has received gratuity under this Act subse8uently reenters the active service and is
retired #ursuant to 0e#ublic Act 'umbered Three hundred forty& such gratuity shall be deducted from
his retirement gratuity or #ensions: And #rovided& finally& That for #ur#oses of this section& any #eriod
of service amounting to si2 months or more shall be counted as one year$
%n conclusion& -hether the 5#ecial "rovision in 8uestion is constitutional or not& #etitioner cannot
com#lain about his reversion to inactive duty& considering the #rovisions of 0e#ublic Act +>> by
virtue of -hich& according to the sti#ulation of facts& it -as ordered by res#ondents$ 4ence& the herein
#etition should be dismissed$
5e#arate /#inions
)A00ED/& .$& concurring:
% cannot but concur in the able and scholarly o#inion of Mr$ .ustice Castro$ There is indeed constant
need to ma*e it em#hatically clear that the Constitution #roscribes the insertion of riders in the )udget&
the #ernicious im#lications of -hich are too #lain and -ell=*no-n to call for further elucidation$ % am
adding a fe- -ords here& only to bolster& if % may& the conclusion that #etitioner@s #ose -ould still be
unsustainable even if it could be assumed that the 5#ecial "rovisions invo*ed by him -ere
constitutional$
According to the sti#ulation of facts submitted (ointly by both #arties to the lo-er court& FB#Detitioner@s
reversion to inactive status on 1, 'ovember 19!9 -as #ursuant to #rovisions of 0e#ublic Act +>>&
and such reversion -as neither for cause& at his o-n re8uest& nor after court martial #roceedingsF and
that FBoDn .une 1L& 19,,& the date -hen 0e#ublic Act 1>L+ too* effect& #etitioner had a total of BonlyD 9
years& months and 1+ days of accumulated active commission service in the Armed Forces of the
"hili##ines$F %n other -ords& indis#utably #etitioner is not in a #osition to invo*e 0e#ublic Act 1>L+
-hich #rovides as follo-s:
5ECT%/' 1$ 0eserve /fficers -ith at least ten years of active accumulated commissioned service -ho
are still on active duty at the time of the a##roval of this Act shall not be reverted into inactive status
e2ce#t for cause after #ro#er court martial #roceedings or u#on their o-n re8uest: "rovided& That for
#ur#oses of com#uting the length of service& si2 months or more of active service shall be considered
one year$
for the sim#le reason that he lac*ed& as of the date of the a##roval of this la-& the 19=year accumulated
active commissioned service re8uired thereby$
/n .une 19& 19,9& 0e#ublic Act +>> -as enacted containing the follo-ing #ertinent #rovisions:
5EC$ +$ After the a##roval of this Act& and e2ce#t in time of emergency& no reserve officer shall be
called to e2tended tours of active duty e2ceeding a total of t-o years -ithin any #eriod of five
consecutive years: "rovided& That reserve officers on active duty for more than t-o years on the date of
a##roval of this Act& -ith the e2ce#tion of those covered by section three of this Act& shall be reverted
to inactive status -ithin three years from the a##roval of this Act: "rovided& further& That hereafter calls
to e2tended tours of active duty of reserve officers shall be in #ro#ortion to the officers re8uirement of
each ma(or service in the reserve force build=u# #rogram of the Armed Forces of the "hili##ines and
the #riority for selecting such reserve officers -ithin each ma(or service shall follo- the order of age
grou#ings for the reserve force as defined in section fifty=t-o of the 'ational Defense Act& as amended$
5EC$ >$ The #rovisions of section t-o of this Act shall not a##ly to reserve officers covered by the
#rovisions of 0e#ublic Act 'umbered Thirteen hundred eighty=t-o nor to those #ossessing technical
8ualifications& s*ills& and com#etence -hich are indis#ensable to the needs of the Armed Forces of the
"hili##ines and for -hom there are no satisfactory re#lacements from among reserve officers in the
inactive status: "rovided& That the selection of such officers shall be as determined by a )oard of
/fficers to be a##ointed by the Chief of 5taff$
4aving the foregoing #rovisions in mind& it is clear to me that in reverting #etitioner to inactive status
on 'ovember 1,& 19!9& the Armed Forces authorities and original res#ondents herein& no- substituted
res#ectively by the #resent incumbents& acted #ro#erly and -ere merely com#lying -ith the in(unction
of 5ection + above that FBrDeserve officers on active duty for more than t-o years on the date of the
a##roval of this Act& -ith the e2ce#tion of those covered by section three of this Act& shall be reverted
to inactive status -ithin three years from the a##roval of this Act$F As already stated& it is definite that
#etitioner is not covered by the #rovisions of 0e#ublic Act 1>L+ and there is no evidence here
-hatsoever that #etitioner comes -ithin the other e2ce#tion of the Act$ 3e have not been sho-n that& if
he #ossesses the indis#ensable technical 8ualifications& s*ills& etc$ mentioned in 5ection >& he has been
selected by the )oard of /fficers a##ointed by the Chief of 5taff for the #ur#ose$
'o-& under the 5#ecial "rovision in 8uestion contained in the 'ational )udget for the fiscal year 19,,=
,! B0e#ublic Act 1!99D& reserve officers -ith at least ten years of active accumulated commissioned
service u# to .uly 11& 19,!& the date of its enactment& and -ho -ere still on active duty on said date
Fshall not be reverted to inactive status e2ce#t for cause after #ro#er court martial #roceedings or u#on
their re8uest$F :#on the other hand& as already stated& under the subse8uent la-& 0e#ublic Act +>>&
FBrDeserve officers on active duty for more than t-o years on the date of the a##roval of this ActF B.une
19& 19,9D& -ith the e2ce#tions already noted -hich do not a##ly to #etitioner& Fshall be reverted to
inactive status -ithin three years from the a##roval of this Act$F To my mind& there is irreconcilable
re#ugnance bet-een these t-o legal #rovisions$ The first #rohibited reversion -hile the second ordains
it under #ractically identical circumstances$ Accordingly& it is my considered vie- that 0e#ublic Act
+>> has re#ealed the 5#ecial "rovision relied u#on by #etitioner& assuming its validity&
not-ithstanding the absence of any s#ecific re#ealing clause in this later legislation$ As % see it& the
inconsistency bet-een the t-o is so clear and definite that one cannot stand together -ith the other$
3hat the first says should not be done BreversionD& the later one en(oins mandatorily to be
accom#lished$
As to the #ossible contention that #etitioner had ac8uired a vested right to a #ermanent status under the
#rior la-& % believe it is #lainly -ithin the #o-er of the legislature to ad(ust the rights and status of
reserve officers of the Armed Forces$ 'o member of the army has a vested right in his em#loyment&
status or ran* therein$ /ne can easily imagine the difficulties and com#lications& -hich can affect the
national security or the fiscal resources of the government& if the legislature -ere de#rived of the
authority to ad(ust the tours of duty of reserve officers according to the demands of the #revailing
situation$ After all& from the very nature of things& every member of the reserve force should be under
constant notice that this status as such member is sub(ect to legislative control$ Moreover& reversion
cannot be considered as de#riving the& officer concerned totally of his em#loyment and benefits& for
5ection of 0e#ublic Act +>> #rovides in this connection as follo-s:
5EC$ $ Any reserve officer -ho is reverted to inactive duty under the #rovisions of this Act after
having com#leted an accumulated #eriod of active commissioned service of bet-een five years and
t-enty years shall& unless he is already entitled to the retirement benefits under 0e#ublic Act 'umbered
Three hundred forty& as amended& be entitled u#on reversion to receive a gratuity e8uivalent to one
month@s authoriHed base and longevity #ay in the #ermanent ran* held at the time of such reversion
multi#lied by his years of active commissioned service: "rovided& That such reversion is not as a result
of court martial action or due to the officer@s gross misconduct& the intem#arate use of drugs or
alcoholics& or inefficiency: "rovided& ho-ever& That if a reserve officer is reem#loyed in a civilian
office of the government or government o-ned or controlled cor#oration& he shall not be made to
reimburse the amounts received by him as gratuity under this Act: "rovided& further& That if a reserve
officer -ho has received gratuity under this Act reenters the active service& he shall not be eligible for a
ne- gratuity until he has com#leted at least five years of active commissioned service from the date of
such reentry& and no subse8uent gratuity shall be #aid covering any #eriod of active commissioned
service for -hich he has already received gratuity under this Act: "rovided& further& That in case a
reserve officer -ho has received gratuity under this Act subse8uently reenters the active service and is
retired #ursuant to 0e#ublic Act 'umbered Three hundred forty& such gratuity shall be deducted from
his retirement gratuity or #ensions: And #rovided& finally& That for #ur#oses of this section& any #eriod
of service amounting to si2 months or more shall be counted as one year$
%n conclusion& -hether the 5#ecial "rovision in 8uestion is constitutional or not& #etitioner cannot
com#lain about his reversion to inactive duty& considering the #rovisions of 0e#ublic Act +>> by
virtue of -hich& according to the sti#ulation of facts& it -as ordered by res#ondents$ 4ence& the herein
#etition should be dismissed$
Today is Tuesday& 5e#tember 9+& +91
search
0e#ublic of the "hili##ines
5:"0EME C/:0T
Manila
E' )A'C
;$0$ 'o$ M19MM February +M& 19LM
DEMET0%/ ;$ DEMET0%A& M$"$& A:;:5T/ 5$ 5A'C4EA& M$"$& /0<A'D/ 5$ ME0CAD/&
M$"$& 4/'/0AT/ P$ AK:%'/& M$"$& AAF%0/ <$ 0E5"%C%/& M$"$& D/:;<A5 0$ CA;A5& M$"$&
/5CA0 F$ 5A'T/5& M$"$& A<)E0T/ ;$ 0/M:</& M$"$& C%0%AC/ 0$ A<FE</0& M$"$& %5%D/0/
E$ 0EA<& M$"$& EM%;D%/ <$ <%';AD& M$"$& 0/<A'D/ C$ MA0C%A<& M$"$& "ED0/ M$
MA0CE<<A'A& M$"$& V%CT/0 5$ A%;A& M$"$& and 0/;E<%/ V$ ;A0C%A$ M$"$& #etitioners&
vs$
4/'$ MA':E< A<)A in his ca#acity as the M%'%5TE0 /F T4E ):D;ET and V%CT/0
MACA<%';CA; in his ca#acity as the T0EA5:0E0 /F T4E "4%<%""%'E5& res#ondents$

FE0'A'& .$:
Assailed in this #etition for #rohibition -ith #rayer for a -rit of #reliminary in(unction is the
constitutionality of the first #aragra#h of 5ection of "residential Decree 'o$ 11MM& other-ise *no-n
as the F)udget 0eform Decree of 19MM$F
"etitioners& -ho filed the instant #etition as concerned citiHens of this country& as members of the
'ational AssemblyZ)atasan "ambansa re#resenting their millions of constituents& as #arties -ith
general interest common to all the #eo#le of the "hili##ines& and as ta2#ayers -hose vital interests may
be affected by the outcome of the reliefs #rayed forF 1 listed the grounds relied u#on in this #etition as
follo-s:
A$ 5ECT%/' /F T4E @):D;ET 0EF/0M DEC0EE /F 19MM@ %'F0%';E5 :"/' T4E
F:'DAME'TA< <A3 )P A:T4/0%A%'; T4E %<<E;A< T0A'5FE0 /F ":)<%C M/'EP5$
)$ 5ECT%/' /F "0E5%DE'T%A< DEC0EE '/$ 11MM %5 0E":;'A'T T/ T4E
C/'5T%T:T%/' A5 %T FA%<5 T/ 5"EC%FP T4E /).ECT%VE5 A'D ":0"/5E5 F/0 34%C4
T4E "0/"/5ED T0A'5FE0 /F F:'D5 A0E T/ )E MADE$
C$ 5ECT%/' /F "0E5%DE'T%A< DEC0EE '/$ 11MM A<</35 T4E "0E5%DE'T T/
/VE00%DE T4E 5AFE;:A0D5& F/0M A'D "0/CED:0E "0E5C0%)ED )P T4E
C/'5T%T:T%/' %' A""0/V%'; A""0/"0%AT%/'5$
D$ 5ECT%/' /F T4E 5AME DEC0EE AM/:'T5 T/ A' :'D:E DE<E;AT%/' /F
<E;%5<AT%VE "/3E05 T/ T4E ECEC:T%VE$
E$ T4E T40EATE'ED A'D C/'T%':%'; T0A'5FE0 /F F:'D5 )P T4E "0E5%DE'T
A'D T4E %M"<EME'TAT%/' T4E0E/F )P T4E ):D;ET M%'%5TE0 A'D T4E
T0EA5:0E0 /F T4E "4%<%""%'E5 A0E 3%T4/:T /0 %' ECCE55 /F T4E%0 A:T4/0%TP
A'D .:0%5D%CT%/'$ +
Commenting on the #etition in com#liance -ith the Court resolution dated 5e#tember 19& 19L,& the
5olicitor ;eneral& for the #ublic res#ondents& 8uestioned the legal standing of #etitioners& -ho -ere
allegedly merely begging an advisory o#inion from the Court& there being no (usticiable controversy fit
for resolution or determination$ 4e further contended that the #rovision under consideration -as
enacted #ursuant to 5ection 1!N,O& Article V%%% of the 19M> ConstitutionG and that at any rate&
#rohibition -ill not lie from one branch of the government to a coordinate branch to en(oin the
#erformance of duties -ithin the latter@s s#here of res#onsibility$
/n February +M& 19L!& the Court re8uired the #etitioners to file a 0e#ly to the Comment$ This& they did&
stating& among others& that as a result of the change in the administration& there is a need to hold the
resolution of the #resent case in abeyance Funtil develo#ments arise to enable the #arties to concretiHe
their res#ective stands$F >
Thereafter& 3e re8uired #ublic res#ondents to file a re(oinder$ The 5olicitor ;eneral filed a re(oinder
-ith a motion to dismiss& setting forth as grounds therefor the abrogation of 5ection 1!N,O& Article V%%%
of the 19M> Constitution by the Freedom Constitution of March +,& 19L!& -hich has allegedly rendered
the instant #etition moot and academic$ 4e li*e-ise cited the Fseven #illarsF enunciated by .ustice
)randeis in Ash-ander v$ TVA& +9M :$5$ +LL B19>!D as basis for the #etition@s dismissal$
%n the case of Evelio )$ .avier v$ The Commission on Elections and Arturo F$ "acificador& ;$0$ 'os$
!L>M9=L1& 5e#tember ++& 19L!& 3e stated that:
The abolition of the )atasang "ambansa and the disa##earance of the office in dis#ute bet-een the
#etitioner and the #rivate res#ondents E both of -hom have gone their se#arate -ays E could be a
convenient (ustification for dismissing the case$ )ut there are larger issues involved that must be
resolved no-& once and for all& not only to dis#el the legal ambiguities here raised$ The more im#ortant
#ur#ose is to manifest in the clearest #ossible terms that this Court -ill not disregard and in effect
condone -rong on the sim#listic and tolerant #rete2t that the case has become moot and academic$
The 5u#reme Court is not only the highest arbiter of legal 8uestions but also the conscience of the
government$ The citiHen comes to us in 8uest of la- but -e must also give him (ustice$ The t-o are not
al-ays the same$ There are times -hen -e cannot grant the latter because the issue has been settled and
decision is no longer #ossible according to the la-$ )ut there are also times -hen although the dis#ute
has disa##eared& as in this case& it nevertheless cries out to be resolved$ .ustice demands that -e act
then& not only for the vindication of the outraged right& though gone& but also for the guidance of and as
a restraint u#on the future$
%t is in the discharge of our role in society& as above=8uoted& as -ell as to avoid great disservice to
national interest that 3e ta*e cogniHance of this #etition and thus deny #ublic res#ondents@ motion to
dismiss$ <i*e-ise note-orthy is the fact that the ne- Constitution& ratified by the Fili#ino #eo#le in the
#lebiscite held on February +& 19LM& carries verbatim section 1!N,O& Article V%%% of the 19M>
Constitution under 5ection +N,O& Article V%$ And -hile Congress has not officially reconvened& 3e see
no cogent reason for further delaying the resolution of the case at bar$
The e2ce#tion ta*en to #etitioners@ legal standing deserves scant consideration$ The case of "ascual v$
5ecretary of "ublic 3or*s& et al$& 119 "hil$ >>1& is authority in su##ort of #etitioners@ locus standi$ Thus:
Again& it is -ell=settled that the validity of a statute may be contested only by one -ho -ill sustain a
direct in(ury in conse8uence of its enforcement$ Pet& there are many decisions nullifying at the instance
of ta2#ayers& la-s #roviding for the disbursement of #ublic funds& u#on the theory that the e2#enditure
of #ublic funds by an officer of the state for the #ur#ose of administering an unconstitutional act
constitutes a misa##lication of such funds -hich may be en(oined at the re8uest of a ta2#ayer$ Although
there are some decisions to the contrary& the #revailing vie- in the :nited 5tates is stated in the
American .uris#rudence as follo-s:
%n the determination of the degree of interest essential to give the re8uisite standing to attac* the
constitutionality of a statute& the general rule is that not only #ersons individually affected& but also
ta2#ayers have sufficient interest in #reventing the illegal e2#enditures of moneys raised by ta2ation
and may therefore 8uestion the constitutionality of statutes re8uiring e2#enditure of #ublic moneys$
N 11 Am$ .ur$ M!1& Em#hasis su##lied$ O
Moreover& in Tan v$ Maca#agal& > 5C0A !MM and 5anidad v$ Comelec& M> 5C0A >>>& 3e said that as
regards ta2#ayers@ suits& this Court en(oys that o#en discretion to entertain the same or not$
The conflict bet-een #aragra#h 1 of 5ection of "residential Decree 'o$ 11MM and 5ection 1!N,O&
Article V%%% of the 19M> Constitution is readily #erceivable from a mere cursory reading thereof$ 5aid
#aragra#h 1 of 5ection #rovides:
The "resident shall have the authority to transfer any fund& a##ro#riated for the different de#artments&
bureaus& offices and agencies of the E2ecutive De#artment& -hich are included in the ;eneral
A##ro#riations Act& to any #rogram& #ro(ect or activity of any de#artment& bureau& or office included in
the ;eneral A##ro#riations Act or a##roved after its enactment$
/n the other hand& the constitutional #rovision under consideration reads as follo-s:
5ec$ 1!N,O$ 'o la- shall be #assed authoriHing any transfer of a##ro#riations& ho-ever& the
"resident& the "rime Minister& the 5#ea*er& the Chief .ustice of the 5u#reme Court& and the heads of
constitutional commis ions may by la- be authoriHed to augment any item in the general a##ro#riations
la- for their res#ective offices from savings in other items of their res#ective a##ro#riations$
The #rohibition to transfer an a##ro#riation for one item to another -as e2#licit and categorical under
the 19M> Constitution$ 4o-ever& to afford the heads of the different branches of the government and
those of the constitutional commissions considerable fle2ibility in the use of #ublic funds and
resources& the constitution allo-ed the enactment of a la- authoriHing the transfer of funds for the
#ur#ose of augmenting an item from savings in another item in the a##ro#riation of the government
branch or constitutional body concerned$ The lee-ay granted -as thus limited$ The #ur#ose and
conditions for -hich funds may be transferred -ere s#ecified& i$e$ transfer may be allo-ed for the
#ur#ose of augmenting an item and such transfer may be made only if there are savings from another
item in the a##ro#riation of the government branch or constitutional body$
"aragra#h 1 of 5ection of "$D$ 'o$ 11MM unduly over e2tends the #rivilege granted under said
5ection 1!N,O$ %t em#o-ers the "resident to indiscriminately transfer funds from one de#artment&
bureau& office or agency of the E2ecutive De#artment to any #rogram& #ro(ect or activity of any
de#artment& bureau or office included in the ;eneral A##ro#riations Act or a##roved after its
enactment& -ithout regard as to -hether or not the funds to be transferred are actually savings in the
item from -hich the same are to be ta*en& or -hether or not the transfer is for the #ur#ose of
augmenting the item to -hich said transfer is to be made$ %t does not only com#letely disregard the
standards set in the fundamental la-& thereby amounting to an undue delegation of legislative #o-ers&
but li*e-ise goes beyond the tenor thereof$ %ndeed& such constitutional infirmities render the #rovision
in 8uestion null and void$
FFor the love of money is the root of all evil: $$$F and money belonging to no one in #articular& i$e$
#ublic funds& #rovide an even greater tem#tation for misa##ro#riation and embeHHlement$ This&
evidently& -as foremost in the minds of the framers of the constitution in meticulously #rescribing the
rules regarding the a##ro#riation and dis#osition of #ublic funds as embodied in 5ections 1! and 1L of
Article V%%% of the 19M> Constitution$ 4ence& the conditions on the release of money from the treasury
N5ec$ 1LB1DOG the restrictions on the use of #ublic funds for #ublic #ur#ose N5ec$ 1LB+DOG the #rohibition
to transfer an a##ro#riation for an item to another N5ee$ 1!B,D and the re8uirement of s#ecifications
N5ec$ 1!B+DO& among others& -ere all safeguards designed to forestall abuses in the e2#enditure of #ublic
funds$ "aragra#h 1 of 5ection #uts all these safeguards to naught$ For& as correctly observed by
#etitioners& in vie- of the unlimited authority besto-ed u#on the "resident& F$$$ "res$ Decree 'o$ 11MM
o#ens the floodgates for the enactment of unfunded a##ro#riations& results in uncontrolled e2ecutive
e2#enditures& diffuses accountability for budgetary #erformance and entrenches the #or* barrel system
as the ruling #arty may -ell e2#and NsicO #ublic money not on the basis of develo#ment #riorities but
on #olitical and #ersonal e2#ediency$F , The contention of #ublic res#ondents that #aragra#h 1 of
5ection of "$D$ 11MM -as enacted #ursuant to 5ection 1!B,D of Article V%%% of the 19M> Constitution
must #erforce fall flat on its face$
Another theory advanced by #ublic res#ondents is that #rohibition -ill not lie from one branch of the
government against a coordinate branch to en(oin the #erformance of duties -ithin the latter@s s#here of
res#onsibility$
Thomas M$ Cooley in his FA Treatise on the Constitutional <imitations&F Vol$ 1& Eight Edition& <ittle&
)ro-n and Com#any& )oston& e2#lained:
$$$ The legislative and (udicial are coordinate de#artments of the government& of e8ual dignityG each is
ali*e su#reme in the e2ercise of its #ro#er functions& and cannot directly or indirectly& -hile acting
-ithin the limits of its authority& be sub(ected to the control or su#ervision of the other& -ithout an
un-arrantable assum#tion by that other of #o-er -hich& by the Constitution& is not conferred u#on it$
The Constitution a##ortions the #o-ers of government& but it does not ma*e any one of the three
de#artments subordinate to another& -hen e2ercising the trust committed to it$ The courts may declare
legislative enactments unconstitutional and void in some cases& but not because the (udicial #o-er is
su#erior in degree or dignity to the legislative$ )eing re8uired to declare -hat the la- is in the cases
-hich come before them& they must enforce the Constitution& as the #aramount la-& -henever a
legislative enactment comes in conflict -ith it$ )ut the courts sit& not to revie- or revise the legislative
action& but to enforce the legislative -ill& and it is only -here they find that the legislature has failed to
*ee# -ithin its constitutional limits& that they are at liberty to disregard its actionG and in doing so& they
only do -hat every #rivate citiHen may do in res#ect to the mandates of the courts -hen the (udges
assumed to act and to render (udgments or decrees -ithout (urisdiction$ F%n e2ercising this high
authority& the (udges claim no (udicial su#remacyG they are only the administrators of the #ublic -ill$ %f
an act of the legislature is held void& it is not because the (udges have any control over the legislative
#o-er& but because the act is forbidden by the Constitution& and because the -ill of the #eo#le& -hich is
therein declared& is #aramount to that of their re#resentatives e2#ressed in any la-$F N<indsay v$
Commissioners& T c$& + )ay& >L& !1G "eo#le v$ 0uc*er& , Col$ ,G 0uss v$ Com$& +19 "a$ 5t$ ,G !9 Atl$
1!9& 1 <$0$A$ N'$5$O 99& 19, Am$ 5t$ 0e#$ L+,O B##$ >>+=>>D$
%ndeed& -here the legislature or the e2ecutive branch is acting -ithin the limits of its authority& the
(udiciary cannot and ought not to interfere -ith the former$ )ut -here the legislature or the e2ecutive
acts beyond the sco#e of its constitutional #o-ers& it becomes the duty of the (udiciary to declare -hat
the other branches of the government had assumed to do as void$ This is the essence of (udicial #o-er
conferred by the Constitution Fin one 5u#reme Court and in such lo-er courts as may be established by
la-F NArt$ V%%%& 5ection 1 of the 19>, ConstitutionG Art$ C& 5ection 1 of the 19M> Constitution and
-hich -as ado#ted as #art of the Freedom Constitution& and Art$ V%%%& 5ection 1 of the 19LM
ConstitutionO and -hich #o-er this Court has e2ercised in many instances$ c
"ublic res#ondents are being en(oined from acting under a #rovision of la- -hich 3e have earlier
mentioned to be constitutionally infirm$ The general #rinci#le relied u#on cannot therefore accord them
the #rotection sought as they are not acting -ithin their Fs#here of res#onsibilityF but -ithout it$
The nation has not recovered from the shoc*& and -orst& the economic destitution brought about by the
#lundering of the Treasury by the de#osed dictator and his cohorts$ A #rovision -hich allo-s even the
slightest #ossibility of a re#etition of this sad e2#erience cannot remain -ritten in our statute boo*s$
34E0EF/0E& the instant #etition is granted$ "aragra#h 1 of 5ection of "residential Decree 'o$
11MM is hereby declared null and void for being unconstitutional$
5/ /0DE0 0ED$
Teehan*ee& C$.$& Pa#& 'arvasa& Melencio=4errera& Alam#ay& ;utierreH& .r$& CruH& "aras& Feliciano&
;ancayco& "adilla& )idin& 5armiento and Cortes& ..$& concur$

Footnotes
1 "etition& #$ >& 0ollo$
+ ##$ !=M& 0ollo
> #$ 1!9& 0ollo$
The relevant #ortions read as follo-s:
The Court develo#ed& for its o-n governance in the case confessedly -ithin its (urisdiction& a series of
rules under -hich it has avoided #assing u#on a large #art of all the constitutional 8uestions #ressed
u#on it for decision$ They are:
1$ The Court -ill not #ass u#on the constitutionality of legislation in a friendly& non=adversary
#roceeding& declining because to decide such 8uestions Fis legitimate only in the last resort& and as a
necessity in the determination of real& earnest and vital controversy bet-een individuals$ %t never -as
the thought tht& by means of a friendly suit& a #arty beaten in the legislature could transfer to the courts
an in8uiry as to the constitutionality of the legislative act$F Chicago T ;rand Trun* 0y$ v$ 3ellman&
1> :$5$ >>9& >,$
+$ The Court -ill not Fantici#ate 8uestion of constitutional la- in advance of the necessity of
deciding it$F <iver#ool$ '$P$ T "$5$5$ Co$ v$ Emigration Commissioners& 11> :$5$ >>& >9 $$$ F%t is not
the habit of the Court to decide 8uestions of a constitutional nature unless absolutely necessary to a
decision of the case$ @)urton v$ :nited 5tates$ 19! :$5$ +L>& +9,$
>$ The Court -ill not formulate a rule of constitutional la- broader than is re8uired by the #recise
facts to -hich it is to be a##lied$F <iver#ool& '$P$ T "$5$5$ Co$ v$ Emigration Commissioners& su#ra$
$ The Court -ill not #ass u#on a constitutional 8uestion although #ro#erly #resented by the
record& if there is also #resent some other ground u#on -hich the case may be dis#osed of$ This rule
has found most varied a##lication$ Thus& if a case can be decided on either of t-o grounds& one
involving a constitutional 8uestion& the other a 8uestion of statutory construction or general la-& the
Court -ill decide only the latter$ 5iler v$ <ouisville T 'ashville 0$ Co$& +1> :$5$ 1M,& 191G <ight v$
:nited 5tates& ++9 :$5$ ,+>& ,>L$ A##eals from the highest court of a state challenging its decision of a
8uestion under the Federal Constitution are fre8uently dismissed because the (udgment can be
sustained on an inde#endent state ground$ )erea College v$ Rentuc*y& +11 :$5$ ,& ,>$
,$ The Court -ill not #ass u#on the validity of a statute u#on com#laint of one -ho fails to sho-
that he is in(ured by its o#eration$ Tyler v$ The .udges& 1M9 :$5$ 9,G 4endric* v$ Maryland& +>, :$5$
!19& !+1$ Among the many a##lications of this rule& none is more stri*ing than the denial of the right of
challenge to one -ho lac*s a #ersonal or #ro#erty right$ Thus& the challenge by a #ublic official
interested only in the #erformance of his official duty -ill not be entertained$$$$$ %n Fairchild v$ 4ughes&
+,L :$5$ 1+!& the Court affirmed the dismissal of a suit brought by a citiHen-ho sought to have the
'ineteenth Amendment declared unconstitutional$ %n Massachusetts v$ Mellon& +!+ :$5$ M& the
challenge of the federal Maternity Act -as not entertained although made by the Common-ealth on
behalf of all its citiHens$
!$ The Court -ill not #ass u#on the constitutionality of a statute at the instance of one -ho has
availed himself of its benefits$ ;reat Falls Mfg$ Co$ v$ Attorney ;eneral& 1+& :$5$ ,L1 $ $ $
M$ F3hen the validity of an act of the Congress is dra-n in 8uestion& and even if a serious doubt of
constitutionality is raised& it is a cardinal #rinci#le that this Court -ill first ascertain -hether a
construction of the statute is fairly #ossible by -hich the 8uestion may be avoided$@ Crom-ell v$
)enson& +L, :$5$ ++& !+$F N##$ 1M!=1MM& 0olloO$
, #$ 1& 0ollo$
c Casanovas vs$ 4ord L "hil$ 1+,G Mc;irr vs$ 4amilton& >9 "hil$ ,!>G Com#ania ;eneral de
Tabacos vs$ )oard of "ublic :tility& > "hil$ 1>!G Central Ca#iH vs$ 0amireH& 9 "hil$ LL>G Conce#cion
vs$ "aredes& + "hil$ ,99G :5 vs$ Ang Tang 4o > "hil$ !G McDaniel vs$ A#acible& "hil$ +LG "eo#le
vs$ "omar& ! "hil$ 9G Agcaoili vs$ 5uguitan& L "hil$ !M!G ;overnment of "$%$ vs$ 5#ringer& ,9 "hil$
+,9G Manila Electric Co$ vs$ "asay Trans#$ Co$& ,M "hil$ !99: "eo#le vs$ <insanganG !+ "hil$ !G
"eo#le and 4ong*ong T 5hanghai )an*ing Cor#$ vs$ .ose /$ Vera& !, "hil$ ,!G "eo#le vs$ Carlos& ML
"hil$ ,>,G City of )aguio vs$ 'a-asa& 19! "hil$ 1G City of Cebu vs$ 'a-asa& 19M "hil& 111+G 0utter
vs$ Esteban 9> "hil$ !L$
The <a-#hil "ro(ect = Arellano <a- Foundation

Today is Tuesday& 5e#tember 9+& +91
search
0e#ublic of the "hili##ines
5:"0EME C/:0T
Manila
E' )A'C
;$0$ 'o$ <=19+91 .une 1!& 19!,
0EV$ F0$ CA5%M%0/ <<AD/C& #etitioner&
vs$
The C/MM%55%/'E0 /F %'TE0'A< 0EVE':E and The C/:0T of TAC A""EA<5& res#ondents$
4ilado and 4ilado for #etitioner$
/ffice of the 5olicitor ;eneral for res#ondents$
"A0EDE5& .$:
5ometime in 19,M& the M$)$ Estate& %nc$& of )acolod City& donated "19&999$99 in cash to 0ev$ Fr$
Cris#in 0uiH& then #arish #riest of Victorias& 'egros /ccidental& and #redecessor of herein #etitioner&
for the construction of a ne- Catholic Church in the locality$ The total amount -as actually s#ent for
the #ur#ose intended$
/n March >& 19,L& the donor M$)$ Estate& %nc$& filed the donor@s gift ta2 return$ :nder date of A#ril +9&
19!9& the res#ondent Commissioner of %nternal 0evenue issued an assessment for donee@s gift ta2
against the Catholic "arish of Victorias& 'egros /ccidental& of -hich #etitioner -as the #riest$ The ta2
amounted to "1&>M9$99 including surcharges& interests of 1d monthly from May 1,& 19,L to .une 1,&
19!9& and the com#romise for the late filing of the return$
"etitioner lodged a #rotest to the assessment and re8uested the -ithdra-al thereof$ The #rotest and the
motion for reconsideration #resented to the Commissioner of %nternal 0evenue -ere denied$ The
#etitioner a##ealed to the Court of Ta2 A##eals on 'ovember +& 19!9$ %n the #etition for revie-& the
0ev$ Fr$ Casimiro <ladoc claimed& among others& that at the time of the donation& he -as not the #arish
#riest in VictoriasG that there is no legal entity or (uridical #erson *no-n as the FCatholic "arish "riest
of Victorias&F and& therefore& he should not be liable for the donee@s gift ta2$ %t -as also asserted that the
assessment of the gift ta2& even against the 0oman Catholic Church& -ould not be valid& for such -ould
be a clear violation of the #rovisions of the Constitution$
After hearing& the CTA rendered (udgment& the #ertinent #ortions of -hich are 8uoted belo-:
$$$ $ "arish #riests of the 0oman Catholic Church under canon la-s are similarly situated as its
Archbisho#s and )isho#s -ith res#ect to the #ro#erties of the church -ithin their #arish$ They are the
guardians& su#erintendents or administrators of these #ro#erties& -ith the right of succession and may
sue and be sued$
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
The #etitioner im#ugns the& fairness of the assessment -ith the argument that he should not be held
liable for gift ta2es on donation -hich he did not receive #ersonally since he -as not yet the #arish
#riest of Victorias in the year 19,M -hen said donation -as given$ %t is intimated that if someone has to
#ay at all& it should be #etitioner@s #redecessor& the 0ev$ Fr$ Cris#in 0uiH& -ho received the donation in
behalf of the Catholic #arish of Victorias or the 0oman Catholic Church$ Follo-ing #etitioner@s line of
thin*ing& -e should be e8ually unfair to hold that the assessment no- in 8uestion should have been
addressed to& and collected from& the 0ev$ Fr$ Cris#in 0uiH to be #aid from income derived from his
#resent #arish -here ever it may be$ %t does not seem right to indirectly burden the #resent #arishioners
of 0ev$ Fr$ 0uiH for donee@s gift ta2 on a donation to -hich they -ere not benefited$
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
3e sa- no legal basis then as -e see none no-& to include -ithin the Constitutional e2em#tion& ta2es
-hich #arta*e of the nature of an e2cise u#on the use made of the #ro#erties or u#on the e2ercise of the
#rivilege of receiving the #ro#erties$ B"hi##s vs$ Commissioner of %nternal 0evenue& 91 F N+dO !+MG
19>L& >9+ :$5$ M+$D
%t is a cardinal rule in ta2ation that e2em#tions from #ayment thereof are highly disfavored by la-& and
the #arty claiming e2em#tion must (ustify his claim by a clear& #ositive& or e2#ress grant of such
#rivilege by la-$ BCollector vs$ Manila .oc*ey Club& ;$0$ 'o$ <=LM,,& March +>& 19,!G ,> /$;$ >M!+$D
The #hrase Fe2em#t from ta2ationF as em#loyed in 5ection ++B>D& Article V% of the Constitution of the
"hili##ines& should not be inter#reted to mean e2em#tion from all *inds of ta2es$ 5tatutes e2em#ting
charitable and religious #ro#erty from ta2ation should be construed fairly though strictly and in such
manner as to give effect to the main intent of the la-ma*ers$ B0oman Catholic Church vs$ 4astrings ,
"hil$ M91$D
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
34E0EF/0E& in vie- of the foregoing considerations& the decision of the res#ondent Commissioner
of %nternal 0evenue a##ealed from& is hereby affirmed e2ce#t -ith regard to the im#osition of the
com#romise #enalty in the amount of "+9$99 BCollector of %nternal 0evenue v$ :$5$T$& ;$0$ 'o$ <=
11+M& 'ov$ +L& 19,LDG $$$& and the #etitioner& the 0ev$ Fr$ Casimiro <ladoc is hereby ordered to #ay to
the res#ondent the amount of "999$99 as donee@s gift ta2& #lus the surcharge of five #er centum B,dD as
ad valorem #enalty under 5ection 119 BcD of the Ta2 Code& and one #er centum B1dD monthly interest
from May 1,& 19,L to the date of actual #ayment$ The surcharge of +,d #rovided in 5ection 1+9 for
failure to file a return may not be im#osed as the failure to file a return -as not due to -illful neglect$
B $$$ D 'o costs$
The above (udgment is no- before us on a##eal& #etitioner assigning t-o B+D errors allegedly
committed by the Ta2 Court& all of -hich converge on the singular issue of -hether or not #etitioner
should be liable for the assessed donee@s gift ta2 on the "19&999$99 donated for the construction of the
Victorias "arish Church$
5ection ++ B>D& Art$ V% of the Constitution of the "hili##ines& e2em#ts from ta2ation cemeteries&
churches and #arsonages or convents& a##urtenant thereto& and all lands& buildings& and im#rovements
used e2clusively for religious #ur#oses$ The e2em#tion is only from the #ayment of ta2es assessed on
such #ro#erties enumerated& as #ro#erty ta2es& as contra distinguished from e2cise ta2es$ %n the #resent
case& -hat the Collector assessed -as a donee@s gift ta2G the assessment -as not on the #ro#erties
themselves$ %t did not rest u#on general o-nershi#G it -as an e2cise u#on the use made of the
#ro#erties& u#on the e2ercise of the #rivilege of receiving the #ro#erties B"hi##s vs$ Com$ of %nt$ 0ec$
91 F +d !+MD$ Manifestly& gift ta2 is not -ithin the e2em#ting #rovisions of the section (ust mentioned$
A gift ta2 is not a #ro#erty ta2& but an e2cise ta2 im#osed on the transfer of #ro#erty by -ay of gift
inter vivos& the im#osition of -hich on #ro#erty used e2clusively for religious #ur#oses& does not
constitute an im#airment of the Constitution$ As -ell observed by the learned res#ondent Court& the
#hrase Fe2em#t from ta2ation&F as em#loyed in the Constitution Bsu#raD should not be inter#reted to
mean e2em#tion from all *inds of ta2es$ And there being no clear& #ositive or e2#ress grant of such
#rivilege by la-& in favor of #etitioner& the e2em#tion herein must be denied$
The ne2t issue -hich readily #resents itself& in vie- of #etitioner@s thesis& and /ur finding that a ta2
liability e2ists& is& -ho should be called u#on to #ay the gift ta2Q "etitioner #ostulates that he should not
be liable& because at the time of the donation he -as not the #riest of Victorias$ 3e note the merit of the
above claim& and in order to #ut things in their #ro#er light& this Court& in its 0esolution of March 1,&
19!,& ordered the #arties to sho- cause -hy the 4ead of the Diocese to -hich the #arish of Victorias
#ertains& should not be substituted in lieu of #etitioner 0ev$ Fr$ Casimiro <ladoc it a##earing that the
4ead of such Diocese is the real #arty in interest$ The 5olicitor ;eneral& in re#resentation of the
Commissioner of %nternal 0evenue& inter#osed no ob(ection to such a substitution$ Counsel for the
#etitioner did not also offer ob(ection thereto$
/n A#ril >9& 19!,& in a resolution& 3e ordered the 4ead of the Diocese to #resent -hatever legal issues
andZor defenses he might -ish to raise& to -hich resolution counsel for #etitioner& -ho also a##eared as
counsel for the 4ead of the Diocese& the 0oman Catholic )isho# of )acolod& manifested that it -as
submitting itself to the (urisdiction and orders of this Court and that it -as #resenting& by reference& the
brief of #etitioner 0ev$ Fr$ Casimiro <ladoc as its o-n and for all #ur#oses$
%n vie- here of and considering that as heretofore stated& the assessment at bar had been #ro#erly made
and the im#osition of the ta2 is not a violation of the constitutional #rovision e2em#ting churches&
#arsonages or convents& etc$ BArt V%& sec$ ++ N>O& ConstitutionD& the 4ead of the Diocese& to -hich the
#arish Victorias "ertains& is liable for the #ayment thereof$
The decision a##ealed from should be& as it is hereby affirmed insofar as ta2 liability is concernedG it is
modified& in the sense that #etitioner herein is not #ersonally liable for the said gift ta2& and that the
4ead of the Diocese& herein substitute #etitioner& should #ay& as he is #resently ordered to #ay& the said
gift ta2& -ithout s#ecial& #ronouncement as to costs$
)engHon& C$.$& )autista Angelo& Conce#cion& 0eyes& .$)$<$& DiHon& 0egala& Ma*alintal& )engHon& .$"$&
and Aaldivar& ..$& concur$
)arrera& .$& too* no #art$
The <a-#hil "ro(ect = Arellano <a- Foundation

Today is Tuesday& 5e#tember 9+& +91
search
0e#ublic of the "hili##ines
5:"0EME C/:0T
Manila
E' )A'C

;$0$ 'o$ 1>+,9> .une +,& 1999
"4%<%""%'E %'TE0'AT%/'A< T0AD%'; C/0"/0AT%/'& #etitioner&
vs$
C/MM%55%/' /' A:D%T& res#ondent$

;/'AA;A=0EPE5& .$:
This is a #etition for certiorari under 0ule ! of the 199M 0ules of Civil "rocedure to annul Decision
'o$ +M dated .uly +M& 199+ of the Commission on Audit BC/AD denying "hili##ine %nternational
Trading Cor#oration@s B"%TCD a##eal from the disallo-ances made by the resident C/A auditor on
"%TC@s car #lan benefitsG and Decision 'o$ 9L=9L dated .anuary +M& 199L of the C/A denying "%TC@s
motion for reconsideration$
The follo-ing facts are undis#uted:
The "%TC is a government=o-ned and controlled cor#oration created under "residential Decree B"DD
'o$ +,+ on .uly +1& 19M> 1& #rimarily for the #ur#ose of #romoting and develo#ing "hili##ine trade in
#ursuance of national economic develo#ment$ /n /ctober 19& 19LL& the "%TC )oard of Directors
a##roved a Car "lan "rogram for 8ualified "%TC officers$ + :nder such car #lan #rogram& an eligible
officer is entitled to #urchase a vehicle& fifty #ercent B,9dD of the value of -hich shall be shouldered
by "%TC -hile the remaining fifty #ercent B,9dD -ill be shouldered by the officer through salary
deduction over a #eriod of five B,D years$ Ma2imum value of the vehicle to be #urchased ranges from
T-o 4undred Thousand "esos B"+99&999$99D to Three 4undred and Fifty Thousand "esos
B">,9&999$99D& de#ending on the #osition of the officer in the cor#oration$ %n addition& "%TC -ill
reimburse the officer concerned fifty #ercent B,9dD of the annual car registration& insurance #remiums
and costs of registration of the chattel mortgage over the car for a #eriod of five B,D years from the date
the vehicle -as #urchased$ The terms and conditions of the car #lan are embodied in a FCar <oan
AgreementF$ > "er "%TC@s car #lan guidelines& the #ur#ose of the #lan is to #rovide financial assistance
to 8ualified em#loyees in #urchasing their o-n trans#ortation facilities in the #erformanced of their
-or*& for re#resentation& and #ersonal use$ The #lan is envisioned to facilitate greater mobility during
official tri#s es#ecially -ithin Metro Manila or the em#loyee@s #rinci#al #lace of assignment& -ithout
having to rely on "%TC vehicles& ta2is or cars for hire$ ,
/n .uly 1& 19L9& 0e#ublic Act 'o$ !M,L B0A !M,LD& entitled FAn Act "rescribing a 0evised
Com#ensation and "osition Classification 5ystem in the ;overnment and For /ther "ur#osesF& too*
effect$ 5ection 1+ of said la- #rovides for the consolidation of allo-ances and additional com#ensation
into standardiHed salary rates save for certain additional com#ensation such as re#resentation and
trans#ortation allo-ances -hich -ere e2em#ted from consolidation into the standardiHed rate$ 5aid
section li*e-ise #rovides that other additional com#ensation being received by incumbents as by of
.uly 1& 19L9 not integrated into the standardiHed salary rates shall continue to be authoriHed$
5ec$ 1+& 0A !M,L& reads E
5ec$ 1+$ Consolidation of All Allo-ances and Com#ensation$ E All allo-ances& e2ce#t for
re#resentation and trans#ortation allo-ancesG clothing and laundry allo-ancesG subsistence allo-ance
of marine officers and cre- on board government vessels and hos#ital #ersonnelG haHard #ayG
allo-ances of foreign service #ersonnel stationed abroadG and such other additional com#ensation not
other-ise s#ecified herein as may be determined by the D)M& shall be deemed included in the
standardiHed salary rates herein #rescribed$ 5uch other additional com#ensation& -hether in cash or in
*ind& being received by incumbents only as of .uly 1& 19L9 not integrated into the standardiHed salary
rates shall continue to be authoriHed$
To im#lement 0A !M,L& the De#artment of )udget and Management BD)MD issued Cor#orate
Com#ensation Circular 'o$ 19 BD)M=CCC 'o$ 19D$ "aragra#h ,$! of D)M=CCC 'o$ 19 discontinued
effective 'ovember 1& 19L9& all allo-ances and fringe benefits granted on to# of basic salary& not
other-ise enumerated under #aragra#hs ,$ and ,$, thereof$
"aragra#h ,$! of D)M=CCC 'o$ 19 #rovides:
,$! "ayment of other allo-ancesZfringe benefits and all other forms of com#ensation granted on to#
of basic salary& -hether in cash or in *ind& not mentioned in 5ub=#aragra#hs ,$ and ,$, ! above shall
be discontinued effective 'ovember 1& 19L9$ "ayment made for such allo-anceZfringe benefits after
said date shall be considered as illegal disbursement of #ublic funds$
/n #ost audit& the #aymentZreimbursement of the above=mentioned e2#enses B,9d of the yearly car
registration and insurance #remiums and ,9d of the costs of registration of the chattel mortgage over
the carD made after 'ovember 1& 19L9 -as disallo-ed by the resident C/A auditor$ The disallo-ance
-as made on the ground that the sub(ect car #lan benefits -ere not one of the fringe benefits or form of
com#ensation allo-ed to be continued after said date under the afore8uoted #aragra#h ,$! of D)M=
CCC 'o$ 19 M& in relation to "aragra#hs ,$ and ,$, thereof$
"%TC& on its behalf& and that of the affected "%TC officials& a##ealed the decision of the resident C/A
auditor to the C/A$ /n .uly +M& 199+& C/A denied "%TC@s a##eal and affirmed the disallo-ance of the
said car #lan e2#enses in the assailed Decision 'o$ +M dated .uly +M& 199+$ 0elevant #ortions of the
decision read thus:
:#on circums#ect evaluation thereof& this Commission finds the instant a##eal to be devoid of merit$ %t
should be noted that the reimbursementZ#ayment of e2#enses in 8uestion is based on the Car "lan
benefit granted under )oard 0esolution 'o$ 19=LL=9> ado#ted by the "%TC )oard of Directors on
/ctober 19& 19LL$ The Car "lan is undeniably a fringe benefit as a##earing in "%TC@s FCom#ensation
"olicy under the heading F>$ /ther Fringe )enefitsF& #articularly %tem 'o$ >$1> thereof$ %nasmuch as
"%TC is a government=o-ned andZor controlled cor#oration& the grant of the Car "lan Bbeing a fringe
benefitD should be governed by the #rovisions of Cor#orate Com#ensation Circular 'o$ 19&
im#lementing 0A !M,L$ :nder sub=#aragra#h ,$! of said Circular& it e2#licitly #rovides:
222 222 222
5ince the Car "lan benefit is not one of those fringe benefits or other forms of com#ensation mentioned
in 5ub=#aragra#hs ,$ and ,$, of CCC 'o$ 19& conse8uently the reimbursement of the ,9d share of
"%TC in the yearly registration and insurance #remium of the cars #urchased under said Car "lan
benefit should not be allo-ed$ $ $ $ L
"%TC@s motion for reconsideration -as denied by the C/A in its 0esolution dated .anuary +M& 199L$ 9
4ence& the instant #etition on the follo-ing grounds:
1$ That the legislature did not intend to revo*e e2isting benefits being received by incumbent
government em#loyees as of .uly 1& 19L9 Bincluding sub(ect car #lan benefitsD -hen 0A !M,L -as
#assedG
+$ That the Car <oan Agreements signed bet-een "%TC and its officers #ursuant to "%TC@s Car
"lan "rogram& including the Car <oan Agreements& duly e2ecuted #rior to the effectivity of 0A !M,L&
constitute the la- bet-een the #arties and as such& #rotected by 5ection 19& Article %%% of the 19LM
"hili##ine Constitution -hich #rohibits the im#airment of contractsG and
>$ Finally& that the #rovisions of "D 9L, do not a##ly to "%TC inasmuch as under its 0evised
Charter& "D 19M1& as amended by E$/$ M,! and E$/$ 19!M& "%TC is not only e2#ressly e2em#ted from
/C"C rules and regulations but its )oard of Directors -as e2#ressly authoriHed to ado#t com#ensation
#olicies and other related benefits to its officersZem#loyees -ithout need for further a##roval thereof by
any government office& agency or authority$ 19
The #etition is meritorious$
First of all& -e must mention that this Court has confirmed in "hili##ine "ost Authority vs$
Commission on Audit 11 the legislative intent to #rotect incumbents -ho are receiving salaries andZor
allo-ances over and above those authoriHed by 0A !M,L to continue to receive the same even after 0A
!M,L too* effect$ %n reserving the benefit to incumbents& the legislature has manifested its intent to
gradually #hase out this #rivilege -ithout u#setting the #olicy of non=diminution of #ay and consistent
-ith the rule that la-s should only be a##lied #ros#ectively in the s#irit of fairness and (ustice$ 1+
Addressing the issue as to -hether the #etitioners=officials may still receive their re#resentation and
trans#ortation allo-ance B0ATAD at the higher rates #rovided by <etter of %m#lementation B</%D 'o$
9M in light of 5ection 1+& 0A !M,L& this Court said:
'o-& under the second sentence of 5ection 1+& first #aragra#h& the 0ATA en(oyed by these ""A
officials shall continue to be authoriHed only if they are Fbeing received by incumbents only as of .uly
1& 19L9$F 0A !M,L has therefore& to this e2tent& amended </% 'o$ 9M$ )y limiting the benefit of the
0ATA granted by </% 'o$ 9M to incumbents& Congress has manifested its intent to gradually #hase out
this #rivilege -ithout u#setting its #olicy of non=diminution of #ay$
The legislature has similarly adhered to this #olicy of non=diminution of #ay -hen it #rovided for the
transition allo-ance under 5ection 1M of 0A !M,L -hich reads:
5ec$ 1M$ 5alaries of %ncumbents$ E %ncumbents of #osition #resently receiving salaries and
additional com#ensationZfringe benefits including those absorbed from local government units and
other emoluments the aggregate of -hich e2ceeds the standardiHed salary rate as herein #rescribed&
shall continue to receive such e2cess com#ensation& -hich shall be referred to as transition allo-ance$
The transition allo-ance shall be reduced by the amount of salary ad(ustment that the incumbent shall
receive in the future$
3hile 5ection 1+ refers to allo-ances that are not integrated into the standardiHed salaries -hereas
5ection 1M refers to salaries and additional com#ensation or fringe benefits& both sections are intended
to #rotect incumbents -ho are receiving said salaries andZor allo-ances at the time 0A !M,L too*
effect$ 1> BEm#hasis su##lied$D
)ased on the foregoing #ronouncement& #etitioner correctly #ointed out that there -as no intention on
the #art of the legislature to revo*e e2isting benefits being en(oyed by incumbents of government
#ositions at the time of the virtue of 5ections 1+ and 1M thereof$ There is no dis#ute that the "%TC
officials -ho availed of the sub(ect car #lan benefits -ere incumbents of their #ositions as of .uly 1&
19L9$ Thus& it -as legal and #ro#er for them to continue en(oying said benefits -ithin the five year
#eriod from date of #urchase of the vehicle allo-ed by their Car <oan Agreements -ith "%TC$
Further& -e see the rationale for the cor#oration@s fifty #ercent B,9dD #artici#ation and contribution to
the sub(ect e2#enses$ As to the insurance #remium& "%TC& at least& u# to the e2tent of ,9d of the value
of the vehicle& has an insurable interest in said vehicle in case of loss or damage thereto$ As to the costs
of registration of the vehicle in the em#loyee@s name and of the chattel mortgage in favor of "%TC& this
is to secure "%TC of the re#ayment of the FCar <oan AgreementF and the fulfillment of the other
obligations contained therein by the em#loyee$
5till further& the vehicle being utiliHed by the officer is actually being used for cor#orate #ur#oses
because the officer concerned is no longer entitled to utiliHe com#any=o-ned vehicles for official
business once heZshe has availed of a car #lan$ 'either is said officer allo-ed to reimburse the costs of
other land trans#ortation used -ithin his #rinci#al #lace of assignment Bi$e$ Metro ManilaD as the
vehicle is #resumed to be his official vehicle$ 1 %n the event that the em#loyee resigns& retires or is
se#arated from the com#any -ithout cause #rior to the com#letion of the !9=month car #lan& the
em#loyee shall be given the #rivilege to buy the car #rovided he #ays the remaining installments of the
loan and the amount e8uivalent to that #ortion of the com#any@s contribution corres#onding to the
une2#ired #eriod of the car #lan$ /n the other hand& if the em#loyee has been se#arated from the
com#any for cause& the com#any has the other o#tion aside from the foregoing to re#ossess the car
from the em#loyee& in -hich case& the com#any shall #ay bac* to the em#loyee all amortiHations
already made by the em#loyee to the com#any& interest free$ 1,
5econdly& C/A relied on D)M=CCC 'o$ 19 1! as basis for the disallo-ance of the sub(ect car #lan
benefits$ D)M=CCC 'o$ 19 -hich -as issued by the D)M #ursuant to 5ection +> 1M of 0A !M,L
mandating the said agency to issue the necessary guidelines to im#lement 0A !M,L has been declared
by this Court in De .esus& et al$ vs$ Commission on Audit& et al$ 1L as of no force and effect due to the
absence of #ublication thereof in the /fficial ;aHette or in a ne-s#a#er of general circulation$ 5alient
#ortions of said decision read:
/n the need #ublication of sub(ect D)M=CCC 'o$ 19& -e rule in the affirmative$ Follo-ing the
doctrine enunciated in Tanada 19& #ublication in the /fficial ;aHette or in a ne-s#a#er of general
circulation in the "hili##ines is re8uired since D)M=CCC 'o$ 19 is in the nature of an administrative
circular the #ur#ose of -hich is to enforce or im#lement an e2isting la-$ 5tated differently& to be
effective and enforceable& D)M=CCC 'o$ 19 must go through the re8uisite #ublication in the /fficial
;aHette or in a ne-s#a#er of general circulation in the "hili##ines$
%n the #resent case under scrutiny& it is decisively clear that D)M=CCC 'o$ 19& -hich com#letely
disallo-s #ayment of allo-ances and other additional com#ensation to government officials and
em#loyees& starting 'ovember 1& 19L9& is not a mere inter#retative or internal regulation$ %t is
something more than that$ And -hy not& -hen it tends to de#rive government -or*ers of their
allo-ances and additional com#ensation sorely needed to *ee# body and soul together$ At the very
least& before the circular under attac* may be #ermitted to substantially reduce their income& the
government officials and em#loyees concerned should be a##rised and alerted by the #ublication of
said circular in the /fficial ;aHette or in a ne-s#a#er or general circulation in the "hili##ines E to the
end that they be given am#lest o##ortunity to voice out -hatever o##osition they may have& and to
ventilate their stance on the matter$ This a##roach is more in *ee#ing -ith democratic #rece#ts and
rudiments of fairness and trans#arency$
%n the case at bar& the disallo-ance of the sub(ect car #lan benefits -ould ham#er the officials in the
#erformance of their functions to #romote and develo# trade -hich re8uires mobility in the
#erformance of official business$ %ndeed& the car #lan benefits are su##ortive of the im#lementation of
the ob(ectives and mission of the agency relative to the nature of its o#eration and res#onsive to the
e2igencies of the service$
%t has come to our *no-ledge that D)M=CCC 'o$ 19 has been re=issued in its entirety and submitted
for #ublication in the /fficial ;aHette #er letter to the 'ational "rinting /ffice dated March 9& 1999$
3ould the subse8uent #ublication thereof cure the defect and retroact to the time that the above=
mentioned items -ere disallo-ed in auditQ
The ans-er is in the negative& #recisely& for the reason that #ublication is re8uired as a condition
#recedent to the effectivity of a la- to inform the #ublic of the contents of the la- or rules and
regulations before their rights and interests are affected by the same$ From the time the C/A
disallo-ed the e2#enses in audit u# to the filing of herein #etition the sub(ect circular remained in legal
limbo due to its non=#ublication$ As -as stated in Tanada vs$ Tuvera& +1& F#rior #ublication of la-s
before they become effective cannot be dis#ensed -ith& for the reason that such omission -ould offend
due #rocess insofar as it -ould deny the #ublic *no-ledge of the la-s that are su##osed to govern it$
%n vie- of the nullity of D)M=CCC 'o$ 19 relied u#on by the C/A as basis for the disallo-ance of the
sub(ect car #lan benefits& -e deem it unnecessary to discuss the second issue raised in the instant
#etition$
3e deem it necessary though to resolve the third issue as to -hether "%TC is e2em#t from 0A 9L, ++
as subse8uently amended by 0A !M,L$ According to #etitioner& "%TC@s 0evised Charter& "D 19M1 dated
.anuary +,& 19MM& as amended by E/ M,! dated December +9& 19L1& and further amended by E/ 19!M
dated 'ovember +,& 19L,& e2#ressly e2em#ted "%TC from the /ffice of the Com#ensation and "osition
Classification B/C"CD rules and regulations$ "etitioner cites 5ection +L of "$D$ 19M1 +>G 5ection ! of
E/ M,! +G and 5ection > of E/ 19!M$ +,
According to the C/A in its Decision 'o$ 9L=9L dated .anuary +M& 199L& the e2em#tion granted to the
"%TC has been re#ealed and revo*ed by the re#ealing #rovisions of 0A !M,L& #articularly 5ection 1!
thereof -hich #rovides:
5ec$ 1!$ 0e#eal of 5#ecial 5alary <a-s and 0egulations$ E All la-s& decrees& e2ecutive& orders&
cor#orate charters& and other issuances or #arts thereof& that e2em#t agencies from the coverage of the
5ystem& or that authoriHe and fi2 #osition classifications& salaries& #ay rates or allo-ances of s#ecified
#ositions& or grou#s of officials& and em#loyees or of agencies& -hich are inconsistent -ith the 5ystem&
including the #roviso under 5ection + and 5ection 1! of "D 'o$ 9L, are hereby re#ealed$
To this& #etitioner argues that 0A !M,L -hich is a la- of general a##lication cannot re#eal #rovisions
of the 0evised Charter of "%TC and its amendatory la-s e2#ressly e2em#ting "%TC from /C"C
coverage being s#ecial la-s$ /ur rules on statutory construction #rovide that a s#ecial la- cannot be
re#ealed& amended or altered by a subse8uent general la- by mere
im#lication +!G that a statute& general in character as to its terms and a##lication& is not to be construed
as re#ealing a s#ecial or s#ecific enactment& unless the legislative #ur#ose to do so is manifested +MG
that if re#eal of #articular or s#ecific la- or la-s is intended& the #ro#er ste# is to so e2#ress it$ +L
%n the case at bar& the re#eal by 5ection 1! of 0A !M,L of Fall cor#orate charters that e2em#t agencies
from the coverage of the 5ystemF -as clear and e2#ressed necessarily to achieve the #ur#oses for
-hich the la- -as enacted& that is& the standardiHation of salaries of all em#loyees in government
o-ned andZor controlled cor#orations to achieve Fe8ual #ay for substantially e8ual -or*F$ 4enceforth&
"%TC should no- be considered as covered by la-s #rescribing a com#ensation and #osition
classification system in the government including 0A !M,L$ This is -ithout #re(udice& ho-ever& as
discussed above& to the non=diminution of #ay of incumbents as of .uly 1& 19L9 as #rovided in 5ections
1+ and 1M of said la-$
34E0EF/0E& the "etition is hereby ;0A'TED& the assailed Decisions of the Commission on Audit
are 5ET A5%DE$
5/ /0DE0ED$
Davide& .r$& C$.$& 0omero& )ellosillo& Melo& "uno& Vitug& Ra#unan& MendoHa& Kuisumbing& "urisima&
"ardo and Pnares=5antiago& ..$& concur$
"anganiban and )uena& ..$& are on leave$
Footnotes
1 Amended by "D 19M1 on .anuary 19& 19MM& later by E2ecutive /rder BE/D 'o$ M,! on
December +9& 19L1& and E/ 'o$ 19!M on 'ovember +,& 19L,$
+ 0esolution 'o$ 19=LL=9>$
> 0ollo& #$ ,>$
%bid$& #$ >$
, %d$
! ,$ The rates of the follo-ing allo-ancesZfringe benefits -hich are not integrated into the
basic salary and -hich are allo-ed to be continued after .une >9& 19L9 shall be sub(ect to the condition
that the grant of such benefits is covered by statutory authority:
,$$1 0e#resentation and Trans#ortation Allo-ances B0ATAD of incumbent of the #osition authoriHed
to receive the same at the highest amount legally authoriHed as of .une >9& 19L9 for the level of his
#osition -ithin the #articular ;/CCZ;F%G$
,$$+ :niform and Clothing Allo-ance at a rate as #reviously authoriHedG
,$$> 4aHard #ay as authoriHed by la-G
,$$ 4onorariaZadditional com#ensation for em#loyees on detail -ith s#ecial #ro(ects or inter=agency
underta*ingsG
,$$, 4onoraria for services rendered by researchers& e2#erts and s#ecialists -ho are of
ac*no-ledged authorities in their fields of s#ecialiHationG
,$$! 4onoraria for lecturers and resource #ersonsZs#ea*ersG
,$$M /vertime #ay in accordance to Memorandum /rder 'o$ ++LG
,$$L ClothingZlaundry allo-ances and subsistence allo-ance of marine officers and cre- on board
;/CCsZ;F%s o-ned vessels and used in their o#erations& and of hos#ital #ersonnel -ho attend directly
to #atients and -ho by nature of their duties are re8uired to -ear uniformsG
,$$9 Kuarters Allo-ance of officials and em#loyees -ho are #resently entitled to the sameG
,$$19 /verseas& <iving Kuarters and other allo-ances #resently authoriHed for #ersonnel stationed
abroadG
,$$11 'ight Differential of #ersonnel on night dutyG
,$$1+ "er Diems of members of the governing )oards of ;/CCsZ;F%s at the rate as #rescribed in
their res#ective ChartersG
,$$1> Flying "ay of #ersonnel underta*ing serial flightsG
,$$1 "er DiemsZAllo-ances of Chairman and MembersZ5taff of collegial bodies and CommitteeG
and&
,$$1, "er DiemsZAllo-ances of officials and em#loyees on official foreign and local travel outside of
their official station$
,$, /ther allo-ancesZfringe benefits not li*e-ise integrated into the basic salary and allo-ed to be
continued only for incumbents as of .une >9& 19L9 sub(ect to the condition that the grant of same is
-ith a##ro#riate authoriHation either from the D)M& /ffice of the "resident or legislative issuances
areas follo-s:
,$,$1 0ice 5ubsidy
,$,$+ 5ugar 5ubsidy
,$,$> Death )enefits other than those granted by the ;5%5G
,$,$ MedicalZdentalZo#tical allo-ancesZbenefitsG
,$,$, Children@s allo-anceG
,$,$! 5#ecial Duty "ayZAllo-anceG
,$,$M Meal 5ubsidyG
,$,$L <ongevity "ayG and
,$,$9 Teller@s Allo-ance
M 0ollo& #$ >1$
L %d$& ##$ >9=>1$
9 %d$& #$ +>$
19 %d$& #$ L$
11 +1 5C0A !,>$
1+ Erectors& %nc$ vs$ 'ational <abor 0elations Commission& +,! 5C0A !+9$
1> 5ee note 11& #$ !!9$
1 0ollo& #$ >9$
1, %bid$& ##$ 9=,9$
1! 0ules and 0egulations for the %m#lementation of the 0evised Com#ensation and "osition
Classification 5ystem "rescribed :nder 0$A$ 'o$ !M,L for ;overnment /-ned AndZ/r Controlled
Cor#orations B;/CC@sD and ;overnment Financial %nstitutions B;F%sD$
1M 5ec$ +>$ Effectivity$ E Thin Act shall ta*e effect .uly 1& 19L9$ The D)M shall -ithin
si2ty B!9D days after its a##roval allocate all #ositions in their a##ro#riate #osition titles and salary
grades and #re#are and issue the necessary guidelines to im#lement the same$
1L ;$0$ 'o$ 1999+>& August 1+& 199L$
19 0eferring to Tanada vs$ Tuvera& 1! 5C0A ,>$
+9 5u#ra& at ##$ M=L$
+1 su#ra$
++ FA Decree 0evising The "osition Classification and Com#ensation 5ystems %n The 'ational
;overnment& And %ntegrating The 5ameF issued on August ++& 19M!& to standardiHe the com#ensation
of government officials and em#loyees& including those in government=o-ned andZor controlled
cor#orations$
+> 5ec$ +L$ "ersonnel 0ecruitment E The cor#oration shall ado#t a s#ecial recruitment and
em#loyment scheme that is res#onsive to the commercial nature of its o#erations$ Further& the
cor#oration is hereby authoriHed to e2tend #ermanent a##ointment to& or contract the services of&
trained and e2#erienced #ersons& even -ithout civil eligibility& for its man#o-er building as a
com#eting trading firm$ %n vie- of the #ioneering nature of its o#eration& the Cor#oration shall
continue to be e2em#t from the /C"C rules and regulations$
+ 5ec$ !$ E2em#tion from /C"C E %n recognition of the s#ecial nature of its o#erations& the
Cor#oration shall continue to be e2em#t from the a##lication of the rules and regulations of the /ffice
of the Com#ensation and "osition Classification or any other similar agencies that may be established
hereafter as #rovided under "residential Decree 19M1$ $ $ $
+, 5ec$ >$ Com#ensation "olicies$ E The com#ensation #olicies including allo-ances& merit
increases and other em#loyee benefits for all officers and em#loyees ado#ted by the )oard of Directors
are hereby a##roved in accordance -ith "$D$ 'os$ 11MM and 1,9M$ Any future changes a##roved by the
)oard that may be deemed necessary shall not re8uire any referral to or a##roval of any other authority&
agency or office$1e-#hi1$nft
+! <aguna <a*e Develo#ment Authority vs$ Court of A##eals& +,1 5C0A +$
+M Commissioner of %nternal 0evenue vs$ Court of A##eals& +9M 5C0A LM$
+L Agu(etas vs$ Court of A##eals& +,L 5C0A 1M$
The <a-#hil "ro(ect = Arellano <a- Foundation

Today is Tuesday& 5e#tember 9+& +91
search
0e#ublic of the "hili##ines
5:"0EME C/:0T
Manila
E' )A'C
;$0$ 'o$ <=11+1! March !& 191!
C/M"A'%A ;E'E0A< DE TA)AC/5 DE F%<%"%'A5& #etitioner&
vs$
T4E )/A0D /F ":)<%C :T%<%TP C/MM%55%/'E05& res#ondent$
;ilbert& Cohn and Fisher for #etitioner$
Attorney=;eneral Avance?a for res#ondent$
M/0E<A'D& .$:
This is an a##eal from& or a #etition for revie- of& an order of the )oard of "ublic :tility
Commissioners of the "hili##ine %slands& re8uiring the #etitioner to file a detailed re#ort of its finances
and o#erations in the form set forth in the #etition$
The #etitioner alleges that it is a foreign cor#oration organiHed under the la-s of 5#ain and engaged in
business in the "hili##ine %slands as a common carrier of #assengers and merchandise by -aterG that on
or about the Mth day of .une& 191,& the )oard of "ublic :tility Commissioners issued and caused to be
served on #etitioner an order to sho- cause -hy #etitioner should not be re8uired to #resent detailed
annual re#orts res#ecting its finances and o#erations res#ecting the vessels o-ned and o#erated by it& in
the form and containing the matters indicated by the model attached to the #etitionG that after a hearing
the )oard of "ublic :tility Commissioners dictated an order in the follo-ing terms: FThe res#ondent is
therefore ordered to #resent annually on or before March first of each year a detailed re#ort of finances
and o#erations of such vessels as are o#erated by it as a common carrier -ithin the "hili##ine %slands&
in the form and containing the matters indicated in the model of annual re#ort -hich accom#anied the
order to sho- cause herein$F The model referred to is made a #art of this o#inion and may be found in
an a##endi2 thereto$
/n its return to the order to sho- cause before the )oard of "ublic :tility Commissioners the #etitioner
denied the authority of the board to re8uire the re#ort as*ed for on the ground that the #rovision of Act
'o$ +>9M relied on by said board as authority for such re8uirement -as& if construed as conferring such
#o-er& invalid as constituting an unla-ful attem#t on the #art of the <egislature to delegate legislative
#o-er to the board$ The #etitioner also ans-ered that the re8uirements of the board -ith res#ect to the
#ro#osed re#ort -ere Fcumbersome and unnecessarily #roli2 and that the #re#aration of the same
-ould entail an immense amount of clerical -or*$F
The case coming here under the #rovision of section >M of said Act 'o$ +>9M& the #etitioner raises the
same 8uestions that it #resented to the )oard of "ublic :tility Commissioners in its ans-er to the order
to sho- cause$
The section of Act 'o$ +>9M under -hich the )oard of "ublic :tility Commissioners relies for its
authority& so far as #ertinent to the case at hand& reads as follo-s:
5ec$ 1!$ The )oard shall have #o-er& after hearing& u#on notice& by order in -riting& to re8uire
every #ublic utility as herein defined:
222 222 222
BeD To furnish annually a detailed re#ort of finances and o#erations& in such form and containing
such matters as the )oard may from time to time by order #rescribe$
As is a##arent at a glance the #rovision conferring authority on the board is very general$ %t is also very
com#rehensive$ %t calls for a detailed re#ort of the finances and o#erations of the #etitioning steamshi#
com#any$ That& it -ould seem& covers substantially everythingG for there is very little to a steamshi#
com#any but its finances and o#erations$ %t -ould have been #ractically the same if the statute had
given the )oard of "ublic :tility Commissioners #o-er Fto re8uire every #ublic utility to furnish
annually a detailed re#ort$F 5uch #rovision -ould have been but little broader and little less general
than the #resent #rovision$ %t is clear that a statute -hich authoriHes a )oard of "ublic :tility
Commissioners to re8uire detailed re#orts from #ublic utilities& leaving the nature of the re#ort& the
contents thereof& the general lines -hich it shall follo-& the #rinci#le u#on -hich it shall #roceed&
indeed& all other matters -hatsoever& to the e2clusive discretion of the board& is not e2#ressing its o-n
-ill or the -ill of the 5tate -ith res#ect to the #ublic utilities to -hich it refers$ 5uch a #rovision does
not declare& or set out& or indicate -hat information the 5tate re8uires& -hat is valuable to it& -hat it
needs in order to im#ose correct and (ust ta2ation& su#ervision or control& or the facts -hich the 5tate
must have in order to deal (ustly and e8uitably -ith such #ublic utilities and to re8uire them to deal
(ustly and e8uitably -ith the 5tate$ The <egislature seems sim#ly to have authoriHed the )oard of
"ublic :tility Commissioners to re8uire -hat information the board -ants$ %t -ould seem that the
<egislature& by the #rovision in 8uestion& delegated to the )oard of "ublic :tility Commissioners all of
its #o-ers over a given sub(ect=matter in a manner almost absolute& and -ithout laying do-n a rule or
even ma*ing a suggestion by -hich that #o-er is to be directed& guided or a##lied$
%n the case of Cincinnati& 3$ T A$ 0$ 0$ Co$ vs$ Clinton County Comrs$ B1 /hio 5t$ MMD& the court&
dealing -ith the 8uestion of -hether a #o-er is strictly legislative& or administrative& or merely relates
to the e2ecution of the la-& said:
The true distinction is bet-een the delegation of #o-er to ma*e the la-& -hich necessarily involves a
discretion as to -hat shall be& and conferring authority or discretion as to its e2ecution& to be e2ercised
under and in #ursuance of the la-$ The first cannot be doneG to the latter no valid ob(ection can be
made$
This #rinci#le -as a##lied in the case of Do-ling vs$ <ancashire %nsurance Co$ B9+ 3is$& !>D$ %n that
case the statute #rovided that the insurance commissioner shall #re#are& a##rove and ado#t a #rinted
form of fire insurance #olicy to conform as nearly as might be to that used in the 5tate of 'e- Por*$
The 3isconsin 5u#reme Court held that to be a delegation of legislative #o-er saying:
The act& in our (udgment& -holly fails to #rovide definitely and clearly -hat the standard #olicy should
contain& so that it could be #ut in use as a uniform #olicy re8uired to ta*e the #lace of all others&
-ithout the determination of the insurance commissioner in res#ect to matters involving the e2ercise of
a legislative discretion that could not be delegated& and -ithout -hich the act could not #ossibly be #ut
in use& as an act in conformity to -hich all fire insurance #olicies -ere re8uired to be issued$
The court also said:
The result of all the cases on this sub(ect is that a la- must be com#lete& in all its terms and #rovisions&
-hen it leaves the legislative branch of the government& and nothing must be left to the (udgment of the
electors or other a##ointee or delegate of the legislature& so that& in form and substance& it is a la- in all
its details& in #resenti& but -hich may be left to ta*e effect in futuro& if necessary& u#on the
ascertainment of any #rescribed fact or event$
%n the case of )irdsall vs$ Clar* BM> '$ P$& M>D& the court said:
%f discretion and (udgment are to be e2ercised& either as to time or manner& the body or officer intrusted
-ith the duty must e2ercise it& and cannot delegate it to any other officer or #erson$
5ee also Ring vs$ Concordia Fire %nsurance Co$ B19 Mich$& +,LDG /@'eil vs$ Fire %nsurance Co$ B1!!
"a$ 5t$& M+DG Anderson vs$ Manchester Fire Assurance Co$ B,9 Minn$& 1L+D$
%n the case of 5tate e2 rel$ Adams vs$ )urdge B9, 3is$& >99D& a statute authoriHing the state board of
health Fto ma*e rules and regulations& and to ta*e such measures as may in its (udgment be necessary
for the #rotection of the #eo#le of the state from Asiatic cholera& or other dangerous contagious
diseases&F and declaring that the term Fdangerous and contagious diseases&F and used in the act& Fshall
be construed and understood to mean such diseases as the state board of health shall designate as
contagious and dangerous to the #ublic health&F -as held to Fim#ort and include an absolute delegation
of the legislative #o-er over the entire sub(ect here involved&F and -as therefore declared
unconstitutional$
%n the case of Merchants E2change vs$ Rnott B+1+ Mo$& !1!D& in declaring unconstitutional& on the
ground of delegation of legislative #o-er& a statute authoriHing the )oard of 0ailroad and 3arehouse
Commissioners to establish state ins#ection of grain Fat such #laces or in such territory $$$ as in their
o#inion may be necessary&F the court said:
%t is obvious that the foregoing grant of #o-er is given -ithout statutory landmar*& com#ass& ma#&
guide=#ost or corner=stone in one -hit controlling its e2ercise or #rescribing its channel& or indicative
of any certain intendment of the legislative mind& beyond the mere grant$ %n essence it is the #o-er of
#ure and sim#le des#otism$
Commenting on the statute& the court further said:
True& the act -as #assed by the ;eneral Assembly& a##roved by the Chief E2ecutive and stands
#ublished as authenticated la-& but to all intents and #ur#oses it is only a barren ideality& having such
life as is thereafter breathed into it from an unconstitutional source$ 'o Missourian may *no- -hether
it a##lies to him or his concerns& as a rule of civil conduct& or -ill ever a##ly until in the Uo#inion@ of
the commissioners it Umay be@ considered Unecessary@$
The ;eneral Assembly may not cli# itself of one iota of its la-ma*ing #o-er by a voluntary delegation
of any element of it E by #utting its constitutional #rerogatives& its conscience and -isdom& Finto
commissionF$
%n the case of 5chaeHlein vs$ Cabaniss B1>, Cal$& !!D& the 8uestion before the court -as the validity of
the follo-ing #rovision of the state la- of California:
%f in any factory or -or*sho# any #rocess or -or* is carried on by -hich dust& filaments& or in(urious
gases are generated or #roduced that are liable to be inhaled by the #ersons em#loyed therein& and it
a##ears to the commissioner $ $ $ $ that such inhalation could& to a great e2tent& be #revented by the use
of some mechanical contrivance& he shall direct that such contrivance shall be #rovided& and -ithin a
reasonable time it shall be so #rovided and used$F
Another section of the same act made it a misdemeanor for any #erson to violate any of the #rovisions
of the act including those above 8uoted$ 0es#ecting the validity of the act the court said:
The manifest ob(ection to this la- is& that u#on the commission has been im#osed not the duty to
enforce a la- of the legislature& but the #o-er to ma*e a la- for the individual& and to enforce such
rules of conduct as he may #rescribe$ %t is thus arbitrary& s#ecial legislation& and violative of the
constitution$
The decision in the case of %nterstate Commerce Commission vs$ ;oodrich Transit Co$ B++ :$ 5$& 19D
seems& by im#lication at least& to bear out the theory on -hich -e are deciding this case$ The 8uestion
there involved the validity of an act authoriHing the %nterstate Commerce Commission to #rescribe the
form of accounts& records and memorandums to be *e#t by carriers& and to re8uire such carriers to
ma*e annual re#orts to the commission -ith res#ect to certain information defined in the act$ /ne of
the 8uestions raised by the steamshi# com#any -as that section +9 constituted an invalid delegation of
legislative #o-er to the commission$ The 5u#reme Court held that there -as no delegation of
legislative #o-er& it said:
The Congress may not delegate its #urely legislative #o-ers to a commission& but& having laid do-n
the general rules of action under -hich a commission shall #roceed& it may re8uire of that commission
the a##lication of such rules to #articular situations and the investigation of facts& -ith a vie- to
ma*ing orders in a #articular matter -ithin the rules laid do-n by the Congress$ $ $ $
%n section +9 Bof the Commerce ActD& Congress has authoriHed the commission to re8uire annual
re#orts$ The act itself #rescribes in detail -hat those re#orts shall contain$ $ $ $ %n other -ords& Congress
has laid do-n general rules for the guidance of the Commission& leaving to it merely the carrying out of
details in the e2ercise of the #o-er so conferred$ This& -e thin*& is not a delegation of legislative
authority$
%n another #art of the same decision the court said -ith reference to the form of re#orts called for by the
%nterstate Commerce Commission:
)ut such re#ort is no broader than the annual re#ort of such carriers& as #rescribed by section +9 of the
Act$
5ee also Field vs$ Clar* B1> :$ 5$& !9DG 5tate vs$ ;reat 'orthern 0y$ Co$ B199 Minn$& ,D$
The Attorney=;eneral lay great stress on the case of Ransas City 5o$ 0y$ Co$ vs$ :nited 5tates B+>1 :$
5$& +>D$ That case& ho-ever& so far as it touched the 8uestion of delegation of legislative #o-er& -as
decided on the #rinci#les governing the case of %nterstate Commerce Commission vs$ ;oodrich Transit
Co$& su#ra$ 5ection +9 of the Act referred to in that and in the ;oodrich case sets out in detail the form
-hich the accounts shall ta*e and the matters they shall contain& and even goes into considerable detail
-ith regard to the classification of the carriers@ accounts$ %n that case the court said:
%t amounts& after all& to no more than laying do-n the general rules of action under -hich the
Commission shall #roceed& and leaving it to the Commission to a##ly those rules to #articular
situations and circumstances by the establishment and enforcement of administrative regulations$
%n the case at bar the #rovision com#lained of does not la- Fdo-n the general rules of action under
-hich the commission shall #roceed$F nor does it itself #rescribe in detail -hat those re#orts shall
contain$ "ractically everything is left to the (udgment and discretion of the )oard of "ublic :tility
Commissioners& -hich is unrestrained as to -hen it shall act& -hy it shall act& ho- it shall act& to -hat
e2tent it shall act& or -hat it shall act u#on$
3e believe that the <egislature& by the #rovision in 8uestion& has abdicated its #o-ers and functions in
favor of the )oard of "ublic :tility Commissioners -ith res#ect to the matters therein referred to& and
that such Act is in violation of the Act of Congress of .uly 1& 199+$ 3e believe that the <egislature& by
the #rovision referred to& has not as*ed for the information -hich the 5tate -ants but has authoriHed
and board to obtain the information -hich the board -ants$
The order a##ealed from is set aside and the cause is returned to the )oard of "ublic :tility
Commissioners -ith instructions to dismiss the #roceeding$ 5o ordered$
Arellano& C$.$& Torres and Araullo& ..$& concur$
Carson and Trent& ..$& dissent$
The <a-#hil "ro(ect = Arellano <a- Foundation







E' )A'C


"0/F$ 0A'D/<F 5$ DAV%D& </0E'A/ TAgADA %%%& 0/'A<D <<AMA5& 4$ 4A00P <$
0/K:E& .0$& ./E< 0:%A ):T:PA'& 0/;E0 0$ 0APE<& ;A0P 5$ MA<<A0%& 0/ME<
0E;A<AD/ )A;A0E5& C40%5T/"4E0 F$C$ )/<A5T%;&
"etitioners&

= versus =


;</0%A MACA"A;A<=A00/P/& A5 "0E5%DE'T A'D C/MMA'DE0=%'=C4%EF&
ECEC:T%VE 5EC0ETA0P ED:A0D/ E0M%TA& 4/'$ AVE<%'/ C0:A %%& 5EC0ETA0P /F
'AT%/'A< DEFE'5E& ;E'E0A< ;E'E0/5/ 5E';A& C4%EF /F 5TAFF& A0MED F/0CE5
/F T4E "4%<%""%'E5& D%0ECT/0 ;E'E0A< A0T:0/ </M%)A/& C4%EF& "4%<%""%'E
'AT%/'A< "/<%CE&
0es#ondents$
2=================================================2
'%gEA CAC4/=/<%VA0E5 A'D T0%):'E ":)<%54%'; C/$& %'C$&
"etitioners&


= versus =


4/'/0A)<E 5EC0ETA0P ED:A0D/ E0M%TA A'D 4/'/0A)<E D%0ECT/0 ;E'E0A<
A0T:0/ C$ </M%)A/&
0es#ondents$
2=================================================2
F0A'C%5 ./5E"4 ;$ E5C:DE0/& ./5E"4 A$ 5A'T%A;/& TE/D/0/ A$ CA5%'/& A;A"%T/
A$ AK:%'/& MA0%/ .$ A;:.A& 5AT:0 C$ /CAM"/& M:.%V 5$ 4ATAMA'& .:A' ED;A0D/
A';A0A& TE/F%5T/ D<$ ;:%';/'A %%%& EMMA':E< ./5E< .$ V%<<A':EVA& <%AA <$
MAAA& %MEE 0$ MA0C/5& 0E'AT/ )$ MA;T:)/& .:5T%' MA0C 5)$ C4%"EC/& 0/%</
;/<EA& DA0<E'E A'T/'%'/=C:5T/D%/& </0ETTA A'' "$ 0/5A<E5& ./5E< ;$
V%0AD/0& 0AFAE< V$ MA0%A'/& ;%<)E0T C$ 0EM:<<A& F</0E'C%/ ;$ '/E<& A'A
T4E0E5%A 4/'T%VE0/5=)A0AK:E<& %ME<DA C$ '%C/<A5& MA0V%C M$V$F$ <E/'E'&
'E0% .AV%E0 C/<ME'A0E5& M/VEME'T /F C/'CE0'ED C%T%AE'5 F/0 C%V%<
<%)E0T%E5 0E"0E5E'TED )P AMAD/ ;AT %'C%/';&
"etitioners&

= versus =


ED:A0D/ 0$ E0M%TA& ECEC:T%VE 5EC0ETA0P& AVE<%'/ .$ C0:A& .0$& 5EC0ETA0P& D'D
0/'A<D/ V$ ":'/& 5EC0ETA0P& D%<;& ;E'E0/5/ 5E';A& AF" C4%EF /F 5TAFF&
A0T:0/ </M%)A/& C4%EF "'"&
0es#ondents$
2=================================================2
R%<:5A'; MAP/ :'/& 0E"0E5E'TED )P %T5 C4A%0"E05/' E<ME0 C$ <A)/; A'D
5EC0ETA0P ;E'E0A< ./E< MA;<:'5/D& 'AT%/'A< FEDE0AT%/' /F <A)/0 :'%/'5
1 R%<:5A'; MAP/ :'/ B'AF<:=RM:D& 0E"0E5E'TED )P %T5 'AT%/'A< "0E5%DE'T&
./5E<%T/ V$ :5TA0EA& A'T/'%/ C$ "A5C:A<& 5A<VAD/0 T$ CA00A'AA& EM%<%A "$
DA":<A';& MA0T%' C:5T/D%/& .0$& A'D 0/K:E M$ TA'&
"etitioners&




= versus =




4E0 ECCE<<E'CP& "0E5%DE'T ;</0%A MACA"A;A<=A00/P/& T4E 4/'/0A)<E
ECEC:T%VE 5EC0ETA0P& ED:A0D/ E0M%TA& T4E C4%EF /F 5TAFF& A0MED F/0CE5 /F
T4E "4%<%""%'E5& ;E'E0/5/ 5E';A& A'D T4E "'" D%0ECT/0 ;E'E0A<& A0T:0/
</M%)A/&
0es#ondents$
2=================================================2
A<TE0'AT%VE <A3 ;0/:"5& %'C$ BA<;D&
"etitioner&
= versus =


ECEC:T%VE 5EC0ETA0P ED:A0D/ 0$ E0M%TA& <T$ ;E'$ ;E'E0/5/ 5E';A& A'D
D%0ECT/0 ;E'E0A< A0T:0/ </M%)A/&
0es#ondents$
2=================================================2
./5E A'5E<M/ %$ CAD%A& FE<%C%A'/ M$ )A:T%5TA& 0/M:</ 0$ 0%VE0A& ./5E AM/0 M$
AM/0AD/& A<%C%A A$ 0%5/5=V%DA<& FE<%M/' C$ A)E<%TA %%%& MA':E< "$ <E;A5"%& .$)$
./VP C$ )E0'A)E& )E0'A0D <$ DA;C:TA& 0/;E<%/ V$ ;A0C%A A'D %'TE;0ATED )A0
/F T4E "4%<%""%'E5 B%)"D&
"etitioners&

= versus =


4/'$ ECEC:T%VE 5EC0ETA0P ED:A0D/ E0M%TA& ;E'E0A< ;E'E0/5/ 5E';A& %' 4%5
CA"AC%TP A5 AF" C4%EF /F 5TAFF& A'D D%0ECT/0 ;E'E0A< A0T:0/ </M%)A/& %' 4%5
CA"AC%TP A5 "'" C4%EF&
0es#ondents$
2=================================================2
</0E' )$ <E;A0DA&
"etitioner&


= versus =


;</0%A MACA"A;A<=A00/P/& %' 4E0 CA"AC%TP A5 "0E5%DE'T A'D C/MMA'DE0=
%'=C4%EFG A0T:0/ </M%)A/& %' 4%5 CA"AC%TP A5 D%0ECT/0=;E'E0A< /F T4E
"4%<%""%'E 'AT%/'A< "/<%CE B"'"DG ;E'E0/5/ 5E';A& %' 4%5 CA"AC%TP A5 C4%EF /F
5TAFF /F T4E A0MED F/0CE5 /F T4E "4%<%""%'E5 BAF"DG A'D ED:A0D/ E0M%TA& %'
4%5 CA"AC%TP A5 ECEC:T%VE 5EC0ETA0P&
0es#ondents$

;$0$ 'o$ 1M1>9!

"resent:

"A';A'%)A'& C$.$&
c":'/&
K:%5:M)%';&
P'A0E5=5A'T%A;/&
5A'D/VA<=;:T%E00EA&
CA0"%/&
A:5T0%A=MA0T%'EA&
C/0/'A&
CA0"%/ M/0A<E5&
CA<<E./& 50$&
AAC:'A&
T%';A&
C4%C/='AAA0%/&
;A0C%A& and
VE<A5C/& ..$

"romulgated:

May >& +99!


;$0$ 'o$ 1M199












;$0$ 'o$ 1M1L,



































;$0$ 'o$ 1M1L>






























;$0$ 'o$ 1M199















;$0$ 'o$ 1M1L9






















;$0$ 'o$ 1M1+


2=============================================================================================2



DEC%5%/'


5A'D/VA<=;:T%E00EA& .$:


All #o-ers need some restraintG #ractical ad(ustments rather than rigid formula are necessary$N1O
5u#erior strength 1 the use of force 1 cannot ma*e -rongs into rights$ %n this regard& the courts should
be vigilant in safeguarding the constitutional rights of the citiHens& s#ecifically their liberty$

Chief .ustice Artemio V$ "anganibanhs #hiloso#hy of liberty is thus most relevant$ 4e said: 6%n cases
involving liberty& the scales of (ustice should -eigh heavily against government and in favor of the
#oor& the o##ressed& the marginaliHed& the dis#ossessed and the -ea*$7 <a-s and actions that restrict
fundamental rights come to the courts 6-ith a heavy #resum#tion against their constitutional
validity$7N+O
These seven BMD consolidated #etitions for certiorari and #rohibition allege that in issuing
"residential "roclamation 'o$ 191M B"" 191MD and ;eneral /rder 'o$ , B;$/$ 'o$ ,D& "resident ;loria
Maca#agal=Arroyo committed grave abuse of discretion$ "etitioners contend that res#ondent officials
of the ;overnment& in their #rofessed efforts to defend and #reserve democratic institutions& are
actually tram#ling u#on the very freedom guaranteed and #rotected by the Constitution$ 4ence& such
issuances are void for being unconstitutional$


/nce again& the Court is faced -ith an age=old but #ersistently modern #roblem$ 4o- does the
Constitution of a free #eo#le combine the degree of liberty& -ithout -hich& la- becomes tyranny& -ith
the degree of la-& -ithout -hich& liberty becomes licenseQN>O
/n February +& +99!& as the nation celebrated the +9th Anniversary of the Edsa "eo#le "o-er %&
"resident Arroyo issued "" 191M declaring a state of national emergency& thus:

'/3& T4E0EF/0E& %& ;loria Maca#agal=Arroyo& "resident of the 0e#ublic of the "hili##ines and
Commander=in=Chief of the Armed Forces of the "hili##ines& by virtue of the #o-ers vested u#on me
by 5ection 1L& Article M of the "hili##ine Constitution -hich states that: 6The "resident$ $ $ -henever it
becomes necessary& $ $ $ may call out BtheD armed forces to #revent or su##ress$ $ $rebellion$ $ $&7 and in
my ca#acity as their Commander=in=Chief& do hereby command the Armed Forces of the "hili##ines& to
maintain la- and order throughout the "hili##ines& #revent or su##ress all forms of la-less violence as
-ell as any act of insurrection or rebellion and to enforce obedience to all the la-s and to all decrees&
orders and regulations #romulgated by me #ersonally or u#on my directionG and as #rovided in 5ection
1M& Article 1+ of the Constitution do hereby declare a 5tate of 'ational Emergency$

5he cited the follo-ing facts as bases:

34E0EA5& over these #ast months& elements in the #olitical o##osition have cons#ired -ith
authoritarians of the e2treme <eft re#resented by the 'DF=C""='"A and the e2treme 0ight&
re#resented by military adventurists 1 the historical enemies of the democratic "hili##ine 5tate 1 -ho
are no- in a tactical alliance and engaged in a concerted and systematic cons#iracy& over a broad front&
to bring do-n the duly constituted ;overnment elected in May +99G

34E0EA5& these cons#irators have re#eatedly tried to bring do-n the "residentG

34E0EA5& the claims of these elements have been rec*lessly magnified by certain segments of the
national mediaG

34E0EA5& this series of actions is hurting the "hili##ine 5tate 1 by obstructing governance including
hindering the gro-th of the economy and sabotaging the #eo#lehs confidence in government and their
faith in the future of this countryG

34E0EA5& these actions are adversely affecting the economyG

34E0EA5& these activities give totalitarian forces of both the e2treme <eft and e2treme 0ight the
o#ening to intensify their avo-ed aims to bring do-n the democratic "hili##ine 5tateG

34E0EA5& Article +& 5ection of the our Constitution ma*es the defense and #reservation of the
democratic institutions and the 5tate the #rimary duty of ;overnmentG

34E0EA5& the activities above=described& their conse8uences& ramifications and collateral effects
constitute a clear and #resent danger to the safety and the integrity of the "hili##ine 5tate and of the
Fili#ino #eo#leG


/n the same day& the "resident issued ;$ /$ 'o$ , im#lementing "" 191M& thus:

34E0EA5& over these #ast months& elements in the #olitical o##osition have cons#ired -ith
authoritarians of the e2treme <eft& re#resented by the 'DF=C""='"A and the e2treme 0ight&
re#resented by military adventurists = the historical enemies of the democratic "hili##ine 5tate 1 and
-ho are no- in a tactical alliance and engaged in a concerted and systematic cons#iracy& over a broad
front& to bring do-n the duly=constituted ;overnment elected in May +99G
34E0EA5& these cons#irators have re#eatedly tried to bring do-n our re#ublican governmentG

34E0EA5& the claims of these elements have been rec*lessly magnified by certain segments of the
national mediaG

34E0EA5& these series of actions is hurting the "hili##ine 5tate by obstructing governance& including
hindering the gro-th of the economy and sabotaging the #eo#lehs confidence in the government and
their faith in the future of this countryG

34E0EA5& these actions are adversely affecting the economyG

34E0EA5& these activities give totalitarian forcesG of both the e2treme <eft and e2treme 0ight the
o#ening to intensify their avo-ed aims to bring do-n the democratic "hili##ine 5tateG

34E0EA5& Article +& 5ection of our Constitution ma*es the defense and #reservation of the
democratic institutions and the 5tate the #rimary duty of ;overnmentG

34E0EA5& the activities above=described& their conse8uences& ramifications and collateral effects
constitute a clear and #resent danger to the safety and the integrity of the "hili##ine 5tate and of the
Fili#ino #eo#leG

34E0EA5& "roclamation 191M date February +& +99! has been issued declaring a 5tate of 'ational
EmergencyG

'/3& T4E0EF/0E& % ;</0%A MACA"A;A<=A00/P/& by virtue of the #o-ers vested in me
under the Constitution as "resident of the 0e#ublic of the "hili##ines& and Commander=in=Chief of the
0e#ublic of the "hili##ines& and #ursuant to "roclamation 'o$ 191M dated February +& +99!& do
hereby call u#on the Armed Forces of the "hili##ines BAF"D and the "hili##ine 'ational "olice B"'"D&
to #revent and su##ress acts of terrorism and la-less violence in the countryG

% hereby direct the Chief of 5taff of the AF" and the Chief of the "'"& as -ell as the officers
and men of the AF" and "'"& to immediately carry out the necessary and a##ro#riate actions and
measures to su##ress and #revent acts of terrorism and la-less violence$


/n March >& +99!& e2actly one -ee* after the declaration of a state of national emergency and after all
these #etitions had been filed& the "resident lifted "" 191M$ 5he issued "roclamation 'o$ 19+1 -hich
reads:
34E0EA5& #ursuant to 5ection 1L& Article V%% and 5ection 1M& Article C%% of the Constitution&
"roclamation 'o$ 191M dated February +& +99!& -as issued declaring a state of national emergencyG

34E0EA5& by virtue of ;eneral /rder 'o$, and 'o$! dated February +& +99!& -hich -ere
issued on the basis of "roclamation 'o$ 191M& the Armed Forces of the "hili##ines BAF"D and the
"hili##ine 'ational "olice B"'"D& -ere directed to maintain la- and order throughout the "hili##ines&
#revent and su##ress all form of la-less violence as -ell as any act of rebellion and to underta*e such
action as may be necessaryG

34E0EA5& the AF" and "'" have effectively #revented& su##ressed and 8uelled the acts
la-less violence and rebellionG

'/3& T4E0EF/0E& %& ;</0%A MACA"A;A<=A00/P/& "resident of the 0e#ublic of the
"hili##ines& by virtue of the #o-ers vested in me by la-& hereby declare that the state of national
emergency has ceased to e2ist$


%n their #resentation of the factual bases of "" 191M and ;$/$ 'o$ ,& res#ondents stated that the
#ro2imate cause behind the e2ecutive issuances -as the cons#iracy among some military officers&
leftist insurgents of the 'e- "eo#lehs Army B'"AD& and some members of the #olitical o##osition in a
#lot to unseat or assassinate "resident Arroyo$NO They considered the aim to oust or assassinate the
"resident and ta*e=over the reigns of government as a clear and #resent danger$
During the oral arguments held on March M& +99!& the 5olicitor ;eneral s#ecified the facts leading to
the issuance of "" 191M and ;$/$ 'o$ ,$ 5ignificantly& there -as no refutation from #etitionersh
counsels$
The 5olicitor ;eneral argued that the intent of the Constitution is to give full discretionary #o-ers to
the "resident in determining the necessity of calling out the armed forces$ 4e em#hasiHed that none of
the #etitioners has sho-n that "" 191M -as -ithout factual bases$ 3hile he e2#lained that it is not
res#ondentsh tas* to state the facts behind the 8uestioned "roclamation& ho-ever& they are #resenting
the same& narrated hereunder& for the elucidation of the issues$
/n .anuary 1M& +99!& Ca#tain 'athaniel 0abonHa and First <ieutenants 5onny 5armiento&
<a-rence 5an .uan and "atricio )umidang& members of the Magdalo ;rou# indicted in the /a*-ood
mutiny& esca#ed their detention cell in Fort )onifacio& Taguig City$ %n a #ublic statement& they vo-ed
to remain defiant and to elude arrest at all costs$ They called u#on the #eo#le to 6sho- and #roclaim
our dis#leasure at the sham regime$ <et us demonstrate our disgust& not only by going to the streets in
#rotest& but also by -earing red bands on our left arms$7 N,O

/n February 1M& +99!& the authorities got hold of a document entitled 6/#lan 4ac*le % 7 -hich detailed
#lans for bombings and attac*s during the "hili##ine Military Academy Alumni 4omecoming in
)aguio City$ The #lot -as to assassinate selected targets including some cabinet members and
"resident Arroyo herself$N!O :#on the advice of her security& "resident Arroyo decided not to attend
the Alumni 4omecoming$ The ne2t day& at the height of the celebration& a bomb -as found and
detonated at the "MA #arade ground$
/n February +1& +99!& <t$ 5an .uan -as reca#tured in a communist safehouse in )atangas #rovince$
Found in his #ossession -ere t-o B+D flash dis*s containing minutes of the meetings bet-een members
of the Magdalo ;rou# and the 'ational "eo#lehs Army B'"AD& a ta#e recorder& audio cassette
cartridges& dis*ettes& and co#ies of subversive documents$NMO "rior to his arrest& <t$ 5an .uan
announced through DA04 that the 6Magdalohs D=Day -ould be on February +& +99!& the +9th
Anniversary of Edsa %$7
/n February +>& +99!& "'" Chief Arturo <omibao interce#ted information that members of the "'"=
5#ecial Action Force -ere #lanning to defect$ Thus& he immediately ordered 5AF Commanding
;eneral Marcelino Franco& .r$ to 6disavo-7 any defection$ The latter #rom#tly obeyed and issued a
#ublic statement: 6All 5AF units are under the effective control of res#onsible and trust-orthy officers
-ith #roven integrity and un8uestionable loyalty$7
/n the same day& at the house of former Congressman "e#ing Co(uangco& "resident Cory A8uinohs
brother& businessmen and mid=level government officials #lotted moves to bring do-n the Arroyo
administration$ 'elly 5indayen of T%ME MagaHine re#orted that "astor 5aycon& longtime Arroyo
critic& called a :$5$ government official about his grou#hs #lans if "resident Arroyo is ousted$ 5aycon
also #honed a man code=named Delta$ 5aycon identified him as )Z;en$ Danilo <im& Commander of the
Armyhs elite 5cout 0anger$ <im said 6it -as all systems go for the #lanned movement against
Arroyo$7NLO
)Z;en$ Danilo <im and )rigade Commander Col$ Ariel Kuerubin confided to ;en$ ;eneroso 5enga&
Chief of 5taff of the Armed Forces of the "hili##ines BAF"D& that a huge number of soldiers -ould (oin
the rallies to #rovide a critical mass and armed com#onent to the Anti=Arroyo #rotests to be held on
February +& +99,$ According to these t-o B+D officers& there -as no -ay they could #ossibly sto# the
soldiers because they too& -ere brea*ing the chain of command to (oin the forces foist to unseat the
"resident$ 4o-ever& ;en$ 5enga has remained faithful to his Commander=in=Chief and to the chain of
command$ 4e immediately too* custody of )Z;en$ <im and directed Col$ Kuerubin to return to the
"hili##ine Marines 4ead8uarters in Fort )onifacio$
Earlier& the C""='"A called for intensification of #olitical and revolutionary -or* -ithin the military
and the #olice establishments in order to forge alliances -ith its members and *ey officials$ '"A
s#o*esman ;regorio 6Ra 0oger7 0osal declared: 6The Communist "arty and revolutionary movement
and the entire #eo#le loo* for-ard to the #ossibility in the coming year of accom#lishing its immediate
tas* of bringing do-n the Arroyo regimeG of rendering it to -ea*en and unable to rule that it -ill not
ta*e much longer to end it$7N9O
/n the other hand& Cesar 0enerio& s#o*esman for the 'ational Democratic Front B'DFD at 'orth
Central Mindanao& #ublicly announced: 6Anti=Arroyo grou#s -ithin the military and #olice are
gro-ing ra#idly& hastened by the economic difficulties suffered by the families of AF" officers and
enlisted #ersonnel -ho underta*e counter=insurgency o#erations in the field$7 4e claimed that -ith the
forces of the national democratic movement& the anti=Arroyo conservative #olitical #arties& coalitions&
#lus the grou#s that have been reinforcing since .une +99,& it is #robable that the "residenths ouster is
nearing its concluding stage in the first half of +99!$
0es#ondents further claimed that the bombing of telecommunication to-ers and cell sites in )ulacan
and )ataan -as also considered as additional factual basis for the issuance of "" 191M and ;$/$ 'o$ ,$
5o is the raid of an army out#ost in )enguet resulting in the death of three B>D soldiers$ And also the
directive of the Communist "arty of the "hili##ines ordering its front organiHations to (oin ,&999 Metro
Manila radicals and +,&999 more from the #rovinces in mass #rotests$N19O
)y midnight of February +>& +99!& the "resident convened her security advisers and several cabinet
members to assess the gravity of the fermenting #eace and order situation$ 5he directed both the AF"
and the "'" to account for all their men and ensure that the chain of command remains solid and
undivided$ To #rotect the young students from any #ossible trouble that might brea* loose on the
streets& the "resident sus#ended classes in all levels in the entire 'ational Ca#ital 0egion$
For their #art& #etitioners cited the events that follo-ed after the issuance of "" 191M and ;$/$ 'o$ ,$
%mmediately& the /ffice of the "resident announced the cancellation of all #rograms and activities
related to the +9th anniversary celebration of Edsa "eo#le "o-er %G and revo*ed the #ermits to hold
rallies issued earlier by the local governments$ .ustice 5ecretary 0aul ;onHales stated that #olitical
rallies& -hich to the "residenths mind -ere organiHed for #ur#oses of destabiliHation& are cancelled$
"residential Chief of 5taff Michael Defensor announced that 6-arrantless arrests and ta*e=over of
facilities& including media& can already be im#lemented$7N11O
:ndeterred by the announcements that rallies and #ublic assemblies -ould not be allo-ed& grou#s of
#rotesters Bmembers of Rilusang Mayo :no NRM:O and 'ational Federation of <abor :nions=
Rilusang Mayo :no N'AF<:=RM:OD& marched from various #arts of Metro Manila -ith the intention
of converging at the ED5A shrine$ Those -ho -ere already near the ED5A site -ere violently
dis#ersed by huge clusters of anti=riot #olice$ The -ell=trained #olicemen used truncheons& big fiber
glass shields& -ater cannons& and tear gas to sto# and brea* u# the marching grou#s& and scatter the
massed #artici#ants$ The same #olice action -as used against the #rotesters marching for-ard to
Cubao& KueHon City and to the corner of 5antolan 5treet and ED5A$ That same evening& hundreds of
riot #olicemen bro*e u# an ED5A celebration rally held along Ayala Avenue and "aseo de 0o2as 5treet
in Ma*ati City$N1+O
According to #etitioner Rilusang Mayo :no& the #olice cited "" 191M as the ground for the dis#ersal of
their assemblies$
During the dis#ersal of the rallyists along ED5A& #olice arrested B-ithout -arrantD #etitioner 0andolf
5$ David& a #rofessor at the :niversity of the "hili##ines and ne-s#a#er columnist$ Also arrested -as
his com#anion& 0onald <lamas& #resident of #arty=list A*bayan$
At around 1+:+9 in the early morning of February +,& +99!& o#eratives of the Criminal %nvestigation
and Detection ;rou# BC%D;D of the "'"& on the basis of "" 191M and ;$/$ 'o$ ,& raided the Daily
Tribune offices in Manila$ The raiding team confiscated ne-s stories by re#orters& documents&
#ictures& and moc*=u#s of the 5aturday issue$ "olicemen from Cam# Crame in KueHon City -ere
stationed inside the editorial and business offices of the ne-s#a#erG -hile #olicemen from the Manila
"olice District -ere stationed outside the building$N1>O
A fe- minutes after the search and seiHure at the Daily Tribune offices& the #olice surrounded the
#remises of another #ro=o##osition #a#er& Malaya& and its sister #ublication& the tabloid Abante$
The raid& according to "residential Chief of 5taff Michael Defensor& is 6meant to sho- a istrong
#resence&h to tell media outlets not to connive or do anything that -ould hel# the rebels in bringing
do-n this government$7 The "'" -arned that it -ould ta*e over any media organiHation that -ould
not follo- 6standards set by the government during the state of national emergency$7 Director ;eneral
<omibao stated that 6if they do not follo- the standards 1 and the standards are = if they -ould
contribute to instability in the government& or if they do not subscribe to -hat is in ;eneral /rder 'o$ ,
and "roc$ 'o$ 191M 1 -e -ill recommend a ita*eover$h7 'ational Telecommunicationsh Commissioner
0onald 5olis urged television and radio net-or*s to 6coo#erate7 -ith the government for the duration
of the state of national emergency$ 4e as*ed for 6balanced re#orting7 from broadcasters -hen
covering the events surrounding the cou# attem#t foiled by the government$ 4e -arned that his
agency -ill not hesitate to recommend the closure of any broadcast outfit that violates rules set out for
media coverage -hen the national security is threatened$N1O
Also& on February +,& +99!& the #olice arrested Congressman Cris#in )eltran& re#resenting the
Ana*#a-is "arty and Chairman of Rilusang Mayo :no BRM:D& -hile leaving his farmhouse in
)ulacan$ The #olice sho-ed a -arrant for his arrest dated 19L,$ )eltranhs la-yer e2#lained that the
-arrant& -hich stemmed from a case of inciting to rebellion filed during the Marcos regime& had long
been 8uashed$ )eltran& ho-ever& is not a #arty in any of these #etitions$
3hen members of #etitioner RM: -ent to Cam# Crame to visit )eltran& they -ere told they could not
be admitted because of "" 191M and ;$/$ 'o$ ,$ T-o members -ere arrested and detained& -hile the
rest -ere dis#ersed by the #olice$
)ayan Muna 0e#resentative 5atur /cam#o eluded arrest -hen the #olice -ent after him during a
#ublic forum at the 5ulo 4otel in KueHon City$ )ut his t-o drivers& identified as 0oel and Art& -ere
ta*en into custody$
0etired Ma(or ;eneral 0amon Monta?o& former head of the "hili##ine Constabulary& -as arrested
-hile -ith his -ife and golfmates at the /rchard ;olf and Country Club in Dasmari?as& Cavite$
Attem#ts -ere made to arrest Ana*#a-is 0e#resentative 5atur /cam#o& 0e#resentative 0afael
Mariano& )ayan Muna 0e#resentative Teodoro Casi?o and ;abriela 0e#resentative <iHa MaHa$ )ayan
Muna 0e#resentative .osel Virador -as arrested at the "A< Tic*et /ffice in Davao City$ <ater& he -as
turned over to the custody of the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives -here the 6)atasan ,7 decided to stay
indefinitely$
<et it be stressed at this #oint that the alleged violations of the rights of 0e#resentatives )eltran& 5atur
/cam#o& et al$& are not being raised in these #etitions$
/n March >& +99!& "resident Arroyo issued "" 19+1 declaring that the state of national emergency has
ceased to e2ist$
%n the interim& these seven BMD #etitions challenging the constitutionality of "" 191M and ;$/$ 'o$ ,
-ere filed -ith this Court against the above=named res#ondents$ Three B>D of these #etitions im#leaded
"resident Arroyo as res#ondent$
%n ;$0$ 'o$ 1M1>9!& #etitioners 0andolf 5$ David& et al$ assailed "" 191M on the grounds that B1D
it encroaches on the emergency #o-ers of CongressG B+D it is a subterfuge to avoid the constitutional
re8uirements for the im#osition of martial la-G and B>D it violates the constitutional guarantees of
freedom of the #ress& of s#eech and of assembly$
%n ;$0$ 'o$ 1M199& #etitioners 'ineH Cacho=/livares and Tribune "ublishing Co$& %nc$
challenged the C%D;hs act of raiding the Daily Tribune offices as a clear case of 6censorshi#7 or 6#rior
restraint$7 They also claimed that the term 6emergency7 refers only to tsunami& ty#hoon& hurricane
and similar occurrences& hence& there is 6absolutely no emergency7 that -arrants the issuance of ""
191M$
%n ;$0$ 'o$ 1M1L,& #etitioners herein are 0e#resentative Francis .ose#h ;$ Escudero& and t-enty
one B+1D other members of the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives& including 0e#resentatives 5atur /cam#o&
0afael Mariano& Teodoro Casi?o& <iHa MaHa& and .osel Virador$ They asserted that "" 191M and ;$/$
'o$ , constitute 6usur#ation of legislative #o-ers7G 6violation of freedom of e2#ression7 and 6a
declaration of martial la-$7 They alleged that "resident Arroyo 6gravely abused her discretion in
calling out the armed forces -ithout clear and verifiable factual basis of the #ossibility of la-less
violence and a sho-ing that there is necessity to do so$7
%n ;$0$ 'o$ 1M1L>& #etitioners RM:& 'AF<:=RM:& and their members averred that "" 191M and
;$/$ 'o$ , are unconstitutional because B1D they arrogate unto "resident Arroyo the #o-er to enact
la-s and decreesG B+D their issuance -as -ithout factual basisG and B>D they violate freedom of
e2#ression and the right of the #eo#le to #eaceably assemble to redress their grievances$
%n ;$0$ 'o$ 1M199& #etitioner Alternative <a- ;rou#s& %nc$ BA<;%D alleged that "" 191M and ;$/$
'o$ , are unconstitutional because they violate BaD 5ection N1,O of Article %%& BbD 5ections 1&N1!O +&
N1MO and N1LO of Article %%%& BcD 5ection +>N19O of Article V%& and BdD 5ection 1MN+9O of Article C%% of
the Constitution$
%n ;$0$ 'o$ 1M1L9& #etitioners .ose Anselmo %$ CadiH et al$& alleged that "" 191M is an 6arbitrary and
unla-ful e2ercise by the "resident of her Martial <a- #o-ers$7 And assuming that "" 191M is not
really a declaration of Martial <a-& #etitioners argued that 6it amounts to an e2ercise by the "resident
of emergency #o-ers -ithout congressional a##roval$7 %n addition& #etitioners asserted that "" 191M
6goes beyond the nature and function of a #roclamation as defined under the 0evised Administrative
Code$7
And lastly& in ;$0$ 'o$ 1M1+& #etitioner <oren )$ <egarda maintained that "" 191M and ;$/$ 'o$ ,
are 6unconstitutional for being violative of the freedom of e2#ression& including its cognate rights such
as freedom of the #ress and the right to access to information on matters of #ublic concern& all
guaranteed under Article %%%& 5ection of the 19LM Constitution$7 %n this regard& she stated that these
issuances #revented her from fully #rosecuting her election #rotest #ending before the "residential
Electoral Tribunal$
%n res#ondentsh Consolidated Comment& the 5olicitor ;eneral countered that: first& the #etitions
should be dismissed for being mootG second& #etitioners in ;$0$ 'os$ 1M199 BA<;%D& 1M1+
B<egardaD& 1M1L> BRM: et al$D& 1M1L, BEscudero et al$D and 1M1L9 BCadiH et al$D have no legal
standingG third& it is not necessary for #etitioners to im#lead "resident Arroyo as res#ondentG fourth&
"" 191M has constitutional and legal basisG and fifth& "" 191M does not violate the #eo#lehs right to free
e2#ression and redress of grievances$
/n March M& +99!& the Court conducted oral arguments and heard the #arties on the above
interloc*ing issues -hich may be summariHed as follo-s:
A$ "0/CED:0A<:
1D 3hether the issuance of "" 19+1 renders the #etitions moot and academic$
+D 3hether #etitioners in 1M1L, BEscudero et al$D& ;$0$ 'os$ 1M199 BA<;%D& 1M1L> BRM: et al$D&
1M1L9 BCadiH et al$D& and 1M1+ B<egardaD have legal standing$
)$ 5:)5TA'T%VE:
1D 3hether the 5u#reme Court can revie- the factual bases of "" 191M$
+D 3hether "" 191M and ;$/$ 'o$ , are unconstitutional$
a$ Facial Challenge
b$ Constitutional )asis
c$ As A##lied Challenge

A$ "0/CED:0A<

First& -e must resolve the #rocedural roadbloc*s$
%= Moot and Academic "rinci#le
/ne of the greatest contributions of the American system to this country is the conce#t of (udicial
revie- enunciated in Marbury v$ Madison$N+1O This conce#t rests on the e2traordinary sim#le
foundation ==
The Constitution is the su#reme la-$ %t -as ordained by the #eo#le& the ultimate source of all
#olitical authority$ %t confers limited #o-ers on the national government$ 2 2 2 %f the government
consciously or unconsciously overste#s these limitations there must be some authority com#etent to
hold it in control& to th-art its unconstitutional attem#t& and thus to vindicate and #reserve inviolate the
-ill of the #eo#le as e2#ressed in the Constitution$ This #o-er the courts e2ercise$ This is the
beginning and the end of the theory of (udicial revie-$N++O

)ut the #o-er of (udicial revie- does not re#ose u#on the courts a 6self=starting ca#acity$7N+>O
Courts may e2ercise such #o-er only -hen the follo-ing re8uisites are #resent: first& there must be an
actual case or controversyG second& #etitioners have to raise a 8uestion of constitutionalityG third& the
constitutional 8uestion must be raised at the earliest o##ortunityG and fourth& the decision of the
constitutional 8uestion must be necessary to the determination of the case itself$N+O
0es#ondents maintain that the first and second re8uisites are absent& hence& -e shall limit our
discussion thereon$
An actual case or controversy involves a conflict of legal right& an o##osite legal claims susce#tible of
(udicial resolution$ %t is 6definite and concrete& touching the legal relations of #arties having adverse
legal interestG7 a real and substantial controversy admitting of s#ecific relief$N+,O The 5olicitor
;eneral refutes the e2istence of such actual case or controversy& contending that the #resent #etitions
-ere rendered 6moot and academic7 by "resident Arroyohs issuance of "" 19+1$
5uch contention lac*s merit$
A moot and academic case is one that ceases to #resent a (usticiable controversy by virtue of
su#ervening events&N+!O so that a declaration thereon -ould be of no #ractical use or value$N+MO
;enerally& courts decline (urisdiction over such caseN+LO or dismiss it on ground of mootness$N+9O
The Court holds that "resident Arroyohs issuance of "" 19+1 did not render the #resent #etitions moot
and academic$ During the eight BLD days that "" 191M -as o#erative& the #olice officers& according to
#etitioners& committed illegal acts in im#lementing it$ Are "" 191M and ;$/$ 'o$ , constitutional or
validQ Do they (ustify these alleged illegal actsQ These are the vital issues that must be resolved in the
#resent #etitions$ %t must be stressed that 6an unconstitutional act is not a la-& it confers no rights& it
im#oses no duties& it affords no #rotectionG it is in legal contem#lation& ino#erative$7N>9O
The 6moot and academic7 #rinci#le is not a magical formula that can automatically dissuade the courts
in resolving a case$ Courts -ill decide cases& other-ise moot and academic& if: first& there is a grave
violation of the ConstitutionGN>1O second& the e2ce#tional character of the situation and the #aramount
#ublic interest is involvedGN>+O third& -hen constitutional issue raised re8uires formulation of
controlling #rinci#les to guide the bench& the bar& and the #ublicGN>>O and fourth& the case is ca#able of
re#etition yet evading revie-$N>O
All the foregoing e2ce#tions are #resent here and (ustify this Courths assum#tion of (urisdiction over
the instant #etitions$ "etitioners alleged that the issuance of "" 191M and ;$/$ 'o$ , violates the
Constitution$ There is no 8uestion that the issues being raised affect the #ublichs interest& involving as
they do the #eo#lehs basic rights to freedom of e2#ression& of assembly and of the #ress$ Moreover&
the Court has the duty to formulate guiding and controlling constitutional #rece#ts& doctrines or rules$
%t has the symbolic function of educating the bench and the bar& and in the #resent #etitions& the
military and the #olice& on the e2tent of the #rotection given by constitutional guarantees$N>,O And
lastly& res#ondentsh contested actions are ca#able of re#etition$ Certainly& the #etitions are sub(ect to
(udicial revie-$
%n their attem#t to #rove the alleged mootness of this case& res#ondents cited Chief .ustice Artemio V$
"anganibanhs 5e#arate /#inion in 5anla*as v$ E2ecutive 5ecretary$N>!O 4o-ever& they failed to ta*e
into account the Chief .usticehs very statement that an other-ise 6moot7 case may still be decided
6#rovided the #arty raising it in a #ro#er case has been andZor continues to be #re(udiced or damaged as
a direct result of its issuance$7 The #resent case falls right -ithin this e2ce#tion to the mootness rule
#ointed out by the Chief .ustice$
%%= <egal 5tanding
%n vie- of the number of #etitioners suing in various #ersonalities& the Court deems it im#erative to
have a more than #assing discussion on legal standing or locus standi$

<ocus standi is defined as 6a right of a##earance in a court of (ustice on a given 8uestion$7N>MO
%n #rivate suits& standing is governed by the 6real=#arties=in interest7 rule as contained in 5ection +&
0ule > of the 199M 0ules of Civil "rocedure& as amended$ %t #rovides that 6every action must be
#rosecuted or defended in the name of the real #arty in interest$7 Accordingly& the 6real=#arty=in
interest7 is 6the #arty -ho stands to be benefited or in(ured by the (udgment in the suit or the #arty
entitled to the avails of the suit$7N>LO 5uccinctly #ut& the #laintiffhs standing is based on his o-n right to
the relief sought$


The difficulty of determining locus standi arises in #ublic suits$ 4ere& the #laintiff -ho
asserts a 6#ublic right7 in assailing an allegedly illegal official action& does so as a re#resentative of the
general #ublic$ 4e may be a #erson -ho is affected no differently from any other #erson$ 4e could be
suing as a 6stranger&7 or in the category of a 6citiHen&7 or ita2#ayer$7 %n either case& he has to
ade8uately sho- that he is entitled to see* (udicial #rotection$ %n other -ords& he has to ma*e out a
sufficient interest in the vindication of the #ublic order and the securing of relief as a 6citiHen7 or
6ta2#ayer$
Case la- in most (urisdictions no- allo-s both 6citiHen7 and 6ta2#ayer7 standing in #ublic
actions$ The distinction -as first laid do-n in )eaucham# v$ 5il*&N>9O -here it -as held that the
#laintiff in a ta2#ayerhs suit is in a different category from the #laintiff in a citiHenhs suit$ %n the former&
the #laintiff is affected by the e2#enditure of #ublic funds& -hile in the latter& he is but the mere
instrument of the #ublic concern$ As held by the 'e- Por* 5u#reme Court in "eo#le e2 rel Case v$
Collins:N9O 6%n matter of mere #ublic right& ho-everjthe #eo#le are the real #artiesj%t is at least
the right& if not the duty& of every citiHen to interfere and see that a #ublic offence be #ro#erly #ursued
and #unished& and that a #ublic grievance be remedied$7 3ith res#ect to ta2#ayerhs suits& Terr v$
.ordanN1O held that 6the right of a citiHen and a ta2#ayer to maintain an action in courts to restrain the
unla-ful use of #ublic funds to his in(ury cannot be denied$7
4o-ever& to #revent (ust about any #erson from see*ing (udicial interference in any official #olicy
or act -ith -hich he disagreed -ith& and thus hinders the activities of governmental agencies engaged
in #ublic service& the :nited 5tate 5u#reme Court laid do-n the more stringent 6direct in(ury7 test in
E2 "arte <evitt&N+O later reaffirmed in Tileston v$ :llman$N>O The same Court ruled that for a #rivate
individual to invo*e the (udicial #o-er to determine the validity of an e2ecutive or legislative action& he
must sho- that he has sustained a direct in(ury as a result of that action& and it is not sufficient that he
has a general interest common to all members of the #ublic$
This Court ado#ted the 6direct in(ury7 test in our (urisdiction$ %n "eo#le v$ Vera&NO it held that the
#erson -ho im#ugns the validity of a statute must have 6a #ersonal and substantial interest in the case
such that he has sustained& or -ill sustain direct in(ury as a result$7 The Vera doctrine -as u#held in a
litany of cases& such as& Custodio v$ "resident of the 5enate&N,O Manila 0ace 4orse Trainersh
Association v$ De la Fuente&N!O "ascual v$ 5ecretary of "ublic 3or*sNMO and Anti=Chinese <eague of
the "hili##ines v$ Feli2$NLO
4o-ever& being a mere #rocedural technicality& the re8uirement of locus standi may be -aived by the
Court in the e2ercise of its discretion$ This -as done in the 199 Emergency "o-ers Cases& Araneta v$
Dinglasan&N9O -here the 6transcendental im#ortance7 of the cases #rom#ted the Court to act liberally$
5uch liberality -as neither a rarity nor accidental$ %n A8uino v$ Comelec&N,9O this Court resolved to
#ass u#on the issues raised due to the 6far=reaching im#lications7 of the #etition not-ithstanding its
categorical statement that #etitioner therein had no #ersonality to file the suit$ %ndeed& there is a chain
of cases -here this liberal #olicy has been observed& allo-ing ordinary citiHens& members of Congress&
and civic organiHations to #rosecute actions involving the constitutionality or validity of la-s&
regulations and rulings$N,1O
Thus& the Court has ado#ted a rule that even -here the #etitioners have failed to sho- direct
in(ury& they have been allo-ed to sue under the #rinci#le of 6transcendental im#ortance$7 "ertinent are
the follo-ing cases:
B1D ChaveH v$ "ublic Estates Authority&N,+O -here the Court ruled that the enforcement of the
constitutional right to information and the e8uitable diffusion of natural resources are matters of
transcendental im#ortance -hich clothe the #etitioner -ith locus standiG

B+D )agong Alyansang Ma*abayan v$ Aamora&N,>O -herein the Court held that 6given the
transcendental im#ortance of the issues involved& the Court may rela2 the standing re8uirements and
allo- the suit to #ros#er des#ite the lac* of direct in(ury to the #arties see*ing (udicial revie-7 of the
Visiting Forces AgreementG

B>D <im v$ E2ecutive 5ecretary&N,O -hile the Court noted that the #etitioners may not file suit in their
ca#acity as ta2#ayers absent a sho-ing that 6)ali*atan 9+=917 involves the e2ercise of Congressh
ta2ing or s#ending #o-ers& it reiterated its ruling in )agong Alyansang Ma*abayan v$ Aamora&
N,,O that in cases of transcendental im#ortance& the cases must be settled #rom#tly and definitely and
standing re8uirements may be rela2ed$

)y -ay of summary& the follo-ing rules may be culled from the cases decided by this Court$
Ta2#ayers& voters& concerned citiHens& and legislators may be accorded standing to sue& #rovided that
the follo-ing re8uirements are met:
B1D the cases involve constitutional issuesG
B+D for ta2#ayers& there must be a claim of illegal disbursement of #ublic funds or that the
ta2 measure is unconstitutionalG
B>D for voters& there must be a sho-ing of obvious interest in the validity of the election la-
in 8uestionG
BD for concerned citiHens& there must be a sho-ing that the issues raised are of
transcendental im#ortance -hich must be settled earlyG and
B,D for legislators& there must be a claim that the official action com#lained of infringes
u#on their #rerogatives as legislators$
5ignificantly& recent decisions sho- a certain toughening in the Courths attitude to-ard legal standing$
%n Rilosbayan& %nc$ v$ Morato&N,!O the Court ruled that the status of Rilosbayan as a #eo#lehs
organiHation does not give it the re8uisite #ersonality to 8uestion the validity of the on=line lottery
contract& more so -here it does not raise any issue of constitutionality$ Moreover& it cannot sue as a
ta2#ayer absent any allegation that #ublic funds are being misused$ 'or can it sue as a concerned
citiHen as it does not allege any s#ecific in(ury it has suffered$
%n Telecommunications and )roadcast Attorneys of the "hili##ines& %nc$ v$ Comelec&N,MO the
Court reiterated the 6direct in(ury7 test -ith res#ect to concerned citiHensh cases involving
constitutional issues$ %t held that 6there must be a sho-ing that the citiHen #ersonally suffered some
actual or threatened in(ury arising from the alleged illegal official act$7
%n <acson v$ "ereH&N,LO the Court ruled that one of the #etitioners& <aban ng Demo*rati*ong "ili#ino
B<D"D& is not a real #arty=in=interest as it had not demonstrated any in(ury to itself or to its leaders&
members or su##orters$
%n 5anla*as v$ E2ecutive 5ecretary&N,9O the Court ruled that only the #etitioners -ho are members of
Congress have standing to sue& as they claim that the "residenths declaration of a state of rebellion is a
usur#ation of the emergency #o-ers of Congress& thus im#airing their legislative #o-ers$ As to
#etitioners 5anla*as& "artido Manggaga-a& and 5ocial .ustice 5ociety& the Court declared them to be
devoid of standing& e8uating them -ith the <D" in <acson$
'o-& the a##lication of the above #rinci#les to the #resent #etitions$
The locus standi of #etitioners in ;$0$ 'o$ 1M1>9!& #articularly David and <lamas& is beyond doubt$
The same holds true -ith #etitioners in ;$0$ 'o$ 1M199& Cacho=/livares and Tribune "ublishing Co$
%nc$ They alleged 6direct in(ury7 resulting from 6illegal arrest7 and 6unla-ful search7 committed by
#olice o#eratives #ursuant to "" 191M$ 0ightly so& the 5olicitor ;eneral does not 8uestion their legal
standing$
%n ;$0$ 'o$ 1M1L,& the o##osition Congressmen alleged there -as usur#ation of legislative
#o-ers$ They also raised the issue of -hether or not the concurrence of Congress is necessary
-henever the alarming #o-ers incident to Martial <a- are used$ Moreover& it is in the interest of
(ustice that those affected by "" 191M can be re#resented by their Congressmen in bringing to the
attention of the Court the alleged violations of their basic rights$
%n ;$0$ 'o$ 1M199& BA<;%D& this Court a##lied the liberality rule in "hilconsa v$ Enri8ueH&N!9O
Ra#atiran 'g Mga 'agliling*od sa "amahalaan ng "ili#inas& %nc$ v$ Tan&N!1O Association of 5mall
<ando-ners in the "hili##ines& %nc$ v$ 5ecretary of Agrarian 0eform&N!+O )asco v$ "hili##ine
Amusement and ;aming Cor#oration&N!>O and Ta?ada v$ Tuvera&N!O that -hen the issue concerns a
#ublic right& it is sufficient that the #etitioner is a citiHen and has an interest in the e2ecution of the
la-s$
%n ;$0$ 'o$ 1M1L>& RM:hs assertion that "" 191M and ;$/$ 'o$ , violated its right to #eaceful
assembly may be deemed sufficient to give it legal standing$ /rganiHations may be granted standing to
assert the rights of their members$N!,O 3e ta*e (udicial notice of the announcement by the /ffice of
the "resident banning all rallies and canceling all #ermits for #ublic assemblies follo-ing the issuance
of "" 191M and ;$/$ 'o$ ,$
%n ;$0$ 'o$ 1M1L9& #etitioners& CadiH et al$& -ho are national officers of the %ntegrated )ar of the
"hili##ines B%)"D have no legal standing& having failed to allege any direct or #otential in(ury -hich the
%)" as an institution or its members may suffer as a conse8uence of the issuance of "" 'o$ 191M and
;$/$ 'o$ ,$ %n %ntegrated )ar of the "hili##ines v$ Aamora&N!!O the Court held that the mere
invocation by the %)" of its duty to #reserve the rule of la- and nothing more& -hile undoubtedly true&
is not sufficient to clothe it -ith standing in this case$ This is too general an interest -hich is shared
by other grou#s and the -hole citiHenry$ 4o-ever& in vie- of the transcendental im#ortance of the
issue& this Court declares that #etitioner have locus standi$
%n ;$0$ 'o$ 1M1+& <oren <egarda has no #ersonality as a ta2#ayer to file the instant #etition as there
are no allegations of illegal disbursement of #ublic funds$ The fact that she is a former 5enator is of no
conse8uence$ 5he can no longer sue as a legislator on the allegation that her #rerogatives as a
la-ma*er have been im#aired by "" 191M and ;$/$ 'o$ ,$ 4er claim that she is a media #ersonality
-ill not li*e-ise aid her because there -as no sho-ing that the enforcement of these issuances
#revented her from #ursuing her occu#ation$ 4er submission that she has #ending electoral #rotest
before the "residential Electoral Tribunal is li*e-ise of no relevance$ 5he has not sufficiently sho-n
that "" 191M -ill affect the #roceedings or result of her case$ )ut considering once more the
transcendental im#ortance of the issue involved& this Court may rela2 the standing rules$
%t must al-ays be borne in mind that the 8uestion of locus standi is but corollary to the bigger 8uestion
of #ro#er e2ercise of (udicial #o-er$ This is the underlying legal tenet of the 6liberality doctrine7 on
legal standing$ %t cannot be doubted that the validity of "" 'o$ 191M and ;$/$ 'o$ , is a (udicial
8uestion -hich is of #aramount im#ortance to the Fili#ino #eo#le$ To #ara#hrase .ustice <aurel& the
-hole of "hili##ine society no- -aits -ith bated breath the ruling of this Court on this very critical
matter$ The #etitions thus call for the a##lication of the 6transcendental im#ortance7 doctrine& a
rela2ation of the standing re8uirements for the #etitioners in the 6"" 191M cases$7

This Court holds that all the #etitioners herein have locus standi$

%ncidentally& it is not #ro#er to im#lead "resident Arroyo as res#ondent$ 5ettled is the doctrine that the
"resident& during his tenure of office or actual incumbency&N!MO may not be sued in any civil or criminal
case& and there is no need to #rovide for it in the Constitution or la-$ %t -ill degrade the dignity of the
high office of the "resident& the 4ead of 5tate& if he can be dragged into court litigations -hile serving
as such$ Furthermore& it is im#ortant that he be freed from any form of harassment& hindrance or
distraction to enable him to fully attend to the #erformance of his official duties and functions$ :nli*e
the legislative and (udicial branch& only one constitutes the e2ecutive branch and anything -hich
im#airs his usefulness in the discharge of the many great and im#ortant duties im#osed u#on him by
the Constitution necessarily im#airs the o#eration of the ;overnment$ 4o-ever& this does not mean
that the "resident is not accountable to anyone$ <i*e any other official& he remains accountable to the
#eo#leN!LO but he may be removed from office only in the mode #rovided by la- and that is by
im#eachment$N!9O

)$ 5:)5TA'T%VE
%$ 0evie- of Factual )ases

"etitioners maintain that "" 191M has no factual basis$ 4ence& it -as not 6necessary7 for "resident
Arroyo to issue such "roclamation$
The issue of -hether the Court may revie- the factual bases of the "residenths e2ercise of his
Commander=in=Chief #o-er has reached its distilled #oint = from the indulgent days of )arcelon v$
)a*erNM9O and Montenegro v$ CastanedaNM1O to the volatile era of <ansang v$
;arcia&NM+O A8uino& .r$ v$ Enrile&NM>O and ;arcia="adilla v$ Enrile$NMO The tug=of=-ar al-ays cuts
across the line defining 6#olitical 8uestions&7 #articularly those 8uestions 6in regard to -hich full
discretionary authority has been delegated to the legislative or e2ecutive branch of the
government$7NM,O )arcelon and Montenegro -ere in unison in declaring that the authority to decide
-hether an e2igency has arisen belongs to the "resident and his decision is final and conclusive on the
courts$ <ansang too* the o##osite vie-$ There& the members of the Court -ere unanimous in the
conviction that the Court has the authority to in8uire into the e2istence of factual bases in order to
determine their constitutional sufficiency$ From the #rinci#le of se#aration of #o-ers& it shifted the
focus to the system of chec*s and balances& 6under -hich the "resident is su#reme& 2 2 2 only if and
-hen he acts -ithin the s#here allotted to him by the )asic <a-& and the authority to determine
-hether or not he has so acted is vested in the .udicial De#artment& -hich in this res#ect& is& in
turn& constitutionally su#reme$7NM!O %n 19M>& the unanimous Court of <ansang -as divided in A8uino
v$ Enrile$NMMO There& the Court -as almost evenly divided on the issue of -hether the
validity of the im#osition of Martial <a- is a #olitical or (usticiable 8uestion$NMLO Then
came ;arcia="adilla v$ Enrile -hich greatly diluted <ansang$ %t declared that there is a need to re=
e2amine the latter case& ratiocinating that 6in times of -ar or national emergency& the "resident must be
given absolute control for the very life of the nation and the government is in great #eril$ The
"resident& it intoned& is ans-erable only to his conscience& the "eo#le& and ;od$7NM9O
The %ntegrated )ar of the "hili##ines v$ AamoraNL9O == a recent case most #ertinent to these cases at bar
== echoed a #rinci#le similar to <ansang$ 3hile the Court considered the "residenths 6calling=out7
#o-er as a discretionary #o-er solely vested in his -isdom& it stressed that 6this does not #revent an
e2amination of -hether such #o-er -as e2ercised -ithin #ermissible constitutional limits or -hether it
-as e2ercised in a manner constituting grave abuse of discretion$7 This ruling is mainly a result of
the Courths reliance on 5ection 1& Article V%%% of 19LM Constitution -hich fortifies the authority of the
courts to determine in an a##ro#riate action the validity of the acts of the #olitical de#artments$ :nder
the ne- definition of (udicial #o-er& the courts are authoriHed not only 6to settle actual controversies
involving rights -hich are legally demandable and enforceable&7 but also 6to determine -hether or not
there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lac* or e2cess of (urisdiction on the #art of any
branch or instrumentality of the government$7 The latter #art of the authority re#resents a broadening
of (udicial #o-er to enable the courts of (ustice to revie- -hat -as before a forbidden territory& to
-it& the discretion of the #olitical de#artments of the government$NL1O %t s#ea*s of (udicial #rerogative
not only in terms of #o-er but also of duty$NL+O

As to ho- the Court may in8uire into the "residenths e2ercise of #o-er& <ansang ado#ted the test that
6(udicial in8uiry can go no further than to satisfy the Court not that the "residenths decision is correct&7
but that 6the "resident did not act arbitrarily$7 Thus& the standard laid do-n is not correctness& but
arbitrariness$NL>O %n %ntegrated )ar of the "hili##ines& this Court further ruled that 6it is incumbent
u#on the #etitioner to sho- that the "residenths decision is totally bereft of factual basis7 and that if he
fails& by -ay of #roof& to su##ort his assertion& then 6this Court cannot underta*e an inde#endent
investigation beyond the #leadings$7

"etitioners failed to sho- that "resident Arroyohs e2ercise of the calling=out #o-er& by issuing "" 191M&
is totally bereft of factual basis$ A reading of the 5olicitor ;eneralhs Consolidated Comment and
Memorandum sho-s a detailed narration of the events leading to the issuance of "" 191M& -ith
su##orting re#orts forming #art of the records$ Mentioned are the esca#e of the Magdalo ;rou#& their
audacious threat of the Magdalo D=Day& the defections in the military& #articularly in the "hili##ine
Marines& and the re#roving statements from the communist leaders$ There -as also the Minutes of the
%ntelligence 0e#ort and 5ecurity ;rou# of the "hili##ine Army sho-ing the gro-ing alliance bet-een
the '"A and the military$ "etitioners #resented nothing to refute such events$ Thus& absent any
contrary allegations& the Court is convinced that the "resident -as (ustified in issuing "" 191M calling
for military aid$



%ndeed& (udging the seriousness of the incidents& "resident Arroyo -as not e2#ected to sim#ly fold her
arms and do nothing to #revent or su##ress -hat she believed -as la-less violence& invasion or
rebellion$ 4o-ever& the e2ercise of such #o-er or duty must not stifle liberty$

%%$ Constitutionality of "" 191M and ;$/$ 'o$ ,

Doctrines of 5everal "olitical Theorists
on the "o-er of the "resident
in Times of Emergency


This case brings to fore a contentious sub(ect == the #o-er of the "resident in times of emergency$ A
glim#se at the various #olitical theories relating to this sub(ect #rovides an ade8uate bac*dro# for our
ensuing discussion$


.ohn <oc*e& describing the architecture of civil government& called u#on the English doctrine of
#rerogative to co#e -ith the #roblem of emergency$ %n times of danger to the nation& #ositive la-
enacted by the legislature might be inade8uate or even a fatal obstacle to the #rom#tness of action
necessary to avert catastro#he$ %n these situations& the Cro-n retained a #rerogative 6#o-er to act
according to discretion for the #ublic good& -ithout the #roscri#tion of the la- and sometimes even
against it$7NLO )ut <oc*e recogniHed that this moral restraint might not suffice to avoid abuse of
#rerogative #o-ers$ 3ho shall (udge the need for resorting to the #rerogative and ho- may its abuse
be avoidedQ 4ere& <oc*e readily admitted defeat& suggesting that 6the #eo#le have no other remedy in
this& as in all other cases -here they have no (udge on earth& but to a##eal to 4eaven$7NL,O


.ean=.ac8ues 0ousseau also assumed the need for tem#orary sus#ension of democratic #rocesses of
government in time of emergency$ According to him:
The infle2ibility of the la-s& -hich #revents them from ado#ting themselves to circumstances& may& in
certain cases& render them disastrous and ma*e them bring about& at a time of crisis& the ruin of the
5tatej

%t is -rong therefore to -ish to ma*e #olitical institutions as strong as to render it im#ossible to
sus#end their o#eration$ Even 5#arta allo-ed its la- to la#se$$$

%f the #eril is of such a *ind that the #ara#hernalia of the la-s are an obstacle to their #reservation& the
method is to nominate a su#reme la-yer& -ho shall silence all the la-s and sus#end for a moment the
sovereign authority$ %n such a case& there is no doubt about the general -ill& and it clear that the
#eo#lehs first intention is that the 5tate shall not #erish$NL!O


0osseau did not fear the abuse of the emergency dictatorshi# or 6su#reme magistracy7 as he termed it$
For him& it -ould more li*ely be chea#ened by 6indiscreet use$7 4e -as un-illing to rely u#on an
6a##eal to heaven$7 %nstead& he relied u#on a tenure of office of #rescribed duration to avoid
#er#etuation of the dictatorshi#$NLMO


.ohn 5tuart Mill concluded his ardent defense of re#resentative government: 6% am far from
condemning& in cases of e2treme necessity& the assum#tion of absolute #o-er in the form of a
tem#orary dictatorshi#$7NLLO

'icollo Machiavellihs vie- of emergency #o-ers& as one element in the -hole scheme of limited
government& furnished an ironic contrast to the <oc*ean theory of #rerogative$ 4e recogniHed and
attem#ted to bridge this chasm in democratic #olitical theory& thus:
'o-& in a -ell=ordered society& it should never be necessary to resort to e2tra 1constitutional
measuresG for although they may for a time be beneficial& yet the #recedent is #ernicious& for if the
#ractice is once established for good ob(ects& they -ill in a little -hile be disregarded under that #rete2t
but for evil #ur#oses$ Thus& no re#ublic -ill ever be #erfect if she has not by la- #rovided for
everything& having a remedy for every emergency and fi2ed rules for a##lying it$NL9O


Machiavelli 1 in contrast to <oc*e& 0osseau and Mill 1 sought to incor#orate into the constitution
a regulariHed system of standby emergency #o-ers to be invo*ed -ith suitable chec*s and controls in
time of national danger$ 4e attem#ted forthrightly to meet the #roblem of combining a ca#acious
reserve of #o-er and s#eed and vigor in its a##lication in time of emergency& -ith effective
constitutional restraints$N99O

Contem#orary #olitical theorists& addressing themselves to the #roblem of res#onse to emergency by
constitutional democracies& have em#loyed the doctrine of constitutional dictatorshi#$N91O Frederic* M$
3at*ins sa- 6no reason -hy absolutism should not be used as a means for the defense of liberal
institutions&7 #rovided it 6serves to #rotect established institutions from the danger of #ermanent in(ury
in a #eriod of tem#orary emergency and is follo-ed by a #rom#t return to the #revious forms of
#olitical life$7N9+O 4e recogniHed the t-o B+D *ey elements of the #roblem of emergency governance&
as -ell as all constitutional governance: increasing administrative #o-ers of the e2ecutive& -hile at the
same time 6im#osing limitation u#on that #o-er$7N9>O 3at*ins #laced his real faith in a scheme of
constitutional dictatorshi#$ These are the conditions of success of such a dictatorshi#: 6The #eriod of
dictatorshi# must be relatively shortjDictatorshi# should al-ays be strictly legitimate in characterj
Final authority to determine the need for dictatorshi# in any given case must never rest -ith the dictator
himselfj7N9O and the ob(ective of such an emergency dictatorshi# should be 6strict #olitical
conservatism$7

Carl .$ Friedrich cast his analysis in terms similar to those of 3at*ins$N9,O 6%t is a #roblem of
concentrating #o-er 1 in a government -here #o-er has consciously been divided 1 to co#e -ithj
situations of un#recedented magnitude and gravity$ There must be a broad grant of #o-ers& sub(ect to
e8ually strong limitations as to -ho shall e2ercise such #o-ers& -hen& for ho- long& and to -hat
end$7N9!O Friedrich& too& offered criteria for (udging the ade8uacy of any of scheme of emergency
#o-ers& to -it: 6The emergency e2ecutive must be a##ointed by constitutional means 1 i$e$& he must be
legitimateG he should not en(oy #o-er to determine the e2istence of an emergencyG emergency #o-ers
should be e2ercised under a strict time limitationG and last& the ob(ective of emergency action must be
the defense of the constitutional order$7N9MO

Clinton <$ 0ossiter& after surveying the history of the em#loyment of emergency #o-ers in ;reat
)ritain& France& 3eimar& ;ermany and the :nited 5tates& reverted to a descri#tion of a scheme of
6constitutional dictatorshi#7 as solution to the ve2ing #roblems #resented by emergency$N9LO <i*e
3at*ins and Friedrich& he stated a #riori the conditions of success of the 6constitutional dictatorshi#&7
thus:
1D 'o general regime or #articular institution of constitutional dictatorshi# should be initiated unless it
is necessary or even indis#ensable to the #reservation of the 5tate and its constitutional orderj

+D jthe decision to institute a constitutional dictatorshi# should never be in the hands of the man or
men -ho -ill constitute the dictatorj

>D 'o government should initiate a constitutional dictatorshi# -ithout ma*ing s#ecific #rovisions for
its terminationj

D jall uses of emergency #o-ers and all read(ustments in the organiHation of the government should
be effected in #ursuit of constitutional or legal re8uirementsj

,D j no dictatorial institution should be ado#ted& no right invaded& no regular #rocedure altered any
more than is absolutely necessary for the con8uest of the #articular crisis $ $ $

!D The measures ado#ted in the #rosecution of the a constitutional dictatorshi# should never be
#ermanent in character or effectj

MD The dictatorshi# should be carried on by #ersons re#resentative of every #art of the citiHenry
interested in the defense of the e2isting constitutional order$ $ $

LD :ltimate res#onsibility should be maintained for every action ta*en under a constitutional
dictatorshi#$ $ $

9D The decision to terminate a constitutional dictatorshi#& li*e the decision to institute one should
never be in the hands of the man or men -ho constitute the dictator$ $ $

19D 'o constitutional dictatorshi# should e2tend beyond the termination of the crisis for -hich it -as
institutedj

11D jthe termination of the crisis must be follo-ed by a com#lete return as #ossible to the #olitical
and governmental conditions e2isting #rior to the initiation of the constitutional dictatorshi#jN99O


0ossiter accorded to legislature a far greater role in the oversight e2ercise of emergency #o-ers than
did 3at*ins$ 4e -ould secure to Congress final res#onsibility for declaring the e2istence or
termination of an emergency& and he #laces great faith in the effectiveness of congressional
investigating committees$N199O
5cott and Cotter& in analyHing the above contem#orary theories in light of recent e2#erience& -ere
one in saying that& 6the suggestion that democracies surrender the control of government to an
authoritarian ruler in time of grave danger to the nation is not based u#on sound constitutional theory$7
To a##raise emergency #o-er in terms of constitutional dictatorshi# serves merely to distort the
#roblem and hinder realistic analysis$ %t matters not -hether the term 6dictator7 is used in its normal
sense Bas a##lied to authoritarian rulersD or is em#loyed to embrace all chief e2ecutives administering
emergency #o-ers$ 4o-ever used& 6constitutional dictatorshi#7 cannot be divorced from the
im#lication of sus#ension of the #rocesses of constitutionalism$ Thus& they favored instead the
6conce#t of constitutionalism7 articulated by Charles 4$ Mc%l-ain:

A conce#t of constitutionalism -hich is less misleading in the analysis of #roblems of emergency
#o-ers& and -hich is consistent -ith the findings of this study& is that formulated by Charles 4$
Mc%l-ain$ 3hile it does not by any means necessarily e2clude some indeterminate limitations u#on the
substantive #o-ers of government& full em#hasis is #laced u#on #rocedural limitations& and #olitical
res#onsibility$ Mc%l-ain clearly recogniHed the need to re#ose ade8uate #o-er in government$ And in
discussing the meaning of constitutionalism& he insisted that the historical and #ro#er test of
constitutionalism -as the e2istence of ade8uate #rocesses for *ee#ing government res#onsible$ 4e
refused to e8uate constitutionalism -ith the enfeebling of government by an e2aggerated em#hasis
u#on se#aration of #o-ers and substantive limitations on governmental #o-er$ 4e found that the really
effective chec*s on des#otism have consisted not in the -ea*ening of government but& but rather in the
limiting of itG bet-een -hich there is a great and very significant difference$ %n associating
constitutionalism -ith 6limited7 as distinguished from 6-ea*7 government& Mc%l-ain meant
government limited to the orderly #rocedure of la- as o##osed to the #rocesses of force$ The t-o
fundamental correlative elements of constitutionalism for -hich all lovers of liberty must yet fight are
the legal limits to arbitrary #o-er and a com#lete #olitical res#onsibility of government to the
governed$N191O

%n the final analysis& the various a##roaches to emergency of the above #olitical theorists 1= from
<oc*hs 6theory of #rerogative&7 to 3at*insh doctrine of 6constitutional dictatorshi#7 and& eventually& to
Mc%l-ainhs 6#rinci#le of constitutionalism7 === ultimately aim to solve one real #roblem in emergency
governance& i$e$& that of allotting increasing areas of discretionary #o-er to the Chief E2ecutive& -hile
insuring that such #o-ers -ill be e2ercised -ith a sense of #olitical res#onsibility and under effective
limitations and chec*s$

/ur Constitution has fairly co#ed -ith this #roblem$ Fresh from the fetters of a re#ressive regime& the
19L! Constitutional Commission& in drafting the 19LM Constitution& endeavored to create a government
in the conce#t of .ustice .ac*sonhs 6balanced #o-er structure$7N19+O E2ecutive& legislative& and
(udicial #o-ers are dis#ersed to the "resident& the Congress& and the 5u#reme Court& res#ectively$
Each is su#reme -ithin its o-n s#here$ )ut none has the mono#oly of #o-er in times of emergency$
Each branch is given a role to serve as limitation or chec* u#on the other$ This system does not
-ea*en the "resident& it (ust limits his #o-er& using the language of Mc%l-ain$ %n other -ords& in
times of emergency& our Constitution reasonably demands that -e re#ose a certain amount of faith in
the basic integrity and -isdom of the Chief E2ecutive but& at the same time& it obliges him to o#erate
-ithin carefully #rescribed #rocedural limitations$

a$ 6Facial Challenge7


"etitioners contend that "" 191M is void on its face because of its 6overbreadth$7 They claim that its
enforcement encroached on both un#rotected and #rotected rights under 5ection & Article %%% of the
Constitution and sent a 6chilling effect7 to the citiHens$

A facial revie- of "" 191M& using the overbreadth doctrine& is uncalled for$


First and foremost& the overbreadth doctrine is an analytical tool develo#ed for testing 6on their faces7
statutes in free s#eech cases& also *no-n under the American <a- as First Amendment cases$N19>O


A #lain reading of "" 191M sho-s that it is not #rimarily directed to s#eech or even s#eech=related
conduct$ %t is actually a call u#on the AF" to #revent or su##ress all forms of la-less violence$ %n
:nited 5tates v$ 5alerno&N19O the :5 5u#reme Court held that 6-e have not recogniHed an
ioverbreadthh doctrine outside the limited conte2t of the First Amendment7 Bfreedom of s#eechD$


Moreover& the overbreadth doctrine is not intended for testing the validity of a la- that 6reflects
legitimate state interest in maintaining com#rehensive control over harmful& constitutionally
un#rotected conduct$7 :ndoubtedly& la-less violence& insurrection and rebellion are considered
6harmful7 and 6constitutionally un#rotected conduct$7 %n )roadric* v$ /*lahoma&N19,O it -as held:

%t remains a imatter of no little difficultyh to determine -hen a la- may #ro#erly be held void on its
face and -hen isuch summary actionh is ina##ro#riate$ )ut the #lain im#ort of our cases is& at the very
least& that facial overbreadth ad(udication is an e2ce#tion to our traditional rules of #ractice and that its
function& a limited one at the outset& attenuates as the other-ise un#rotected behavior that it forbids the
5tate to sanction moves from i#ure s#eechh to-ard conduct and that conduct 1even if e2#ressive 1 falls
-ithin the sco#e of other-ise valid criminal la-s that reflect legitimate state interests in maintaining
com#rehensive controls over harmful& constitutionally un#rotected conduct$


Thus& claims of facial overbreadth are entertained in cases involving statutes -hich& by their
terms& see* to regulate only 6s#o*en -ords7 and again& that 6overbreadth claims& if entertained at all&
have been curtailed -hen invo*ed against ordinary criminal la-s that are sought to be a##lied to
#rotected conduct$7N19!O 4ere& the incontrovertible fact remains that "" 191M #ertains to a s#ectrum
of conduct& not free s#eech& -hich is manifestly sub(ect to state regulation$


5econd& facial invalidation of la-s is considered as 6manifestly strong medicine&7 to be used
6s#aringly and only as a last resort&7 and is 6generally disfavoredG7N19MO The reason for this is
obvious$ Embedded in the traditional rules governing constitutional ad(udication is the #rinci#le that a
#erson to -hom a la- may be a##lied -ill not be heard to challenge a la- on the ground that it may
conceivably be a##lied unconstitutionally to others& i$e$& in other situations not before the Court$N19LO
A -riter and scholar in Constitutional <a- e2#lains further:

The most distinctive feature of the overbreadth techni8ue is that it mar*s an e2ce#tion to some of the
usual rules of constitutional litigation$ /rdinarily& a #articular litigant claims that a statute is
unconstitutional as a##lied to him or herG if the litigant #revails& the courts carve a-ay the
unconstitutional as#ects of the la- by invalidating its im#ro#er a##lications on a case to case basis$
Moreover& challengers to a la- are not #ermitted to raise the rights of third #arties and can only assert
their o-n interests$ %n overbreadth analysis& those rules give -ayG challenges are #ermitted to raise the
rights of third #artiesG and the court invalidates the entire statute 6on its face&7 not merely 6as a##lied
for7 so that the overbroad la- becomes unenforceable until a #ro#erly authoriHed court construes it
more narro-ly$ The factor that motivates courts to de#art from the normal ad(udicatory rules is the
concern -ith the 6chillingG7 deterrent effect of the overbroad statute on third #arties not courageous
enough to bring suit$ The Court assumes that an overbroad la-hs 6very e2istence may cause others not
before the court to refrain from constitutionally #rotected s#eech or e2#ression$7 An overbreadth ruling
is designed to remove that deterrent effect on the s#eech of those third #arties$


%n other -ords& a facial challenge using the overbreadth doctrine -ill re8uire the Court to e2amine ""
191M and #in#oint its fla-s and defects& not on the basis of its actual o#eration to #etitioners& but on the
assum#tion or #rediction that its very e2istence may cause others not before the Court to refrain from
constitutionally #rotected s#eech or e2#ression$ %n Pounger v$ 4arris&N199O it -as held that:

NTOhe tas* of analyHing a #ro#osed statute& #in#ointing its deficiencies& and re8uiring correction of
these deficiencies before the statute is #ut into effect& is rarely if ever an a##ro#riate tas* for the
(udiciary$ The combination of the relative remoteness of the controversy& the im#act on the legislative
#rocess of the relief sought& and above all the s#eculative and amor#hous nature of the re8uired line=
by=line analysis of detailed statutes&$$$ordinarily results in a *ind of case that is -holly unsatisfactory
for deciding constitutional 8uestions& -hichever -ay they might be decided$

And third& a facial challenge on the ground of overbreadth is the most difficult challenge to mount
successfully& since the challenger must establish that there can be no instance -hen the assailed la-
may be valid$ 4ere& #etitioners did not even attem#t to sho- -hether this situation e2ists$

"etitioners li*e-ise see* a facial revie- of "" 191M on the ground of vagueness$ This& too& is
un-arranted$

0elated to the 6overbreadth7 doctrine is the 6void for vagueness doctrine7 -hich holds that 6a la- is
facially invalid if men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its
a##lication$7N119O %t is sub(ect to the same #rinci#les governing overbreadth doctrine$ For one& it is
also an analytical tool for testing 6on their faces7 statutes in free s#eech cases$ And li*e overbreadth& it
is said that a litigant may challenge a statute on its face only if it is vague in all its #ossible
a##lications$ Again& #etitioners did not even attem#t to sho- that "" 191M is vague in all its
a##lication$ They also failed to establish that men of common intelligence cannot understand the
meaning and a##lication of "" 191M$


b$ Constitutional )asis of "" 191M


'o- on the constitutional foundation of "" 191M$

The o#erative #ortion of "" 191M may be divided into three im#ortant #rovisions& thus:

First #rovision:


6by virtue of the #o-er vested u#on me by 5ection 1L& Artilce V%% j do hereby command the Armed
Forces of the "hili##ines& to maintain la- and order throughout the "hili##ines& #revent or su##ress all
forms of la-less violence as -ell any act of insurrection or rebellion7

5econd #rovision:




6and to enforce obedience to all the la-s and to all decrees& orders and regulations #romulgated by
me #ersonally or u#on my directionG7




Third #rovision:




6as #rovided in 5ection 1M& Article C%% of the Constitution do hereby declare a 5tate of 'ational
Emergency$7



First "rovision: Calling=out "o-er


The first #rovision #ertains to the "residenths calling=out #o-er$ %n
5anla*as v$ E2ecutive 5ecretary&N111O this Court& through Mr$ .ustice Dante /$ Tinga& held that 5ection
1L& Article V%% of the Constitution re#roduced as follo-s:

5ec$ 1L$ The "resident shall be the Commander=in=Chief of all armed forces of the "hili##ines
and -henever it becomes necessary& he may call out such armed forces to #revent or su##ress la-less
violence& invasion or rebellion$ %n case of invasion or rebellion& -hen the #ublic safety re8uires it& he
may& for a #eriod not e2ceeding si2ty days& sus#end the #rivilege of the -rit of habeas cor#us or #lace
the "hili##ines or any #art thereof under martial la-$ 3ithin forty=eight hours from the #roclamation of
martial la- or the sus#ension of the #rivilege of the -rit of habeas cor#us& the "resident shall submit a
re#ort in #erson or in -riting to the Congress$ The Congress& voting (ointly& by a vote of at least a
ma(ority of all its Members in regular or s#ecial session& may revo*e such #roclamation or sus#ension&
-hich revocation shall not be set aside by the "resident$ :#on the initiative of the "resident& the
Congress may& in the same manner& e2tend such #roclamation or sus#ension for a #eriod to be
determined by the Congress& if the invasion or rebellion shall #ersist and #ublic safety re8uires it$

The Congress& if not in session& shall -ithin t-enty=four hours follo-ing such
#roclamation or sus#ension& convene in accordance -ith its rules -ithout need of a call$

The 5u#reme Court may revie-& in an a##ro#riate #roceeding filed by any citiHen& the
sufficiency of the factual bases of the #roclamation of martial la- or the sus#ension of the #rivilege of
the -rit or the e2tension thereof& and must #romulgate its decision thereon -ithin thirty days from its
filing$

A state of martial la- does not sus#end the o#eration of the Constitution& nor su##lant the
functioning of the civil courts or legislative assemblies& nor authoriHe the conferment of (urisdiction on
military courts and agencies over civilians -here civil courts are able to function& nor automatically
sus#end the #rivilege of the -rit$

The sus#ension of the #rivilege of the -rit shall a##ly only to #ersons (udicially
charged for rebellion or offenses inherent in or directly connected -ith invasion$

During the sus#ension of the #rivilege of the -rit& any #erson thus arrested or
detained shall be (udicially charged -ithin three days& other-ise he shall be released$


grants the "resident& as Commander=in=Chief& a 6se8uence7 of graduated #o-ers$ From the most to the
least benign& these are: the calling=out #o-er& the #o-er to sus#end the #rivilege of the -rit of habeas
cor#us& and the #o-er to declare Martial <a-$ Citing %ntegrated )ar of the "hili##ines v$ Aamora&
N11+O the Court ruled that the only criterion for the e2ercise of the calling=out #o-er is that 6-henever
it becomes necessary&7 the "resident may call the armed forces 6to #revent or su##ress la-less
violence& invasion or rebellion$7 Are these conditions #resent in the instant casesQ As stated earlier&
considering the circumstances then #revailing& "resident Arroyo found it necessary to issue "" 191M$
/-ing to her /fficehs vast intelligence net-or*& she is in the best #osition to determine the actual
condition of the country$

:nder the calling=out #o-er& the "resident may summon the armed forces to aid him in
su##ressing la-less violence& invasion and rebellion$ This involves ordinary #olice action$ )ut every
act that goes beyond the "residenths calling=out #o-er is considered illegal or ultra vires$ For this
reason& a "resident must be careful in the e2ercise of his #o-ers$ 4e cannot invo*e a greater #o-er
-hen he -ishes to act under a lesser #o-er$ There lies the -isdom of our Constitution& the greater the
#o-er& the greater are the limitations$

%t is #ertinent to state& ho-ever& that there is a distinction bet-een the "residenths authority to
declare a 6state of rebellion7 Bin 5anla*asD and the authority to #roclaim a state of national emergency$
3hile "resident Arroyohs authority to declare a 6state of rebellion7 emanates from her #o-ers as Chief
E2ecutive& the statutory authority cited in 5anla*as -as 5ection & Cha#ter +& )oo* %% of the 0evised
Administrative Code of 19LM& -hich #rovides:

5EC$ $ 1 "roclamations$ 1 Acts of the "resident fi2ing a date or declaring a status or condition of
#ublic moment or interest& u#on the e2istence of -hich the o#eration of a s#ecific la- or regulation is
made to de#end& shall be #romulgated in #roclamations -hich shall have the force of an e2ecutive
order$


"resident Arroyohs declaration of a 6state of rebellion7 -as merely an act declaring a status or
condition of #ublic moment or interest& a declaration allo-ed under 5ection cited above$ 5uch
declaration& in the -ords of 5anla*as& is harmless& -ithout legal significance& and deemed not -ritten$
%n these cases& "" 191M is more than that$ %n declaring a state of national emergency& "resident Arroyo
did not only rely on 5ection 1L& Article V%% of the Constitution& a #rovision calling on the AF" to
#revent or su##ress la-less violence& invasion or rebellion$ 5he also relied on 5ection 1M& Article C%%&
a #rovision on the 5tatehs e2traordinary #o-er to ta*e over #rivately=o-ned #ublic utility and business
affected -ith #ublic interest$ %ndeed& "" 191M calls for the e2ercise of an a-esome #o-er$ /bviously&
such "roclamation cannot be deemed harmless& -ithout legal significance& or not -ritten& as in the case
of 5anla*as$

5ome of the #etitioners vehemently maintain that "" 191M is actually a declaration of Martial
<a-$ %t is no so$ 3hat defines the character of "" 191M are its -ordings$ %t is #lain therein that -hat
the "resident invo*ed -as her calling=out #o-er$

The declaration of Martial <a- is a 6-arnNingO to citiHens that the military #o-er has been called
u#on by the e2ecutive to assist in the maintenance of la- and order& and that& -hile the emergency
lasts& they must& u#on #ain of arrest and #unishment& not commit any acts -hich -ill in any -ay render
more difficult the restoration of order and the enforcement of la-$7N11>O

%n his 65tatement before the 5enate Committee on .ustice7 on March 1>& +99!& Mr$ .ustice Vicente V$
MendoHa&N11O an authority in constitutional la-& said that of the three #o-ers of the "resident as
Commander=in=Chief& the #o-er to declare Martial <a- #oses the most severe threat to civil liberties$
%t is a strong medicine -hich should not be resorted to lightly$ %t cannot be used to stifle or #ersecute
critics of the government$ %t is #laced in the *ee#ing of the "resident for the #ur#ose of enabling him to
secure the #eo#le from harm and to restore order so that they can en(oy their individual freedoms$ %n
fact& 5ection 1L& Art$ V%%& #rovides:

A state of martial la- does not sus#end the o#eration of the Constitution& nor su##lant the functioning
of the civil courts or legislative assemblies& nor authoriHe the conferment of (urisdiction on military
courts and agencies over civilians -here civil courts are able to function& nor automatically sus#end the
#rivilege of the -rit$


.ustice MendoHa also stated that "" 191M is not a declaration of Martial <a-$ %t is no more than a
call by the "resident to the armed forces to #revent or su##ress la-less violence$ As such& it cannot be
used to (ustify acts that only under a valid declaration of Martial <a- can be done$ %ts use for any
other #ur#ose is a #erversion of its nature and sco#e& and any act done contrary to its command is ultra
vires$

.ustice MendoHa further stated that s#ecifically& BaD arrests and seiHures -ithout (udicial -arrantsG
BbD ban on #ublic assembliesG BcD ta*e=over of ne-s media and agencies and #ress censorshi#G and BdD
issuance of "residential Decrees& are #o-ers -hich can be e2ercised by the "resident as Commander=
in=Chief only -here there is a valid declaration of Martial <a- or sus#ension of the -rit of habeas
cor#us$

)ased on the above dis8uisition& it is clear that "" 191M is not a declaration of Martial <a-$ %t is
merely an e2ercise of "resident Arroyohs calling=out #o-er for the armed forces to assist her in
#reventing or su##ressing la-less violence$




5econd "rovision: 6Ta*e Care7 "o-er

The second #rovision #ertains to the #o-er of the "resident to ensure that the la-s be faithfully
e2ecuted$ This is based on 5ection 1M& Article V%% -hich reads:


5EC$ 1M$ The "resident shall have control of all the e2ecutive de#artments& bureaus& and offices$ 4e
shall ensure that the la-s be faithfully e2ecuted$




As the E2ecutive in -hom the e2ecutive #o-er is vested&N11,O the #rimary function of the "resident is
to enforce the la-s as -ell as to formulate #olicies to be embodied in e2isting la-s$ 4e sees to it that
all la-s are enforced by the officials and em#loyees of his de#artment$ )efore assuming office& he is
re8uired to ta*e an oath or affirmation to the effect that as "resident of the "hili##ines& he -ill& among
others& 6e2ecute its la-s$7N11!O %n the e2ercise of such function& the "resident& if needed& may em#loy
the #o-ers attached to his office as the Commander=in=Chief of all the armed forces of the country&
N11MO including the "hili##ine 'ational "oliceN11LO under the De#artment of %nterior and <ocal
;overnment$N119O


"etitioners& es#ecially 0e#resentatives Francis .ose#h ;$ Escudero& 5atur /cam#o& 0afael Mariano&
Teodoro Casi?o& <iHa MaHa& and .osel Virador argue that "" 191M is unconstitutional as it arrogated
u#on "resident Arroyo the #o-er to enact la-s and decrees in violation of 5ection 1& Article V% of the
Constitution& -hich vests the #o-er to enact la-s in Congress$ They assail the clause 6to enforce
obedience to all the la-s and to all decrees& orders and regulations #romulgated by me #ersonally or
u#on my direction$7

b

"etitionersh contention is understandable$ A reading of "" 191M o#erative clause sho-s that it -as
liftedN1+9O from Former "resident Marcosh "roclamation 'o$ 19L1& -hich #artly reads:


'/3& T4E0EF/0E& %& FE0D%'A'D E$ MA0C/5& "resident of the "hili##ines by virtue of the
#o-ers vested u#on me by Article V%%& 5ection 19& "aragra#h B+D of the Constitution& do hereby #lace
the entire "hili##ines as defined in Article 1& 5ection 1 of the Constitution under martial la- and& in my
ca#acity as their Commander=in=Chief& do hereby command the Armed Forces of the "hili##ines& to
maintain la- and order throughout the "hili##ines& #revent or su##ress all forms of la-less violence as
-ell as any act of insurrection or rebellion and to enforce obedience to all the la-s and decrees& orders
and regulations #romulgated by me #ersonally or u#on my direction$



3e all *no- that it -as "" 19L1 -hich granted "resident Marcos legislative #o-er$ %ts enabling clause
states: 6to enforce obedience to all the la-s and decrees& orders and regulations #romulgated by me
#ersonally or u#on my direction$7 :#on the other hand& the enabling clause of "" 191M issued by
"resident Arroyo is: to enforce obedience to all the la-s and to all decrees& orders and regulations
#romulgated by me #ersonally or u#on my direction$7

%s it -ithin the domain of "resident Arroyo to #romulgate 6decrees7Q

"" 191M states in #art: 6to enforce obedience to all the la-s and decrees 2 2 2 #romulgated by
me #ersonally or u#on my direction$7

The "resident is granted an /rdinance "o-er under Cha#ter +& )oo* %%% of E2ecutive /rder 'o$ +9+
BAdministrative Code of 19LMD$ 5he may issue any of the follo-ing:

5ec$ +$ E2ecutive /rders$ E Acts of the "resident #roviding for rules of a general or #ermanent
character in im#lementation or e2ecution of constitutional or statutory #o-ers shall be #romulgated in
e2ecutive orders$
5ec$ >$ Administrative /rders$ E Acts of the "resident -hich relate to #articular as#ect of
governmental o#erations in #ursuance of his duties as administrative head shall be #romulgated in
administrative orders$
5ec$ $ "roclamations$ E Acts of the "resident fi2ing a date or declaring a status or condition of #ublic
moment or interest& u#on the e2istence of -hich the o#eration of a s#ecific la- or regulation is made to
de#end& shall be #romulgated in #roclamations -hich shall have the force of an e2ecutive order$
5ec$ ,$ Memorandum /rders$ E Acts of the "resident on matters of administrative detail or of
subordinate or tem#orary interest -hich only concern a #articular officer or office of the ;overnment
shall be embodied in memorandum orders$
5ec$ !$ Memorandum Circulars$ E Acts of the "resident on matters relating to internal administration&
-hich the "resident desires to bring to the attention of all or some of the de#artments& agencies&
bureaus or offices of the ;overnment& for information or com#liance& shall be embodied in
memorandum circulars$
5ec$ M$ ;eneral or 5#ecial /rders$ E Acts and commands of the "resident in his ca#acity as
Commander=in=Chief of the Armed Forces of the "hili##ines shall be issued as general or s#ecial
orders$


"resident Arroyohs ordinance #o-er is limited to the foregoing issuances$ 5he cannot issue decrees
similar to those issued by Former "resident Marcos under "" 19L1$ "residential Decrees are la-s
-hich are of the same category and binding force as statutes because they -ere issued by the "resident
in the e2ercise of his legislative #o-er during the #eriod of Martial <a- under the 19M> Constitution$
N1+1O

This Court rules that the assailed "" 191M is unconstitutional insofar as it grants "resident Arroyo the
authority to #romulgate 6decrees$7 <egislative #o-er is #eculiarly -ithin the #rovince of the
<egislature$ 5ection 1& Article V% categorically states that 6NtOhe legislative #o-er shall be vested in the
Congress of the "hili##ines -hich shall consist of a 5enate and a 4ouse of 0e#resentatives$7 To be
sure& neither Martial <a- nor a state of rebellion nor a state of emergency can (ustify "resident
Arroyohs e2ercise of legislative #o-er by issuing decrees$

Can "resident Arroyo enforce obedience to all decrees and la-s through the militaryQ


As this Court stated earlier& "resident Arroyo has no authority to enact decrees$ %t follo-s that
these decrees are void and& therefore& cannot be enforced$ 3ith res#ect to 6la-s&7 she cannot call the
military to enforce or im#lement certain la-s& such as customs la-s& la-s governing family and
#ro#erty relations& la-s on obligations and contracts and the li*e$ 5he can only order the military&
under "" 191M& to enforce la-s #ertinent to its duty to su##ress la-less violence$




Third "rovision: "o-er to Ta*e /ver


The #ertinent #rovision of "" 191M states:

2 2 2 and to enforce obedience to all the la-s and to all decrees& orders& and regulations #romulgated by
me #ersonally or u#on my directionG and as #rovided in 5ection 1M& Article C%% of the Constitution do
hereby declare a state of national emergency$


The im#ort of this #rovision is that "resident Arroyo& during the state of national emergency under ""
191M& can call the military not only to enforce obedience 6to all the la-s and to all decrees 2 2 27 but
also to act #ursuant to the #rovision of 5ection 1M& Article C%% -hich reads:

5ec$ 1M$ %n times of national emergency& -hen the #ublic interest so re8uires& the 5tate may&
during the emergency and under reasonable terms #rescribed by it& tem#orarily ta*e over or direct the
o#eration of any #rivately=o-ned #ublic utility or business affected -ith #ublic interest$



3hat could be the reason of "resident Arroyo in invo*ing the above #rovision -hen she issued ""
191MQ

The ans-er is sim#le$ During the e2istence of the state of national emergency& "" 191M #ur#orts to
grant the "resident& -ithout any authority or delegation from Congress& to ta*e over or direct the
o#eration of any #rivately=o-ned #ublic utility or business affected -ith #ublic interest$

This #rovision -as first introduced in the 19M> Constitution& as a #roduct of the 6martial la-7 thin*ing
of the 19M1 Constitutional Convention$N1++O %n effect at the time of its a##roval -as "resident Marcosh
<etter of %nstruction 'o$ + dated 5e#tember ++& 19M+ instructing the 5ecretary of 'ational Defense to
ta*e over 6the management& control and o#eration of the Manila Electric Com#any& the "hili##ine
<ong Distance Tele#hone Com#any& the 'ational 3ater-or*s and 5e-erage Authority& the "hili##ine
'ational 0ail-ays& the "hili##ine Air <ines& Air Manila BandD Fili#inas /rient Air-ays $ $ $ for the
successful #rosecution by the ;overnment of its effort to contain& solve and end the #resent national
emergency$7

"etitioners& #articularly the members of the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives& claim that "resident
Arroyohs inclusion of 5ection 1M& Article C%% in "" 191M is an encroachment on the legislaturehs
emergency #o-ers$

This is an area that needs delineation$

A distinction must be dra-n bet-een the "residenths authority to declare 6a state of national
emergency7 and to e2ercise emergency #o-ers$ To the first& as elucidated by the Court& 5ection
1L& Article V%% grants the "resident such #o-er& hence& no legitimate constitutional ob(ection can be
raised$ )ut to the second& manifold constitutional issues arise$

5ection +>& Article V% of the Constitution reads:

5EC$ +>$ B1D The Congress& by a vote of t-o=thirds of both 4ouses in (oint session assembled& voting
se#arately& shall have the sole #o-er to declare the e2istence of a state of -ar$
B+D %n times of -ar or other national emergency& the Congress may& by la-& authoriHe the "resident& for
a limited #eriod and sub(ect to such restrictions as it may #rescribe& to e2ercise #o-ers necessary and
#ro#er to carry out a declared national #olicy$ :nless sooner -ithdra-n by resolution of the Congress&
such #o-ers shall cease u#on the ne2t ad(ournment thereof$

%t may be #ointed out that the second #aragra#h of the above #rovision refers not only to -ar but
also to 6other national emergency$7 %f the intention of the Framers of our Constitution -as to -ithhold
from the "resident the authority to declare a 6state of national emergency7 #ursuant to 5ection 1L&
Article V%% Bcalling=out #o-erD and grant it to Congress Bli*e the declaration of the e2istence of a state
of -arD& then the Framers could have #rovided so$ Clearly& they did not intend that Congress should
first authoriHe the "resident before he can declare a 6state of national emergency$7 The logical
conclusion then is that "resident Arroyo could validly declare the e2istence of a state of national
emergency even in the absence of a Congressional enactment$

)ut the e2ercise of emergency #o-ers& such as the ta*ing over of #rivately o-ned #ublic utility or
business affected -ith #ublic interest& is a
different matter$ This re8uires a delegation from Congress$

Courts have often said that constitutional #rovisions in #ari materia are to be construed together$
/ther-ise stated& different clauses& sections& and #rovisions of a constitution -hich relate to the same
sub(ect matter -ill be construed together and considered in the light of each other$N1+>O Considering
that 5ection 1M of Article C%% and 5ection +> of Article V%& #reviously 8uoted& relate to national
emergencies& they must be read together to determine the limitation of the e2ercise of emergency
#o-ers$

;enerally& Congress is the re#ository of emergency #o-ers$ This is evident in the tenor of 5ection +>
B+D& Article V% authoriHing it to delegate such #o-ers to the "resident$ Certainly& a body cannot
delegate a #o-er not re#osed u#on it$ 4o-ever& *no-ing that during grave emergencies& it may not be
#ossible or #racticable for Congress to meet and e2ercise its #o-ers& the Framers of our Constitution
deemed it -ise to allo- Congress to grant emergency #o-ers to the "resident& sub(ect to certain
conditions& thus:


B1D There must be a -ar or other emergency$

B+D The delegation must be for a limited #eriod only$

B>D The delegation must be sub(ect to such restrictions as the Congress may #rescribe$
BD The emergency #o-ers must be e2ercised to carry out a national #olicy declared by Congress$N1+O



5ection 1M& Article C%% must be understood as an as#ect of the emergency #o-ers clause$ The
ta*ing over of #rivate business affected -ith #ublic interest is (ust another facet of the emergency
#o-ers generally re#osed u#on Congress$ Thus& -hen 5ection 1M states that the 6the 5tate may& during
the emergency and under reasonable terms #rescribed by it& tem#orarily ta*e over or direct the
o#eration of any #rivately o-ned #ublic utility or business affected -ith #ublic interest&7 it refers to
Congress& not the "resident$ 'o-& -hether or not the "resident may e2ercise such #o-er is de#endent
on -hether Congress may delegate it to him #ursuant to a la- #rescribing the reasonable terms thereof$
Poungsto-n 5heet T Tube Co$ et al$ v$ 5a-yer&N1+,O held:

%t is clear that if the "resident had authority to issue the order he did& it must be found in some
#rovision of the Constitution$ And it is not claimed that e2#ress constitutional language grants this
#o-er to the "resident$ The contention is that #residential #o-er should be im#lied from the aggregate
of his #o-ers under the Constitution$ "articular reliance is #laced on #rovisions in Article %% -hich say
that 6The e2ecutive "o-er shall be vested in a "resident $ $ $ $G7 that 6he shall ta*e Care that the <a-s
be faithfully e2ecutedG7 and that he 6shall be Commander=in=Chief of the Army and 'avy of the :nited
5tates$

The order cannot #ro#erly be sustained as an e2ercise of the "residenths military #o-er as Commander=
in=Chief of the Armed Forces$ The ;overnment attem#ts to do so by citing a number of cases
u#holding broad #o-ers in military commanders engaged in day=to=day fighting in a theater of -ar$
5uch cases need not concern us here$ Even though 6theater of -ar7 be an e2#anding conce#t& -e
cannot -ith faithfulness to our constitutional system hold that the Commander=in=Chief of the Armed
Forces has the ultimate #o-er as such to ta*e #ossession of #rivate #ro#erty in order to *ee# labor
dis#utes from sto##ing #roduction$ This is a (ob for the nationhs la-ma*ers& not for its military
authorities$

'or can the seiHure order be sustained because of the several constitutional #rovisions that grant
e2ecutive #o-er to the "resident$ %n the frame-or* of our Constitution& the "residenths #o-er to see
that the la-s are faithfully e2ecuted refutes the idea that he is to be a la-ma*er$ The Constitution
limits his functions in the la-ma*ing #rocess to the recommending of la-s he thin*s -ise and the
vetoing of la-s he thin*s bad$ And the Constitution is neither silent nor e8uivocal about -ho shall
ma*e la-s -hich the "resident is to e2ecute$ The first section of the first article says that 6All
legislative "o-ers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the :nited 5tates$ $ $7N1+!O



"etitioner Cacho=/livares& et al$ contends that the term 6emergency7 under 5ection 1M& Article C%%
refers to 6tsunami&7 6ty#hoon&7 6hurricane7 and 6similar occurrences$7 This is a limited vie- of
6emergency$7



Emergency& as a generic term& connotes the e2istence of conditions suddenly intensifying the degree of
e2isting danger to life or -ell=being beyond that -hich is acce#ted as normal$ %m#licit in this
definitions are the elements of intensity& variety& and #erce#tion$N1+MO Emergencies& as #erceived by
legislature or e2ecutive in the :nited 5ates since 19>>& have been occasioned by a -ide range of
situations& classifiable under three B>D #rinci#al heads: aD economic&N1+LO bD natural disaster&N1+9O and
cD national security$N1>9O





6Emergency&7 as contem#lated in our Constitution& is of the same breadth$ %t may include rebellion&
economic crisis& #estilence or e#idemic& ty#hoon& flood& or other similar catastro#he of nation-ide
#ro#ortions or effect$N1>1O This is evident in the 0ecords of the Constitutional Commission& thus:

M0$ ;A5C/'$ Pes$ 3hat is the Committeehs definition of 6national emergency7 -hich a##ears in
5ection 1>& #age ,Q %t reads:

3hen the common good so re8uires& the 5tate may tem#orarily ta*e over or direct the o#eration of any
#rivately o-ned #ublic utility or business affected -ith #ublic interest$
M0$ V%<<E;A5$ 3hat % mean is threat from e2ternal aggression& for e2am#le& calamities or natural
disasters$
M0$ ;A5C/'$ There is a 8uestion by Commissioner de los 0eyes$ 3hat about stri*es and riotsQ
M0$ V%<<E;A5$ 5tri*es& noG those -ould not be covered by the term 6national emergency$7
M0$ )E';A/'$ :nless they are of such #ro#ortions such that they -ould #aralyHe government
service$N1>+O
2 2 2 2 2 2
M0$ T%';5/'$ May % as* the committee if 6national emergency7 refers to military national
emergency or could this be economic emergencyQ7
M0$ V%<<E;A5$ Pes& it could refer to both military or economic dislocations$
M0$ T%';5/'$ Than* you very much$N1>>O

%t may be argued that -hen there is national emergency& Congress may not be able to convene
and& therefore& unable to delegate to the "resident the #o-er to ta*e over #rivately=o-ned #ublic utility
or business affected -ith #ublic interest$

%n Araneta v$ Dinglasan&N1>O this Court em#hasiHed that legislative #o-er& through -hich
e2traordinary measures are e2ercised& remains in Congress even in times of crisis$

62 2 2

After all the criticisms that have been made against the efficiency of the system of the
se#aration of #o-ers& the fact remains that the Constitution has set u# this form of government& -ith all
its defects and shortcomings& in #reference to the commingling of #o-ers in one man or grou# of men$
The Fili#ino #eo#le by ado#ting #arliamentary government have given notice that they share the faith
of other democracy=loving #eo#les in this system& -ith all its faults& as the ideal$ The #oint is& under
this frame-or* of government& legislation is #reserved for Congress all the time& not e2ce#ting #eriods
of crisis no matter ho- serious$ 'ever in the history of the :nited 5tates& the basic features of -hose
Constitution have been co#ied in ours& have s#ecific functions of the legislative branch of enacting la-s
been surrendered to another de#artment 1 unless -e regard as legislating the carrying out of a
legislative #olicy according to #rescribed standardsG no& not even -hen that 0e#ublic -as fighting a
total -ar& or -hen it -as engaged in a life=and=death struggle to #reserve the :nion$ The truth is that
under our conce#t of constitutional government& in times of e2treme #erils more than in normal
circumstances ithe various branches& e2ecutive& legislative& and (udicial&h given the ability to act& are
called u#on ito #erform the duties and discharge the res#onsibilities committed to them res#ectively$7


Follo-ing our inter#retation of 5ection 1M& Article C%%& invo*ed by "resident Arroyo in issuing ""
191M& this Court rules that such "roclamation does not authoriHe her during the emergency to
tem#orarily ta*e over or direct the o#eration of any #rivately o-ned #ublic utility or business affected
-ith #ublic interest -ithout authority from Congress$

<et it be em#hasiHed that -hile the "resident alone can declare a state of national emergency&
ho-ever& -ithout legislation& he has no #o-er to ta*e over #rivately=o-ned #ublic utility or business
affected -ith #ublic interest$ The "resident cannot decide -hether e2ce#tional circumstances
e2ist -arranting the ta*e over of #rivately=o-ned #ublic utility or business affected -ith #ublic
interest$ 'or can he determine -hen such e2ce#tional circumstances have ceased$ <i*e-ise& -ithout
legislation& the "resident has no #o-er to #oint out the ty#es of businesses affected -ith #ublic interest
that should be ta*en over$ %n short& the "resident has no absolute authority to e2ercise all the #o-ers of
the 5tate under 5ection 1M& Article V%% in the absence of an emergency #o-ers act #assed by Congress$


c$ 6A5 A""<%ED C4A<<E';E7

/ne of the misfortunes of an emergency& #articularly& that -hich #ertains to security& is that military
necessity and the guaranteed rights of the individual are often not com#atible$ /ur history reveals that
in the crucible of conflict& many rights are curtailed and tram#led u#on$ 4ere& the right against
unreasonable search and seiHureG the right against -arrantless arrestG and the freedom of s#eech& of
e2#ression& of the #ress& and of assembly under the )ill of 0ights suffered the greatest blo-$

/f the seven BMD #etitions& three B>D indicate 6direct in(ury$7

%n ;$0$ 'o$ 1M1>9!& #etitioners David and <lamas alleged that& on February +& +99!& they -ere
arrested -ithout -arrants on their -ay to ED5A to celebrate the +9th Anniversary of "eo#le "o-er %$
The arresting officers cited "" 191M as basis of the arrest$

%n ;$0$ 'o$ 1M199& #etitioners Cacho=/livares and Tribune "ublishing Co$& %nc$ claimed that on
February +,& +99!& the C%D; o#eratives 6raided and ransac*ed -ithout -arrant7 their office$ Three
#olicemen -ere assigned to guard their office as a #ossible 6source of destabiliHation$7 Again& the
basis -as "" 191M$

And in ;$0$ 'o$ 1M1L>& #etitioners RM: and 'AF<:=RM: et al$ alleged that their members -ere
6turned a-ay and dis#ersed7 -hen they -ent to ED5A and later& to Ayala Avenue& to celebrate the +9th
Anniversary of "eo#le "o-er %$

A #erusal of the 6direct in(uries7 allegedly suffered by the said #etitioners sho-s that they
resulted from the im#lementation& #ursuant to ;$/$ 'o$ ,& of "" 191M$

Can this Court ad(udge as unconstitutional "" 191M and ;$/$ 'o , on the basis of these illegal actsQ %n
general& does the illegal im#lementation of a la- render it unconstitutionalQ

5ettled is the rule that courts are not at liberty to declare statutes invalid although they may be abused
and misabusedN1>,O and may afford an o##ortunity for abuse in the manner of a##lication$N1>!O The
validity of a statute or ordinance is to be determined from its general #ur#ose and its efficiency to
accom#lish the end desired& not from its effects in a #articular case$N1>MO "" 191M is merely an
invocation of the "residenths calling=out #o-er$ %ts general #ur#ose is to command the AF" to su##ress
all forms of la-less violence& invasion or rebellion$ %t had accom#lished the end desired -hich
#rom#ted "resident Arroyo to issue "" 19+1$ )ut there is nothing in "" 191M allo-ing the #olice&
e2#ressly or im#liedly& to conduct illegal arrest& search or violate the citiHensh constitutional rights$




'o-& may this Court ad(udge a la- or ordinance unconstitutional on the ground that its im#lementor
committed illegal actsQ The ans-er is no$ The criterion by -hich the validity of the statute or
ordinance is to be measured is the essential basis for the e2ercise of #o-er& and not a mere incidental
result arising from its e2ertion$N1>LO This is logical$ .ust imagine the absurdity of situations -hen la-s
maybe declared unconstitutional (ust because the officers im#lementing them have acted arbitrarily$ %f
this -ere so& (udging from the blunders committed by #olicemen in the cases #assed u#on by the Court&
ma(ority of the #rovisions of the 0evised "enal Code -ould have been declared unconstitutional a long
time ago$


"resident Arroyo issued ;$/$ 'o$ , to carry into effect the #rovisions of "" 191M$ ;eneral orders are
6acts and commands of the "resident in his ca#acity as Commander=in=Chief of the Armed Forces of
the "hili##ines$7 They are internal rules issued by the e2ecutive officer to his subordinates #recisely for
the #ro#er and efficient administration of la-$ 5uch rules and regulations create no relation e2ce#t
bet-een the official -ho issues them and the official -ho receives them$N1>9O They are based on and
are the #roduct of& a relationshi# in -hich #o-er is their source& and obedience& their ob(ect$N19O For
these reasons& one re8uirement for these rules to be valid is that they must be reasonable& not arbitrary
or ca#ricious$

;$/$ 'o$ , mandates the AF" and the "'" to immediately carry out the 6necessary and a##ro#riate
actions and measures to su##ress and #revent acts of terrorism and la-less violence$7

:nli*e the term 6la-less violence7 -hich is unarguably e2tant in our statutes and the Constitution& and
-hich is invariably associated -ith 6invasion& insurrection or rebellion&7 the #hrase 6acts of terrorism7
is still an amor#hous and vague conce#t$ Congress has yet to enact a la- defining and #unishing acts
of terrorism$



%n fact& this 6definitional #redicament7 or the 6absence of an agreed definition of terrorism7 confronts
not only our country& but the international
community as -ell$ The follo-ing observations are 8uite a#ro#os:

%n the actual uni#olar conte2t of international relations& the 6fight against terrorism7 has become one of
the basic slogans -hen it comes to the (ustification of the use of force against certain states and against
grou#s o#erating internationally$ <ists of states 6s#onsoring terrorism7 and of terrorist organiHations
are set u# and constantly being u#dated according to criteria that are not al-ays *no-n to the #ublic&
but are clearly determined by strategic interests$

The basic #roblem underlying all these military actions 1 or threats of the use of force as the most
recent by the :nited 5tates against %ra8 1 consists in the absence of an agreed definition of terrorism$

0emar*able confusion #ersists in regard to the legal categoriHation of acts of violence either by states&
by armed grou#s such as liberation movements& or by individuals$

The dilemma can by summariHed in the saying 6/ne countryhs terrorist is another countryhs freedom
fighter$7 The a##arent contradiction or lac* of consistency in the use of the term 6terrorism7 may
further be demonstrated by the historical fact that leaders of national liberation movements such as
'elson Mandela in 5outh Africa& 4abib )ourgouiba in Tunisia& or Ahmed )en )ella in Algeria& to
mention only a fe-& -ere originally labeled as terrorists by those -ho controlled the territory at the
time& but later became internationally res#ected statesmen$

3hat& then& is the defining criterion for terrorist acts 1 the differentia s#ecifica distinguishing those
acts from eventually legitimate acts of national resistance or self=defenseQ

5ince the times of the Cold 3ar the :nited 'ations /rganiHation has been trying in vain to reach a
consensus on the basic issue of definition$ The organiHation has intensified its efforts recently& but has
been unable to bridge the ga# bet-een those -ho associate 6terrorism7 -ith any violent act by non=
state grou#s against civilians& state functionaries or infrastructure or military installations& and those
-ho believe in the conce#t of the legitimate use of force -hen resistance against foreign occu#ation or
against systematic o##ression of ethnic andZor religious grou#s -ithin a state is concerned$

The dilemma facing the international community can best be illustrated by reference to the
contradicting categoriHation of organiHations and movements such as "alestine <iberation /rganiHation
B"</D 1 -hich is a terrorist grou# for %srael and a liberation movement for Arabs and Muslims 1 the
Rashmiri resistance grou#s 1 -ho are terrorists in the #erce#tion of %ndia& liberation fighters in that of
"a*istan 1 the earlier Contras in 'icaragua 1 freedom fighters for the :nited 5tates& terrorists for the
5ocialist cam# 1 or& most drastically& the Afghani Mu(ahedeen Blater to become the Taliban movementD:
during the Cold 3ar #eriod they -ere a grou# of freedom fighters for the 3est& nurtured by the :nited
5tates& and a terrorist gang for the 5oviet :nion$ /ne could go on and on in enumerating e2am#les of
conflicting categoriHations that cannot be reconciled in any -ay 1 because of o##osing #olitical
interests that are at the roots of those #erce#tions$

4o-& then& can those contradicting definitions and conflicting #erce#tions and evaluations of one and
the same grou# and its actions be e2#lainedQ %n our analysis& the basic reason for these stri*ing
inconsistencies lies in the divergent interest of states$ De#ending on -hether a state is in the #osition
of an occu#ying #o-er or in that of a rival& or adversary& of an occu#ying #o-er in a given territory& the
definition of terrorism -ill 6fluctuate7 accordingly$ A state may eventually see itself as #rotector of the
rights of a certain ethnic grou# outside its territory and -ill therefore s#ea* of a 6liberation struggle&7
not of 6terrorism7 -hen acts of violence by this grou# are concerned& and vice=versa$

The :nited 'ations /rganiHation has been unable to reach a decision on the definition of terrorism
e2actly because of these conflicting interests of sovereign states that determine in each and every
instance ho- a #articular armed movement Bi$e$ a non=state actorD is labeled in regard to the terrorists=
freedom fighter dichotomy$ A 6#olicy of double standards7 on this vital issue of international affairs
has been the unavoidable conse8uence$

This 6definitional #redicament7 of an organiHation consisting of sovereign states 1 and not of #eo#les&
in s#ite of the em#hasis in the "reamble to the :nited 'ations CharterS 1 has become even more
serious in the #resent global #o-er constellation: one su#er#o-er e2ercises the decisive role in the
5ecurity Council& former great #o-ers of the Cold 3ar era as -ell as medium #o-ers are increasingly
being marginaliHedG and the #roblem has become even more acute since the terrorist attac*s of 11
5e#tember +991 % the :nited 5tates$N11O

The absence of a la- defining 6acts of terrorism7 may result in abuse and o##ression on the #art of the
#olice or military$ An illustration is -hen a grou# of #ersons are merely engaged in a drin*ing s#ree$
Pet the military or the #olice may consider the act as an act of terrorism and immediately arrest them
#ursuant to ;$/$ 'o$ ,$ /bviously& this is abuse and o##ression on their #art$ %t must be remembered
that an act can only be considered a crime if there is a la- defining the same as such and im#osing the
corres#onding #enalty thereon$


5o far& the -ord 6terrorism7 a##ears only once in our criminal la-s& i$e$& in "$D$ 'o$ 1L>, dated
.anuary 1!& 19L1 enacted by "resident Marcos during the Martial <a- regime$ This decree is entitled
6Codifying The Various <a-s on Anti=5ubversion and %ncreasing The "enalties for Membershi# in
5ubversive /rganiHations$7 The -ord 6terrorism7 is mentioned in the follo-ing #rovision: 6That one
-ho cons#ires -ith any other #erson for the #ur#ose of overthro-ing the ;overnment of the
"hili##ines 2 2 2 by force& violence& terrorism& 2 2 2 shall be #unished by reclusion tem#oral 2 2 2$7



"$D$ 'o$ 1L>, -as re#ealed by E$/$ 'o$ 1!M B-hich outla-s the Communist "arty of the "hili##inesD
enacted by "resident CoraHon A8uino on May ,& 19L,$ These t-o B+D la-s& ho-ever& do not define
6acts of terrorism$7 5ince there is no la- defining 6acts of terrorism&7 it is "resident Arroyo alone&
under ;$/$ 'o$ ,& -ho has the discretion to determine -hat acts constitute terrorism$ 4er (udgment on
this as#ect is absolute& -ithout restrictions$ Conse8uently& there can be indiscriminate arrest -ithout
-arrants& brea*ing into offices and residences& ta*ing over the media enter#rises& #rohibition and
dis#ersal of all assemblies and gatherings unfriendly to the administration$ All these can be effected in
the name of ;$/$ 'o$ ,$ These acts go far beyond the calling=out #o-er of the "resident$ Certainly&
they violate the due #rocess clause of the Constitution$ Thus& this Court declares that the 6acts of
terrorism7 #ortion of ;$/$ 'o$ , is unconstitutional$




5ignificantly& there is nothing in ;$/$ 'o$ , authoriHing the military or #olice to commit acts beyond
-hat are necessary and a##ro#riate to su##ress and #revent la-less violence& the limitation of their
authority in #ursuing the /rder$ /ther-ise& such acts are considered illegal$





3e first e2amine ;$0$ 'o$ 1M1>9! BDavid et al$D



The Constitution #rovides that 6the right of the #eo#le to be secured in their #ersons& houses& #a#ers
and effects against unreasonable search and seiHure of -hatever nature and for any #ur#ose shall be
inviolable& and no search -arrant or -arrant of arrest shall issue e2ce#t u#on #robable cause to be
determined #ersonally by the (udge after e2amination under oath or affirmation of the com#lainant and
the -itnesses he may #roduce& and #articularly describing the #lace to be searched and the #ersons or
things to be seiHed$7N1+O The #lain im#ort of the language of the Constitution is that searches&
seiHures and arrests are normally unreasonable unless authoriHed by a validly issued search -arrant or
-arrant of arrest$ Thus& the fundamental #rotection given by this #rovision is that bet-een #erson and
#olice must stand the #rotective authority of a magistrate clothed -ith #o-er to issue or refuse to issue
search -arrants or -arrants of arrest$N1>O


%n the )rief AccountN1O submitted by #etitioner David& certain facts are established: first& he
-as arrested -ithout -arrantG second& the "'" o#eratives arrested him on the basis of "" 191MG third&
he -as brought at Cam# Raringal& KueHon City -here he -as finger#rinted& #hotogra#hed and boo*ed
li*e a criminal sus#ectG fourth& he -as treated brus8uely by #olicemen -ho 6held his head and tried to
#ush him7 inside an unmar*ed carG fifth& he -as charged -ith Violation of )atas "ambansa )ilang
'o$ LL9N1,O and %nciting to 5editionG si2th& he -as detained for seven BMD hoursG and seventh& he -as
eventually released for insufficiency of evidence$





5ection ,& 0ule 11> of the 0evised 0ules on Criminal "rocedure #rovides:

5ec$ ,$ Arrest -ithout -arrantG -hen la-ful$ = A #eace officer or a #rivate #erson may& -ithout a
-arrant& arrest a #erson:

BaD 3hen& in his #resence& the #erson to be arrested has committed& is actually committing& or is
attem#ting to commit an offense$

BbD 3hen an offense has (ust been committed and he has #robable cause to believe based on #ersonal
*no-ledge of facts or circumstances that the #erson to be arrested has committed itG and

2 2 2$





'either of the t-o B+D e2ce#tions mentioned above (ustifies #etitioner Davidhs -arrantless arrest$
During the in8uest for the charges of inciting to sedition and violation of )" LL9& all that the
arresting officers could invo*e -as their observation that some rallyists -ere -earing t=shirts
-ith the invective 6/ust ;loria 'o-7 and their erroneous assum#tion that #etitioner David -as the
leader of the rally$N1!O Conse8uently& the %n8uest "rosecutor ordered his immediate release on the
ground of insufficiency of evidence$ 4e noted that #etitioner David -as not -earing the sub(ect t=shirt
and even if he -as -earing it& such fact is insufficient to charge him -ith inciting to sedition$ Further&
he also stated that there is insufficient evidence for the charge of violation of )" LL9 as it -as not even
*no-n -hether #etitioner David -as the leader of the rally$N1MO




)ut -hat made it doubly -orse for #etitioners David et al$ is that not only -as their right against
-arrantless arrest violated& but also their right to #eaceably assemble$






5ection of Article %%% guarantees:

'o la- shall be #assed abridging the freedom of s#eech& of e2#ression& or of the #ress& or the right of
the #eo#le #eaceably to assemble and #etition the government for redress of grievances$


6Assembly7 means a right on the #art of the citiHens to meet #eaceably for consultation in res#ect to
#ublic affairs$ %t is a necessary conse8uence of our re#ublican institution and com#lements the right of
s#eech$ As in the case of freedom of e2#ression& this right is not to be limited& much less denied&
e2ce#t on a sho-ing of a clear and #resent danger of a substantive evil that Congress has a right to
#revent$ %n other -ords& li*e other rights embraced in the freedom of e2#ression& the right to assemble
is not sub(ect to #revious restraint or censorshi#$ %t may not be conditioned u#on the #rior issuance of
a #ermit or authoriHation from the government authorities e2ce#t& of course& if the assembly is intended
to be held in a #ublic #lace& a #ermit for the use of such #lace& and not for the assembly itself& may be
validly re8uired$



The ringing truth here is that #etitioner David& et al$ -ere arrested -hile they -ere e2ercising their right
to #eaceful assembly$ They -ere not committing any crime& neither -as there a sho-ing of a clear and
#resent danger that -arranted the limitation of that right$ As can be gleaned from circumstances& the
charges of inciting to sedition and violation of )" LL9 -ere mere afterthought$ Even the 5olicitor
;eneral& during the oral argument& failed to (ustify the arresting officersh conduct$ %n De .onge v$
/regon&N1LO it -as held that #eaceable assembly cannot be made a crime& thus:

"eaceable assembly for la-ful discussion cannot be made a crime$ The holding of meetings for
#eaceable #olitical action cannot be #roscribed$ Those -ho assist in the conduct of such meetings
cannot be branded as criminals on that score$ The 8uestion& if the rights of free s#eech and #eaceful
assembly are not to be #reserved& is not as to the aus#ices under -hich the meeting -as held but as to
its #ur#oseG not as to the relations of the s#ea*ers& but -hether their utterances transcend the bounds of
the freedom of s#eech -hich the Constitution #rotects$ %f the #ersons assembling have committed
crimes else-here& if they have formed or are engaged in a cons#iracy against the #ublic #eace and
order& they may be #rosecuted for their cons#iracy or other violations of valid la-s$ )ut it is a different
matter -hen the 5tate& instead of #rosecuting them for such offenses& seiHes u#on mere #artici#ation in
a #eaceable assembly and a la-ful #ublic discussion as the basis for a criminal charge$



/n the basis of the above #rinci#les& the Court li*e-ise considers the dis#ersal and arrest of the
members of RM: et al$ B;$0$ 'o$ 1M1L>D un-arranted$ A##arently& their dis#ersal -as done merely
on the basis of Malaca?anghs directive canceling all #ermits #reviously issued by local government
units$ This is arbitrary$ The -holesale cancellation of all #ermits to rally is a blatant disregard of the
#rinci#le that 6freedom of assembly is not to be limited& much less denied& e2ce#t on a sho-ing of a
clear and #resent danger of a substantive evil that the 5tate has a right to #revent$7N19O Tolerance is
the rule and limitation is the e2ce#tion$ /nly u#on a sho-ing that an assembly #resents a clear and
#resent danger that the 5tate may deny the citiHensh right to e2ercise it$ %ndeed& res#ondents failed to
sho- or convince the Court that the rallyists committed acts amounting to la-less violence& invasion or
rebellion$ 3ith the blan*et revocation of #ermits& the distinction bet-een #rotected and un#rotected
assemblies -as eliminated$


Moreover& under )" LL9& the authority to regulate assemblies and rallies is lodged -ith the local
government units$ They have the #o-er to issue #ermits and to revo*e such #ermits after due notice
and hearing on the determination of the #resence of clear and #resent danger$ 4ere& #etitioners -ere not
even notified and heard on the revocation of their #ermits$N1,9O The first time they learned of it -as at
the time of the dis#ersal$ 5uch absence of notice is a fatal defect$ 3hen a #ersonhs right is restricted by
government action& it behooves a democratic government to see to it that the restriction is fair&
reasonable& and according to #rocedure$



;$0$ 'o$ 1M199& BCacho=/livares& et al$D #resents another facet of freedom of s#eech i$e$& the freedom
of the #ress$ "etitionersh narration of facts& -hich the 5olicitor ;eneral failed to refute& established the
follo-ing: first& the Daily Tribunehs offices -ere searched -ithout -arrantG second& the #olice
o#eratives seiHed several materials for #ublicationG third& the search -as conducted at about 1:99 oh
cloc* in the morning of February +,& +99!G fourth& the search -as conducted in the absence of any
official of the Daily Tribune e2ce#t the security guard of the buildingG and fifth& #olicemen stationed
themselves at the vicinity of the Daily Tribune offices$

Thereafter& a -ave of -arning came from government officials$ "residential Chief of 5taff
Michael Defensor -as 8uoted as saying that such raid -as 6meant to sho- a istrong #resence&h to tell
media outlets not to connive or do anything that -ould hel# the rebels in bringing do-n this
government$7 Director ;eneral <omibao further stated that 6if they do not follo- the standards 1and
the standards are if they -ould contribute to instability in the government& or if they do not subscribe to
-hat is in ;eneral /rder 'o$ , and "roc$ 'o$ 191M 1 -e -ill recommend a ita*eover$h7 'ational
Telecommunications Commissioner 0onald 5olis urged television and radio net-or*s to 6coo#erate7
-ith the government for the duration of the state of national emergency$ 4e -arned that his agency
-ill not hesitate to recommend the closure of any broadcast outfit that violates rules set out for media
coverage during times -hen the national security is threatened$N1,1O


The search is illegal$ 0ule 1+! of The 0evised 0ules on Criminal "rocedure lays do-n the ste#s in the
conduct of search and seiHure$ 5ection re8uires that a search -arrant be issued u#on #robable cause
in connection -ith one s#ecific offence to be determined #ersonally by the (udge after e2amination
under oath or affirmation of the com#lainant and the -itnesses he may #roduce$ 5ection L mandates
that the search of a house& room& or any other #remise be made in the #resence of the la-ful occu#ant
thereof or any member of his family or in the absence of the latter& in the #resence of t-o B+D -itnesses
of sufficient age and discretion residing in the same locality$ And 5ection 9 states that the -arrant
must direct that it be served in the daytime& unless the #ro#erty is on the #erson or in the #lace ordered
to be searched& in -hich case a direction may be inserted that it be served at any time of the day or
night$ All these rules -ere violated by the C%D; o#eratives$


'ot only that& the search violated #etitionersh freedom of the #ress$ The best gauge of a free and
democratic society rests in the degree of freedom en(oyed by its media$ %n the )urgos v$ Chief of
5taffN1,+O this Court held that ==
As heretofore stated& the #remises searched -ere the business and #rinting offices of the FMetro#olitan
MailF and the F3e Forum7 ne-s#a#ers$ As a conse8uence of the search and seiHure& these #remises
-ere #adloc*ed and sealed& -ith the further result that the #rinting and #ublication of said ne-s#a#ers
-ere discontinued$

5uch closure is in the nature of #revious restraint or censorshi# abhorrent to the freedom of the #ress
guaranteed under the fundamental la-& and constitutes a virtual denial of #etitioners@ freedom to
e2#ress themselves in #rint$ This state of being is #atently anathematic to a democratic frame-or*
-here a free& alert and even militant #ress is essential for the #olitical enlightenment and gro-th of the
citiHenry$



3hile admittedly& the Daily Tribune -as not #adloc*ed and sealed li*e the 6Metro#olitan Mail7 and
63e Forum7 ne-s#a#ers in the above case& yet it cannot be denied that the C%D; o#eratives e2ceeded
their enforcement duties$ The search and seiHure of materials for #ublication& the stationing of
#olicemen in the vicinity of the The Daily Tribune offices& and the arrogant -arning of government
officials to media& are #lain censorshi#$ %t is that officious functionary of the re#ressive government
-ho tells the citiHen that he may s#ea* only if allo-ed to do so& and no more and no less than -hat he
is #ermitted to say on #ain of #unishment should he be so rash as to disobey$N1,>O :ndoubtedly& the
The Daily Tribune -as sub(ected to these arbitrary intrusions because of its anti=government
sentiments$ This Court cannot tolerate the blatant disregard of a constitutional right even if it involves
the most defiant of our citiHens$ Freedom to comment on #ublic affairs is essential to the vitality of a
re#resentative democracy$ %t is the duty of the courts to be -atchful for the constitutional rights of the
citiHen& and against any stealthy encroachments thereon$ The motto should al-ays be obsta #rinci#iis$
N1,O




%ncidentally& during the oral arguments& the 5olicitor ;eneral admitted that the search of the Tribunehs
offices and the seiHure of its materials for #ublication and other #a#ers are illegalG and that the same are
inadmissible 6for any #ur#ose&7 thus:

.:5T%CE CA<<E./:

Pou made 8uite a mouthful of admission -hen you said that the #olicemen& -hen ins#ected the
Tribune for the #ur#ose of gathering evidence and you admitted that the #olicemen -ere able to get the
cli##ings$ %s that not in admission of the admissibility of these cli##ings that -ere ta*en from the
TribuneQ

5/<%C%T/0 ;E'E0A< )E'%"AP/:

:nder the la- they -ould seem to be& if they -ere illegally seiHed& % thin* and % *no-& Pour
4onor& and these are inadmissible for any #ur#ose$N1,,O

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

50$ A55/$ .:5T%CE ":'/:

These have been #ublished in the #ast issues of the Daily TribuneG all you have to do is to get
those #ast issues$ 5o -hy do you have to go there at 1 ohcloc* in the morning and -ithout any search
-arrantQ Did they become suddenly #art of the evidence of rebellion or inciting to sedition or -hatQ

5/<;E' )E'%"AP/:

3ell& it -as the #olice that did that& Pour 4onor$ 'ot u#on my instructions$

50$ A55/$ .:5T%CE ":'/:

Are you saying that the act of the #oliceman is illegal& it is not based on any la-& and it is not
based on "roclamation 191M$

5/<;E' )E'%"AP/:

%t is not based on "roclamation 191M& Pour 4onor& because there is nothing in 191M -hich says
that the #olice could go and ins#ect and gather cli##ings from Daily Tribune or any other ne-s#a#er$

50$ A55/$ .:5T%CE ":'/:

%s it based on any la-Q

5/<;E' )E'%"AP/:

As far as % *no-& no& Pour 4onor& from the facts& no$

50$ A55/$ .:5T%CE ":'/:

5o& it has no basis& no legal basis -hatsoeverQ




5/<;E' )E'%"AP/:

Maybe so& Pour 4onor$ Maybe so& that is -hy % said& % donht *no- if it is #remature to say this&
-e do not condone this$ %f the #eo#le -ho have been in(ured by this -ould -ant to sue them& they can
sue and there are remedies for this$N1,!O


<i*e-ise& the -arrantless arrests and seiHures e2ecuted by the #olice -ere& according to the 5olicitor
;eneral& illegal and cannot be condoned& thus:

C4%EF .:5T%CE "A';A'%)A':

There seems to be some confusions if not contradiction in your theory$

5/<%C%T/0 ;E'E0A< )E'%"AP/:

% donht *no- -hether this -ill clarify$ The acts& the su##osed illegal or unla-ful acts
committed on the occasion of 191M& as % said& it cannot be condoned$ Pou cannot blame the "resident
for& as you said& a misa##lication of the la-$ These are acts of the #olice officers& that is their
res#onsibility$N1,MO



The Dissenting /#inion states that "" 191M and ;$/$ 'o$ , are constitutional in every as#ect and
6should result in no constitutional or statutory breaches if a##lied according to their letter$7

The Court has #assed u#on the constitutionality of these issuances$ %ts ratiocination has been
e2haustively #resented$ At this #oint& suffice it to reiterate that "" 191M is limited to the calling out by
the "resident of the military to #revent or su##ress la-less violence& invasion or rebellion$ 3hen in
im#lementing its #rovisions& #ursuant to ;$/$ 'o$ ,& the military and the #olice committed acts -hich
violate the citiHensh rights under the Constitution& this Court has to declare such acts unconstitutional
and illegal$

%n this connection& Chief .ustice Artemio V$ "anganibanhs concurring o#inion& attached hereto& is
considered an integral #art of this #onencia$


5 : M M A T % / '

%n sum& the lifting of "" 191M through the issuance of "" 19+1 1 a su#ervening event 1 -ould have
normally rendered this case moot and academic$ 4o-ever& -hile "" 191M -as still o#erative& illegal
acts -ere committed allegedly in #ursuance thereof$ )esides& there is no guarantee that "" 191M& or
one similar to it& may not again be issued$ Already& there have been media re#orts on A#ril >9& +99!
that allegedly "" 191M -ould be reim#osed 6if the May 1 rallies7 become 6unruly and violent$7
Conse8uently& the transcendental issues raised by the #arties should not be 6evadedG7 they must no- be
resolved to #revent future constitutional aberration$

The Court finds and so holds that "" 191M is constitutional insofar as it constitutes a call by the
"resident for the AF" to #revent or su##ress la-less violence$ The #roclamation is sustained by
5ection 1L& Article V%% of the Constitution and the relevant (uris#rudence discussed earlier$ 4o-ever&
"" 191Mhs e2traneous #rovisions giving the "resident e2#ress or im#lied #o-er B1D to issue decreesG B+D
to direct the AF" to enforce obedience to all la-s even those not related to la-less violence as -ell as
decrees #romulgated by the "residentG and B>D to im#ose standards on media or any form of #rior
restraint on the #ress& are ultra vires and unconstitutional$ The Court also rules that under 5ection 1M&
Article C%% of the Constitution& the "resident& in the absence of a legislation& cannot ta*e over #rivately=
o-ned #ublic utility and #rivate business affected -ith #ublic interest$



%n the same vein& the Court finds ;$/$ 'o$ , valid$ %t is an /rder issued by the "resident 1 acting as
Commander=in=Chief 1 addressed to subalterns in the AF" to carry out the #rovisions of "" 191M$
5ignificantly& it also #rovides a valid standard 1 that the military and the #olice should ta*e only the
6necessary and a##ro#riate actions and measures to su##ress and #revent acts of la-less violence$7
)ut the -ords 6acts of terrorism7 found in ;$/$ 'o$ , have not been legally defined and made
#unishable by Congress and should thus be deemed deleted from the said ;$/$ 3hile 6terrorism7 has
been denounced generally in media& no la- has been enacted to guide the military& and eventually the
courts& to determine the limits of the AF"hs authority in carrying out this #ortion of ;$/$ 'o$ ,$



/n the basis of the relevant and uncontested facts narrated earlier& it is also #ristine clear that B1D the
-arrantless arrest of #etitioners 0andolf 5$ David and 0onald <lamasG B+D the dis#ersal of the rallies
and -arrantless arrest of the RM: and 'AF<:=RM: membersG B>D the im#osition of standards on
media or any #rior restraint on the #ressG and BD the -arrantless search of the Tribune offices and the
-himsical seiHures of some articles for #ublication and other materials& are not authoriHed by the
Constitution& the la- and (uris#rudence$ 'ot even by the valid #rovisions of "" 191M and ;$/$ 'o$ ,$


/ther than this declaration of invalidity& this Court cannot im#ose any civil& criminal or administrative
sanctions on the individual #olice officers concerned$ They have not been individually identified and
given their day in court$ The civil com#laints or causes of action andZor relevant criminal %nformations
have not been #resented before this Court$ Elementary due #rocess bars this Court from ma*ing any
s#ecific #ronouncement of civil& criminal or administrative liabilities$




%t is -ell to remember that military #o-er is a means to an end and substantive civil rights are ends in
themselves$ 4o- to give the military the #o-er it needs to #rotect the 0e#ublic -ithout unnecessarily
tram#ling individual rights is one of the eternal balancing tas*s of a democratic state$ During
emergency& governmental action may vary in breadth and intensity from normal times& yet they should
not be arbitrary as to unduly restrain our #eo#lehs liberty$

"erha#s& the vital lesson that -e must learn from the theorists -ho studied the various com#eting
#olitical #hiloso#hies is that& it is #ossible to grant government the authority to co#e -ith crises -ithout
surrendering the t-o vital #rinci#les of constitutionalism: the maintenance of legal limits to arbitrary
#o-er& and #olitical res#onsibility of the government to the governed$N1,LO

34E0EF/0E& the "etitions are #artly granted$ The Court rules that "" 191M is C/'5T%T:T%/'A<
insofar as it constitutes a call by "resident ;loria Maca#agal=Arroyo on the AF" to #revent or su##ress
la-less violence$ 4o-ever& the #rovisions of "" 191M commanding the AF" to enforce la-s not related
to la-less violence& as -ell as decrees #romulgated by the "resident& are declared
:'C/'5T%T:T%/'A<$ %n addition& the #rovision in "" 191M declaring national emergency under
5ection 1M& Article V%% of the Constitution is C/'5T%T:T%/'A<& but such declaration does not
authoriHe the "resident to ta*e over #rivately=o-ned #ublic utility or business affected -ith #ublic
interest -ithout #rior legislation$

;$/$ 'o$ , is C/'5T%T:T%/'A< since it #rovides a standard by -hich the AF" and the "'" should
im#lement "" 191M& i$e$ -hatever is 6necessary and a##ro#riate actions and measures to su##ress and
#revent acts of la-less violence$7 Considering that 6acts of terrorism7 have not yet been defined and
made #unishable by the <egislature& such #ortion of ;$/$ 'o$ , is declared :'C/'5T%T:T%/'A<$





The -arrantless arrest of 0andolf 5$ David and 0onald <lamasG the dis#ersal and -arrantless arrest of
the RM: and 'AF<:=RM: members during their rallies& in the absence of #roof that these #etitioners
-ere committing acts constituting la-less violence& invasion or rebellion and violating )" LL9G the
im#osition of standards on media or any form of #rior restraint on the #ress& as -ell as the -arrantless
search of the Tribune offices and -himsical seiHure of its articles for #ublication and other materials&
are declared :'C/'5T%T:T%/'A<$

'o costs$

5/ /0DE0ED$

A';E<%'A 5A'D/VA<=;:T%E00EA
Associate .ustice


3E C/'C:0:


A0TEM%/ V$ "A';A'%)A'
Chief .ustice



B/n leaveD
0EP'AT/ 5$ ":'/
Associate .ustice



C/'5:E</ P'A0E5=5A'T%A;/
Associate .ustice



MA$ A<%C%A A:5T0%A=MA0T%'EA
Associate .ustice



C/'C4%TA CA0"%/ M/0A<E5
Associate .ustice



AD/<F/ 5$ AAC:'A
Associate .ustice



M%'%TA V$ C4%C/='AAA0%/
Associate .ustice




<E/'A0D/ A$ K:%5:M)%';
Associate .ustice



A'T/'%/ T$ CA0"%/
Associate .ustice



0E'AT/ C$ C/0/'A
Associate .ustice



0/ME/ .$ CA<<E./& 50$
Associate .ustice



DA'TE /$ T%';A
Associate .ustice



CA'C%/ C$ ;A0C%A
Associate .ustice

"0E5)%TE0/ .$ VE<A5C/& .0$
Associate .ustice


CE0T%F%CAT%/'

"ursuant to 5ection 1>& Article V%%% of the Constitution& it is hereby certified that the conclusions in the
above Decision -ere reached in consultation before the case -as assigned to the -riter of the o#inion
of the Court$


A0TEM%/ V$ "A';A'%)A'
Chief .ustice



c /n leave$
N1O <a- and Disorder& The Fran*lin Memorial <ectures& .ustice Tom C$ Clar* 1 <ecturer& Volume
C%C& 19M1& #$ +9$
N+O Chief .ustice Artemio V$ "anganiban& <iberty and "ros#erity& February 1,& +99!$

N>O Articulated in the -ritings of the ;ree* #hiloso#her& 4eraclitus of E#hesus& ,9=L9 )$C$& -ho
#ro#ounded universal im#ermanence and that all things& notably o##osites are interrelated$
NO 0es#ondentsh Comment dated March !& +99!$
N,O %bid$
N!O %bid$
NMO Minutes of the %ntelligence 0e#ort and 5ecurity ;rou#& "hili##ine Army& Anne2 6%7 of
0es#ondentsh Consolidated Comment$
NLO 0es#ondentsh Consolidated Comment$
N9O %bid$
N19O %bid$

N11O "etition in ;$0$ 'o$ 1M1>9!& #$ ,$
N1+O "olice action in various #arts of Metro Manila and the reactions of the huge cro-ds being
dis#ersed -ere broadcast as 6brea*ing ne-s7 by the ma(or television stations of this country$

N1>O "etition in ;$0$ 'o$ 1M199& #$ 11$

N1O %bid$

N1,O The #rime duty of the ;overnment is to serve and #rotect the #eo#le$ The ;overnment may call
u#on the #eo#le to defend the 5tate and& in the fulfillment thereof& all citiHens may be re8uired& under
conditions #rovided by la-& to render #ersonal military or civil service$
N1!O 'o #erson shall be de#rived of life& liberty& or #ro#erty -ithout due #rocess of la-& nor shall any
#erson be denied the e8ual #rotection of the la-s$
N1MO The right of the #eo#le to be secure in their #ersons& houses& #a#ers& and effects against
unreasonable searches and seiHures of -hatever nature and for any #ur#ose shall be inviolable& and no
search -arrant or -arrant of arrest shall issue e2ce#t u#on #robable cause to be determined #ersonally
by the (udge after e2amination under oath or affirmation of the com#lainant and the -itnesses he may
#roduce& and #articularly describing the #lace to be searched and the #ersons or things to be seiHed$
N1LO 'o la- shall be #assed abridging the freedom of s#eech& of e2#ression& or of the #ress& or the
right of the #eo#le #eaceably to assemble and #etition the ;overnment for redress of grievances$
N19O B1D The Congress& by a vote of t-o=thirds of both 4ouses in (oint session assembled& voting
se#arately& shall have the sole #o-er to declare the e2istence of a state of -ar$
B+D %n times of -ar or other national emergency& the Congress may& by la-& authoriHe the "resident& for
a limited #eriod and sub(ect to such restrictions as it may #rescribe& to e2ercise #o-ers necessary and
#ro#er to carry out a declared national #olicy$ :nless sooner -ithdra-n by resolution of the Congress&
such #o-ers shall cease u#on the ne2t ad(ournment thereof$
N+9O %n times of national emergency& -hen the #ublic interest so re8uires& the 5tate may& during the
emergency and under reasonable terms #rescribed by it& tem#orarily ta*e over or direct the o#eration of
any #rivately o-ned #ublic utility or business affected -ith #ublic interest$
N+1O 1 Cranch 1>M N1L9>O$
N++O 4o-ard <$ Mac)ain& 65ome As#ects of .udicial 0evie-&7 )acon <ectures on the Constitution of
the :nited 5tates B)oston: )oston :niversity 4effernan "ress& 19>9D& ##$ >M!=MM$
N+>O The Court has no self=starting ca#acity and must a-ait the action of some litigant so aggrieved
as to have a (usticiable case$ B5ha#iro and Tresolini& American Constitutional <a-& 5i2th Edition& 19L>&
#$ M9D$
N+O CruH& "hili##ine "olitical <a-& +99+ Ed$& #$ +,9$
N+,O %bid$
N+!O "rovince of )atangas v$ 0omulo& ;$0$ 'o$ 1,+MM& May +M& +99& +9 5C0A M>!$
N+MO )anco Fili#ino 5avings and Mortgage )an* v$ TuaHon& .r$& ;$0$ 'o$ 1>+M9,& March 19& +99&
+, 5C0A 1+9G Vda$ De Dabao v$ Court of A##eals& ;$0$ 'o$ 11!,& March +>& +99& +! 5C0A 91G
and "aloma v$ Court of A##eals& ;$0$ 'o$ 1,>1& 'ovember 11& +99>& 1, 5C0A ,99$
N+LO 0oyal Cargo Cor#oration v$ Civil Aeronautics )oard& ;$0$ 'os$ 19>9,,=,!& .anuary +!& +99&
+1 5C0A +1G Vda$ De Dabao v$ Court of A##eals& su#ra$
N+9O <acson v$ "ereH& ;$0$ 'o$ 1MML9& May 19& +991& >,M 5C0A M,!$
N>9O CruH& "hili##ine "olitical <a-& +99+& #$ +!L citing 'orton v$ 5helby& 11L :$5$ +,$
N>1O "rovince of )atangas v$ 0omulo& su#ra$
N>+O <acson v$ "ereH& su#ra$
N>>O "rovince of )atangas v$ 0omulo& su#ra$
N>O Alba?a v$ Commission on Elections& ;$0$ 'o$ 1!>>9+& .uly +>& +99& >, 5C0A 9L& Aco# v$
;uingona& .r$& ;$0$ 'o$ 1>L,,& .uly +& +99+& >L> 5C0A ,MM& 5anla*as v$ E2ecutive 5ecretary& ;$0$
'o$ 1,99L,& February >& +99& +1 5C0A !,!$
N>,O 5alonga v$ CruH "a?o& et al$& 'o$ <= ,9,+& February 1L& 19L,& 1> 5C0A >L$

N>!O ;$0$ 'o$ 1,99L,& February >& +99& +1 5C0A !,!$

N>MO )lac*hs <a- Dictionary& !th Ed$ 1991& #$ 91$
N>LO 5alonga v$ 3arner )arnes T Co$& LL "hil$ 1+, B19,1D$
N>9O +M, Ry 91& 1+9 53+d M!, B19>LD$
N9O 19 3end$ ,! B1L>MD$
N1O +>+ 'C L& ,9 5E+d >,9 B19,9D$
N+O >9+ :$5$ !>>$
N>O >1L :$5$ !$
NO !, "hil$ ,! B19>MD$
N,O ;$0$ 'o$ 11M& 'ovember M& 19, B:nre#ortedD$
N!O ;$0$ 'o$ +9M& .anuary 11& 19,9 B:nre#ortedD$
NMO 119 "hil$ >>1 B19!9D$
NLO MM "hil$ 191+ B19MD$
N9O L "hil$ >!L B199D The Court held: 6Above all& the transcendental im#ortance to the #ublic of
these cases demands that they be settled #rom#tly and definitely& brushing aside& if -e must&
technicalities of #rocedure$7
N,9O <='o$ 999& .anuary >1& 19M,& !+ 5C0A +M,$
N,1O Ta?ada v$ Tuvera& ;$0$ 'o$ !>91,& A#ril +& 19L,& 1>! 5C0A +M& -here the Court held that
-here the 8uestion is one of #ublic duty and the enforcement of a #ublic right& the #eo#le are the real
#arty in interest& and it is sufficient that the #etitioner is a citiHen interested in the e2ecution of the la-G
<egas#i v$ Civil 5ervice Commission& ;$0$ 'o$ M+119& May +9& 19LM& 1,9 5C0A ,>9& -here the
Court held that in cases involving an assertion of a #ublic right& the re8uirement of #ersonal interest is
satisfied by the mere fact that the #etitioner is a citiHen and #art of the general #ublic -hich #ossesses
the right$
Ra#atiran ng mga 'agliling*od sa "amahalaan ng "ili#inas& %nc$ v$ Tan& <$ 'o$ L1>11& .une >9&
19LL& 1!> 5C0A >M1& -here the Court held that ob(ections to ta2#ayersh lac* of #ersonality to sue may
be disregarded in determining the validity of the VAT la-G
Albano v$ 0eyes& ;$0$ 'o$ L>,,1& .uly 11& 19L9& 1M, 5C0A +!& -here the Court held that -hile no
e2#enditure of #ublic funds -as involved under the 8uestioned contract& nonetheless considering its
im#ortant role in the economic develo#ment of the country and the magnitude of the financial
consideration involved& #ublic interest -as definitely involved and this clothed #etitioner -ith the legal
#ersonality under the disclosure #rovision of the Constitution to 8uestion it$
Association of 5mall <ando-ners in the "hili##ines& %nc$ v$ 5ec$ of Agrarian 0eform& ;$0$ 'o$
MLM+& .uly 1& 19L9& 1M, 5C0A >>& -here the Court ruled that -hile #etitioners are strictly s#ea*ing&
not covered by the definition of a 6#ro#er #arty&7 nonetheless& it has the discretion to -aive the
re8uirement& in determining the validity of the im#lementation of the CA0"$
;onHales v$ Macaraig& .r$& ;$0$ 'o$ LM!>!& 'ovember 19& 1999& 191 5C0A ,+& -here the Court
held that it en(oys the o#en discretion to entertain ta2#ayerhs suit or not and that a member of the
5enate has the re8uisite #ersonality to bring a suit -here a constitutional issue is raised$
Maceda v$ Macaraig& .r$& ;$0$ 'o$ LL+91& May >1& 1991& 19M 5C0A MM1& -here the Court held that
#etitioner as a ta2#ayer& has the #ersonality to file the instant #etition& as the issues involved& #ertains to
illegal e2#enditure of #ublic moneyG
/sme?a v$ Comelec& ;$0$ 'o$ 199>1L& 199>9L& 1991M&199+9& .uly >9& 1991& 199 5C0A M,9&
-here the Court held that -here serious constitutional 8uestions are involved& the 6transcendental
im#ortance7 to the #ublic of the cases involved demands that they be settled #rom#tly and definitely&
brushing aside technicalities of #roceduresG
De ;uia v$ Comelec& ;$0$ 'o$ 19M1+& May !& 199+& +9L 5C0A +9& -here the Court held that the
im#ortance of the issues involved concerning as it does the #olitical e2ercise of 8ualified voters
affected by the a##ortionment& necessitates the brushing aside of the #rocedural re8uirement of locus
standi$
N,+O ;$0$ 'o$ 1>>+,9& .uly 9& +99+& >L 5C0A 1,+$

N,>O ;$0$ 'os$ 1>L,M9& 1>L,M+& 1>L,LM& 1>L!L9& 1>L!9L& /ctober 19& +999& >+ 5C0A 9$

N,O ;$0$ 'o$ 1,1,& A#ril 11& +99+& >L9 5C0A M>9$

N,,O 5u#ra$

N,!O ;$0$ 'o$ 11L919& 'ovember 1!& 199,& +,9 5C0A 1>9$
N,MO ;$0$ 'o$ 1>+9++& A#ril +1& 199L& +L9 5C0A >>M$
N,LO ;$0$ 'o$ 1MML9& 1MML1& 1MM99& 1ML19& May 19& +991& >,M 5C0A M,!$
N,9O ;$0$ 'o$ 1,99L,& February >& +99& +1 5C0A !,!$
N!9O +>, 5C0A ,9! B199D$

N!1O 5u#ra$

N!+O 5u#ra$

N!>O 19M 5C0A ,+& !9 B1991D$

N!O 5u#ra$

N!,O 5ee 'AAC" v$ Alabama& >,M :$5$ 9 B19,LD$
N!!O ;$0$ 'o$ 11+L& August 1,& +999& >>L 5C0A L1$

N!MO From the deliberations of the Constitutional Commission& the intent of the framers is clear that
the immunity of the "resident from suit is concurrent only -ith his tenure and not his term$ BDe <eon&
"hili##ine Constitutional <a-& Vol$ +& +99 Ed$& #$ >9+D$
N!LO 5ection 1& Article C% of the Constitution #rovides: "ublic /ffice is a #ublic trust$ "ublic officers
and em#loyees must at all times be accountable to the #eo#le& serve them -ith utmost res#onsibility&
integrity& loyalty and efficiency& act -ith #atriotism and (ustice& and lead modest lives$

N!9O %bid$& 5ec$ +$

NM9O 'o$ +99L& 5e#tember >9& +99,& M1 5C0A LM$
NM1O 91 "hil$ LL+ B19,+D$
NM+O 'o$ <=>>9!& December 11& 19M1& + 5C0A L$
NM>O 'o$ <=>,,!& 5e#tember 1M& 19M& ,9 5C0A 1L>$
NMO 'o$ <=!1>LL& A#ril +9& 19L>& 1+1 5C0A M+$
NM,O Ta?ada v$ Cuenco& 19> "hil$ 19,1 B19,MD$
NM!O <ansang v$ ;arcia& su#ra& ##$ M> and L1$
NMMO 5u#ra$

NMLO 6Five .ustices 1 Antonio& Ma*asiar& Esguerra& FernandeH& and A8uino 1 too* the #osition that the
#roclamation of martial la- and the arrest and detention orders accom#anying the #roclamation #osed a
6#olitical 8uestion7 beyond the (urisdiction of the Court$ .ustice Antonio& in a se#arate o#inion
concurred in by Ma*asiar& FernandeH& and A8uino& argued that the Constitution had deliberately set u#
a strong #residency and had concentrated #o-ers in times of emergency in the hands of the "resident
and had given him broad authority and discretion -hich the Court -as bound to res#ect$ 4e made
reference to the decision in <ansang v$ ;arcia but read it as in effect u#holding the 6#olitical 8uestion7
#osition$ FernandeH& in a se#arate o#inion& also argued <ansang& even understood as giving a narro-
sco#e of revie- authority to the Court& affirmed the im#ossible tas* of ichec*ingh the action ta*en by
the "resident$ 4ence& he advocated a return to )arcelon v$ )a*er$ 5imilarly& Esguerra advocated the
abandonment of <ansang and a return to )arcelon$ And& although .ustices Castro& Fernando& Mu?oH=
"alma& and& im#licitly& Teehan*ee& lined u# on the side of (usticiability as enunciated in <ansang& 2 2
2 )arredo& ho-ever& -anted to have the best of both -orlds and o#ted for the vie- that 6#olitical
8uestions are not #er se beyond the Courths (urisdiction $$$ but that as a matter of #olicy im#licit in the
Constitution itself the Court should abstain from interfering -ith the E2ecutivehs "roclamation$7
B)ernas& The 19LM Constitution of the 0e#ublic of the "hili##ines: A Commentary& 199! Edition& #$
M9$D
NM9O 5ee 5e#arate /#inion of .$ "uno in %ntegrated )ar of the "hili##ines v$ Aamora& su#ra$
NL9O 5u#ra$
NL1O CruH& "hili##ine "olitical <a-& +99+ Ed$& #$ +M$
NL+O 5antiago v$ ;uingona& .r$& ;$0$ 'o$ 1>,MM& 'ovember 1L& 199L& +9L 5C0A M,!$
NL>O 5u#ra& L1=L+$
NLO 5mith and Cotter& "o-ers of the "resident during Crises& 19M+& #$ !$
NL,O %bid$
NL!O The 5ocial Contract B'e- Por*: Dutton& 19,9D& ##$ 1+>=1+$
NLMO 5mith and Cotter& "o-ers of the "resident during Crises& 19M+& ##$ !=M$
NLLO 0e#resentative ;overnment& 'e- Por*& Dutton& 19,9& ##$ +M& +MM=ML$
NL9O The Discourses& )*$ 1& Ch$ CCC%V$
N99O 5mith and Cotter& "o-ers of the "resident During Crises& 19M+$ #$ L$
N91O %bid$
N9+O 5ee The "roblem of Constitutional Dictatorshi#& #$ >+L$
N9>O %bid$& #$ >,>$
N9O %bid$& ##$ >>L=>1$
N9,O 5mith and Cotter& "o-ers of the "resident During Crises& 19M+& #$ 9$
N9!O Constitutional ;overnment and Democracy& Ch$ CCV%& rev$ ed$& )oston: ;inn T Co$& 199& #$
,L9$
N9MO %bid& ##$ ,M=,L$
N9LO 5mith and Cotter& "o-ers of the "resident During Crises& 19M+& #$ 19$
N99O 0ossiter& Constitutional Dictatorshi#& "rinceton: "rinceton :niversity "ress& 19L& ##$ +9L=>9!$
N199O 5mith and Cotter& "o-ers of the "resident During Crises& 19M+& #$ 11$
N191O 5mith and Cotter& "o-ers of the "resident During Crises& 19M+& #$ 1+$
N19+O Poungsto-n 5heet and Tube Co$ v$ 5a-yer& >> :$5$ ,M9G M+ 5u#$ Ct$ L!>G 9! <$ Ed$ 11,>
B19,+D& 5ee Concurring /#inion .$ .ac*son$

N19>O 5ee Concurring /#inion of .ustice MendoHa in Estrada v$ 5andiganbayan& ;$0$ 'o$ 1L,!9&
'ovember 19& +991& >!9 5C0A >9>$

N19O L1 :$5$ M>9& 9, <$ Ed$ +d !9M B19LMD$

N19,O 5u#ra$

N19!O 5ee Concurring /#inion of .ustice MendoHa in Estrada v$ 5andiganbayan& su#ra$

N19MO )roadric* v$ /*lahoma& 1> :$5$ !91 B19M>D$

N19LO %bid$
N199O 91 :$5$ >M& ,+=,>& +M <$Ed$+d !!9& !L9 B19M1D& :nited 5tates v$ 0aines& >!+ :$5$ 1M&
<$Ed$+d ,+ B19!9DG )oard of Trustees& 5tate :niv$ of '$P v$ Fo2& 9+ :$5$ !9& 19! <$Ed$+d >LL
B19L9D$

N119O Ermita=Malate 4otel and Motel /#erators Association v$ City Mayor& 'o$ <=+!9>& .uly >1&
19!M& +9 5C0A L9 B19!MD$
N111O ;$0$ 'o$ 1,99L,& February >& +99& +1 5C0A !,!& -herein this Court sustained "resident
Arroyohs declaration of a 6state of rebellion7 #ursuant to her calling=out #o-er$


N11+O 5u#ra$

N11>O 3estel 3illoughby& Constitutional <a- of the :nited 5tates 1,91 N+d Ed$ 19+9& 8uoted in
A8uino v$ "once Enrile& ,9 5C0A 1L> B19MD& BFernando& .$& concurringDO$

N11O 0etired Associate .ustice of the 5u#reme Court$

N11,O 5ection 1& Article V%% of the Constitution$

N11!O 5ection ,& Article V%% of the Constitution$

N11MO 5ection 1L& Article V%% of the Constitution$

N11LO 5ection !& Article CV% of the Constitution$

N119O 5ee 0e#ublic Act 'o$ !9M,$

N1+9O %ronically& even the Mth 3hereas Clause of "" 191M -hich states that 6Article +& 5ection of our
Constitution ma*es the defense and #reservation of the democratic institutions and the 5tate the
#rimary duty of ;overnment7 re#licates more closely 5ection +& Article + of the 19M> Constitution than
5ection & Article + of the 19LM Constitution -hich #rovides that& 6NtNhe #rime duty of the ;overnment
is to serve and #rotect the #eo#le$7

N1+1O Ag#alo& 5tatutory Construction& Fourth Edition& 199L& #$ 1& citing <egas#i v$ Ministry of
Finance& 11, 5C0A 1L B19L+DG ;arcia="adilla v$ "once=Enrile& su#ra$ A8uino v$ Commission on
Election& su#ra$
N1++O 5ection 1M& Article C%V of the 19M> Constitution reads: 6%n times of national emergency -hen
the #ublic interest so re8uires& the 5tate may tem#orarily ta*e over or direct the o#eration of any
#rivately o-ned #ublic utility or business affected -ith #ublic interest$7

N1+>O Antieau& Constitutional Construction& 19L+& #$+1$

N1+O CruH& "hili##ine "olitical <a-& 199L& #$ 9$

N1+,O >> :$5$ ,M9G M+ 5u#$ Ct$ L!>G 9! <$ Ed$ 11,> B19,+D$

N1+!O Tresolini& American Constitutional <a-& 19,9& "o-er of the "resident& ##$ +,,=+,M$
N1+MO 5mith and Cotter& "o-ers of the "resident During Crises& 19M+& #$ 1

N1+LO The Federal Emergency 0elief Act of 19>> o#ened -ith a declaration that the economic
de#ression created a serious emergency& due to -ide=s#read unem#loyment and the inade8uacy of 5tate
and local relief funds& $ $ $ ma*ing it im#erative that the Federal ;overnment coo#erate more effectively
-ith the several 5tates and Territories and the District of Columbia in furnishing relief to their needy
and distressed #eo#le$ "resident 0oosevelt in declaring a ban* holiday a fe- days after ta*ing office in
19>> #roclaimed that 6heavy and un-arranted -ithdra-als of gold and currency from j ban*ing
institutions for the #ur#ose of hoardingG $$$ resulting in 6sever drains on the 'ationhs stoc*s of gold j
have created a national emergency&7 re8uiring his action$ Enacted -ithin months after .a#anhs attac*
on "earl 4arbor& the Emergency "rice Control Act of 19+ -as designed to #revent economic
dislocations from endangering the national defense and security and the effective #rosecution of the
-ar$ B5mith and Cotter& "o-ers of the "resident During Crises& 19M+& #$1LD

N1+9O The Emergency A##ro#riation Act for Fiscal 19>, a##ro#riated fund to meet the emergency and
necessity for relief in stric*en agricultural areas and in another section referred to 6the #resent drought
emergency$7N1+9O The %ndia Emergency Food Aid Act of 19,1 #rovided for emergency shi#ments of
food to %ndia to meet famine conditions then ravaging the great Asian sub=continent$ The
Communication Act of 19> and its 19,1 amendment grant the "resident certain #o-ers in time of
6#ublic #eril or disaster$7 The other statutes #rovide for e2isting or antici#ated emergencies attributable
to earth8ua*e& flood& tornado& cyclone& hurricane& conflagration an landslides$N1+9O There is also a .oint
0esolution of A#ril 19>M$ %t made 6funds available for the control of inci#ient or emergency outbrea*s
of insect #ests or #lant diseases& including grassho##ers& Mormon cric*ets& and chinch bugs$ B!! 5tat
>1,& .uly 1& 19,+& 5ec$ + NaOD 5u#ra$

N1>9O 'ational 5ecurity may be cataloged under the heads of B1D 'eutrality& B+D Defense& B>D Civil
Defense& and BD 4ostilities or 3ar$ B#$ ++D The Federal Civil Defense Act of 19,9 contem#lated an
attac* or series of attac*s by an enemy of the :nited 5tates -hich conceivably -ould cause substantial
damage or in(ury to civilian #ro#erty or #ersons in the :nited 5tates by any one of several meansG
sabotage& the use of bombs& shellfire& or atomic& radiological& chemical& bacteriological means or other
-ea#ons or #rocesses$ 5uch an occurrence -ould cause a 6'ational Emergency for Civil Defense
"ur#oses&7 or 6a state of civil defense emergency&7 during the term -hich the Civil Defense
Administrator -ould have recourse to e2traordinary #o-ers outlined in the Act$ The 'e- Por*='e-
.ersey Civil Defense Com#act su##lies an illustration in this conte2t for emergency coo#eration$
6Emergency7 as used in this com#act shall mean and include invasion& or other hostile action& disaster&
insurrection or imminent danger thereof$ B %d$& #$1,=1!D

N1>1O CruH& "hili##ine "olitical <a-& 199L& #$ 9,$

N1>+O 0ecord of the Constitutional Commission& Vol$ %%%& ##$ +!!=+!M$

N1>>O 0ecord of the Constitutional Convention& ##$ !L=!9$

N1>O L "hil$ >!L B199D$
N1>,O :ren v )agley& 11L /r MM& +, " 19M& ! A<0 11M>$
N1>!O ;utierreH v$ Middle 0io ;rande Conservancy Dist$& > 'M >!& +L+ " 1& M9 A<0 1+!1& cert
den +L9 :5 !19& M < ed !,>& ,9 5 Ct 1,L$
N1>MO 5anitation Dist$ V$ Cam#bell BRyD& +9 53 +d M!MG 0ochester v$ ;utberlett& +11 'P >99& 19,
'E ,L$
N1>LO 4ammond "ac*ing Co$ v$ Ar*ansas& +1+ :5 >++& ,> < ed ,>9& +9 5 Ct >M9$
N1>9O De <eon and De <eon .r$& Administrative <a-& Te2t and Cases& +991 Ed$& #$ 11,$
N19O %bid$
N11O %n a <ecture delivered on March 1+& +99+ as #art of the 5u#reme Court Centenary <ecture
5eries& 4ans Roechler& "rofessor of "hiloso#hy at the :niversity of %nnsbruc* BAustriaD and "resident
of the %nternational "rogress /rganiHation& s#ea*ing on 6The :nited 'ations& The %nternational 0ule of
<a- and Terrorism7 cited in the Dissenting /#inion of .ustice Ra#unan in <im v$ E2ecutive 5ecretary&
;$0$ 'o$ 1,1,& A#ril 11& +99+& >L9 5C0A M>9$
N1+O 5ection +& Article %%% of the 19LM Constitution$
N1>O )ernas& The 19LM Constitution of the 0e#ublic of the "hili##ines& A 0evie-er="rimer& #$ ,1$
N1O Anne2 6A7 of the Memorandum in ;$0$ 'o$ 1M1>9!& ##$ +M1=+M>$
N1,O An Act Ensuring the Free E2ercise by the "eo#le of their 0ight "eaceably to Assemble and
"etition the ;overnment for /ther "ur#oses$

N1!O Anne2 6A7 of the Memorandum in ;$0$ 'o$ 1M1>9!& ##$ +M1=+M>$
N1MO %bid$
N1LO +99 :$5$ >,>& ,M 5$ Ct$ +,,& L1 <$ Ed$ +ML$

N19O 0eyes v$ )agatsing& 'o$ <=!,>!!& 'ovember 9& 19L>& 1+, 5C0A ,,>$

N1,9O 5ection ,$ A##lication re8uirements = All a##lications for a #ermit shall com#ly -ith the
follo-ing guidelines:

2 2 2 2 2 2
BcD %f the mayor is of the vie- that there is imminent and grave danger of a substantive
evil -arranting the denial or modification of the #ermit& he shall immediately inform the a##licant -ho
must be heard on the matter$
N1,1O "etition in ;$0$ 'o$ 1M199& #$ 11$
N1,+O 'o$ <=!1!1& December +!& 19L& 1>> 5C0A L1!$

N1,>O Dissenting /#inion& .$ CruH& 'ational "ress Club v$ Commission on Elections& ;$0$ 'os$
19+!,>& 19+9+, T 19+9L>& March ,& 199+& +9M 5C0A 1$

N1,O )oyd v$ :nited 5tates& 11! :$5$ !1! B1LL!D$
N1,,O Transcri#t of 5tenogra#hic 'otes& /ral Arguments& March M& +99!& #$ M9$
N1,!O %bid$& ##$ >+=>>$

N1,MO %bid& ##$ ,9M=,9L$
N1,LO 5mith and Cotter& "o-ers of the "resident During Crisis& 19M+& #$ 1!$
E' )A'C
N;$0$ 'o$ 1L>>9$ February +>& +99,O
<:CE'A ;0A'D CE'T0A< TE0M%'A<& %'C$& #etitioner& vs$ .AC <%'E0& %'C$& res#ondent$
D E C % 5 % / '
CA0"%/ M/0A<E5& .$:
0es#ondent& .AC <iner& %nc$& a common carrier o#erating buses -hich #ly various routes to and from
<ucena City& assailed& via a #etition for #rohibition and in(unctionN1O against the City of <ucena& its
Mayor& and the 5angguniang "anlungsod of <ucena before the 0egional Trial Court B0TCD of <ucena
City& City /rdinance 'os$ 1!>1 and 1MML as unconstitutional on the ground that& inter alia& the same
constituted an invalid e2ercise of #olice #o-er& an undue ta*ing of #rivate #ro#erty& and a violation of
the constitutional #rohibition against mono#olies$ The salient #rovisions of the ordinances are:
/rdinance 'o$ 1!>1N+O
A' /0D%'A'CE ;0A'T%'; T4E <:CE'A ;0A'D CE'T0A< TE0M%'A<& %'C$& A
F0A'C4%5E T/ C/'5T0:CT& F%'A'CE& E5TA)<%54& /"E0ATE A'D MA%'TA%' A
C/MM/' ):5=.EE"'EP TE0M%'A< FAC%<%TP %' T4E C%TP /F <:CE'A
2 2 2
5ECT%/' 1$ 1 There is hereby granted to the <ucena ;rand Central Terminal& %nc$& its successors or
assigns& hereinafter referred to as the 6grantee7& a franchise to construct& finance& establish& o#erate& and
maintain a common bus=(ee#ney terminal facility in the City of <ucena$
5ECT%/' +$ 1 This franchise shall continue for a #eriod of t-enty=five years& counted from the
a##roval of this /rdinance& and rene-able at the o#tion of the grantee for another #eriod of t-enty=five
B+,D years u#on such e2#iration$
2 2 2
5ECT%/' $ 1 0es#onsibilities and /bligations of the City ;overnment of <ucena$ 1 During the
e2istence of the franchise& the City ;overnment of <ucena shall have the follo-ing res#onsibilities and
obligations:
2 2 2
BcD %t shall not grant any third #arty any #rivilege andZor concession to o#erate a bus& mini=bus andZor
(ee#ney terminal$
2 2 2
/rdinance 'o$ 1MMLN>O
A' /0D%'A'CE 0E;:<AT%'; T4E E'T0A'CE T/ T4E C%TP /F <:CE'A /F A<< ):5E5&
M%'%=):5E5 A'D /:T=/F=T/3' "A55E';E0 .EE"'EP5 A'D F/0 T4%5 ":0"/5E&
AME'D%'; /0D%'ACE '/$ 1+9& 5E0%E5 /F 199>& A'D /0D%'A'CE '/$ 1,,M& 5E0%E5 /F
199,
2 2 2
5ECT%/' 1$ 1 The entrance to the City of <ucena of all buses& mini=buses and out=of=to-n #assenger
(ee#neys is hereby regulated as follo-s:
BaD All buses& mini=buses and out=of=to-n #assenger (ee#neys shall be #rohibited from entering the city
and are hereby directed to #roceed to the common terminal& for #ic*ing=u# andZor dro##ing of their
#assengers$
BbD All tem#orary terminals in the City of <ucena are hereby declared ino#erable starting from the
effectivity of this ordinance$
2 2 2
5ECT%/' >$ 1 aD 5ection 1 of /rdinance 'o$ 1,,M& 5eries of 199,& is hereby amended to read as
follo-s:
)uses& mini=buses& and (ee#ney ty#e mini=buses from other munici#alities andZor local government
units going to <ucena City are directed to #roceed to the Common Terminal located at Diversion 0oad&
)rgy$ %layang Du#ay& to unload and load #assengers$
2 2 2
cD 5ection > of /rdinance 'o$ 1,,M& 5eries of 199,& is hereby amended to read as follo-s:
"assenger buses& mini=buses& and (ee#ney ty#e mini=buses coming from other munici#alities andZor
local government units shall utiliHe the facilities of the <ucena ;rand Central Terminal at Diversion
0oad& )rgy$ %layang Du#ay& this City& and no other terminals shall be situated inside or -ithin the City
of <ucenaG
dD 5ection of /rdinance 'o$ 1,,M& 5eries of 199,& is hereby amended to read as follo-s:
"assenger buses& mini=buses& and (ee#ney ty#e mini=buses coming from other munici#alities andZor
local government units shall avail of the facilities of the <ucena ;rand Central Terminal -hich is
hereby designated as the officially sanctioned common terminal for the City of <ucenaG
eD 5ection , of /rdinance 'o$ 1,,M& 5eries of 199,& is hereby amended to read as follo-s:
The <ucena ;rand Central Terminal is the #ermanent common terminal as this is the entity -hich -as
given the e2clusive franchise by the 5angguniang "anglungsod under /rdinance 'o$ 1!>1G BEm#hasis
and underscoring su##liedD
These ordinances& by granting an e2clusive franchise for t-enty five years& rene-able for another
t-enty five years& to one entity for the construction and o#eration of one common bus and (ee#ney
terminal facility in <ucena City& to be located outside the city #ro#er& -ere #rofessedly aimed to-ards
alleviating the traffic congestion alleged to have been caused by the e2istence of various bus and
(ee#ney terminals -ithin the city& as the 6E2#lanatory 'ote7=3hereas Clause ado#ting /rdinance 'o$
1MML states:
34E0EA5& in line -ith the -orsening traffic condition of the City of <ucena& and -ith the #ur#ose of
easing and regulating the flo- of the same& it is im#erative that the )uses& Mini=)uses and out=of=to-n
(ee#neys be #rohibited from maintaining terminals -ithin the City& but instead directing to #roceed to
the <ucena ;rand Central Terminal for #ur#oses of #ic*ing=u# andZor dro##ing off their #assengersGNO
0es#ondent& -ho had maintained a terminal -ithin the city& -as one of those affected by the
ordinances$
"etitioner& <ucena ;rand Central Terminal& %nc$& claiming legal interest as the grantee of the e2clusive
franchise for the o#eration of the common terminal&N,O -as allo-ed to intervene in the #etition before
the trial court$
%n the hearing conducted on 'ovember +,& 199L& all the #arties agreed to dis#ense -ith the #resentation
of evidence and to submit the case for resolution solely on the basis of the #leadings filed$N!O
)y /rder of March >1& 1999&NMO )ranch , of the <ucena 0TC rendered (udgment& the dis#ositive
#ortion of -hich reads:
34E0EF/0E& in vie- of the foregoing #remises& (udgment is hereby rendered& as follo-s:
1$ Declaring City /rdinance 'o$ 1!>1 as valid& having been issued in the e2ercise of the #olice #o-er
of the City ;overnment of <ucena insofar as the grant of franchise to the <ucena ;rand Central
Terminal& %nc$& to construct& finance& establish& o#erate and maintain common bus=(ee#ney terminal
facility in the City of <ucenaG
+$ )ut ho-ever& declaring the #rovision of 5ec$ BcD of /rdinance 'o$ 1!>1 to the effect that the City
;overnment shall not grant any third #arty any #rivilege andZor concession to o#erate a bus& mini=bus
andZor (ee#ney terminal& as illegal and ultra vires because it contravenes the #rovisions of 0e#ublic Act
'o$ M1!9& other-ise *no-n as 6The <ocal ;overnment Code7G
>$ Declaring City /rdinance 'o$ 1MML as null and void& the same being also an ultra vires act of the
City ;overnment of <ucena arising from an invalid& o##ressive and unreasonable e2ercise of the #olice
#o-er& more s#ecifically& declaring illegal Nsections 1BbD& >BcD and >BeDOG
$ /rdering the issuance of a 3rit of "rohibition andZor %n(unction directing the res#ondents #ublic
officials& the City Mayor and the 5angguniang "anglungsod of <ucena& to cease and desist from
im#lementing /rdinance 'o$ 1MML insofar as said ordinance #rohibits or curtails #etitioner from
maintaining and o#erating its o-n bus terminal sub(ect to the conditions #rovided for in /rdinance 'o$
1,,M& 5ec$ >& -hich authoriHes the construction of terminal outside the #oblacion of <ucena CityG and
li*e-ise& insofar as said ordinance directs and com#els the #etitioner to use the <ucena ;rand Central
Terminal %nc$& and furthermore& insofar as it declares that no other terminals shall be situated&
constructed& maintained or established inside or -ithin the City of <ucenaG and furthermore&
,$ The Motion to Dismiss filed by the %ntervenor& <ucena ;rand Central Terminal %nc$& dated /ctober
19& 199L& is hereby DE'%ED for lac* of merit$
5/ /0DE0ED$ BEm#hasis and underscoring su##liedDNLO
"etitionerhs Motion for 0econsiderationN9O of the trial courths order having been denied by /rder of
August !& 1999&N19O it elevated it via #etition for revie- under 0ule , before this Court$N11O This
Court& by 0esolution of 'ovember +& 1999&N1+O referred the #etition to the Court of A##eals -ith
-hich it has concurrent (urisdiction& no s#ecial and im#ortant reason having been cited for it to ta*e
cogniHance thereof in the first instance$
)y Decision of December 1,& +999&N1>O the a##ellate court dismissed the #etition and affirmed the
challenged orders of the trial court$ %ts motion for reconsiderationN1O having been denied by the
a##ellate court by 0esolution dated .une ,& +991&N1,O #etitioner once again comes to this Court via
#etition for revie-&N1!O this time assailing the Decision and 0esolution of the Court of A##eals$
Decision on the #etition hinges on t-o issues& to -it: B1D -hether the trial court has (urisdiction over
the case& it not having furnished the /ffice of the 5olicitor ;eneral co#y of the orders it issued therein&
and B+D -hether the City of <ucena #ro#erly e2ercised its #olice #o-er -hen it enacted the sub(ect
ordinances$
"etitioner argues that since the trial court failed to serve a co#y of its assailed orders u#on the /ffice of
the 5olicitor ;eneral& it never ac8uired (urisdiction over the case& it citing 5ection ++& 0ule > of the
0ules -hich #rovides:
5EC$ ++$ 'otice to the 5olicitor ;eneral$E%n any action involving the validity of any treaty& la-&
ordinance& e2ecutive order& #residential decree& rules or regulations& the court in its discretion& may
re8uire the a##earance of the 5olicitor ;eneral -ho may be heard in #erson or through re#resentative
duly designated by him$ BEm#hasis and underscoring su##liedD
Furthermore& #etitioner invo*es 5ections > and of 0ule !> -hich res#ectively #rovide:
5EC$ >$ 'otice on 5olicitor ;eneral$ 1 %n any action -hich involves the validity of a statute& e2ecutive
order or regulation& or any other governmental regulation& the 5olicitor ;eneral shall be notified by the
#arty assailing the same and shall be entitled to be heard u#on such 8uestion$
5EC$ $ <ocal government ordinances$ 1 %n any action involving the validity of a local government
ordinance& the corres#onding #rosecutor or attorney of the local government unit involved shall be
similarly notified and entitled to be heard$ %f such ordinance is alleged to be unconstitutional& the
5olicitor ;eneral shall also be notified and entitled to be heard$ BEm#hasis and underscoring su##liedD
'o-here& ho-ever& is it stated in the above=8uoted rules that failure to notify the 5olicitor ;eneral
about the action is a (urisdictional defect$
%n fact& 0ule >& 5ection ++ gives the courts in any action involving the 6validity7 of any ordinance& inter
alia& 6discretion7 to notify the 5olicitor ;eneral$
5ection of 0ule !>& -hich more s#ecifically deals -ith cases assailing the constitutionality& not (ust
the validity& of a local government ordinance& directs that the 5olicitor ;eneral 6shall also be notified
and entitled to be heard$7 3ho -ill notify him& 5ec$ > of the same rule #rovides E it is the #arty
-hich is assailing the local governmenths ordinance$
More im#ortantly& ho-ever& this Court finds that no #rocedural defect& fatal or other-ise& attended the
dis#osition of the case$ For res#ondent actually served a co#y of its #etition u#on the /ffice of the
5olicitor ;eneral on /ctober 1& 199L& t-o days after it -as filed$ The 5olicitor ;eneral has issued a
Certification to that effect$N1MO There -as thus com#liance -ith above=8uoted rules$
0es#ecting the issue of -hether #olice #o-er -as #ro#erly e2ercised -hen the sub(ect ordinances -ere
enacted: As -ith the 5tate& the local government may be considered as having #ro#erly e2ercised its
#olice #o-er only if the follo-ing re8uisites are met: B1D the interests of the #ublic generally& as
distinguished from those of a #articular class& re8uire the interference of the 5tate& and B+D the means
em#loyed are reasonably necessary for the attainment of the ob(ect sought to be accom#lished and not
unduly o##ressive u#on individuals$ /ther-ise stated& there must be a concurrence of a la-ful sub(ect
and la-ful method$N1LO
That traffic congestion is a #ublic& not merely a #rivate& concern& cannot be gainsaid$ %n Calalang v$
3illiamsN19O -hich involved a statute authoriHing the Director of "ublic 3or*s to #romulgate rules
and regulations to regulate and control traffic on national roads& this Court held:
%n enacting said la-& therefore& the 'ational Assembly -as #rom#ted by considerations of #ublic
convenience and -elfare$ %t -as ins#ired by a desire to relieve congestion of traffic& -hich is& to say the
least& a menace to #ublic safety$ "ublic -elfare& then& lies at the bottom of the enactment of said la-&
and the state in order to #romote the general -elfare may interfere -ith #ersonal liberty& -ith #ro#erty&
and -ith business and occu#ations$N+9O BEm#hasis su##liedD
The 8uestioned ordinances having been enacted -ith the ob(ective of relieving traffic congestion in the
City of <ucena& they involve #ublic interest -arranting the interference of the 5tate$ The first re8uisite
for the #ro#er e2ercise of #olice #o-er is thus #resent$
0es#ondenths suggestion to have this Court loo* behind the e2#licit ob(ective of the ordinances -hich&
to it& -as actually to benefit the #rivate interest of #etitioner by coercing all bus o#erators to #atroniHe
its terminal does not lie$N+1O <im v$ "ac8uingN++O instructs:
$ $ $ NTOhis Court cannot loo* into allegations that "D 'o$ MM1 -as enacted to benefit a select grou#
-hich -as later given authority to o#erate the (ai=alai under "D 'o$ L19$ The e2amination of legislative
motivation is generally #rohibited$ B"almer v$ Thom#son& 9> :$5$ +1M& +9 <$ Ed$ +d >L N19M1O #er
)lac*& .$D There is& in the first #lace& absolute lac* of evidence to su##ort ADChs allegation of im#ro#er
motivation in the issuance of "D 'o$ MM1$ %n the second #lace& as already averred& this Court cannot go
behind the e2#ressed and #roclaimed #ur#oses of "D 'o$ MM1& -hich are reasonable and even laudable$
B:nderscoring su##liedDN+>O
This leaves for determination the issue of -hether the means em#loyed by the <ucena 5angguniang
"anlungsod to attain its #rofessed ob(ective -ere reasonably necessary and not unduly o##ressive u#on
individuals$
3ith the aim of localiHing the source of traffic congestion in the city to a single location&N+O the
sub(ect ordinances #rohibit the o#eration of all bus and (ee#ney terminals -ithin <ucena& including
those already e2isting& and allo- the o#eration of only one common terminal located outside the city
#ro#er& the franchise for -hich -as granted to #etitioner$ The common carriers #lying routes to and
from <ucena City are thus com#elled to close do-n their e2isting terminals and use the facilities of
#etitioner$
%n De la CruH v$ "aras&N+,O this Court declared unconstitutional an ordinance characteriHed by
overbreadth$ %n that case& the Munici#ality of )ocaue& )ulacan #rohibited the o#eration of all night
clubs& cabarets and dance halls -ithin its (urisdiction for the #rotection of #ublic morals$ 4eld the
Court:
%t cannot be said that such a s-ee#ing e2ercise of a la-ma*ing #o-er by )ocaue could 8ualify under
the term reasonable$ The ob(ective of fostering #ublic morals& a -orthy and desirable end can be
attained by a measure that does not encom#ass too -ide a field$ Certainly the ordinance on its face is
characteriHed by overbreadth$ The #ur#ose sought to be achieved could have been attained by
reasonable restrictions rather than by an absolute #rohibition$ The admonition in 5alaveria should be
heeded: 6The .udiciary should not lightly set aside legislative action -hen there is not a clear invasion
of #ersonal or #ro#erty rights under the guise of #olice regulation$7 %t is clear that in the guise of a
#olice regulation& there -as in this instance a clear invasion of #ersonal or #ro#erty rights& #ersonal in
the case of those individuals desirous of #atroniHing those night clubs and #ro#erty in terms of the
investments made and salaries to be earned by those therein em#loyed$ B:nderscoring su##liedDN+!O
%n <u#angco v$ Court of A##eals&N+MO this Court& in declaring unconstitutional the resolution sub(ect
thereof& advanced a similar consideration$ That case involved a resolution issued by the "rofessional
0egulation Commission -hich #rohibited e2aminees from attending revie- classes and receiving
handout materials& ti#s& and the li*e three days before the date of e2amination in order to #reserve the
integrity and #urity of the licensure e2aminations in accountancy$ )esides being unreasonable on its
face and violative of academic freedom& the measure -as found to be more s-ee#ing than -hat -as
necessary& viH:
'eedless to say& the enforcement of 0esolution 'o$ 19, is not a guarantee that the alleged lea*ages in
the licensure e2aminations -ill be eradicated or at least minimiHed$ Ma*ing the e2aminees suffer by
de#riving them of legitimate means of revie- or #re#aration on those last three #recious days -hen
they should be refreshing themselves -ith all that they have learned in the revie- classes and #re#aring
their mental and #sychological ma*e=u# for the e2amination day itself E -ould be li*e u#rooting the
tree to get rid of a rotten branch$ 3hat is needed to be done by the res#ondent is to find out the source
of such lea*ages and sto# it right there$ %f corru#t officials or #ersonnel should be terminated from their
loss& then so be it$ Fi2ers or s-indlers should be flushed out$ 5trict guidelines to be observed by
e2aminers should be set u# and if violations are committed& then licenses should be sus#ended or
revo*ed$ 2 2 2 BEm#hasis and underscoring su##liedDN+LO
As in De la CruHN+9O and <u#angco&N>9O the ordinances assailed herein are characteriHed by
overbreadth$ They go beyond -hat is reasonably necessary to solve the traffic #roblem$ Additionally&
since the com#ulsory use of the terminal o#erated by #etitioner -ould sub(ect the users thereof to fees&
rentals and charges& such measure is unduly o##ressive& as correctly found by the a##ellate court$ N>1O
3hat should have been done -as to determine e2actly -here the #roblem lies and then to sto# it right
there$
The true role of Constitutional <a- is to effect an e8uilibrium bet-een authority and liberty so that
rights are e2ercised -ithin the frame-or* of the la- and the la-s are enacted -ith due deference to
rights$ B:nderscoring su##liedDN>+O
A due deference to the rights of the individual thus re8uires a more careful formulation of solutions to
societal #roblems$
From the memorandumN>>O filed before this Court by #etitioner& it is gathered that the 5angguniang
"anlungsod had identified the cause of traffic congestion to be the indiscriminate loading and
unloading of #assengers by buses on the streets of the city #ro#er& hence& the conclusion that the
terminals contributed to the #roliferation of buses obstructing traffic on the city streets$
)us terminals #er se do not& ho-ever& im#ede or hel# im#ede the flo- of traffic$ 4o- the outright
#roscri#tion against the e2istence of all terminals& a#art from that franchised to #etitioner& can be
considered as reasonably necessary to solve the traffic #roblem& this Court has not been enlightened$ %f
terminals lac* ade8uate s#ace such that bus drivers are com#elled to load and unload #assengers on the
streets instead of inside the terminals& then reasonable s#ecifications for the siHe of terminals could be
instituted& -ith #ermits to o#erate the same denied those -hich are unable to meet the s#ecifications$
%n the sub(ect ordinances& ho-ever& the sco#e of the #roscri#tion against the maintenance of terminals
is so broad that even entities -hich might be able to #rovide facilities better than the franchised
terminal are barred from o#erating at all$
"etitioner argues& ho-ever& that other solutions for the traffic #roblem have already been tried but
#roven ineffective$ )ut the grant of an e2clusive franchise to #etitioner has not been sho-n to be the
only solution to the #roblem$
3hile the 5angguniang "anlungsod& via /rdinance 'o$ 1,,M&N>O #reviously directed bus o-ners and
o#erators to #ut u# their terminals 6outside the #oblacion of <ucena City&7 #etitioner informs that said
ordinance only resulted in the relocation of terminals to other -ell=#o#ulated barangays& thereby giving
rise to traffic congestion in those areas$N>,O Assuming that information to be true& the 5angguniang
"anlungsod -as not -ithout remedy$ %t could have defined& among other considerations& in a more
#recise manner& the area of relocation to avoid such conse8uences$
As for #etitionerhs argument that the challenged ordinances -ere enacted #ursuant to the #o-er of the
5angguniang "anlungsod to 6NrOegulate traffic on all streets and bridgesG #rohibit encroachments or
obstacles thereon and& -hen necessary in the interest of #ublic -elfare& authoriHe the removal of
encroachments and illegal constructions in #ublic #laces7:N>!O Absent any sho-ing& nay allegation& that
the terminals are encroaching u#on #ublic roads& they are not obstacles$ The buses -hich
indiscriminately load and unload #assengers on the city streets are$ The #o-er then of the 5angguniang
"anlungsod to #rohibit encroachments and obstacles does not e2tend to terminals$
'either are terminals #ublic nuisances as #etitioner argues$ For their o#eration is a legitimate business
-hich& by itself& cannot be said to be in(urious to the rights of #ro#erty& health& or comfort of the
community$
)ut even assuming that terminals are nuisances due to their alleged indirect effects u#on the flo- of
traffic& at most they are nuisance #er accidens& not #er se$
:nless a thing is nuisance #er se& ho-ever& it may not be abated via an ordinance& -ithout (udicial
#roceedings& as -as done in the case at bar$
%n Estate of ;regoria Francisco v$ Court of A##eals&N>MO this Court held:
0es#ondents can not see* cover under the general -elfare clause authoriHing the abatement of
nuisances -ithout (udicial #roceedings$ That tenet a##lies to a nuisance #er se& or one -hich affects the
immediate safety of #ersons and #ro#erty and may be summarily abated under the undefined la- of
necessity BMonteverde v$ ;eneroso& ,+ "hil$ 1+> N19L+OD$ The storage of co#ra in the 8uonset building
is a legitimate business$ )y its nature& it can not be said to be in(urious to rights of #ro#erty& of health or
of comfort of the community$ %f it be a nuisance #er accidens it may be so #roven in a hearing
conducted for that #ur#ose$ %t is not #er se a nuisance -arranting its summary abatement -ithout
(udicial intervention$ B:nderscoring su##liedDN>LO
%n "am#anga )us Co$& %nc$ v$ Munici#ality of TarlacN>9O -here the a##ellant=munici#ality similarly
argued that the terminal involved therein is a nuisance that may be abated by the Munici#al Council via
an ordinance& this Court held: 65uffice it to say that in the abatement of nuisances the #rovisions of the
Civil Code BArticles !9=M9MD must be observed and follo-ed$ This a##ellant failed to do$7
As for #etitionerhs claim that the challenged ordinances have actually been #roven effective in easing
traffic congestion: 3hether an ordinance is effective is an issue different from -hether it is reasonably
necessary$ %t is its reasonableness& not its effectiveness& -hich bears u#on its constitutionality$ %f the
constitutionality of a la- -ere measured by its effectiveness& then even tyrannical la-s may be (ustified
-henever they ha##en to be effective$
The Court is not una-are of the resolutions of various barangays in <ucena City su##orting the
establishment of a common terminal& and similar e2#ressions of su##ort from the #rivate sector& co#ies
of -hich -ere submitted to this Court by #etitioner$ The -eight of #o#ular o#inion& ho-ever& must be
balanced -ith that of an individualhs rights$
There is no 8uestion that not even the strongest moral conviction or the most urgent #ublic need&
sub(ect only to a fe- notable e2ce#tions& -ill e2cuse the by#assing of an individual@s rights$ %t is no
e2aggeration to say that a #erson invo*ing a right guaranteed under Article %%% of the Constitution is a
ma(ority of one even as against the rest of the nation -ho -ould deny him that right$N9O
34E0EF/0E& the #etition is hereby DE'%ED$
5/ /0DE0ED$
Davide& .r$& C$.$& "uno& "anganiban& Kuisumbing& Pnares=5antiago& 5andoval=;utierreH& Car#io&
Austria=MartineH& Corona& Calle(o& 5r$& AHcuna& Tinga& Chico='aHario& and ;arcia& ..$& concur$
N1O 0ecords at 1=19$
N+O 0ollo at 11L=1+9$
N>O %d$ at ++!=++9$
NO %d$ at ++M$
N,O 0ecords at ,,=,9$
N!O %d$ at >>9$
NMO %d$ at >+L=>!9$
NLO %d$ at >,L=>!9$
N9O %d$ at >L=>99$
N19O %d$ at !M=M9$
N11O CA 0ollo at 1L=,9$
N1+O %d$ at >+M$
N1>O %d$ at ,L=,,M$
N1O %d$ at ,!9=,M+$
N1,O %d$ at !++=!+>$
N1!O 0ollo at 9=9M inclusive of Anne2es 6A7 = 6P7$
N1MO CA 0ollo at 9L$
N1LO DEC5 v$ 5an Diego& 1L9 5C0A ,>>& ,>M B19L9D$
N19O M9 "hil$ M+! B199D$
N+9O %d$ at M>>$
N+1O 0ollo at ,>9$
N++O +9 5C0A !9 B199,D$
N+>O %d$ at !MM=!ML$
N+O 0ollo at ,9,$
N+,O 1+> 5C0A ,!9 B19L>D$
N+!O %d$ at ,ML$
N+MO 1!9 5C0A LL B19LLD$
N+LO %d$ at L!9$
N+9O 5u#ra$
N>9O 5u#ra$
N>1O 0ollo at ,9$
N>+O C0:A& %$& C/'5T%T:T%/'A< <A3 1 B199,D$
N>>O 0ollo at 9!& ,99=,19$
N>O %d$ at 199$
N>,O Memorandum of "etitioner& id$ at ,19$
N>!O 5ection ,LB,DBviD& </CA< ;/VE0'ME'T C/DE of 1991$
N>MO 199 5C0A ,9, B1991D$
N>LO %d$ at !91$
N>9O > 5C0A L1! B19!1D$
N9O Association of 5mall <ando-ners in the "hili##ines v$ 5ec$ of Agrarian 0eform& 1M, 5C0A >>&
>M,=>M!$ B19L9D$
E' )A'C
N;$0$ 'o$ 11L1+M$ A#ril 1+& +99,O
C%TP /F MA'%<A& 4/'$ A<F0ED/ 5$ <%M as the Mayor of the City of Manila& 4/'$ ./5E<%T/
<$ AT%E'AA& in his ca#acity as Vice=Mayor of the City of Manila and "residing /fficer of the City
Council of Manila& 4/'$ E0'E5T/ A$ '%EVA& 4/'$ ;/'AA</ "$ ;/'AA<E5& 4/'$ AVE<%'/
5$ CA%<%A'& 4/'$ 0/)E0T/ C$ /CAM"/& 4/'$ A<)E0T/ D/M%';/& 4/'$ 4/'/0%/ :$
</"EA& 4/'$ F0A'C%5C/ ;$ VA0/'A& .0$& 4/'$ 0/M:A<D/ 5$ MA0A'A'& 4/'$
'E5T/0 C$ "/'CE& .0$& 4/'$ 4:M)E0T/ )$ )A5C/& 4/'$ F<AV%A'/ F$ C/'CE"C%/'&
.0$& 4/'$ 0/ME/ ;$ 0%VE0A& 4/'$ MA':E< M$ AA0CA<& 4/'$ "ED0/ 5$ DE .E5:5& 4/'$
)E0'A0D%T/ C$ A';& 4/'$ MA':E< <$ K:%'& 4/'$ .4/5E" P$ </"EA& 4/'$ C4%RA ;$
;/& 4/'$ V%CT/0%A'/ A$ ME<E'DEA& 4/'$ E0'E5T/ V$"$ MACEDA& .0$& 4/'$ 0/<A'D/
"$ '%ET/& 4/'$ DA'%</ V$ 0/<EDA& 4/'$ ;E0%'/ A$ T/<E'T%'/& .0$& 4/'$ MA$ "AA E$
4E00E0A& 4/'$ ./EP D$ 4%A/'& 4/'$ FE<%C)E0T/ D$ E5"%0%T:& 4/'$ RA0</ K$
):T%/';& 4/'$ 0/;E<%/ "$ DE<A "AA& 4/'$ )E0'A0D/ D$ 0A;AAA& 4/'$ MA$
C/0AA/' 0$ CA)A<<E5& 4/'$ CA5%M%0/ C$ 5%5/'& 4/'$ )%E'V%'%D/ M$ A)A'TE& .0$&
4/'$ MA$ </:0DE5 M$ %5%"& 4/'$ A<ECA'DE0 5$ 0%CAF/0T& 4/'$ E0'E5T/ F$ 0%VE0A&
4/'$ <E/'A0D/ <$ A';AT& and 4/'$ ./CE<P' )$ DA3%5& in their ca#acity as councilors of
the City of Manila& #etitioners& vs$ 4/'$ "E0FECT/ A$5$ <A;:%/& .0$& as "residing .udge& 0TC&
Manila and MA<ATE T/:0%5T DEVE</"ME'T C/0"/0AT%/'& res#ondents$
D E C % 5 % / '
T%';A& .$:
% *no- only that -hat is moral is -hat you feel good after and -hat is immoral is -hat you feel bad
after$
Ernest 4erming-ay
Death in the Afternoon& Ch$ 1
%t is a moral and #olitical a2iom that any dishonorable act& if #erformed by oneself& is less immoral than
if #erformed by someone else& -ho -ould be -ell=intentioned in his dishonesty$
.$ Christo#her ;erald
)ona#arte in Egy#t& Ch$ %
The Courths commitment to the #rotection of morals is secondary to its fealty to the fundamental la- of
the land$ %t is foremost a guardian of the Constitution but not the conscience of individuals$ And if it
need be& the Court -ill not hesitate to 6ma*e the hammer fall& and heavily7 in the -ords of .ustice
<aurel& and u#hold the constitutional guarantees -hen faced -ith la-s that& though not lac*ing in Heal
to #romote morality& nevertheless fail to #ass the test of constitutionality$
The #ivotal issue in this "etitionN1O under 0ule , Bthen 0ule +D of the 0evised 0ules on Civil
"rocedure see*ing the reversal of the DecisionN+O in Civil Case 'o$ 9>=!!,11 of the 0egional Trial
Court B0TCD of Manila& )ranch 1L Blo-er courtD&N>O is the validity of /rdinance 'o$ MML> Bthe
/rdinanceD of the City of Manila$NO
The antecedents are as follo-s:
"rivate res#ondent Malate Tourist Develo#ment Cor#oration BMTDCD is a cor#oration engaged in the
business of o#erating hotels& motels& hostels and lodging houses$N,O %t built and o#ened Victoria Court
in Malate -hich -as licensed as a motel although duly accredited -ith the De#artment of Tourism as a
hotel$N!O /n +L .une 199>& MTDC filed a "etition for Declaratory 0elief -ith "rayer for a 3rit of
"reliminary %n(unction andZor Tem#orary 0estraining /rderNMO B0TC "etitionD -ith the lo-er court
im#leading as defendants& herein #etitioners City of Manila& 4on$ Alfredo 5$ <im B<imD& 4on$ .oselito
<$ AtienHa& and the members of the City Council of Manila BCity CouncilD$ MTDC #rayed that the
/rdinance& insofar as it includes motels and inns as among its #rohibited establishments& be declared
invalid and unconstitutional$NLO
Enacted by the City CouncilN9O on 9 March 199> and a##roved by #etitioner City Mayor on >9 March
199>& the said /rdinance is entitled1
A' /0D%'A'CE "0/4%)%T%'; T4E E5TA)<%54ME'T /0 /"E0AT%/' /F ):5%'E55E5
"0/V%D%'; CE0TA%' F/0M5 /F AM:5EME'T& E'TE0TA%'ME'T& 5E0V%CE5 A'D
FAC%<%T%E5 %' T4E E0M%TA=MA<ATE A0EA& "0E5C0%)%'; "E'A<T%E5 F/0 V%/<AT%/'
T4E0E/F& A'D F/0 /T4E0 ":0"/5E5$N19O
The /rdinance is re#roduced in full& hereunder:
5ECT%/' 1$ Any #rovision of e2isting la-s and ordinances to the contrary not-ithstanding& no #erson&
#artnershi#& cor#oration or entity shall& in the Ermita=Malate area bounded by Teodoro M$ Rala- 5r$
5treet in the 'orth& Taft Avenue in the East& Vito CruH 5treet in the 5outh and 0o2as )oulevard in the
3est& #ursuant to "$D$ 99 be allo-ed or authoriHed to contract and engage in& any business #roviding
certain forms of amusement& entertainment& services and facilities -here -omen are used as tools in
entertainment and -hich tend to disturb the community& annoy the inhabitants& and adversely affect the
social and moral -elfare of the community& such as but not limited to:
1$ 5auna "arlors
+$ Massage "arlors
>$ Rarao*e )ars
$ )eerhouses
,$ 'ight Clubs
!$ Day Clubs
M$ 5u#er Clubs
L$ Discothe8ues
9$ Cabarets
19$ Dance 4alls
11$ Motels
1+$ %nns
5EC$ + The City Mayor& the City Treasurer or any #erson acting in behalf of the said officials are
#rohibited from issuing #ermits& tem#orary or other-ise& or from granting licenses and acce#ting
#ayments for the o#eration of business enumerated in the #receding section$
5EC$ >$ /-ners andZor o#erator of establishments engaged in& or devoted to& the businesses enumerated
in 5ection 1 hereof are hereby given three B>D months from the date of a##roval of this ordinance -ithin
-hich to -ind u# business o#erations or to transfer to any #lace outside of the Ermita=Malate area or
convert said businesses to other *inds of business allo-able -ithin the area& such as but not limited to:
1$ Curio or anti8ue sho#
+$ 5ouvenir 5ho#s
>$ 4andicrafts dis#lay centers
$ Art galleries
,$ 0ecords and music sho#s
!$ 0estaurants
M$ Coffee sho#s
L$ Flo-er sho#s
9$ Music lounge and sing=along restaurants& -ith -ell=defined activities for -holesome family
entertainment that cater to both local and foreign clientele$
19$ Theaters engaged in the e2hibition& not only of motion #ictures but also of cultural sho-s& stage and
theatrical #lays& art e2hibitions& concerts and the li*e$
11$ )usinesses allo-able -ithin the la- and medium intensity districts as #rovided for in the Honing
ordinances for Metro#olitan Manila& e2ce#t ne- -arehouse or o#en=storage de#ot& doc* or yard& motor
re#air sho#& gasoline service station& light industry -ith any machinery& or funeral establishments$
5EC$ $ Any #erson violating any #rovisions of this ordinance& shall u#on conviction& be #unished by
im#risonment of one B1D year or fine of F%VE T4/:5A'D B",&999$99D "E5/5& or both& at the
discretion of the Court& "0/V%DED& that in case of (uridical #erson& the "resident& the ;eneral
Manager& or #erson=in=charge of o#eration shall be liable thereofG "0/V%DED F:0T4E0& that in case
of subse8uent violation and conviction& the #remises of the erring establishment shall be closed and
#adloc*ed #ermanently$
5EC$ ,$ This ordinance shall ta*e effect u#on a##roval$
Enacted by the City Council of Manila at its regular session today& March 9& 199>$
A##roved by 4is 4onor& the Mayor on March >9& 199>$ BEm#hasis su##liedD
%n the 0TC "etition& MTDC argued that the /rdinance erroneously and im#ro#erly included in its
enumeration of #rohibited establishments& motels and inns such as MTDChs Victoria Court considering
that these -ere not establishments for 6amusement7 or 6entertainment7 and they -ere not 6services or
facilities for entertainment&7 nor did they use -omen as 6tools for entertainment&7 and neither did they
6disturb the community&7 6annoy the inhabitants7 or 6adversely affect the social and moral -elfare of
the community$7N11O
MTDC further advanced that the /rdinance -as invalid and unconstitutional for the follo-ing reasons:
B1D The City Council has no #o-er to #rohibit the o#eration of motels as 5ection ,L BaD BivDN1+O of
the <ocal ;overnment Code of 1991 Bthe CodeD grants to the City Council only the #o-er to regulate
the establishment& o#eration and maintenance of hotels& motels& inns& #ension houses& lodging houses
and other similar establishmentsG B+D The /rdinance is void as it is violative of "residential Decree
B"$D$D 'o$ 99N1>O -hich s#ecifically declared #ortions of the Ermita=Malate area as a commercial
Hone -ith certain restrictionsG B>D The /rdinance does not constitute a #ro#er e2ercise of #olice #o-er
as the com#ulsory closure of the motel business has no reasonable relation to the legitimate munici#al
interests sought to be #rotectedG BD The /rdinance constitutes an e2 #ost facto la- by #unishing the
o#eration of Victoria Court -hich -as a legitimate business #rior to its enactmentG B,D The /rdinance
violates MTDChs constitutional rights in that: BaD it is confiscatory and constitutes an invasion of
#laintiffhs #ro#erty rightsG BbD the City Council has no #o-er to find as a fact that a #articular thing is a
nuisance #er se nor does it have the #o-er to e2tra(udicially destroy itG and B!D The /rdinance
constitutes a denial of e8ual #rotection under the la- as no reasonable basis e2ists for #rohibiting the
o#eration of motels and inns& but not #ension houses& hotels& lodging houses or other similar
establishments& and for #rohibiting said business in the Ermita=Malate area but not outside of this area$
N1O
%n their Ans-erN1,O dated +> .uly 199>& #etitioners City of Manila and <im maintained that the City
Council had the #o-er to 6#rohibit certain forms of entertainment in order to #rotect the social and
moral -elfare of the community7 as #rovided for in 5ection ,L BaD BviiD of the <ocal ;overnment
Code&N1!O -hich reads& thus:
5ection ,L$ "o-ers& Duties& Functions and Com#ensation$ BaD The sangguniang #anlungsod& as the
legislative body of the city& shall enact ordinances& a##rove resolutions and a##ro#riate funds for the
general -elfare of the city and its inhabitants #ursuant to 5ection 1! of this Code and in the #ro#er
e2ercise of the cor#orate #o-ers of the city as #rovided for under 5ection ++ of this Code& and shall:
$ $ $ $
BD 0egulate activities relative to the use of land& buildings and structures -ithin the city in order to
#romote the general -elfare and for said #ur#ose shall:
$ $ $ $
BviiD 0egulate the establishment& o#eration& and maintenance of any entertainment or amusement
facilities& including theatrical #erformances& circuses& billiard #ools& #ublic dancing schools& #ublic
dance halls& sauna baths& massage #arlors& and other #laces for entertainment or amusementG regulate
such other events or activities for amusement or entertainment& #articularly those -hich tend to disturb
the community or annoy the inhabitants& or re8uire the sus#ension or su##ression of the sameG or&
#rohibit certain forms of amusement or entertainment in order to #rotect the social and moral -elfare of
the community$
Citing R-ong 5ing v$ City of Manila&N1MO #etitioners insisted that the #o-er of regulation s#o*en of in
the above=8uoted #rovision included the #o-er to control& to govern and to restrain #laces of e2hibition
and amusement$N1LO
"etitioners li*e-ise asserted that the /rdinance -as enacted by the City Council of Manila to #rotect
the social and moral -elfare of the community in con(unction -ith its #olice #o-er as found in Article
%%%& 5ection 1LB**D of 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 99&N19O other-ise *no-n as the 0evised Charter of the City of
Manila B0evised Charter of ManilaDN+9O -hich reads& thus:
A0T%C<E %%%
T4E M:'%C%"A< )/A0D
$ $ $
5ection 1L$ <egislative #o-ers$ 1 The Munici#al )oard shall have the follo-ing legislative #o-ers:
$ $ $
B**D To enact all ordinances it may deem necessary and #ro#er for the sanitation and safety& the
furtherance of the #ros#erity& and the #romotion of the morality& #eace& good order& comfort&
convenience& and general -elfare of the city and its inhabitants& and such others as may be necessary to
carry into effect and discharge the #o-ers and duties conferred by this cha#terG and to fi2 #enalties for
the violation of ordinances -hich shall not e2ceed t-o hundred #esos fine or si2 monthsh
im#risonment& or both such fine and im#risonment& for a single offense$
Further& the #etitioners noted& the /rdinance had the #resum#tion of validityG hence& #rivate res#ondent
had the burden to #rove its illegality or unconstitutionality$N+1O
"etitioners also maintained that there -as no inconsistency bet-een "$D$ 99 and the /rdinance as the
latter sim#ly disauthoriHed certain forms of businesses and allo-ed the Ermita=Malate area to remain a
commercial Hone$N++O The /rdinance& the #etitioners li*e-ise claimed& cannot be assailed as e2 #ost
facto as it -as #ros#ective in o#eration$N+>O The /rdinance also did not infringe the e8ual #rotection
clause and cannot be denounced as class legislation as there e2isted substantial and real differences
bet-een the Ermita=Malate area and other #laces in the City of Manila$N+O
/n +L .une 199>& res#ondent .udge "erfecto A$5$ <aguio& .r$ B.udge <aguioD issued an e2=#arte
tem#orary restraining order against the enforcement of the /rdinance$N+,O And on 1! .uly 199>& again
in an intre#id gesture& he granted the -rit of #reliminary in(unction #rayed for by MTDC$N+!O
After trial& on +, 'ovember 199& .udge <aguio rendered the assailed Decision& en(oining the
#etitioners from im#lementing the /rdinance$ The dis#ositive #ortion of said Decision reads:N+MO
34E0EF/0E& (udgment is hereby rendered declaring /rdinance 'o$ MMLN>O& 5eries of 199>& of the
City of Manila null and void& and ma*ing #ermanent the -rit of #reliminary in(unction that had been
issued by this Court against the defendant$ 'o costs$
5/ /0DE0ED$N+LO
"etitioners filed -ith the lo-er court a 'otice of A##ealN+9O on 1+ December 199& manifesting that
they are elevating the case to this Court under then 0ule + on #ure 8uestions of la-$N>9O
/n 11 .anuary 199,& #etitioners filed the #resent "etition& alleging that the follo-ing errors -ere
committed by the lo-er court in its ruling: B1D %t erred in concluding that the sub(ect ordinance is ultra
vires& or other-ise& unfair& unreasonable and o##ressive e2ercise of #olice #o-erG B+D %t erred in holding
that the 8uestioned /rdinance contravenes "$D$ 99N>1O -hich allo-s o#erators of all *inds of
commercial establishments& e2ce#t those s#ecified thereinG and B>D %t erred in declaring the /rdinance
void and unconstitutional$N>+O
%n the "etition and in its Memorandum&N>>O #etitioners in essence re#eat the assertions they made
before the lo-er court$ They contend that the assailed /rdinance -as enacted in the e2ercise of the
inherent and #lenary #o-er of the 5tate and the general -elfare clause e2ercised by local government
units #rovided for in Art$ >& 5ec$ 1L B**D of the 0evised Charter of Manila and con(unctively& 5ection
,L BaD BviiD of the Code$N>O They allege that the /rdinance is a valid e2ercise of #olice #o-erG it
does not contravene "$D$ 99G and that it en(oys the #resum#tion of validity$N>,O
%n its MemorandumN>!O dated +M May 199!& #rivate res#ondent maintains that the /rdinance is ultra
vires and that it is void for being re#ugnant to the general la-$ %t reiterates that the 8uestioned
/rdinance is not a valid e2ercise of #olice #o-erG that it is violative of due #rocess& confiscatory and
amounts to an arbitrary interference -ith its la-ful businessG that it is violative of the e8ual #rotection
clauseG and that it confers on #etitioner City Mayor or any officer unregulated discretion in the
e2ecution of the /rdinance absent rules to guide and control his actions$
This is an o##ortune time to e2#ress the Courths dee# sentiment and tenderness for the Ermita=Malate
area being its home for several decades$ A long=time resident& the Court -itnessed the areahs many turn
of events$ %t relished its glory days and endured its days of infamy$ Much as the Court har*s bac* to the
res#lendent era of the /ld Manila and yearns to restore its lost grandeur& it believes that the /rdinance
is not the fitting means to that end$ The Court is of the o#inion& and so holds& that the lo-er court did
not err in declaring the /rdinance& as it did& ultra vires and therefore null and void$
The /rdinance is so re#lete -ith constitutional infirmities that almost every sentence thereof violates a
constitutional #rovision$ The #rohibitions and sanctions therein transgress the cardinal rights of #ersons
enshrined by the Constitution$ The Court is called u#on to shelter these rights from attem#ts at
rendering them -orthless$
The tests of a valid ordinance are -ell established$ A long line of decisions has held that for an
ordinance to be valid& it must not only be -ithin the cor#orate #o-ers of the local government unit to
enact and must be #assed according to the #rocedure #rescribed by la-& it must also conform to the
follo-ing substantive re8uirements: B1D must not contravene the Constitution or any statuteG B+D must
not be unfair or o##ressiveG B>D must not be #artial or discriminatoryG BD must not #rohibit but may
regulate tradeG B,D must be general and consistent -ith #ublic #olicyG and B!D must not be unreasonable$
N>MO
Anent the first criterion& ordinances shall only be valid -hen they are not contrary to the Constitution
and to the la-s$N>LO The /rdinance must satisfy t-o re8uirements: it must #ass muster under the test of
constitutionality and the test of consistency -ith the #revailing la-s$ That ordinances should be
constitutional u#hold the #rinci#le of the su#remacy of the Constitution$ The re8uirement that the
enactment must not violate e2isting la- gives stress to the #rece#t that local government units are able
to legislate only by virtue of their derivative legislative #o-er& a delegation of legislative #o-er from
the national legislature$ The delegate cannot be su#erior to the #rinci#al or e2ercise #o-ers higher than
those of the latter$N>9O
This relationshi# bet-een the national legislature and the local government units has not been
enfeebled by the ne- #rovisions in the Constitution strengthening the #olicy of local autonomy$ The
national legislature is still the #rinci#al of the local government units& -hich cannot defy its -ill or
modify or violate it$N9O
The /rdinance -as #assed by the City Council in the e2ercise of its #olice #o-er& an enactment of the
City Council acting as agent of Congress$ <ocal government units& as agencies of the 5tate& are
endo-ed -ith #olice #o-er in order to effectively accom#lish and carry out the declared ob(ects of
their creation$N1O This delegated #olice #o-er is found in 5ection 1! of the Code& *no-n as the
general -elfare clause& viH:
5ECT%/' 1!$ ;eneral 3elfare$kEvery local government unit shall e2ercise the #o-ers e2#ressly
granted& those necessarily im#lied therefrom& as -ell as #o-ers necessary& a##ro#riate& or incidental for
its efficient and effective governance& and those -hich are essential to the #romotion of the general
-elfare$ 3ithin their res#ective territorial (urisdictions& local government units shall ensure and
su##ort& among other things& the #reservation and enrichment of culture& #romote health and safety&
enhance the right of the #eo#le to a balanced ecology& encourage and su##ort the develo#ment of
a##ro#riate and self=reliant scientific and technological ca#abilities& im#rove #ublic morals& enhance
economic #ros#erity and social (ustice& #romote full em#loyment among their residents& maintain #eace
and order& and #reserve the comfort and convenience of their inhabitants$
<ocal government units e2ercise #olice #o-er through their res#ective legislative bodiesG in this case&
the sangguniang #anlungsod or the city council$ The Code em#o-ers the legislative bodies to 6enact
ordinances& a##rove resolutions and a##ro#riate funds for the general -elfare of the
#rovinceZcityZmunici#ality and its inhabitants #ursuant to 5ection 1! of the Code and in the #ro#er
e2ercise of the cor#orate #o-ers of the #rovinceZcityZ munici#ality #rovided under the Code$N+O The
in8uiry in this "etition is concerned -ith the validity of the e2ercise of such delegated #o-er$
The /rdinance contravenes
the Constitution
The #olice #o-er of the City Council& ho-ever broad and far=reaching& is subordinate to the
constitutional limitations thereonG and is sub(ect to the limitation that its e2ercise must be reasonable
and for the #ublic good$N>O %n the case at bar& the enactment of the /rdinance -as an invalid e2ercise
of delegated #o-er as it is unconstitutional and re#ugnant to general la-s$
The relevant constitutional #rovisions are the follo-ing:
5EC$ ,$ The maintenance of #eace and order& the #rotection of life& liberty& and #ro#erty& and the
#romotion of the general -elfare are essential for the en(oyment by all the #eo#le of the blessings of
democracy$NO
5EC$ 1$ The 5tate recogniHes the role of -omen in nation=building& and shall ensure the fundamental
e8uality before the la- of -omen and men$N,O
5EC$ 1$ 'o #erson shall be de#rived of life& liberty or #ro#erty -ithout due #rocess of la-& nor shall
any #erson be denied the e8ual #rotection of la-s$N!O
5ec$ 9$ "rivate #ro#erty shall not be ta*en for #ublic use -ithout (ust com#ensation$NMO
A$ The /rdinance infringes
the Due "rocess Clause
The constitutional safeguard of due #rocess is embodied in the fiat 6B'Do #erson shall be de#rived of
life& liberty or #ro#erty -ithout due #rocess of la-$ $ $ $7NLO
There is no controlling and #recise definition of due #rocess$ %t furnishes though a standard to -hich
governmental action should conform in order that de#rivation of life& liberty or #ro#erty& in each
a##ro#riate case& be valid$ This standard is a#tly described as a res#onsiveness to the su#remacy of
reason& obedience to the dictates of (ustice&N9O and as such it is a limitation u#on the e2ercise of the
#olice #o-er$N,9O
The #ur#ose of the guaranty is to #revent governmental encroachment against the life& liberty and
#ro#erty of individualsG to secure the individual from the arbitrary e2ercise of the #o-ers of the
government& unrestrained by the established #rinci#les of #rivate rights and distributive (usticeG to
#rotect #ro#erty from confiscation by legislative enactments& from seiHure& forfeiture& and destruction
-ithout a trial and conviction by the ordinary mode of (udicial #rocedureG and to secure to all #ersons
e8ual and im#artial (ustice and the benefit of the general la-$N,1O
The guaranty serves as a #rotection against arbitrary regulation& and #rivate cor#orations and
#artnershi#s are 6#ersons7 -ithin the sco#e of the guaranty insofar as their #ro#erty is concerned$N,+O
This clause has been inter#reted as im#osing t-o se#arate limits on government& usually called
6#rocedural due #rocess7 and 6substantive due #rocess$7
"rocedural due #rocess& as the #hrase im#lies& refers to the #rocedures that the government must follo-
before it de#rives a #erson of life& liberty& or #ro#erty$ Classic #rocedural due #rocess issues are
concerned -ith -hat *ind of notice and -hat form of hearing the government must #rovide -hen it
ta*es a #articular action$N,>O
5ubstantive due #rocess& as that #hrase connotes& as*s -hether the government has an ade8uate reason
for ta*ing a-ay a #ersonhs life& liberty& or #ro#erty$ %n other -ords& substantive due #rocess loo*s to
-hether there is a sufficient (ustification for the governmenths action$N,O Case la- in the :nited 5tates
B:$5$D tells us that -hether there is such a (ustification de#ends very much on the level of scrutiny used$
N,,O For e2am#le& if a la- is in an area -here only rational basis revie- is a##lied& substantive due
#rocess is met so long as the la- is rationally related to a legitimate government #ur#ose$ )ut if it is an
area -here strict scrutiny is used& such as for #rotecting fundamental rights& then the government -ill
meet substantive due #rocess only if it can #rove that the la- is necessary to achieve a com#elling
government #ur#ose$N,!O
The #olice #o-er granted to local government units must al-ays be e2ercised -ith utmost observance
of the rights of the #eo#le to due #rocess and e8ual #rotection of the la-$ 5uch #o-er cannot be
e2ercised -himsically& arbitrarily or des#oticallyN,MO as its e2ercise is sub(ect to a 8ualification&
limitation or restriction demanded by the res#ect and regard due to the #rescri#tion of the fundamental
la-& #articularly those forming #art of the )ill of 0ights$ %ndividual rights& it bears em#hasis& may be
adversely affected only to the e2tent that may fairly be re8uired by the legitimate demands of #ublic
interest or #ublic -elfare$N,LO Due #rocess re8uires the intrinsic validity of the la- in interfering -ith
the rights of the #erson to his life& liberty and #ro#erty$N,9O
0e8uisites for the valid e2ercise
of "olice "o-er are not met
To successfully invo*e the e2ercise of #olice #o-er as the rationale for the enactment of the /rdinance&
and to free it from the im#utation of constitutional infirmity& not only must it a##ear that the interests of
the #ublic generally& as distinguished from those of a #articular class& re8uire an interference -ith
#rivate rights& but the means ado#ted must be reasonably necessary for the accom#lishment of the
#ur#ose and not unduly o##ressive u#on individuals$N!9O %t must be evident that no other alternative for
the accom#lishment of the #ur#ose less intrusive of #rivate rights can -or*$ A reasonable relation must
e2ist bet-een the #ur#oses of the #olice measure and the means em#loyed for its accom#lishment& for
even under the guise of #rotecting the #ublic interest& #ersonal rights and those #ertaining to #rivate
#ro#erty -ill not be #ermitted to be arbitrarily invaded$N!1O
<ac*ing a concurrence of these t-o re8uisites& the #olice measure shall be struc* do-n as an arbitrary
intrusion into #rivate rightsN!+O ka violation of the due #rocess clause$
The /rdinance -as enacted to address and arrest the social ills #ur#ortedly s#a-ned by the
establishments in the Ermita=Malate area -hich are allegedly o#erated under the dece#tive veneer of
legitimate& licensed and ta2=#aying nightclubs& bars& *arao*e bars& girlie houses& coc*tail lounges&
hotels and motels$ "etitioners insist that even the Court in the case of Ermita=Malate 4otel and Motel
/#erators Association& %nc$ v$ City Mayor of ManilaN!>O had already ta*en (udicial notice of the
6alarming increase in the rate of #rostitution& adultery and fornication in Manila traceable in great #art
to e2istence of motels& -hich #rovide a necessary atmos#here for clandestine entry& #resence and e2it
and thus become the ideal haven for #rostitutes and thrill=see*ers$7N!O
The ob(ect of the /rdinance -as& accordingly& the #romotion and #rotection of the social and moral
values of the community$ ;ranting for the sa*e of argument that the ob(ectives of the /rdinance are
-ithin the sco#e of the City Councilhs #olice #o-ers& the means em#loyed for the accom#lishment
thereof -ere unreasonable and unduly o##ressive$
%t is undoubtedly one of the fundamental duties of the City of Manila to ma*e all reasonable regulations
loo*ing to the #romotion of the moral and social values of the community$ 4o-ever& the -orthy aim of
fostering #ublic morals and the eradication of the communityhs social ills can be achieved through
means less restrictive of #rivate rightsG it can be attained by reasonable restrictions rather than by an
absolute #rohibition$ The closing do-n and transfer of businesses or their conversion into businesses
6allo-ed7 under the /rdinance have no reasonable relation to the accom#lishment of its #ur#oses$
/ther-ise stated& the #rohibition of the enumerated establishments -ill not #er se #rotect and #romote
the social and moral -elfare of the communityG it -ill not in itself eradicate the alluded social ills of
#rostitution& adultery& fornication nor -ill it arrest the s#read of se2ual disease in Manila$
Conceding for the nonce that the Ermita=Malate area teems -ith houses of ill=re#ute and establishments
of the li*e -hich the City Council may la-fully #rohibit&N!,O it is baseless and insu##ortable to bring
-ithin that classification sauna #arlors& massage #arlors& *arao*e bars& night clubs& day clubs& su#er
clubs& discothe8ues& cabarets& dance halls& motels and inns$ This is not -arranted under the acce#ted
definitions of these terms$ The enumerated establishments are la-ful #ursuits -hich are not #er se
offensive to the moral -elfare of the community$
That these are used as arenas to consummate illicit se2ual affairs and as venues to further the illegal
#rostitution is of no moment$ 3e lay stress on the acrid truth that se2ual immorality& being a human
frailty& may ta*e #lace in the most innocent of #laces that it may even ta*e #lace in the substitute
establishments enumerated under 5ection > of the /rdinance$ %f the fla-ed logic of the /rdinance
-ere to be follo-ed& in the remote instance that an immoral se2ual act trans#ires in a church cloister or
a court chamber& -e -ould behold the s#ectacle of the City of Manila ordering the closure of the
church or court concerned$ Every house& building& #ar*& curb& street or even vehicles for that matter
-ill not be e2em#t from the #rohibition$ 5im#ly because there are no 6#ure7 #laces -here there are
im#ure men$ %ndeed& even the 5cri#ture and the Tradition of Christians churches continually recall the
#resence and universality of sin in manhs history$N!!O
The #roblem& it needs to be #ointed out& is not the establishment& -hich by its nature cannot be said to
be in(urious to the health or comfort of the community and -hich in itself is amoral& but the de#lorable
human activity that may occur -ithin its #remises$ 3hile a motel may be used as a venue for immoral
se2ual activity& it cannot for that reason alone be #unished$ %t cannot be classified as a house of ill=
re#ute or as a nuisance #er se on a mere li*elihood or a na*ed assum#tion$ %f that -ere so and if that
-ere allo-ed& then the Ermita=Malate area -ould not only be #urged of its su##osed social ills& it
-ould be e2tinguished of its soul as -ell as every human activity& re#rehensible or not& in its every
noo* and cranny -ould be laid bare to the estimation of the authorities$
The /rdinance see*s to legislate morality but fails to address the core issues of morality$ Try as the
/rdinance may to sha#e morality& it should not foster the illusion that it can ma*e a moral man out of it
because immorality is not a thing& a building or establishmentG it is in the hearts of men$ The City
Council instead should regulate human conduct that occurs inside the establishments& but not to the
detriment of liberty and #rivacy -hich are covenants& #remiums and blessings of democracy$
3hile #etitionersh earnestness at curbing clearly ob(ectionable social ills is commendable& they
un-ittingly #unish even the #ro#rietors and o#erators of 6-holesome&7 6innocent7 establishments$ %n
the instant case& there is a clear invasion of #ersonal or #ro#erty rights& #ersonal in the case of those
individuals desirous of o-ning& o#erating and #atroniHing those motels and #ro#erty in terms of the
investments made and the salaries to be #aid to those therein em#loyed$ %f the City of Manila so desires
to #ut an end to #rostitution& fornication and other social ills& it can instead im#ose reasonable
regulations such as daily ins#ections of the establishments for any violation of the conditions of their
licenses or #ermitsG it may e2ercise its authority to sus#end or revo*e their licenses for these violationsG
N!MO and it may even im#ose increased license fees$ %n other -ords& there are other means to reasonably
accom#lish the desired end$
Means em#loyed are
constitutionally infirm
The /rdinance disallo-s the o#eration of sauna #arlors& massage #arlors& *arao*e bars& beerhouses&
night clubs& day clubs& su#er clubs& discothe8ues& cabarets& dance halls& motels and inns in the Ermita=
Malate area$ %n 5ection > thereof& o-ners andZor o#erators of the enumerated establishments are given
three B>D months from the date of a##roval of the /rdinance -ithin -hich 6to -ind u# business
o#erations or to transfer to any #lace outside the Ermita=Malate area or convert said businesses to other
*inds of business allo-able -ithin the area$7 Further& it states in 5ection that in cases of subse8uent
violations of the #rovisions of the /rdinance& the 6#remises of the erring establishment shall be closed
and #adloc*ed #ermanently$7
%t is readily a##arent that the means em#loyed by the /rdinance for the achievement of its #ur#oses&
the governmental interference itself& infringes on the constitutional guarantees of a #ersonhs
fundamental right to liberty and #ro#erty$
<iberty as guaranteed by the Constitution -as defined by .ustice Malcolm to include 6the right to e2ist
and the right to be free from arbitrary restraint or servitude$ The term cannot be d-arfed into mere
freedom from #hysical restraint of the #erson of the citiHen& but is deemed to embrace the right of man
to en(oy the facilities -ith -hich he has been endo-ed by his Creator& sub(ect only to such restraint as
are necessary for the common -elfare$7N!LO %n accordance -ith this case& the rights of the citiHen to be
free to use his faculties in all la-ful -aysG to live and -or* -here he -illG to earn his livelihood by any
la-ful callingG and to #ursue any avocation are all deemed embraced in the conce#t of liberty$N!9O
The :$5$ 5u#reme Court in the case of 0oth v$ )oard of 0egents&NM9O sought to clarify the meaning of
6liberty$7 %t said:
3hile the Court has not attem#ted to define -ith e2actness the liberty$ $ $ guaranteed Nby the Fifth and
Fourteenth AmendmentsO& the term denotes not merely freedom from bodily restraint but also the right
of the individual to contract& to engage in any of the common occu#ations of life& to ac8uire useful
*no-ledge& to marry& establish a home and bring u# children& to -orshi# ;od according to the dictates
of his o-n conscience& and generally to en(oy those #rivileges long recogniHedjas essential to the
orderly #ursuit of ha##iness by free men$ %n a Constitution for a free #eo#le& there can be no doubt that
the meaning of 6liberty7 must be broad indeed$
%n another case& it also confirmed that liberty #rotected by the due #rocess clause includes #ersonal
decisions relating to marriage& #rocreation& contrace#tion& family relationshi#s& child rearing& and
education$ %n e2#laining the res#ect the Constitution demands for the autonomy of the #erson in
ma*ing these choices& the :$5$ 5u#reme Court e2#lained:
These matters& involving the most intimate and #ersonal choices a #erson may ma*e in a lifetime&
choices central to #ersonal dignity and autonomy& are central to the liberty #rotected by the Fourteenth
Amendment$ At the heart of liberty is the right to define onehs o-n conce#t of e2istence& of meaning& of
universe& and of the mystery of human life$ )eliefs about these matters could not define the attributes
of #ersonhood -here they formed under com#ulsion of the 5tate$NM1O
"ersons desirous to o-n& o#erate and #atroniHe the enumerated establishments under 5ection 1 of the
/rdinance may see* autonomy for these #ur#oses$
Motel #atrons -ho are single and unmarried may invo*e this right to autonomy to consummate their
bonds in intimate se2ual conduct -ithin the motelhs #remiseskbe it stressed that their consensual
se2ual behavior does not contravene any fundamental state #olicy as contained in the Constitution$NM+O
Adults have a right to choose to forge such relationshi#s -ith others in the confines of their o-n #rivate
lives and still retain their dignity as free #ersons$ The liberty #rotected by the Constitution allo-s
#ersons the right to ma*e this choice$NM>O Their right to liberty under the due #rocess clause gives them
the full right to engage in their conduct -ithout intervention of the government& as long as they do not
run afoul of the la-$ <iberty should be the rule and restraint the e2ce#tion$
<iberty in the constitutional sense not only means freedom from unla-ful government restraintG it must
include #rivacy as -ell& if it is to be a re#ository of freedom$ The right to be let alone is the beginning
of all freedomkit is the most com#rehensive of rights and the right most valued by civiliHed men$NMO
The conce#t of liberty com#els res#ect for the individual -hose claim to #rivacy and interference
demands res#ect$ As the case of Morfe v$ Mutuc&NM,O borro-ing the -ords of <as*i& so very a#tly
stated:
Man is one among many& obstinately refusing reduction to unity$ 4is se#arateness& his isolation& are
indefeasibleG indeed& they are so fundamental that they are the basis on -hich his civic obligations are
built$ 4e cannot abandon the conse8uences of his isolation& -hich are& broadly s#ea*ing& that his
e2#erience is #rivate& and the -ill built out of that e2#erience #ersonal to himself$ %f he surrenders his
-ill to others& he surrenders himself$ %f his -ill is set by the -ill of others& he ceases to be a master of
himself$ % cannot believe that a man no longer a master of himself is in any real sense free$
%ndeed& the right to #rivacy as a constitutional right -as recogniHed in Morfe& the invasion of -hich
should be (ustified by a com#elling state interest$ Morfe accorded recognition to the right to #rivacy
inde#endently of its identification -ith libertyG in itself it is fully deserving of constitutional #rotection$
;overnmental #o-ers should sto# short of certain intrusions into the #ersonal life of the citiHen$NM!O
There is a great tem#tation to have an e2tended discussion on these civil liberties but the Court chooses
to e2ercise restraint and restrict itself to the issues #resented -hen it should$ The #revious
#ronouncements of the Court are not to be inter#reted as a license for adults to engage in criminal
conduct$ The re#rehensibility of such conduct is not diminished$ The Court only reaffirms and
guarantees their right to ma*e this choice$ 5hould they be #rosecuted for their illegal conduct& they
should suffer the conse8uences of the choice they have made$ That& ultimately& is their choice$
Modality em#loyed is
unla-ful ta*ing
%n addition& the /rdinance is unreasonable and o##ressive as it substantially divests the res#ondent of
the beneficial use of its #ro#erty$NMMO The /rdinance in 5ection 1 thereof forbids the running of the
enumerated businesses in the Ermita=Malate area and in 5ection > instructs its o-nersZo#erators to
-ind u# business o#erations or to transfer outside the area or convert said businesses into allo-ed
businesses$ An ordinance -hich #ermanently restricts the use of #ro#erty that it can not be used for any
reasonable #ur#ose goes beyond regulation and must be recogniHed as a ta*ing of the #ro#erty -ithout
(ust com#ensation$NMLO %t is intrusive and violative of the #rivate #ro#erty rights of individuals$
The Constitution e2#ressly #rovides in Article %%%& 5ection 9& that 6#rivate #ro#erty shall not be ta*en
for #ublic use -ithout (ust com#ensation$7 The #rovision is the most im#ortant #rotection of #ro#erty
rights in the Constitution$ This is a restriction on the general #o-er of the government to ta*e #ro#erty$
The constitutional #rovision is about ensuring that the government does not confiscate the #ro#erty of
some to give it to others$ %n #art too& it is about loss s#reading$ %f the government ta*es a-ay a #ersonhs
#ro#erty to benefit society& then society should #ay$ The #rinci#al #ur#ose of the guarantee is 6to bar
the ;overnment from forcing some #eo#le alone to bear #ublic burdens -hich& in all fairness and
(ustice& should be borne by the #ublic as a -hole$NM9O
There are t-o different ty#es of ta*ing that can be identified$ A 6#ossessory7 ta*ing occurs -hen the
government confiscates or #hysically occu#ies #ro#erty$ A 6regulatory7 ta*ing occurs -hen the
governmenths regulation leaves no reasonable economically viable use of the #ro#erty$NL9O
%n the landmar* case of "ennsylvania Coal v$ Mahon&NL1O it -as held that a ta*ing also could be found
if government regulation of the use of #ro#erty -ent 6too far$7 3hen regulation reaches a certain
magnitude& in most if not in all cases there must be an e2ercise of eminent domain and com#ensation to
su##ort the act$ 3hile #ro#erty may be regulated to a certain e2tent& if regulation goes too far it -ill be
recogniHed as a ta*ing$NL+O
'o formula or rule can be devised to ans-er the 8uestions of -hat is too far and -hen regulation
becomes a ta*ing$ %n Mahon& .ustice 4olmes recogniHed that it -as 6a 8uestion of degree and therefore
cannot be dis#osed of by general #ro#ositions$7 /n many other occasions as -ell& the :$5$ 5u#reme
Court has said that the issue of -hen regulation constitutes a ta*ing is a matter of considering the facts
in each case$ The Court as*s -hether (ustice and fairness re8uire that the economic loss caused by
#ublic action must be com#ensated by the government and thus borne by the #ublic as a -hole& or
-hether the loss should remain concentrated on those fe- #ersons sub(ect to the #ublic action$NL>O
3hat is crucial in (udicial consideration of regulatory ta*ings is that government regulation is a ta*ing
if it leaves no reasonable economically viable use of #ro#erty in a manner that interferes -ith
reasonable e2#ectations for use$NLO A regulation that #ermanently denies all economically beneficial
or #roductive use of land is& from the o-nerhs #oint of vie-& e8uivalent to a 6ta*ing7 unless #rinci#les
of nuisance or #ro#erty la- that e2isted -hen the o-ner ac8uired the land ma*e the use #rohibitable$
NL,O 3hen the o-ner of real #ro#erty has been called u#on to sacrifice all economically beneficial uses
in the name of the common good& that is& to leave his #ro#erty economically idle& he has suffered a
ta*ing$NL!O
A regulation -hich denies all economically beneficial or #roductive use of land -ill re8uire
com#ensation under the ta*ings clause$ 3here a regulation #laces limitations on land that fall short of
eliminating all economically beneficial use& a ta*ing nonetheless may have occurred& de#ending on a
com#le2 of factors including the regulationhs economic effect on the lando-ner& the e2tent to -hich the
regulation interferes -ith reasonable investment=bac*ed e2#ectations and the character of government
action$ These in8uiries are informed by the #ur#ose of the ta*ings clause -hich is to #revent the
government from forcing some #eo#le alone to bear #ublic burdens -hich& in all fairness and (ustice&
should be borne by the #ublic as a -hole$NLMO
A restriction on use of #ro#erty may also constitute a 6ta*ing7 if not reasonably necessary to the
effectuation of a substantial #ublic #ur#ose or if it has an unduly harsh im#act on the distinct
investment=bac*ed e2#ectations of the o-ner$NLLO
The /rdinance gives the o-ners and o#erators of the 6#rohibited7 establishments three B>D months
from its a##roval -ithin -hich to 6-ind u# business o#erations or to transfer to any #lace outside of
the Ermita=Malate area or convert said businesses to other *inds of business allo-able -ithin the area$7
The directive to 6-ind u# business o#erations7 amounts to a closure of the establishment& a #ermanent
de#rivation of #ro#erty& and is #ractically confiscatory$ :nless the o-ner converts his establishment to
accommodate an 6allo-ed7 business& the structure -hich housed the #revious business -ill be left
em#ty and gathering dust$ 5u##ose he transfers it to another area& he -ill li*e-ise leave the entire
establishment idle$ Consideration must be given to the substantial amount of money invested to build
the edifices -hich the o-ner reasonably e2#ects to be returned -ithin a #eriod of time$ %t is a##arent
that the /rdinance leaves no reasonable economically viable use of #ro#erty in a manner that interferes
-ith reasonable e2#ectations for use$
The second and third o#tionsk to transfer to any #lace outside of the Ermita=Malate area or to convert
into allo-ed businesseskare confiscatory as -ell$ The #enalty of #ermanent closure in cases of
subse8uent violations found in 5ection of the /rdinance is also e8uivalent to a 6ta*ing7 of #rivate
#ro#erty$
The second o#tion instructs the o-ners to abandon their #ro#erty and build another one outside the
Ermita=Malate area$ %n every sense& it 8ualifies as a ta*ing -ithout (ust com#ensation -ith an
additional burden im#osed on the o-ner to build another establishment solely from his coffers$ The
#roffered solution does not #ut an end to the 6#roblem&7 it merely relocates it$ 'ot only is this
im#ractical& it is unreasonable& onerous and o##ressive$ The conversion into allo-ed enter#rises is (ust
as ridiculous$ 4o- may the res#ondent convert a motel into a restaurant or a coffee sho#& art gallery or
music lounge -ithout essentially destroying its #ro#ertyQ This is a ta*ing of #rivate #ro#erty -ithout
due #rocess of la-& nay& even -ithout com#ensation$
The #enalty of closure li*e-ise constitutes unla-ful ta*ing that should be com#ensated by the
government$ The burden on the o-ner to convert or transfer his business& other-ise it -ill be closed
#ermanently after a subse8uent violation should be borne by the #ublic as this end benefits them as a
-hole$
"etitioners cannot ta*e refuge in classifying the measure as a Honing ordinance$ A Honing ordinance&
although a valid e2ercise of #olice #o-er& -hich limits a 6-holesome7 #ro#erty to a use -hich can not
reasonably be made of it constitutes the ta*ing of such #ro#erty -ithout (ust com#ensation$ "rivate
#ro#erty -hich is not no2ious nor intended for no2ious #ur#oses may not& by Honing& be destroyed
-ithout com#ensation$ 5uch #rinci#le finds no su##ort in the #rinci#les of (ustice as -e *no- them$
The #olice #o-ers of local government units -hich have al-ays received broad and liberal
inter#retation cannot be stretched to cover this #articular ta*ing$
Distinction should be made bet-een destruction from necessity and eminent domain$ %t needs restating
that the #ro#erty ta*en in the e2ercise of #olice #o-er is destroyed because it is no2ious or intended for
a no2ious #ur#ose -hile the #ro#erty ta*en under the #o-er of eminent domain is intended for a #ublic
use or #ur#ose and is therefore 6-holesome$7NL9O %f it be of #ublic benefit that a 6-holesome7 #ro#erty
remain unused or relegated to a #articular #ur#ose& then certainly the #ublic should bear the cost of
reasonable com#ensation for the condemnation of #rivate #ro#erty for #ublic use$N99O
Further& the /rdinance fails to set u# any standard to guide or limit the #etitionersh actions$ %t in no -ay
controls or guides the discretion vested in them$ %t #rovides no definition of the establishments covered
by it and it fails to set forth the conditions -hen the establishments come -ithin its ambit of
#rohibition$ The /rdinance confers u#on the mayor arbitrary and unrestricted #o-er to close do-n
establishments$ /rdinances such as this& -hich ma*e #ossible abuses in its e2ecution& de#ending u#on
no conditions or 8ualifications -hatsoever other than the unregulated arbitrary -ill of the city
authorities as the touchstone by -hich its validity is to be tested& are unreasonable and invalid$ The
/rdinance should have established a rule by -hich its im#artial enforcement could be secured$N91O
/rdinances #lacing restrictions u#on the la-ful use of #ro#erty must& in order to be valid and
constitutional& s#ecify the rules and conditions to be observed and conduct to avoidG and must not admit
of the e2ercise& or of an o##ortunity for the e2ercise& of unbridled discretion by the la- enforcers in
carrying out its #rovisions$N9+O
Thus& in Coates v$ City of Cincinnati&N9>O as cited in "eo#le v$ 'aHario&N9O the :$5$ 5u#reme Court
struc* do-n an ordinance that had made it illegal for 6three or more #ersons to assemble on any
side-al* and there conduct themselves in a manner annoying to #ersons #assing by$7 The ordinance
-as nullified as it im#osed no standard at all 6because one may never *no- in advance -hat iannoys
some #eo#le but does not annoy others$h 7
5imilarly& the /rdinance does not s#ecify the standards to ascertain -hich establishments 6tend to
disturb the community&7 6annoy the inhabitants&7 and 6adversely affect the social and moral -elfare of
the community$7 The cited case su##orts the nullification of the /rdinance for lac* of com#rehensible
standards to guide the la- enforcers in carrying out its #rovisions$
"etitioners cannot therefore order the closure of the enumerated establishments -ithout infringing the
due #rocess clause$ These la-ful establishments may be regulated& but not #revented from carrying on
their business$ This is a s-ee#ing e2ercise of #olice #o-er that is a result of a lac* of imagination on
the #art of the City Council and -hich amounts to an interference into #ersonal and #rivate rights
-hich the Court -ill not countenance$ %n this regard& -e ta*e a resolute stand to u#hold the
constitutional guarantee of the right to liberty and #ro#erty$
3orthy of note is an e2am#le derived from the :$5$ of a reasonable regulation -hich is a far cry from
the ill=considered /rdinance enacted by the City Council$
%n F3Z")5& %'C$ v$ Dallas&N9,O the city of Dallas ado#ted a com#rehensive ordinance regulating
6se2ually oriented businesses&7 -hich are defined to include adult arcades& boo*stores& video stores&
cabarets& motels& and theaters as -ell as escort agencies& nude model studio and se2ual encounter
centers$ Among other things& the ordinance re8uired that such businesses be licensed$ A grou# of motel
o-ners -ere among the three grou#s of businesses that filed se#arate suits challenging the ordinance$
The motel o-ners asserted that the city violated the due #rocess clause by failing to #roduce ade8uate
su##ort for its su##osition that renting room for fe-er than ten B19D hours resulted in increased crime
and other secondary effects$ They li*e-ise argued than the ten B19D=hour limitation on the rental of
motel rooms #laced an unconstitutional burden on the right to freedom of association$ Anent the first
contention& the :$5$ 5u#reme Court held that the reasonableness of the legislative (udgment combined
-ith a study -hich the city considered& -as ade8uate to su##ort the cityhs determination that motels
#ermitting room rentals for fe-er than ten B19 D hours should be included -ithin the licensing scheme$
As regards the second #oint& the Court held that limiting motel room rentals to ten B19D hours -ill have
no discernible effect on #ersonal bonds as those bonds that are formed from the use of a motel room for
fe-er than ten B19D hours are not those that have #layed a critical role in the culture and traditions of
the nation by cultivating and transmitting shared ideals and beliefs$
The ordinance challenged in the above=cited case merely regulated the targeted businesses$ %t im#osed
reasonable restrictionsG hence& its validity -as u#held$
The case of Ermita Malate 4otel and Motel /#erators Association& %nc$ v$ City Mayor of Manila&N9!O it
needs #ointing out& is also different from this case in that -hat -as involved therein -as a measure
-hich regulated the mode in -hich motels may conduct business in order to #ut an end to #ractices
-hich could encourage vice and immorality$ 'ecessarily& there -as no valid ob(ection on due #rocess
or e8ual #rotection grounds as the ordinance did not #rohibit motels$ The /rdinance in this case
ho-ever is not a regulatory measure but is an e2ercise of an assumed #o-er to #rohibit$N9MO
The foregoing #remises sho- that the /rdinance is an un-arranted and unla-ful curtailment of
#ro#erty and #ersonal rights of citiHens$ For being unreasonable and an undue restraint of trade& it
cannot& even under the guise of e2ercising #olice #o-er& be u#held as valid$
)$ The /rdinance violates E8ual
"rotection Clause
E8ual #rotection re8uires that all #ersons or things similarly situated should be treated ali*e& both as to
rights conferred and res#onsibilities im#osed$ 5imilar sub(ects& in other -ords& should not be treated
differently& so as to give undue favor to some and un(ustly discriminate against others$N9LO The
guarantee means that no #erson or class of #ersons shall be denied the same #rotection of la-s -hich is
en(oyed by other #ersons or other classes in li*e circumstances$N99O The 6e8ual #rotection of the la-s is
a #ledge of the #rotection of e8ual la-s$7N199O %t limits governmental discrimination$ The e8ual
#rotection clause e2tends to artificial #ersons but only insofar as their #ro#erty is concerned$N191O
The Court has e2#lained the sco#e of the e8ual #rotection clause in this -ise:
j 3hat does it signifyQ To 8uote from .$M$ Tuason T Co$ v$ <and Tenure Administration: 6The ideal
situation is for the la-hs benefits to be available to all& that none be #laced outside the s#here of its
coverage$ /nly thus could chance and favor be e2cluded and the affairs of men governed by that serene
and im#artial uniformity& -hich is of the very essence of the idea of la-$7 There is recognition&
ho-ever& in the o#inion that -hat in fact e2ists 6cannot a##ro2imate the ideal$ 'or is the la-
susce#tible to the re#roach that it does not ta*e into account the realities of the situation$ The
constitutional guarantee then is not to be given a meaning that disregards -hat is& -hat does in fact
e2ist$ To assure that the general -elfare be #romoted& -hich is the end of la-& a regulatory measure
may cut into the rights to liberty and #ro#erty$ Those adversely affected may under such circumstances
invo*e the e8ual #rotection clause only if they can sho- that the governmental act assailed& far from
being ins#ired by the attainment of the common -eal -as #rom#ted by the s#irit of hostility& or at the
very least& discrimination that finds no su##ort in reason$7 Classification is thus not ruled out& it being
sufficient to 8uote from the Tuason decision ane- 6that the la-s o#erate e8ually and uniformly on all
#ersons under similar circumstances or that all #ersons must be treated in the same manner& the
conditions not being different& both in the #rivileges conferred and the liabilities im#osed$ Favoritism
and undue #reference cannot be allo-ed$ For the #rinci#le is that e8ual #rotection and security shall be
given to every #erson under circumstances -hich& if not identical& are analogous$ %f la- be loo*ed u#on
in terms of burden or charges& those that fall -ithin a class should be treated in the same fashion&
-hatever restrictions cast on some in the grou# e8ually binding on the rest$N19+O
<egislative bodies are allo-ed to classify the sub(ects of legislation$ %f the classification is reasonable&
the la- may o#erate only on some and not all of the #eo#le -ithout violating the e8ual #rotection
clause$N19>O The classification must& as an indis#ensable re8uisite& not be arbitrary$ To be valid& it must
conform to the follo-ing re8uirements:
1D %t must be based on substantial distinctions$
+D %t must be germane to the #ur#oses of the la-$
>D %t must not be limited to e2isting conditions only$
D %t must a##ly e8ually to all members of the class$N19O
%n the Courths vie-& there are no substantial distinctions bet-een motels& inns& #ension houses& hotels&
lodging houses or other similar establishments$ )y definition& all are commercial establishments
#roviding lodging and usually meals and other services for the #ublic$ 'o reason e2ists for #rohibiting
motels and inns but not #ension houses& hotels& lodging houses or other similar establishments$ The
classification in the instant case is invalid as similar sub(ects are not similarly treated& both as to rights
conferred and obligations im#osed$ %t is arbitrary as it does not rest on substantial distinctions bearing a
(ust and fair relation to the #ur#ose of the /rdinance$
The Court li*e-ise cannot see the logic for #rohibiting the business and o#eration of motels in the
Ermita=Malate area but not outside of this area$ A no2ious establishment does not become any less
no2ious if located outside the area$
The standard 6-here -omen are used as tools for entertainment7 is also discriminatory as
#rostitutionkone of the hinted ills the /rdinance aims to banishkis not a #rofession e2clusive to
-omen$ )oth men and -omen have an e8ual #ro#ensity to engage in #rostitution$ %t is not any less
grave a sin -hen men engage in it$ And -hy -ould the assum#tion that there is an ongoing immoral
activity a##ly only -hen -omen are em#loyed and be ina##osite -hen men are in harnessQ This
discrimination based on gender violates e8ual #rotection as it is not substantially related to im#ortant
government ob(ectives$N19,O Thus& the discrimination is invalid$
Failing the test of constitutionality& the /rdinance li*e-ise failed to #ass the test of consistency -ith
#revailing la-s$
C$ The /rdinance is re#ugnant
to general la-sG it is ultra vires
The /rdinance is in contravention of the Code as the latter merely em#o-ers local government units to
regulate& and not #rohibit& the establishments enumerated in 5ection 1 thereof$
The #o-er of the City Council to regulate by ordinances the establishment& o#eration& and maintenance
of motels& hotels and other similar establishments is found in 5ection ,L BaD BivD& -hich #rovides
that:
5ection ,L$ "o-ers& Duties& Functions and Com#ensation$ BaD The sangguniang #anlungsod& as the
legislative body of the city& shall enact ordinances& a##rove resolutions and a##ro#riate funds for the
general -elfare of the city and its inhabitants #ursuant to 5ection 1! of this Code and in the #ro#er
e2ercise of the cor#orate #o-ers of the city as #rovided for under 5ection ++ of this Code& and shall:
$ $ $
BD 0egulate activities relative to the use of land& buildings and structures -ithin the city in order to
#romote the general -elfare and for said #ur#ose shall:
$ $ $
BivD 0egulate the establishment& o#eration and maintenance of cafes& restaurants& beerhouses& hotels&
motels& inns& #ension houses& lodging houses& and other similar establishments& including tourist guides
and trans#orts $ $ $ $
3hile its #o-er to regulate the establishment& o#eration and maintenance of any entertainment or
amusement facilities& and to #rohibit certain forms of amusement or entertainment is #rovided under
5ection ,L BaD BviiD of the Code& -hich reads as follo-s:
5ection ,L$ "o-ers& Duties& Functions and Com#ensation$ BaD The sangguniang #anlungsod& as the
legislative body of the city& shall enact ordinances& a##rove resolutions and a##ro#riate funds for the
general -elfare of the city and its inhabitants #ursuant to 5ection 1! of this Code and in the #ro#er
e2ercise of the cor#orate #o-ers of the city as #rovided for under 5ection ++ of this Code& and shall:
$ $ $
BD 0egulate activities relative to the use of land& buildings and structures -ithin the city in order to
#romote the general -elfare and for said #ur#ose shall:
$ $ $
BviiD 0egulate the establishment& o#eration& and maintenance of any entertainment or amusement
facilities& including theatrical #erformances& circuses& billiard #ools& #ublic dancing schools& #ublic
dance halls& sauna baths& massage #arlors& and other #laces for entertainment or amusementG regulate
such other events or activities for amusement or entertainment& #articularly those -hich tend to disturb
the community or annoy the inhabitants& or re8uire the sus#ension or su##ression of the sameG or&
#rohibit certain forms of amusement or entertainment in order to #rotect the social and moral -elfare of
the community$
Clearly& -ith res#ect to cafes& restaurants& beerhouses& hotels& motels& inns& #ension houses& lodging
houses& and other similar establishments& the only #o-er of the City Council to legislate relative thereto
is to regulate them to #romote the general -elfare$ The Code still -ithholds from cities the #o-er to
su##ress and #rohibit altogether the establishment& o#eration and maintenance of such establishments$
%t is -ell to recall the rulings of the Court in R-ong 5ing v$ City of ManilaN19!O that:
The -ord 6regulate&7 as used in subsection BlD& section + of the Administrative Code& means and
includes the #o-er to control& to govern& and to restrainG but 6regulate7 should not be construed as
synonymous -ith 6su##ress7 or 6#rohibit$7 Conse8uently& under the #o-er to regulate laundries& the
munici#al authorities could ma*e #ro#er #olice regulations as to the mode in -hich the em#loyment or
business shall be e2ercised$N19MO
And in "eo#le v$ Esguerra&N19LO -herein the Court nullified an ordinance of the Munici#ality of
Tacloban -hich #rohibited the selling& giving and dis#ensing of li8uor ratiocinating that the
munici#ality is em#o-ered only to regulate the same and not #rohibit$ The Court therein declared that:
BADs a general rule -hen a munici#al cor#oration is s#ecifically given authority or #o-er to regulate or
to license and regulate the li8uor traffic& #o-er to #rohibit is im#liedly -ithheld$N199O
These doctrines still hold contrary to #etitionersh assertionN119O that they -ere modified by the Code
vesting u#on City Councils #rohibitory #o-ers$
5imilarly& the City Council e2ercises regulatory #o-ers over #ublic dancing schools& #ublic dance
halls& sauna baths& massage #arlors& and other #laces for entertainment or amusement as found in the
first clause of 5ection ,L BaD BviiD$ %ts #o-ers to regulate& su##ress and sus#end 6such other events or
activities for amusement or entertainment& #articularly those -hich tend to disturb the community or
annoy the inhabitants7 and to 6#rohibit certain forms of amusement or entertainment in order to #rotect
the social and moral -elfare of the community7 are stated in the second and third clauses& res#ectively
of the same 5ection$ The several #o-ers of the City Council as #rovided in 5ection ,L BaD BviiD of
the Code& it is #ertinent to em#hasiHe& are se#arated by semi=colons BGD& the use of -hich indicates that
the clauses in -hich these #o-ers are set forth are inde#endent of each other albeit closely related to
(ustify being #ut together in a single enumeration or #aragra#h$N111O These #o-ers& therefore& should
not be confused& commingled or consolidated as to create a conglomerated and unified #o-er of
regulation& su##ression and #rohibition$N11+O
The Congress une8uivocably s#ecified the establishments and forms of amusement or entertainment
sub(ect to regulation among -hich are beerhouses& hotels& motels& inns& #ension houses& lodging
houses& and other similar establishments B5ection ,L BaD BivDD& #ublic dancing schools& #ublic dance
halls& sauna baths& massage #arlors& and other #laces for entertainment or amusement B5ection ,L BaD
BviiDD$ This enumeration therefore cannot be included as among 6other events or activities for
amusement or entertainment& #articularly those -hich tend to disturb the community or annoy the
inhabitants7 or 6certain forms of amusement or entertainment7 -hich the City Council may sus#end&
su##ress or #rohibit$
The rule is that the City Council has only such #o-ers as are e2#ressly granted to it and those -hich
are necessarily im#lied or incidental to the e2ercise thereof$ )y reason of its limited #o-ers and the
nature thereof& said #o-ers are to be construed strictissimi (uris and any doubt or ambiguity arising out
of the terms used in granting said #o-ers must be construed against the City Council$N11>O Moreover& it
is a general rule in statutory construction that the e2#ress mention of one #erson& thing& or conse8uence
is tantamount to an e2#ress e2clusion of all others$ E2#ressio unius est e2clusio alterium$ This ma2im
is based u#on the rules of logic and the natural -or*ings of human mind$ %t is #articularly a##licable in
the construction of such statutes as create ne- rights or remedies& im#ose #enalties or #unishments& or
other-ise come under the rule of strict construction$N11O
The argument that the City Council is em#o-ered to enact the /rdinance by virtue of the general
-elfare clause of the Code and of Art$ >& 5ec$ 1L B**D of the 0evised Charter of Manila is li*e-ise
-ithout merit$ /n the first #oint& the ruling of the Court in "eo#le v$ Esguerra&N11,O is instructive$ %t
held that:
The #o-ers conferred u#on a munici#al council in the general -elfare clause& or section ++>L of the
0evised Administrative Code& refers to matters not covered by the other #rovisions of the same Code&
and therefore it can not be a##lied to into2icating li8uors& for the #o-er to regulate the selling& giving
a-ay and dis#ensing thereof is granted s#ecifically by section +++ BgD to munici#al councils$ To hold
that& under the general #o-er granted by section ++>L& a munici#al council may enact the ordinance in
8uestion& not-ithstanding the #rovision of section +++ BgD& -ould be to ma*e the latter su#erfluous
and nugatory& because the #o-er to #rohibit& includes the #o-er to regulate& the selling& giving a-ay
and dis#ensing of into2icating li8uors$
/n the second #oint& it suffices to say that the Code being a later e2#ression of the legislative -ill must
necessarily #revail and override the earlier la-& the 0evised Charter of Manila$ <egis #osteriores
#riores contrarias abrogant& or later statute re#eals #rior ones -hich are re#ugnant thereto$ As bet-een
t-o la-s on the same sub(ect matter& -hich are irreconcilably inconsistent& that -hich is #assed later
#revails& since it is the latest e2#ression of legislative -ill$N11!O %f there is an inconsistency or
re#ugnance bet-een t-o statutes& both relating to the same sub(ect matter& -hich cannot be removed by
any fair and reasonable method of inter#retation& it is the latest e2#ression of the legislative -ill -hich
must #revail and override the earlier$N11MO
%m#lied re#eals are those -hich ta*e #lace -hen a subse8uently enacted la- contains #rovisions
contrary to those of an e2isting la- but no #rovisions e2#ressly re#ealing them$ 5uch re#eals have been
divided into t-o general classes: those -hich occur -here an act is so inconsistent or irreconcilable
-ith an e2isting #rior act that only one of the t-o can remain in force and those -hich occur -hen an
act covers the -hole sub(ect of an earlier act and is intended to be a substitute therefor$ The validity of
such a re#eal is sustained on the ground that the latest e2#ression of the legislative -ill should #revail$
N11LO
%n addition& 5ection ,>BfD of the Code states that 6All general and s#ecial la-s& acts& city charters&
decrees& e2ecutive orders& #roclamations and administrative regulations& or #art or #arts thereof -hich
are inconsistent -ith any of the #rovisions of this Code are hereby re#ealed or modified accordingly$7
Thus& submitting to #etitionersh inter#retation that the 0evised Charter of Manila em#o-ers the City
Council to #rohibit motels& that #ortion of the Charter stating such must be considered re#ealed by the
Code as it is at variance -ith the latterhs #rovisions granting the City Council mere regulatory #o-ers$
%t is -ell to #oint out that #etitioners also cannot see* cover under the general -elfare clause
authoriHing the abatement of nuisances -ithout (udicial #roceedings$ That tenet a##lies to a nuisance
#er se& or one -hich affects the immediate safety of #ersons and #ro#erty and may be summarily abated
under the undefined la- of necessity$ %t can not be said that motels are in(urious to the rights of
#ro#erty& health or comfort of the community$ %t is a legitimate business$ %f it be a nuisance #er accidens
it may be so #roven in a hearing conducted for that #ur#ose$ A motel is not #er se a nuisance -arranting
its summary abatement -ithout (udicial intervention$N119O
'otably& the City Council -as conferred #o-ers to #revent and #rohibit certain activities and
establishments in another section of the Code -hich is re#roduced as follo-s:
5ection ,L$ "o-ers& Duties& Functions and Com#ensation$ BaD The sangguniang #anlungsod& as the
legislative body of the city& shall enact ordinances& a##rove resolutions and a##ro#riate funds for the
general -elfare of the city and its inhabitants #ursuant to 5ection 1! of this Code and in the #ro#er
e2ercise of the cor#orate #o-ers of the city as #rovided for under 5ection ++ of this Code& and shall:
B1D A##rove ordinances and #ass resolutions necessary for an efficient and effective city government&
and in this connection& shall:
$ $ $
BvD Enact ordinances intended to #revent& su##ress and im#ose a##ro#riate #enalties for habitual
drun*enness in #ublic #laces& vagrancy& mendicancy& #rostitution& establishment and maintenance of
houses of ill re#ute& gambling and other #rohibited games of chance& fraudulent devices and -ays to
obtain money or #ro#erty& drug addiction& maintenance of drug dens& drug #ushing& (uvenile
delin8uency& the #rinting& distribution or e2hibition of obscene or #ornogra#hic materials or
#ublications& and such other activities inimical to the -elfare and morals of the inhabitants of the cityG
$ $ $
%f it -ere the intention of Congress to confer u#on the City Council the #o-er to #rohibit the
establishments enumerated in 5ection 1 of the /rdinance& it -ould have so declared in uncertain terms
by adding them to the list of the matters it may #rohibit under the above=8uoted 5ection$ The /rdinance
no- vainly attem#ts to lum# these establishments -ith houses of ill=re#ute and e2#and the City
Councilhs #o-ers in the second and third clauses of 5ection ,L BaD BviiD of the Code in an effort to
overreach its #rohibitory #o-ers$ %t is evident that these establishments may only be regulated in their
establishment& o#eration and maintenance$
%t is im#ortant to distinguish the #unishable activities from the establishments themselves$ That these
establishments are recogniHed legitimate enter#rises can be gleaned from another 5ection of the Code$
5ection 1>1 under the Title on <ocal ;overnment Ta2ation e2#ressly mentioned #ro#rietors or
o#erators of massage clinics& sauna& Tur*ish and 5-edish baths& hotels& motels and lodging houses as
among the 6contractors7 defined in #aragra#h BhD thereof$ The same 5ection also defined 6amusement7
as a 6#leasurable diversion and entertainment&7 6synonymous to rela2ation& avocation& #astime or funG7
and 6amusement #laces7 to include 6theaters& cinemas& concert halls& circuses and other #laces of
amusement -here one see*s admission to entertain oneself by seeing or vie-ing the sho- or
#erformances$7 Thus& it can be inferred that the Code considers these establishments as legitimate
enter#rises and activities$ %t is -ell to recall the ma2im reddendo singula singulis -hich means that
-ords in different #arts of a statute must be referred to their a##ro#riate connection& giving to each in
its #lace& its #ro#er force and effect& and& if #ossible& rendering none of them useless or su#erfluous&
even if strict grammatical construction demands other-ise$ <i*e-ise& -here -ords under consideration
a##ear in different sections or are -idely dis#ersed throughout an act the same #rinci#le a##lies$N1+9O
'ot only does the /rdinance contravene the Code& it li*e-ise runs counter to the #rovisions of "$D$
99$ As correctly argued by MTDC& the statute had already converted the residential Ermita=Malate
area into a commercial area$ The decree allo-ed the establishment and o#eration of all *inds of
commercial establishments e2ce#t -arehouse or o#en storage de#ot& dum# or yard& motor re#air sho#&
gasoline service station& light industry -ith any machinery or funeral establishment$ The rule is that for
an ordinance to be valid and to have force and effect& it must not only be -ithin the #o-ers of the
council to enact but the same must not be in conflict -ith or re#ugnant to the general la-$N1+1O As
succinctly illustrated in 5olicitor ;eneral v$ Metro#olitan Manila Authority:N1++O
The re8uirement that the enactment must not violate e2isting la- e2#lains itself$ <ocal #olitical
subdivisions are able to legislate only by virtue of a valid delegation of legislative #o-er from the
national legislature Be2ce#t only that the #o-er to create their o-n sources of revenue and to levy ta2es
is conferred by the Constitution itselfD$ They are mere agents vested -ith -hat is called the #o-er of
subordinate legislation$ As delegates of the Congress& the local government units cannot contravene but
must obey at all times the -ill of their #rinci#al$ %n the case before us& the enactment in 8uestion& -hich
are merely local in origin cannot #revail against the decree& -hich has the force and effect of a statute$
N1+>O
"etitioners contend that the /rdinance en(oys the #resum#tion of validity$ 3hile this may be the rule& it
has already been held that although the #resum#tion is al-ays in favor of the validity or reasonableness
of the ordinance& such #resum#tion must nevertheless be set aside -hen the invalidity or
unreasonableness a##ears on the face of the ordinance itself or is established by #ro#er evidence$ The
e2ercise of #olice #o-er by the local government is valid unless it contravenes the fundamental la- of
the land& or an act of the legislature& or unless it is against #ublic #olicy or is unreasonable& o##ressive&
#artial& discriminating or in derogation of a common right$N1+O
Conclusion
All considered& the /rdinance invades fundamental #ersonal and #ro#erty rights and im#airs #ersonal
#rivileges$ %t is constitutionally infirm$ The /rdinance contravenes statutesG it is discriminatory and
unreasonable in its o#erationG it is not sufficiently detailed and e2#licit that abuses may attend the
enforcement of its sanctions$ And not to be forgotten& the City Council under the Code had no #o-er to
enact the /rdinance and is therefore ultra vires& null and void$
Concededly& the challenged /rdinance -as enacted -ith the best of motives and shares the concern of
the #ublic for the cleansing of the Ermita=Malate area of its social sins$ "olice #o-er legislation of such
character deserves the full endorsement of the (udiciary k-e reiterate our su##ort for it$ )ut ins#ite of
its virtuous aims& the enactment of the /rdinance has no statutory or constitutional authority to stand
on$ <ocal legislative bodies& in this case& the City Council& cannot #rohibit the o#eration of the
enumerated establishments under 5ection 1 thereof or order their transfer or conversion -ithout
infringing the constitutional guarantees of due #rocess and e8ual #rotection of la-s knot even under
the guise of #olice #o-er$
34E0EF/0E& the "etition is hereby DE'%ED and the decision of the 0egional Trial Court declaring
the /rdinance void is AFF%0MED$ Costs against #etitioners$
5/ /0DE0ED$
Davide& .r$& C$.$& "uno& Kuisumbing& 5andoval=;utierreH& Car#io& Austria=MartineH& Corona& Car#io=
Morales& Calle(o& 5r$& AHcuna& Chico='aHario and ;arcia& ..$& concur
"anganiban& .$& in the result$
Pnares= 5antiago& .$& concur in the result only$
N1O Dated 11 .anuary 199,G 0ollo& ##$ !=M> -ith anne2es$
N+O %d$ at !=M+$
N>O The lo-er court declared the /rdinance to be null and void$
NO %n the case of Cotton Club Cor#oration& etc$ v$ 4on$ Alfredo 5$ <im& etc& et al$ before 0TC& )ranch
,, of Manila& doc*eted as Civil Case 'o$ 9>=!!,,1& .udge 4ermogenes 0$ <i-ag declared the
/rdinance void and unconstitutional$ The defendants elevated the case to the Court of A##eals -hich
denied their #etition on #rocedural grounds in its Decision dated +1 May +99>$ %t a##ears that
defendants 4on$ Alfredo 5$ <im and the City Council of Manila did not elevate the case before the
Court$ Entry of .udgment of the CA Decision -as made on ++ A#ril +99>$
N,O 0ollo& #$ >M$
N!O %d$ at$ M,G %t no- calls itself 4otel Victoria$
NMO %d$ at >,=M$
NLO %d$ at !$
N9O The #rinci#al authors of the /rdinance are: 4ons$ )ienvenido M$ Abante& .r$G 4umberto )$ )ascoG
'estor C$ "once& .r$G Ernesto A$ 'ievaG Francisco ;$ Varona& .r$G .hose# P$ <o#eHG Ma$ "aH E$ 4erreraG
;erino A$ Tolentino& .rG Ma$ <ourdes M$ %si#G Flaviano F$ Conce#cion& .r$G Ernesto V$"$ Maceda& .r$G
Victoriano A$ MelendeHG Ma$ CoraHon 0$ CaballesG )ernardito C$ AngG 0oberto C$ /cam#oG 0ogelio )$
dela "aHG 0omeo ;$ 0iveraG Ale2ander 5$ 0icafortG Avelino 5$ CailianG )ernardo D$ 0agasaG .oey D$
4iHonG <eonardo <$ AngatG and .ocelyn )$ Da-is$
N19O 0ollo& #$ L$
N11O 0TC 0ecords& ##$ 19=11$
N1+O "aragra#h BaD BivD& 5ection ,L& Cha#ter > of the Code reads& thus:
5ection ,L$ "o-ers& Duties& Functions and Com#ensation$ BaD The sangguniang #anlungsod& as
the legislative body of the city& shall enact ordinances& a##rove resolutions and a##ro#riate funds for
the general -elfare of the city and its inhabitants #ursuant to 5ection 1! of this Code and in the #ro#er
e2ercise of the cor#orate #o-ers of the city as #rovided for under 5ection ++ of this Code& and shall:
$ $ $
BD 0egulate activities relative to the use of land& buildings and structures -ithin the city in
order to #romote the general -elfare and for said #ur#ose shall:
$ $ $ $
BivD 0egulate the establishment& o#eration and maintenance of cafes& restaurants& beerhouses&
hotels& motels& inns& #ension houses& lodging houses& and other similar establishments& including tourist
guides and trans#ortsG $ $ $
N1>O "residential Decree 'o$ 99G Dated +L .une 19MG Declaring "ortions of the Ermita=Malate Area
as Commercial Aones -ith Certain 0estrictions$ %t reads in full:
34E0EA5& the government is committed to the #romotion and develo#ment of tourism in the
country& #articularly in the City of Manila -hich is the hub of commercial and cultural activities in
Manila Metro#olitan AreaG
34E0EA5& certain #ortions of the districts of Ermita and Malate *no-n as the Tourist )elt are
still classified as Class 6A7 0esidential Aones and Class 6)7 0esidential Aones -here hotels and other
business establishments such as curio stores& souvenir sho#s& handicraft dis#lay centers and the li*e are
not allo-ed under the e2isting Honing #lan in the City of ManilaG
34E0EA5& the #resence of such establishments in the area -ould not only serve as an
attraction for tourists but are dollar earning enter#rises as -ell& -hich tourist areas all over the -orld
cannot do -ithoutG
'/3& T4E0EF/0E& %& FE0D%'A'D E$ MA0C/5& "resident of the "hili##ines& by virtue of
the #o-ers vested in me under the Constitution as Commander=in=Chief of all the Armed Forces of the
"hili##ines and #ursuant to "roclamation 'o$ 19L1& dated 5e#tember +1& 19M+& and ;eneral /rder 'o$
1& dated 5e#tember ++& 19M+& as amended& do hereby order and decree the classification as a
Commercial Aone of that #ortion of the Ermita=Malate area bounded by Teodoro M$ Rala-& 5r$ 5treet
in the northG Taft Avenue in the eastG Vito CruH 5treet in the south and 0o2as )oulevard in the -est$
"0/V%DED& 4/3EVE0& That no #ermit shall be granted for the establishment of any ne- -arehouse
or o#en storage de#ot& dum# or yard& motor re#air sho#& gasoline service station& light industry -ith any
machinery or funeral establishment in these areas& and "0/V%DED& F:0T4E0& That for #ur#oses of
realty ta2 assessment on #ro#erties situated therein& lands and buildings used e2clusively for residential
#ur#oses by the o-ners themselves shall remain assessed as residential #ro#erties$
All la-s& ordinances& orders& rules and regulations -hich are inconsistent -ith this Decree are
hereby re#ealed or modified accordingly$
This Decree shall ta*e effect immediately$
Done in the City of Manila this +Lth day of .une in the year of /ur <ord& nineteen hundred and
seventy=four$
N1O 0TC 0ecords& ##$ 11=1>$
N1,O %d$ at 1,L=1M1$
N1!O %d$ at 1!9$
N1MO 1 "hil$ 19> B19+9DG see also 5amson v$ Mayor of )acolod City& ;$0$ 'o$ <=+LM,& +> /ctober
19M& !9 5C0A +!M$
N1LO 0TC 0ecords& #$ 1!1$
N19O A##roved on 1L .une 199$
N+9O 0TC 0ecords& #$ 1!9$
N+1O 5u#ra note 1L$
N++O %d$ at 1!$
N+>O %bid$
N+O %d$ at 1!,=1!9$
N+,O %d$ at L$
N+!O %d$ at ,>$
N+MO 0ollo& ##$ ! and M+$
N+LO %d$ at !$
N+9O Dated 1+ December 199G %d$ at M>$
N>9O %d$ at +$
N>1O 5u#ra note 1>$
N>+O 0ollo& #$ 1>$
N>>O %d$ at 199=+91$
N>O %d$ at 1!& 19& 19L$
N>,O %d$ at 19& ++& +,=+!& 199$
N>!O %d$ at 1,9=1L9$
N>MO Tatel v$ Munici#ality of Virac& ;$0$ 'o$ 9+>& 11 March 199+& +9M 5C0A 1,M& 1!1G 5olicitor
;eneral v$ Metro#olitan Manila Authority& ;$0$ 'o$ 19+ML+& 11 December 1991& +9 5C0A L>M& L,G
Magta(as v$ "ryce "ro#erties Cor#$& %nc$& ;$0$ 'o$ 11199M& +9 .uly 199& +> 5C0A +,,& +!L=+!M$
N>LO 5ee A0T$ M& #ar$ B>D of the Civil Code -hich reads& thus:
$ $ $
Administrative or e2ecutive acts& orders and regulations shall be valid only -hen they are not
contrary to the la-s or the Constitution$
N>9O Magta(as v$ "ryce "ro#erties Cor#& %nc$& ;$0$ 'o$ 11199M& +9 .uly 199& +> 5C0A +,,& +M9=+M1$
N9O %d$ at +M>$
N1O Acebedo /#tical Com#any& %nc$ v$ Court of A##eals& >L, "hil$ 9,!& 9!L=9!9 B+999D$
N+O Metro#olitan Manila Devt$ Authority v$ )el=Air Village Asso$& >L, "hil$ ,L!& !9> B+999D& citing
5ections !L BaD& ,L BaD& and M BaD& )oo* %%%& <ocal ;overnment Code of 1991$
N>O 1! C$.$5$& ##$ ,!+=,!,$
NO Art$ %%& DEC<A0AT%/' /F "0%'C%"<E5 A'D 5TATE "/<%C%E5& 19LM C/'5T$
N,O %bid$
N!O Art$ %%%& )%<< /F 0%;4T5& 19LM C/'5T$
NMO %bid$
NLO %d$ at 5ec$ 9G 5ee also C0:A& %5A;A'% A$& C/'5T%T:T%/'A< <A3 9M B199LD$
N9O Ermita=Malate 4otel and Motel /#erators Association& %nc$ v$ City Mayor of Manila& +9 "hil$ L9&
L!9 B19!MD$
N,9O 5ee %n re <ut*er& /*l$ Cr$& +M "$ +d ML!& ML9& M99$
N,1O 5u#ra note > at 11,9=11,1$
N,+O 5ee 5mith& )ell T Co$ v$ 'atividad& 9 "hil$ 1>!& 1, B1919D$
N,>O C4EME0%'5RP& E03%'& C/'5T%T:T%/'A< <A3 "0%'C%"<E5 A'D "/<%C%E5& +nd Ed$
,+> B+99+D$
N,O %d$ at ,+>=,+$
N,,O 5ee County of 5acramento v$ <e-is& ,+> :$5$ L>>& L9 B199LD$
N,!O C4EME0%'5RP& 5u#ra note ,> at ,+$
N,MO <im v$ Court of A##eals& >, "hil$ L,M& L!L B+99+DG This is a related case involving the same
/rdinance challenged in this case$ The Court denied the #etition 8uestioning the -rit of #rohibitory
#reliminary in(unction issued by the 0TC& en(oining the closure of a certain establishment #ursuant to
the /rdinance$
N,LO 4omeo-nersh Asso$ of the "hil$& %nc$ v$ Munici#al )oard of the City of Manila& 1>> "hil$ 99>& 99M
B19!LD$
N,9O C0:A& %5A;A'% A$& C/'5T%T:T%/'A< <A3 19 B199LD$
N!9O 5ee :$5$ v$ Toribio& 1, "hil$ L, B1919DG Fabie v$ City of Manila& +1 "hil$ L! B191+DG Case v$ )oard
of 4ealth& + "hil$ +,! B191>D$
N!1O )alacuit v$ CF% of Agusan del 'orte& 'o$ <=>L+9& >9 .une 19LL& 1!> 5C0A 1L+& 191=19>$
N!+O C0:A& 5u#ra note ,9 at ,!$
N!>O Ermita=Malate 4otel and Motel /#erators Assoc$ %nc$ v$ City Mayor of Manila& su#ra note 9$
N!O %d$ at L,L=L,9$
N!,O 5ection ,L BaD 1 BvD& the Code$
N!!O Catechism of the Catholic Church& Definitive Edition& #$ 191G ECCE and 3ord T <ife
"ublications& Don )osco Com#ound& Ma*ati$
N!MO <im v$ Court of A##eals& su#ra note ,M at L!M$
N!LO 0ubi v$ "rovincial )oard >9 "hil$ !!9 B1919D& as cited in Morfe v$ Mutuc& 1>9 "hil$ 1, B19!LD$
N!9O Morfe v$ Mutuc& 1>9 "hil$ 1,& 9 B19!LD$
NM9O 9L :$5$ ,M+$
NM1O 5ee <a-rence v$ Te2as& ,>9 :$5$ ,,L B+99>D$
NM+O Concerned Em#loyee v$ ;lenda Es#iritu Mayor& A$M$ 'o$ "=9+=1,!& +> 'ovember +99& .$
Tinga& #onente$
NM>O <a-rence v$ Te2as& su#ra note M9$
NMO Morfe v$ Mutuc& su#ra note !L at +$
NM,O %d$ at +=>& citing <as*i& <iberty in the Modern 5tate& B19D$
NM!O %d$ at =,& citing Emerson& 'ine .ustices in 5earch of a Doctrine& ! Mich$ <a-$ 0ev$ +19&
++9 B19!,D$
NMMO "eo#le v$ Fa(ardo& et al$& 19 "hil$ >& M B19,LD$
NMLO %bid$ citing Arverne )ay Const$ Co$ v$ Thatcher B'$P$D 11M A<0$ 1119& 111!$
NM9O C4EME0%'5RP& 5u#ra note ,> at !1!$
NL9O %d$ at !1M$
NL1O +!9 :$5$ >9>& 1, B19++D$
NL+O %d$ at 1>=1,$
NL>O 5ee "enn Central Trans#ortation Co$ v$ 'e- Por* City& >L :$5$ 19 B19MLD$
NLO C4EME0%'5RP & su#ra note ,> at !+>=!+!$
NL,O 5ee <ucas v$ 5outh Carolina Coastal Council& ,9, :$5$ 199> B199+D$
NL!O %bid$
NLMO C4EME0%'5RP& su#ra note ,> at 1!!$
NLLO 5u#ra note L+$
NL9O C0:A& 5u#ra note ,9 at >L$
N99O "eo#le v$ Fa(ardo& su#ra note M! at >& L citing Te-s v$ 3oolhiser B19>>D >,+ %11$ +1+& 1L,
'$E$ L+M$
N91O %d$ at !=M$
N9+O %d$ at M& citing 5chloss "oster Adv$ Co$& %nc$ v$ City of 0oc* 4ill& et al$& + 5E B+dD& ##$ >9=>9,G
"eo#le v$ 'aHario& 'o$ <=1>& >1 August 19LL& 1!, 5C0A 1L!& 19,$
N9>O 9+ :$5$ !11 B19M1D$
N9O 'o$ <=1>& >1 August 19LL& 1!, 5C0A 1L!& 19,$
N9,O 9> :$5$ +1, B1999D$
N9!O 5u#ra note 9$
N9MO De la CruH& et al$ v$ 4on$ "aras& et al$& +9L "hil$ 99& ,9> B19L>D$
N9LO 5ee %chong v$ 4ernandeH& 191 "hil$ 11,, B19,MD$
N99O 1!) Am .ur +d lMM9 +99 citing 5tate of Missouri e2 rel$ ;aines v$ Canada& >9, :$5$ >>M& ,9 5$ Ct$
+>+& L> <$ Ed$ +9L B19>LD& rehhg denied& >9, :$5$ !M!& ,9 5$ Ct$ >,!& L> <$ Ed$ >M B19>9D and
mandate conformed to& > Mo$ 1+>L& 1>1 5$3$ +d +1M B19>9D$
N199O 1!) Am .ur +d lMM9 +99 citing 0omer v$ Evans& ,1M :$5$ !+9& 11! 5$ Ct$ 1!+9& 1> <$ Ed$ +d
L,,& 199 Ed$ <a- 0e#$ ,>9& M9 Fair Em#l$ "rac$ Cas$ B)'AD 11L9& !L Em#l$ "rac$ Dec$ BCC4D 91>
B199!DG 3al*er v$ )oard of 5u#ervisors of Monroe County& ++ Miss$ L91& L1 5o$ +d ++, B19,,D& cert$
denied& >,9 :$5$ LLM& M! 5$ Ct$ 1+& 199 <$ Ed$ ML+ B19,,DG "reisler v$ Calcaterra& >!+ Mo$ !!+& +>
5$3$ +d !+ B19,1D$
N191O 5u#ra note ,+ at 1,$
N19+O 'u?eH v$ 5andiganbayan& 19M "hil$ 9M B19L+D$
N19>O CruH& su#ra note ,9 at 1+,$
N19O 5ee "eo#le v$ Cayat& !L "hil$ 1+ B19>9D$
N19,O 5ee Craig v$ )oren& +9 :$5$ 199 B19M!D$
N19!O 5u#ra note 1M$
N19MO %d$ at 19L B19+9D$
N19LO L1 "hil$ >> B19LD$
N199O %d$ at >L$
N119O 0ollo& #$ 19$
N111O 0TC 0ecords& #$ 99G The Decision of the 0egional Trial Court of Manila& )ranch ,, in the case
of Cotton Club Cor#oration& %nc$ v$ 4on$ Alfredo 5$ <im& etc$& et al$& Civil Case 'o$ 9>=!!,,1G Dated
+L .uly 199>G "enned by .udge 4ermogenes 0$ <i-agG Citing 5ha-& 4arry& "unctuate it 0ightS
Everday 4andboo*s 1+,=1+!$
N11+O %d$ at 9L$
N11>O City of /Hamis v$ <uma#as& 'o$ <=>9M+M& 1, .uly 19M,& !, 5C0A >>& +$
N11O F0A'C%5C/& V%CE'TE .$& 5TAT:T/0P C/'5T0:CT%/'& 5econd Edition 1M+ B19,9DG 5ee
"e#si=Cola )ottling Com#any of the "hili##ines& %nc$ v$ Munici#ality of Tanauan& <eyte& et al$& 1!1
"hil$ ,91& !9, B19M!D$
N11,O 5u#ra note 19M at >>$
N11!O A;"A</& 0:)E' F$& 5TAT:T/0P C/'5T0:CT%/' +9! B19L!D$
N11MO F0A'C%5C/& 5u#ra note 11> at +M1$
N11LO C0A3F/0D& EA0< T$& T4E C/'5T0:CT%/' /F 5TAT:TE5 19!=19M B199DG 5ee Mecano
v$ Commission on Audit& ;$0$ 'o$ 19>9L+& 11 December 199+& +1! 5C0A ,99& ,9,$
N119O 5ee Estate of ;regoria Francisco v$ Court of A##eals& ;$0$ 'o$ 9,+M9& +, .uly 1991& 199 5C0A
,9,& !91$
N1+9O F0A'C%5C/& 5u#ra note 11> at 1ML=1M9G 5ee Ring& et al$ v$ 4ernaeH& etc$& et al$& 11 "hil$ M>9&
M>9 B19!+D$
N1+1O Chua <ao& etc$& et al$ v$ 0aymundo& etc$& et al$& 19 "hil$ >9+& >9M B19,LD$
N1++O ;$0$ 'o$ 19+ML+& 11 December 1991& +9 5C0A L>M$
N1+>O %d$ at LM$
N1+O )alacuit v$ CF% of Agusan del 'orte& su#ra note !1 at 19L=199$


E' )A'C
ATTP$ 0/ME/ <$ E0ECE& ;$0$ 'o$ 1!!L99
"etitioner&
"resent:

":'/& C$.$&
= versus = K:%5:M)%';&
P'A0E5=5A'T%A;/&
CA0"%/&c
A:5T0%A=MA0T%'EA&
<P' )$ MACA<%';AP& ./CE<P' C/0/'A&
)A5T%A'& <PMA' )$ 5A<VAD/0& CA0"%/ M/0A<E5&
)%E'VE'%D/ <$ 0EA'/& )0%;%DA AAC:'A&
CEC%<%A 0$ A)0AT%K:E& .EA' T%';A&
C/0TEA=MA0AA'& F0A'C%5C/ C4%C/='AAA0%/&
M$ )%</;& 0/5A "$ E5"%0%T:& VE<A5C/& .0$&
0/<A'D/ E)0E/& PA'%E A$ 'AC4:0A&
"%T</';AP& and V%0;%<%/ 0EPE5&
MA;"/C& <E/'A0D/=DE CA5T0/& and
0es#ondents$ )0%/'& ..$

"romulgated:

A#ril ++& +99L
C ====================================================================================== C

DEC%5%/'

AAC:'A& .$:

This is a #etition for revie- on certiorariN1O of the Decision of the Court of A##eals BCAD #romulgated
on .anuary M& +99, affirming the Decision of the Civil 5ervice Commission BC5CD -hich found
#etitioner Atty$ 0omeo <$ Erece guilty of dishonesty and conduct #re(udicial to the best interest of the
service$

The facts are as follo-s:

"etitioner is the 0egional Director of the Commission on 4uman 0ights BC40D 0egion %& -hose office
is located in 5an Fernando City& <a :nion$ 0es#ondent em#loyees of the C40 0egion % filed an
Affidavit=Com#laint dated /ctober +& 199L against #etitioner alleging that he denied them the use of
the office vehicle assigned to #etitioner& that #etitioner still claimed trans#ortation allo-ance even if he
-as using the said vehicle& and that he certified that he did not use any government vehicle& -hen in
fact he did& in order to collect trans#ortation allo-ance$


The Affidavit=Com#laint reads:

2 2 2

$ That on 5e#tember 19& 199L& -e& Atty$ <ynn Macalingay and Mr$ <yman 5alvador -ere denied
the use of the office vehicle as evidenced by the hereto attached co#y of our denied %tinerary of Travel
mar*ed as Anne2 i)hG

,$ That on August ,& 199L& %& )rigida Abrati8ue re8uested for the use of the government
vehicle but the same -as denied by Atty$ Erece for the reason that -e -ould be using the same to
Teachers Cam# as evidenced by a co#y of the denied tri# tic*et -ith the marginal notes of Atty$ Erece
hereto attached as Anne2 iChG

!$ That on May +9& 199L& the re8uest of )rigida Cecilia Abrati8ue and Francisco )ilog to use
the vehicle -ithin the City for field -or* #ur#oses -as again denied by Atty$ Erece as he -ill
accordingly use the sameG

M$ That on A#ril +9& 199L& a #ro#osed tri# -as li*e-ise #ost#oned by Atty$ Erece on the
ground that he -ill be using the vehicle as evidenced by a co#y of the #ro#osed %tinerary of Travel -ith
marginal note of Atty$ Erece 222G

L$ That on A#ril& 199M& %& Atty$ .ocelyn )astian re8uested for the use of the vehicle as %
needNedO to go to the )enguet "rovincial .ail but % -as instructed to commute because he -ill use the
vehicle$ To my dismay& % found him still in the office -hen % returned from the "rovincial .ailG

9$ That such denials of the use of the vehicle are not isolated cases but -ere (ust a fe- of the
numerous instances of conflicts of schedules regarding the use of the government vehicle and -here -e
found ourselves al-ays at the losing end because -e are the subordinate em#loyeesG

2 2 2

1>$ That Atty$ Erece regularly receives and li8uidates his 0e#resentation and Trans#ortation
Allo-ances B0ATAD -hich at #resent is in the amount of F/:0 T4/:5A'D "E5/5 B"&999$99D& the
#ayroll of such and its li8uidation could be made available u#on re8uest by an authority to the
0esident Auditor but his li8uidations for the month of A#ril 199L and 5e#tember 199L NareO hereto
attached 222G

1$ That des#ite regular recei#t of his 0ATA& Atty$ Erece still #rioritiHes himself in the use of the
office vehicle to the detriment of the #ublic serviceG

1,$ That to com#ound things& he certifies in his monthly li8uidation of his 0ATA that i4E D%D
'/T :5E A'P ;/VE0'ME'T VE4%C<E F/0 T4E 5A%D M/'T4h 222 -hich is a big lie
because as already stated& he is the regular user of the government vehicle issued to C40& 0egion %G

1!$ That %& 0olando C$ Ebreo& the disbursing officer of the 0egional Field /ffice hereby attest to the
fact that no deductions in the 0ATA of Atty$ 0omeo <$ Erece -as ever done in connection -ith his
regular use of the government vehicle 2 2 2$7N+O


The C5C=Cordillera Administrative 0egion issued an /rder dated /ctober 9& 199L& directing #etitioner
to comment on the com#laint$

%n com#liance& #etitioner countered& thus:

2 2 2

$ %n relation to #aragra#hs +=D& +=E and +=; above cited& it is among the duties as #er
management su#ervisory function of the 0egional 40 Director to a##rove use or non=use of the official
vehicle of the 0egion as it -as memorandum recei#ted to him and the non=a##roval of the use of the
same if it is not arbitrary and for (ustifiable reasonsG said function of a##roval and disa##roval rests on
the 0egional 4uman 0ights Director and that function is not merely ministerialG

,$ That % have issued a guideline that the official vehicle -ill not be used for the Mountain
"rovinces and 4alsema 4igh-ayZMountain Trail because of the #oor road condition and to #revent
brea*do-n and early deterioration of same 222G

!$ That Atty$ <ynn )$ Macalingay& one of the com#lainants had gone to Mt$ "rovince to attend the
"rovincial "eace and /rder Council meetings& conduct (ail visitations and follo-=u# cases on many
occasions using the regular bus tri#s in the s#irit of the #olicy as mentioned in #aragra#h 222G

M$ That all em#loyees had used the vehicle on official business -ithout e2ce#tion& all com#lainants
included 222G

L$ /n 5e#tember 19& 199L& Atty$ <ynn Macalingay and <yman 5alvador had the use of the vehicle
disa##roved for the reasons conforming to #aragra#h 222G

9$ /n August ,& 199L& Atty$ Erece disa##roved the use of vehicle for use of )rigida Abrati8ue
because:

iaD The vehicle -as available since .uly >9& 199L for use in 4a##y 4allo- but not utiliHed earlier
222G

bD /n August !& 199L& a DEC5=C40 5eminar on :se 4uman 0ights E2em#lar -as held at the
Teacherhs Cam# )aguio City and the vehicle -as used to trans#ort 40 materials& overhead #ro(ector
and for the overall use of the seminar u#on the re8uest of the "ublic %nformation and Education /ffice&
Central /ffice& Commission on 4uman 0ights through 5usan 'uguid of C40& ManilaG

2 2 2

dD That Mrs$ Abrati8ue and Co$ -ere as*ed to e2#lain the unreasonable delay to attend to the
case of Cherry Esteban -hich -as sub(ect of the disa##roved travelGh

19$ /n A#ril +9& 199L& the itinerary of travel of <yman 5alvador -as 0E5C4ED:<ED from A#ril
++ T +>& 199L to A#ril +> T +& 199L as the vehicle -as used by Atty$ Erece on an im#ortant travel to
Manila u#on order of no less than the 4onorable Chair#erson& Aurora 'avarette=0eci?a of Commission
on 4uman 0ights 222G

2 2 2

1+$ As to the use of the vehicle by the 0egional 40 Director& same shall be sub(ect to the
allo-anceZdisallo-ance of the C/A 0esident Auditor& li*e-ise the 0egional 40 Director in all his
travels outside )aguio City& he does not claim bus and ta2i fares #er certification of Danilo )alino& the
Administrative /fficer Designate and Mr$ 0olando Ebreo& the Cash Disbursing /fficer& Anne2 iAhG

1>$ %n many cases& Atty$ 0omeo <$ Erece has to maintain the vehicle including car -ashing
thereof& garage #ar*ing at his residence to maintain and u#*ee# the vehicle and same is still in #remium
condition to the satisfaction of the office at no e2tra cost to the CommissionG

2 2 2

1,$ %n su##ort thereof& -e move to dismiss this case as #ure 8uestion on su#ervisory and
management #rerogative& -hich is reserved for the /ffice 4ead and a harassment move by disgruntled
em#loyees -ho are counter=charged hereofG

1!$ Anne2es iEh and iFh of the com#laint NareO mis#laced and misleading because a clear and
cognate reading of same does not reflect that % chec*edZmar*ed the use of government vehicle in the
certification and as such no dishonesty is involvedG the documents s#ea* for themselves$ 2 2 2 Anne2
iEh is for the month of A#ril& 199L -here the chec* mar*s are clear$ /n Anne2 iFh of the com#laint& no
reference is made as to the fact that % did not use the government vehicle& if so& no allegation as to -hen
% did use same for my #ersonal use$7N>O


After a fact=finding investigation& the C5C "ro#er in C5C 0esolution 'o$ 99=1>!9 dated .uly 1& 1999
charged #etitioner -ith Dishonesty and ;rave Misconduct for using a government vehicle in s#ite of
his recei#t of the monthly trans#ortation allo-ance and for certifying that he did not use any
government vehicle& -hen in fact& he did& in order to receive the trans#ortation allo-ance$

"ertinent #ortions of the formal charge read:

1$ That des#ite the regular recei#t of Erece of his monthly 0e#resentation and Trans#ortation
Allo-ance B0ATAD in the amount of "&999$99& he still #rioritiHes himself in the use of the office
vehicle BTamara- FCD in s#ite of the directive from the Central /ffice that he cannot use the service
vehicle for official #ur#oses and at the same time receive his trans#ortation allo-anceG

+$ That Erece did not com#ly -ith the directive of the Central /ffice addressed to all 0egional
4uman 0ights Directors& as follo-s: ito regulariHe your recei#t of the trans#ortation allo-ance
com#onent of the 0ATA to -hich you are entitled monthly& you are hereby directed to immediately
transfer to any of your staff& #referably one of your la-yers& the memorandum recei#t of the vehicleBsD
no- still in your nameGh

>$ That he certified in his monthly li8uidation of his 0ATA that he did not use any government
vehicle for the corres#onding month& -hich is not true because he is the regular user of the government
vehicle issued to C40=0egion %$

The foregoing facts and circumstances indicate that government service has been #re(udiced by the acts
of Erece$

34E0EF/0E& 0omeo <$ Erece is hereby formally charged -ith Dishonesty and ;rave Misconduct$
Accordingly& he is given five B,D days from recei#t hereof to submit his Ans-er under oath and
affidavits of his -itnesses& if any& to the Civil 5ervice Commission=Cordillera Administrative 0egion
BC5C=CA0D$ /n his Ans-er& he should indicate -hether he elects a formal investigation or -aives his
right thereto$ Any Motion to Dismiss& re8uest for clarification or )ills of "articulars shall not be
entertained by the Commission$ Any of these #leadings inter#osed by the res#ondent shall be
considered as an Ans-er and shall be evaluated as such$ <i*e-ise& he is advised of his right to the
assistance of counsel of his choice$NO


After a formal investigation of the case& the C5C issued 0esolution 'o$ 9+91+& dated .anuary +$
+99+& finding #etitioner guilty of dishonesty and conduct #re(udicial to the best interest of the service
and #enaliHing him -ith dismissal from the service$

"etitioner filed a #etition for revie- of the C5C 0esolution -ith the CA$

%n the Decision #romulgated on .anuary M& +99,& the CA u#held the C5C 0esolution& the dis#ositive
#ortion of -hich reads:

34E0EF/0E& in vie- of the foregoing& the #etition is DE'%ED and the assailed 0esolutions of the
Civil 5ervice Commission are hereby AFF%0MED$N,O


4ence& this #etition$


"etitioner raises these issues:


1$ 3hether or not the Court of A##eals erred in ruling that #etitioner -as not denied due
#rocess des#ite the admitted facts that res#ondents failed to identify and testify on their Affidavit=
Com#laint and that #etitioner -as denied of his right to cross=e2amine res#ondents on their Affidavit=
Com#laint$

+$ 3hether or not the Court of A##eals -as correct in ado#ting in toto the conclusions of the
C5C although they -ere based on mere assum#tions$


"etitioner contends that he -as denied due #rocess as he -as not afforded the right to cross=e2amine
his accusers and their -itnesses$ 4e stated that at his instance& in order to #revent delay in the
dis#osition of the case& he -as allo-ed to #resent evidence first to su##ort the allegations in his
Counter=Affidavit$ After he rested his case& res#ondents did not #resent their evidence& but moved to
submit their #osition #a#er and formal offer of evidence& -hich motion -as granted by the C5C over
his B#etitionerhsD ob(ection$ 0es#ondents then submitted their "osition "a#er and Formal /ffer of
E2hibits$

"etitioner submits that although he -as allo-ed to #resent evidence first& it should not be construed as
a -aiver of his right to cross=e2amine the com#lainants$ Although the order of #resentation of
evidence -as not in conformity -ith the #rocedure& still #etitioner should not be deemed to have lost
his right to cross=e2amine his accusers and their -itnesses$ This may be allo-ed only if he e2#ressly
-aived said right$

The Court agrees -ith the CA that #etitioner -as not denied due #rocess -hen he failed to cross=
e2amine the com#lainants and their -itnesses since he -as given the o##ortunity to be heard and
#resent his evidence$ %n administrative #roceedings& the essence of due #rocess is sim#ly the
o##ortunity to e2#lain onehs side$N!O

VeleH v$ De VeraNMO held:

Due #rocess of la- in administrative cases is not identical -ith 6(udicial #rocess7 for a trial in court is
not al-ays essential to due #rocess$ 3hile a day in court is a matter of right in (udicial #roceedings& it
is other-ise in administrative #roceedings since they rest u#on different #rinci#les$ The due #rocess
clause guarantees no #articular form of #rocedure and its re8uirements are not technical$ Thus& in
certain #roceedings of administrative character& the right to a notice or hearing are not essential to due
#rocess of la-$ The constitutional re8uirement of due #rocess is met by a fair hearing before a
regularly established administrative agency or tribunal$ %t is not essential that hearings be had before
the ma*ing of a determination if thereafter& there is available trial and tribunal before -hich all
ob(ections and defenses to the ma*ing of such determination may be raised and considered$ /ne
ade8uate hearing is all that due #rocess re8uires$ $ $ $

The right to cross=e2amine is not an indis#ensable as#ect of due #rocess$ 'or is an actual hearing
al-ays essential$ $ $ $ NLO

'e2t& #etitioner contends that the CA erred in ado#ting in toto the conclusions of the C5C$

"etitioner contends that the conclusion of the C5C #roceeded from the #remise that the #etitioner -as
using the sub(ect vehicle as his service vehicle& -hich he dis#utes& because he did not use the vehicle
regularly$ The evidence sho-ed that the service vehicle -as being used by the em#loyees of the
regional office for official #ur#oses$ 4e argues that although the service vehicle is still in his name& it
should not be concluded that it is assigned to him as his service vehicle& thus dis8ualifying him from
receiving trans#ortation allo-ance$

The Court is not #ersuaded$ The #ertinent conclusion of the C5C referred to by #etitioner reads:

At the outset& it must be stated that the entitlement to trans#ortation allo-ance by certain officials and
em#loyees #ursuant to 0A !!LL #resu##oses that they are not assigned government vehicles$ This -as
clarified by the 5u#reme Court in the case of Aida Domingo vs$ C/A& ;$0$ 'o$ 11+>M1& /ctober M&
199L& -here it ruled& as follo-s:

iThe #rovision of la- in #oint is found in 5ection +L of 0e#ublic Act !!LL& other-ise *no-n as the
;eneral A##ro#riations Act of 19L9& to -it:

5ec$ +L$ 0e#resentation and Trans#ortation Allo-ances$ $$$ The trans#ortation allo-ance herein
authoriHed shall not be granted to officials -ho are assigned a government vehicle or use government
motor trans#ortation& e2ce#t as may be a##roved by the "resident of the "hili##ines$ :nless other-ise
#rovided by la-& no amount a##ro#riated in this Act shall be used to #ay for re#resentation andZor
trans#ortation allo-ances& -hether commutable or reimbursable& -hich e2ceed the rates authoriHed
under this 5ection$ "revious administrative authoriHation not consistent -ith the rates and conditions
herein s#ecified shall no longer be valid and #ayment shall not be allo-ed$

2 2 2

%n the case of )ustamante vs$ Commission on Audit& +1! 5C0A 1>& decided by this Court on
'ovember +M& 199+& C/A also disallo-ed the claim for trans#ortation allo-ance of the legal counsel
of 'ational "o-er Cor#oration because he -as already issued a government vehicle$ %nvolving the
circular aforementioned and almost the same facts as in this case& it -as therein held that C/A Circular
'o$ M,=! is categorical in #rohibiting the use of government vehicles by officials receiving
trans#ortation allo-ance and in stressing that the use of government motor vehicle and claim for
trans#ortation allo-ance are mutually e2clusive and incom#atible$

The issue need no longer be belabored for no less than this Court ruled in the aforesaid case that a
government official& to -hom a motor vehicle has been assigned& cannot& at the same time& claim
trans#ortation allo-ance$ B:nderscoring su##liedD

%t is clear from the records that Director Edmundo 5$ Ancog& C40=Central office BField /#erations
officeD& issued a Memorandum dated February +M& 199L& addressed to all C40 0egional Directors in
res#ect to Trans#ortation Allo-ance$ The Memorandum states that trans#ortation allo-ance shall not
be granted to 0egional Directors -henever a government vehicle or use of government motor
trans#ortation is already assigned to them$ %t further em#hasiHed that should they -ant to 6avail
regulariHation of their 0ATA&7 the 0egional Directors must immediately transfer the vehicle to any of
their staffZla-yer$


0ecords sho- that Erece -as issued a government vehicle since August 19& 199M and he did not
transfer the vehicle to any of his staff$ 'ot-ithstanding this fact and the said memorandum& he
received trans#ortation allo-ance #articularly for the months of A#ril and 5e#tember 199L& as reflected
in the CertificationZs signed by him$ This clearly resulted in undue #re(udice to the best interest of the
service$

The foregoing facts logically lead to the conclusion that the act of Erece in certifying that he has not
used any government vehicle and conse8uently collecting Trans#ortation Allo-ance des#ite the fact
that a government vehicle -as assigned to him constitutes the offenses of Dishonesty and Conduct
"re(udicial to the )est %nterest of the 5ervice$N9O


The above conclusion&as -ell as the Memorandum dated February +M& 199L issued by Director Ancog
to the C40 0egional Directors& are both very clear$ /nce a vehicle is assigned to a regional director&
li*e #etitioner& he is no longer entitled to trans#ortation allo-ance unless he assigns the vehicle to
another staffZla-yer$ 5ince #etitioner did not assign the sub(ect vehicle assigned to him to someone
else& he is not entitled to trans#ortation allo-ance$

Contrary to the argument of #etitioner& there is no 8ualification that the assigned vehicle should be for
the e2clusive use of the service vehicle of the regional director alone to dis8ualify him from receiving
trans#ortation allo-ance$

5ince the records sho- that #etitioner collected trans#ortation allo-ance even if a government vehicle
had been assigned to him& the CA did not err in sustaining the decision of the C5C finding #etitioner
guilty of dishonesty and conduct #re(udicial to the best interest of the service and #enaliHing him -ith
dismissal from the service$

34E0EF/0E& the #etition is denied$ The Decision of the Court of A##eals #romulgated on .anuary M&
+99, is AFF%0MED$

'o costs$

5/ /0DE0ED$


AD/<F/ 5$ AAC:'A
Associate .ustice



3E C/'C:0:




0EP'AT/ 5$ ":'/
Chief .ustice





<E/'A0D/ A$ K:%5:M)%'; C/'5:E</ P'A0E5=5A'T%A;/
Associate .ustice Associate .ustice


B/n <eaveD
A'T/'%/ T$ CA0"%/ MA$ A<%C%A A:5T0%A=MA0T%'EA
Associate .ustice Associate .ustice



0E'AT/ C$ C/0/'A C/'C4%TA CA0"%/ M/0A<E5
Associate .ustice Associate .ustice



DA'TE /$ T%';A M%'%TA V$ C4%C/='AAA0%/
Associate .ustice Associate .ustice





"0E5)%TE0/ .$ VE<A5C/& .0$ A'T/'%/ ED:A0D/ )$ 'AC4:0A
Associate .ustice Associate .ustice





0:)E' T$ 0EPE5 TE0E5%TA .$ <E/'A0D/=DE CA5T0/
Associate .ustice Associate .ustice




A0T:0/ D$ )0%/'
Associate .ustice




CE0T%F%CAT%/'

"ursuant to 5ection 1>& Article V%%% of the Constitution& it is hereby certified that the conclusions
in the above Decision -ere reached in consultation before the case -as assigned to the -riter of the
o#inion of the Court$





0EP'AT/ 5$ ":'/
Chief .ustice

c /n <eave$
N1O :nder 0ule , of the 0ules of Court$
N+O C5C 0esolution& 0ollo& ##$ >!=>M$
N>O %d$ at >L=>9$
NO %d$ at >,=>!$
N,O %d$ at >$
N!O VeleH v$ De Vera& A$C$ 'o$ !!9M& .uly +,& +99!& 9! 5C0A >,$
NMO %d$ at >LM=>LL$
NLO Em#hasis su##lied$
N9O %d$ At 1=>$
Today is Tuesday& 5e#tember 9+& +91
search
0e#ublic of the "hili##ines
5:"0EME C/:0T
Manila
E' )A'
;$0$ 'o$ 1M>9 /ctober 1M& +99!
%' T4E MATTE0 /F T4E "ET%T%/' F/0 %55:A'CE /F 30%T /F 4A)EA5 C/0":5 /F
CAM%</ <$ 5A)%/& #etitioner&
.$ E0M%' E0'E5T </:%E 0$ M%;:E<& #etitioner=relator&
vs$
4/'/0A)<E 5E'AT/0 0%C4A0D ;/0D/'& in his ca#acity as Chairman& and the
4/'/0A)<E MEM)E05 /F T4E C/MM%TTEE /' ;/VE0'ME'T C/0"/0AT%/'5 A'D
":)<%C E'TE0"0%5E5 and T4E C/MM%TTEE /' ":)<%C 5E0V%CE5 of the 5enate&
4/'/0A)<E 5E'AT/0 .:A' "/'CE=E'0%<E& in his official ca#acity as Member&
4/'/0A)<E MA':E< V%<<A0& 5enate "resident& 5E'ATE 5E0;EA'T=AT=A0M5& and the
5E'ATE /F T4E "4%<%""%'E5& res#ondents$
2 =========================================================================== 2
;$0$ 'o$ 1M>1L /ctober 1M& +99!
"0E5%DE'T%A< C/MM%55%/' /' ;//D ;/VE0'ME'T B"C;;D and CAM%</ <$ 5A)%/&
Chairman& 'A0C%5/ 5$ 'A0%/& 0%CA0D/ M$ A)CEDE& TE0E5/ <$ .AV%E0 and '%CA5%/ A$
C/'T%& Commissioners& MA':E< A'DA< and .:<%/ .A<A'D/'%& "C;; nominees to
"hilcomsat 4oldings Cor#oration& #etitioners&
vs$
0%C4A0D ;/0D/'& in his ca#acity as Chairman& and MEM)E05 /F T4E C/MM%TTEE /'
;/VE0'ME'T C/0"/0AT%/'5 A'D ":)<%C E'TE0"0%5E5& MEM)E05 /F T4E
C/MM%TTEE /' ":)<%C 5E0V%CE5& 5E'AT/0 .:A' "/'CE=E'0%<E& in his ca#acity as
member of both said Committees& MA':E< V%<<A0& 5enate "resident& T4E 5E'ATE 5E0;EA'T=
AT=A0M5& and 5E'ATE /F T4E "4%<%""%'E5& res#ondents$
2 =========================================================================== 2
;$0$ 'o$ 1M1MM /ctober 1M& +99!
"4%<C/M5AT 4/<D%';5 C/0"/0AT%/'5& "4%<%" ;$ )0/DETT& <:%5 R$ </R%'& .0$&
0/)E0T/ V$ 5A' ./5E& DE<F%' "$ A';CA/& 0/)E0T/ <$ A)AD& A<MA R0%5T%'A
A</))A& and ./4''P TA'& #etitioners&
vs$
5E'ATE C/MM%TTEE /' ;/VE0'ME'T C/0"/0AT%/'5 and ":)<%C E'TE0"0%5E5& its
MEM)E05 and C4A%0MA'& the 4/'/0A)<E 5E'AT/0 0%C4A0D ;/0D/' and 5E'ATE
C/MM%TTEE /' ":)<%C 5E0V%CE5& its Members and Chairman& the 4/'/0A)<E 5E'AT/0
./RE0 "$ A00/P/& res#ondents$
D E C % 5 % / '
5A'D/VA<=;:T%E00EA& .$:
T-o decades ago& on February +L& 19L!& former "resident CoraHon C$ A8uino installed her regime by
issuing E2ecutive /rder BE$/$D 'o$ 1&1 creating the "residential Commission on ;ood ;overnment
B"C;;D$ 5he entrusted u#on this Commission the herculean tas* of recovering the ill=gotten -ealth
accumulated by the de#osed "resident Ferdinand E$ Marcos& his family& relatives& subordinates and
close associates$+ 5ection BbD of E$/$ 'o$ 1 #rovides that: F'o member or staff of the Commission
shall be re8uired to testify or #roduce evidence in any (udicial& legislative or administrative #roceeding
concerning matters -ithin its official cogniHance$F A##arently& the #ur#ose is to ensure "C;;@s
unham#ered #erformance of its tas*$>
Today& the constitutionality of 5ection BbD is being 8uestioned on the ground that it tram#les u#on the
5enate@s #o-er to conduct legislative in8uiry under Article V%& 5ection +1 of the 19LM Constitution&
-hich reads:
The 5enate or the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives or any of its res#ective committees may conduct in8uiries
in aid of legislation in accordance -ith its duly #ublished rules of #rocedure$ The rights of #ersons
a##earing in or affected by such in8uiries shall be res#ected$
The facts are undis#uted$
/n February +9& +99!& 5enator Miriam Defensor 5antiago introduced "hili##ine 5enate 0esolution 'o$
,, B5enate 0es$ 'o$ ,,D& Fdirecting an in8uiry in aid of legislation on the anomalous losses incurred
by the "hili##ines /verseas Telecommunications Cor#oration B"/TCD& "hili##ine Communications
5atellite Cor#oration B"4%<C/M5ATD& and "4%<C/M5AT 4oldings Cor#oration B"4CD due to the
alleged im#ro#rieties in their o#erations by their res#ective )oard of Directors$F
The #ertinent #ortions of the 0esolution read:
34E0EA5& in the last 8uarter of +99,& the re#resentation and entertainment e2#ense of the "4C
s*yroc*eted to "$> million& as com#ared to the #revious year@s mere "19! thousandG
34E0EA5& some board members established -holly o-ned "4C subsidiary called
Telecommunications Center& %nc$ BTC%D& -here "4C funds are allegedly si#honedG in 1L months& over
"M> million had been allegedly advanced to TC% -ithout any accountability re#ort given to "4C and
"4%<C/M5ATG
34E0EA5& the "hili##ine 5tar& in its 1+ February +99+ issue re#orted that the e2ecutive committee of
"hilcomsat has #reci#itately released "+!, million and granted "1+, million loan to a relative of an
e2ecutive committee memberG to date there have been no #ayments given& sub(ecting the com#any to
an estimated interest income loss of "11$+, million in +99G
34E0EA5& there is an urgent need to #rotect the interest of the 0e#ublic of the "hili##ines in the
"4C& "4%<C/M5AT& and "/TC from any anomalous transaction& and to conserve or salvage any
remaining value of the government@s e8uity #osition in these cor#orations from any abuses of #o-er
done by their res#ective board of directorsG
34E0EF/0E& be it resolved that the #ro#er 5enate Committee shall conduct an in8uiry in aid of
legislation& on the anomalous losses incurred by the "hili##ine /verseas Telecommunications
Cor#oration B"/TCD& "hili##ine Communications 5atellite Cor#oration B"4%<C/M5ATD& and
"hilcomsat 4oldings Cor#orations B"4CD due to the alleged im#ro#rieties in the o#erations by their
res#ective board of directors$
Ado#ted$
B5gdD M%0%AM DEFE'5/0 5A'T%A;/
/n the same date& February +9& +99!& 5enate 0es$ 'o$ ,, -as submitted to the 5enate and referred to
the Committee on Accountability of "ublic /fficers and %nvestigations and Committee on "ublic
5ervices$ 4o-ever& on March +L& +99!& u#on motion of 5enator Francis '$ "angilinan& it -as
transferred to the Committee on ;overnment Cor#orations and "ublic Enter#rises$,
/n May L& +99!& Chief of 5taff 0io C$ %nocencio& under the authority of 5enator 0ichard .$ ;ordon&
-rote Chairman Camilo <$ 5abio of the "C;;& one of the herein #etitioners& inviting him to be one of
the resource #ersons in the #ublic meeting (ointly conducted by the Committee on ;overnment
Cor#orations and "ublic Enter#rises and Committee on "ublic 5ervices$ The #ur#ose of the #ublic
meeting -as to deliberate on 5enate 0es$ 'o$ ,,$!
/n May 9& +99!& Chairman 5abio declined the invitation because of #rior commitment$M At the same
time& he invo*ed 5ection BbD of E$/$ 'o$ 1 earlier 8uoted$
/n August 19& +99!& 5enator ;ordon issued a 5ub#oena Ad Testificandum&L a##roved by 5enate
"resident Manuel Villar& re8uiring Chairman 5abio and "C;; Commissioners 0icardo Abcede&
'icasio Conti& Tereso .avier and 'arciso 'ario to a##ear in the #ublic hearing scheduled on August +>&
+99! and testify on -hat they *no- relative to the matters s#ecified in 5enate 0es$ 'o$ ,,$ 5imilar
sub#oenae -ere issued against the directors and officers of "hilcomsat 4oldings Cor#oration& namely:
)enito V$ Araneta& "hili# .$ )rodett& Enri8ue <$ <ocsin& Manuel D$ Andal& 0oberto <$ Abad& <uis R$
<o*in& .r$& .ulio .$ .alandoni& 0oberto V$ 5an .ose& Delfin "$ Angcao& Alma Rristina Alloba and .ohnny
Tan$9
Again& Chairman 5abio refused to a##ear$ %n his letter to 5enator ;ordon dated August 1L& +99!& he
reiterated his earlier #osition& invo*ing 5ection BbD of E$/$ 'o$ 1$ /n the other hand& the directors and
officers of "hilcomsat 4oldings Cor#oration relied on the #osition #a#er they #reviously filed& -hich
raised issues on the #ro#riety of legislative in8uiry$
Thereafter& Chief of 5taff Ma$ Carissa /$ Coscolluela& under the authority of 5enator ;ordon& sent
another notice19 to Chairman 5abio re8uiring him to a##ear and testify on the same sub(ect matter set
on 5e#tember !& +99!$ The notice -as issued Funder the same authority of the 5ub#oena Ad
Testificandum #reviously served u#on BhimD last 1! August +99!$F
/nce more& Chairman 5abio did not com#ly -ith the notice$ 4e sent a letter11 dated 5e#tember &
+99! to 5enator ;ordon reiterating his reason for declining to a##ear in the #ublic hearing$
This #rom#ted 5enator ;ordon to issue an /rder dated 5e#tember M& +99! re8uiring Chairman 5abio
and Commissioners Abcede& Conti& .avier and 'ario to sho- cause -hy they should not be cited in
contem#t of the 5enate$ /n 5e#tember 11& +99!& they submitted to the 5enate their Com#liance and
E2#lanation&1+ -hich #artly reads:
Doubtless& there are laudable intentions of the sub(ect in8uiry in aid of legislation$ )ut the rule of la-
re8uires that even the best intentions must be carried out -ithin the #arameters of the Constitution and
the la-$ Verily& laudable #ur#oses must be carried out by legal methods$ B)rillantes& .r$& et al$ v$
Commission on Elections& En )anc N;$0$ 'o$ 1!>19>& .une 1,& +99OD
/n this score& 5ection BbD of E$/$ 'o$ 1 should not be ignored as it e2#licitly #rovides:
'o member or staff of the Commission shall be re8uired to testify or #roduce evidence in any (udicial
legislative or administrative #roceeding concerning matters -ithin its official cogniHance$
3ith all due res#ect& 5ection BbD of E$/$ 'o$ 1 constitutes a limitation on the #o-er of legislative
in8uiry& and a recognition by the 5tate of the need to #rovide #rotection to the "C;; in order to ensure
the unham#ered #erformance of its duties under its charter$ E$/$ 'o$ 1 is a la-& 5ection BbD of -hich
had not been amended& re#ealed or revised in any -ay$
To say the least& it -ould re8uire both 4ouses of Congress and "residential fiat to amend or re#eal the
#rovision in controversy$ :ntil then& it stands to be res#ected as #art of the legal system in this
(urisdiction$ BAs held in "eo#le v$ Veneracion& ;$0$ 'os$ 1199LM=LL& /ctober 1+& 199,: /bedience to
the rule of la- forms the bedroc* of our system of (ustice$ %f (udges& under the guise of religious or
#olitical beliefs -ere allo-ed to roam unrestricted beyond boundaries -ithin -hich they are re8uired
by la- to e2ercise the duties of their office& then la- becomes meaningless$ A government of la-s& not
of men e2cludes the e2ercise of broad discretionary #o-ers by those acting under its authority$ :nder
this system& (udges are guided by the 0ule of <a-& and ought to @#rotect and enforce it -ithout fear or
favor&@ NAct of Athens B19,,DO resist encroachments by governments& #olitical #arties& or even the
interference of their o-n #ersonal beliefs$D
2 2 2 2 2 2
0elevantly& Chairman 5abio@s letter to 5en$ ;ordon dated August 19& +99! #ointed out that the
anomalous transactions referred to in the "$5$ 0esolution 'o$ ,, are sub(ect of #ending cases before
the regular courts& the 5andiganbayan and the 5u#reme Court B"ending cases include: a$ 5amuel Divina
v$ Manuel 'ieto& .r$& et al$& CA=;$0$ 'o$ L919+G b$ "hili##ine Communications 5atellite Cor#oration v$
Manuel 'ieto& et al$G c$ "hili##ine Communications 5atellite Cor#oration v$ Manuel D$ Andal& Civil
Case 'o$ 9!=99,& 0TC& )ranch !1& Ma*ati CityG d$ "hili##ine Communications 5atellite Cor#oration v$
"4%<C/M5AT 4oldings Cor#oration& et al$& Civil Case 'o$ 9=199D for -hich reason they may not
be able to testify thereon under the #rinci#le of sub (udice$ The laudable ob(ectives of the "C;;@s
functions& recogniHed in several cases decided by the 5u#reme Court& of the "C;; -ill be #ut to
naught if its recovery efforts -ill be unduly im#eded by a legislative investigation of cases that are
already #ending before the 5andiganbayan and trial courts$
%n )engHon v$ 5enate )lue 0ibbon Committee& B+9> 5C0A M!M& ML N1991OD the 4onorable 5u#reme
Court held:
FjNTOhe issues sought to be investigated by the res#ondent Committee is one over -hich (urisdiction
had been ac8uired by the 5andiganbayan$ %n short& the issue has been #re=em#ted by that court$ To
allo- the res#ondent Committee to conduct its o-n investigation of an issue already before the
5andigabayan -ould not only #ose the #ossibility of conflicting (udgments bet-een a legislative
committee and a (udicial tribunal& but if the Committee@s (udgment -ere to be reached before that of the
5andiganbayan& the #ossibility of its influence being made to bear on the ultimate (udgment of the
5andiganbayan can not be discounted$
2 2 2 2 2 2
%T %5 %' V%E3 /F T4E F/0E;/%'; C/'5%DE0AT%/'5 that the Commission decided not to
attend the 5enate in8uiry to testify and #roduce evidence thereat$
:nconvinced -ith the above Com#liance and E2#lanation& the Committee on ;overnment
Cor#orations and "ublic Enter#rises and the Committee on "ublic 5ervices issued an /rder1> directing
Ma(or ;eneral .ose )ala(adia B0et$D& 5enate 5ergeant=At=Arms& to #lace Chairman 5abio and his
Commissioners under arrest for contem#t of the 5enate$ The /rder bears the a##roval of 5enate
"resident Villar and the ma(ority of the Committees@ members$
/n 5e#tember 1+& +99!& at around 19:, a$m$& Ma(or ;eneral )ala(adia arrested Chairman 5abio in his
office at %0C )uilding& 'o$ L+ ED5A& Mandaluyong City and brought him to the 5enate #remises
-here he -as detained$
4ence& Chairman 5abio filed -ith this Court a #etition for habeas cor#us against the 5enate Committee
on ;overnment Cor#orations and "ublic Enter#rises and Committee on "ublic 5ervices& their
Chairmen& 5enators 0ichard ;ordon and .o*er "$ Arroyo and Members$ The case -as doc*eted as ;$0$
'o$ 1M>9$
Chairman 5abio& Commissioners Abcede& Conti& 'ario& and .avier& and the "C;;@s nominees to
"hilcomsat 4oldings Cor#oration& Manuel Andal and .ulio .alandoni& li*e-ise filed a #etition for
certiorari and #rohibition against the same res#ondents& and also against 5enate "resident Manuel
Villar& 5enator .uan "once Enrile& the 5ergeant=at=Arms& and the entire 5enate$ The case -as doc*eted
as ;$0$ 'o$ 1M>1L$
Mean-hile& "hilcomsat 4oldings Cor#oration and its officers and directors& namely: "hili# ;$ )rodett&
<uis R$ <o*in& .r$& 0oberto V$ 5an .ose& Delfin "$ Angcao& 0oberto <$ Abad& Alma Rristina Alobba and
.ohnny Tan filed a #etition for certiorari and #rohibition against the 5enate Committees on ;overnment
Cor#orations and "ublic Enter#rises and "ublic 5ervices& their Chairmen& 5enators ;ordon and Arroyo&
and Members$ The case -as doc*eted as ;$0$ 'o$ 1M1MM$
%n ;$0$ 'o$ 1M>9 Bfor habeas cor#usD and ;$0$ 'o$ 1M>1L Bfor certiorari and #rohibitionD Chairman
5abio& Commissioners Abcede& Conti& 'ario& and .avierG and the "C;;@s nominees Andal and
.alandoni alleged: first& res#ondent 5enate Committees disregarded 5ection BbD of E$/$ 'o$ 1 -ithout
any (ustifiable reasonG second& the in8uiries conducted by res#ondent 5enate Committees are not in aid
of legislationG third& the in8uiries -ere conducted in the absence of duly #ublished 5enate 0ules of
"rocedure ;overning %n8uiries in Aid of <egislationG and fourth& res#ondent 5enate Committees are not
vested -ith the #o-er of contem#t$
%n ;$0$ 'o$ 1M1MM& #etitioners "hilcomsat 4oldings Cor#oration and its directors and officers alleged:
first& res#ondent 5enate Committees have no (urisdiction over the sub(ect matter stated in 5enate 0es$
'o$ ,,G second& the same in8uiry is not in accordance -ith the 5enate@s 0ules of "rocedure ;overning
%n8uiries in Aid of <egislationG third& the sub#oenae against the individual #etitioners are void for
having been issued -ithout authorityG fourth& the conduct of legislative in8uiry #ursuant to 5enate 0es$
'o$ ,, constitutes undue encroachment by res#ondents into (usticiable controversies over -hich
several courts and tribunals have already ac8uired (urisdictionG and fifth& the sub#oenae violated
#etitioners@ rights to #rivacy and against self=incrimination$
%n their Consolidated Comment& the above=named res#ondents countered: first& the issues raised in the
#etitions involve #olitical 8uestions over -hich this Court has no (urisdictionG second& 5ection BbD has
been re#ealed by the ConstitutionG third& res#ondent 5enate Committees are vested -ith contem#t
#o-erG fourth& 5enate@s 0ules of "rocedure ;overning %n8uiries in Aid of <egislation have been duly
#ublishedG fifth& res#ondents have not violated any civil right of the individual #etitioners& such as their
BaD right to #rivacyG and BbD right against self=incriminationG and si2th& the in8uiry does not constitute
undue encroachment into (usticiable controversies$
During the oral arguments held on 5e#tember +1& +99!& the #arties -ere directed to submit
simultaneously their res#ective memoranda -ithin a non=e2tendible #eriod of fifteen B1,D days from
date$ %n the meantime& #er agreement of the #arties& #etitioner Chairman 5abio -as allo-ed to go
home$ Thus& his #etition for habeas cor#us has become moot$ The #arties also agreed that the service of
the arrest -arrants issued against all #etitioners and the #roceedings before the res#ondent 5enate
Committees are sus#ended during the #endency of the instant cases$1
Crucial to the resolution of the #resent #etitions is the fundamental issue of -hether 5ection BbD of
E$/$ 'o$ 1 is re#ealed by the 19LM Constitution$ /n this lone issue hinges the merit of the contention of
Chairman 5abio and his Commissioners that their refusal to a##ear before res#ondent 5enate
Committees is (ustified$ 3ith the resolution of this issue& all the other issues raised by the #arties have
become inconse8uential$
"erched on one arm of the scale of (ustice is Article V%& 5ection +1 of the 19LM Constitution granting
res#ondent 5enate Committees the #o-er of legislative in8uiry$ %t reads:
The 5enate or the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives or any of its res#ective committees may conduct in8uiries
in aid of legislation in accordance -ith its duly #ublished rules of #rocedure$ The rights of #ersons
a##earing in or affected by such in8uiries shall be res#ected$
/n the other arm of the scale is 5ection BbD of E$/$ 'o$1 limiting such #o-er of legislative in8uiry by
e2em#ting all "C;; members or staff from testifying in any (udicial& legislative or administrative
#roceeding& thus:
'o member or staff of the Commission shall be re8uired to testify or #roduce evidence in any (udicial&
legislative or administrative #roceeding concerning matters -ithin its official cogniHance$
To determine -hether there e2ists a clear and une8uivocal re#ugnancy bet-een the t-o 8uoted
#rovisions that -arrants a declaration that 5ection BbD has been re#ealed by the 19LM Constitution& a
brief consideration of the Congress@ #o-er of in8uiry is im#erative$
The Congress@ #o-er of in8uiry has been recogniHed in foreign (urisdictions long before it reached our
shores through Mc;rain v$ Daugherty&1, cited in Arnault v$ 'aHareno$1! %n those earlier days&
American courts considered the #o-er of in8uiry as inherent in the #o-er to legislate$ The 1L! case of
)riggs v$ MacRellar1M e2#lains the breath and basis of the #o-er& thus:
3here no constitutional limitation or restriction e2ists& it is com#etent for either of the t-o bodies
com#osing the legislature to do& in their se#arate ca#acity& -hatever may be essential to enable them to
legislatej$%t is -ell=established #rinci#le of this #arliamentary la-& that either house may institute any
investigation having reference to its o-n organiHation& the conduct or 8ualification of its members& its
#roceedings& rights& or #rivileges or any matter affecting the #ublic interest u#on -hich it may be
im#ortant that it should have e2act information& and in res#ect to -hich it -ould be com#etent for it to
legislate$ The right to #ass la-s& necessarily im#lies the right to obtain information u#on any matter
-hich may become the sub(ect of a la-$ %t is essential to the full and intelligent e2ercise of the
legislative functionj$%n American legislatures the investigation of #ublic matters before committees&
#reliminary to legislation& or -ith the vie- of advising the house a##ointing the committee is& as a
#arliamentary usage& -ell established as it is in England& and the right of either house to com#el
-itnesses to a##ear and testify before its committee& and to #unish for disobedience has been fre8uently
enforcedj$The right of in8uiry& % thin*& e2tends to other matters& in res#ect to -hich it may be
necessary& or may be deemed advisable to a##ly for legislative aid$
0emar*ably& in Arnault& this Court adhered to a similar theory$ Citing Mc;rain& it recogniHed that the
#o-er of in8uiry is Fan essential and a##ro#riate au2iliary to the legislative function&F thus:
Although there is no #rovision in the FConstitution e2#ressly investing either 4ouse of Congress -ith
#o-er to ma*e investigations and e2act testimony to the end that it may e2ercise its legislative
functions advisedly and effectively& such #o-er is so far incidental to the legislative function as to be
im#lied$ %n other -ords& the #o-er of in8uiry 1 -ith #rocess to enforce it 1 is an essential and
a##ro#riate au2iliary to the legislative function$ A legislative body cannot legislate -isely or effectively
in the absence of information res#ecting the conditions -hich the legislation is intended to affect or
changeG and -here the legislation body does not itself #ossess the re8uisite information 1 -hich is not
infre8uently true 1 recourse must be had to others -ho #ossess it$F
Dis#elling any doubt as to the "hili##ine Congress@ #o-er of in8uiry& #rovisions on such #o-er made
their maiden a##earance in Article V%%%& 5ection 1+ of the 19M> Constitution$1L Then came the 19LM
Constitution incor#orating the #resent Article V%& 5ection 1+$ 3hat -as therefore im#licit under the
19>, Constitution& as influenced by American (uris#rudence& became e2#licit under the 19M> and 19LM
Constitutions$19
'otably& the 19LM Constitution recogniHes the #o-er of investigation& not (ust of Congress& but also of
Fany of its committee$F This is significant because it constitutes a direct conferral of investigatory
#o-er u#on the committees and it means that the mechanisms -hich the 4ouses can ta*e in order to
effectively #erform its investigative function are also available to the committees$+9
%t can be said that the Congress@ #o-er of in8uiry has gained more solid e2istence and e2#ansive
construal$ The Court@s high regard to such #o-er is rendered more evident in 5enate v$ Ermita&+1 -here
it categorically ruled that Fthe #o-er of in8uiry is broad enough to cover officials of the e2ecutive
branch$F Verily& the Court reinforced the doctrine in Arnault that Fthe o#eration of government& being a
legitimate sub(ect for legislation& is a #ro#er sub(ect for investigationF and that Fthe #o-er of in8uiry is
co=e2tensive -ith the #o-er to legislate$F
Considering these (uris#rudential instructions& -e find 5ection BbD directly re#ugnant -ith Article V%&
5ection +1$ 5ection BbD e2em#ts the "C;; members and staff from the Congress@ #o-er of in8uiry$
This cannot be countenanced$ 'o-here in the Constitution is any #rovision granting such e2em#tion$
The Congress@ #o-er of in8uiry& being broad& encom#asses everything that concerns the administration
of e2isting la-s as -ell as #ro#osed or #ossibly needed statutes$++ %t even e2tends Fto government
agencies created by Congress and officers -hose #ositions are -ithin the #o-er of Congress to regulate
or even abolish$F+> "C;; belongs to this class$
Certainly& a mere #rovision of la- cannot #ose a limitation to the broad #o-er of Congress& in the
absence of any constitutional basis$
Furthermore& 5ection BbD is also inconsistent -ith Article C%& 5ection 1 of the Constitution stating that:
F"ublic office is a #ublic trust$ "ublic officers and em#loyees must at all times be accountable to the
#eo#le& serve them -ith utmost res#onsibility& integrity& loyalty& and efficiency& act -ith #atriotism and
(ustice& and lead modest lives$F
The #rovision #resu##oses that since an incumbent of a #ublic office is invested -ith certain #o-ers
and charged -ith certain duties #ertinent to sovereignty& the #o-ers so delegated to the officer are held
in trust for the #eo#le and are to be e2ercised in behalf of the government or of all citiHens -ho may
need the intervention of the officers$ 5uch trust e2tends to all matters -ithin the range of duties
#ertaining to the office$ %n other -ords& #ublic officers are but the servants of the #eo#le& and not their
rulers$+
5ection BbD& being in the nature of an immunity& is inconsistent -ith the #rinci#le of #ublic
accountability$ %t #laces the "C;; members and staff beyond the reach of courts& Congress and other
administrative bodies$ %nstead of encouraging #ublic accountability& the same #rovision only
institutionaliHes irres#onsibility and non=accountability$ %n "residential Commission on ;ood
;overnment v$ "e?a&+, .ustice Florentino "$ Feliciano characteriHed as FobiterF the #ortion of the
ma(ority o#inion barring& on the basis of 5ections BaD and BbD of E$/$ 'o$ 1& a civil case for damages
filed against the "C;; and its Commissioners$ 4e elo8uently o#ined:
The above underscored #ortions are& it is res#ectfully submitted& clearly obiter$ %t is im#ortant to ma*e
clear that the Court is not here inter#reting& much less u#holding as valid and constitutional& the literal
terms of 5ection BaD& BbD of E2ecutive /rder 'o$1$ %f 5ection BaD -ere given its literal im#ort as
immuniHing the "C;; or any member thereof from civil liability Ffor anything done or omitted in the
discharge of the tas* contem#lated by this /rder&F the constitutionality of 5ection BaD -ould& in my
submission& be o#en to most serious doubt$ For so vie-ed& 5ection BaD -ould institutionaliHe the
irres#onsibility and non=accountability of members and staff of the "C;;& a notion that is clearly
re#ugnant to both the 19M> and 19LM Constitution and a #rivileged status not claimed by any other
official of the 0e#ublic under the 19LM Constitution$ 2 2 2$
2 2 2 2 2 2
%t -ould seem constitutionally offensive to su##ose that a member or staff member of the "C;; could
not be re8uired to testify before the 5andiganbayan or that such members -ere e2em#ted from
com#lying -ith orders of this Court$
ChaveH v$ 5andiganbayan+! reiterates the same vie-$ %ndeed& 5ection BbD has been fro-ned u#on by
this Court even before the filing of the #resent #etitions$
Corollarily& 5ection BbD also runs counter to the follo-ing constitutional #rovisions ensuring the
#eo#le@s access to information:
Article %%& 5ection +L
5ub(ect to reasonable conditions #rescribed by la-& the 5tate ado#ts and im#lements a #olicy of full
#ublic disclosure of all its transactions involving #ublic interest$
Article %%%& 5ection M
The right of the #eo#le to information on matters of #ublic concern shall be recogniHed$ Access to
official records& and to documents& and #a#ers #ertaining to official acts& transactions& or decisions& as
-ell as to government research data used as basis for #olicy develo#ment& shall be afforded the citiHen&
sub(ect to such limitations as may be #rovided by la-$
These t-in #rovisions of the Constitution see* to #romote trans#arency in #olicy=ma*ing and in the
o#erations of the government& as -ell as #rovide the #eo#le sufficient information to enable them to
e2ercise effectively their constitutional rights$ Armed -ith the right information& citiHens can
#artici#ate in #ublic discussions leading to the formulation of government #olicies and their effective
im#lementation$ %n Valmonte v$ )elmonte& .r$+M the Court e2#lained that an informed citiHenry is
essential to the e2istence and #ro#er functioning of any democracy& thus:
An essential element of these freedoms is to *ee# o#en a continuing dialogue or #rocess of
communication bet-een the government and the #eo#le$ %t is in the interest of the 5tate that the
channels for free #olitical discussion be maintained to the end that the government may #erceive and be
res#onsive to the #eo#le@s -ill$ Pet& this o#en dialogue can be effective only to the e2tent that the
citiHenry is informed and thus able to formulate its -ill intelligently$ /nly -hen the #artici#ants in the
discussion are a-are of the issues and have access to information relating thereto can such bear fruit$
Conse8uently& the conduct of in8uiries in aid of legislation is not only intended to benefit Congress but
also the citiHenry$ The #eo#le are e8ually concerned -ith this #roceeding and have the right to
#artici#ate therein in order to #rotect their interests$ The e2tent of their #artici#ation -ill largely de#end
on the information gathered and made *no-n to them$ %n other -ords& the right to information really
goes hand=in=hand -ith the constitutional #olicies of full #ublic disclosure and honesty in the #ublic
service$ %t is meant to enhance the -idening role of the citiHenry in governmental decision=ma*ing as
-ell as in chec*ing abuse in the government$+L The cases of Ta?ada v$ Tuvera+9 and <egas#i v$ Civil
5ervice Commission>9 have recogniHed a citiHen@s interest and #ersonality to enforce a #ublic duty and
to bring an action to com#el #ublic officials and em#loyees to #erform that duty$
5ection BbD limits or obstructs the #o-er of Congress to secure from "C;; members and staff
information and other data in aid of its #o-er to legislate$ Again& this must not be countenanced$ %n
5enate v$ Ermita&>1 this Court stressed:
To the e2tent that investigations in aid of legislation are generally conducted in #ublic& ho-ever& any
e2ecutive issuance tending to unduly limit disclosures of information in such investigations necessarily
de#rives the #eo#le of information -hich& being #resumed to be in aid of legislation& is #resumed to be
a matter of #ublic concern$ The citiHens are thereby denied access to information -hich they can use in
formulating their o-n o#inions on the matter before Congress 1 o#inions -hich they can then
communicate to their re#resentatives and other government officials through the various legal means
allo-ed by their freedom of e2#ression$
A statute may be declared unconstitutional because it is not -ithin the legislative #o-er to enactG or it
creates or establishes methods or forms that infringe constitutional #rinci#lesG or its #ur#ose or effect
violates the Constitution or its basic #rinci#les$>+ As sho-n in the above discussion& 5ection BbD is
inconsistent -ith Article V%& 5ection +1 BCongress@ #o-er of in8uiryD& Article C%& 5ection 1 B#rinci#le
of #ublic accountabilityD& Article %%& 5ection +L B#olicy of full disclosureD and Article %%%& 5ection M
Bright to #ublic informationD$
5ignificantly& Article CV%%%& 5ection > of the Constitution #rovides:
All e2isting la-s& decrees& e2ecutive orders& #roclamations& letters of instructions& and other e2ecutive
issuances not inconsistent -ith this Constitution shall remain o#erative until amended& re#ealed& or
revo*ed$
The clear im#ort of this #rovision is that all e2isting la-s& e2ecutive orders& #roclamations& letters of
instructions and other e2ecutive issuances inconsistent or re#ugnant to the Constitution are re#ealed$
.uris#rudence is re#lete -ith decisions invalidating la-s& decrees& e2ecutive orders& #roclamations&
letters of instructions and other e2ecutive issuances inconsistent -ith the Constitution$ %n "elaeH v$
Auditor ;eneral&>> the Court considered re#ealed 5ection !L of the 0evised Administrative Code of
191M authoriHing the E2ecutive to change the seat of the government of any subdivision of local
governments& u#on the a##roval of the 19>, Constitution$ 5ection !L -as ad(udged incom#atible and
inconsistent -ith the Constitutional grant of limited e2ecutive su#ervision over local governments$ %n
%slamic Da@-ah Council of the "hili##ines& %nc$& v$ /ffice of the E2ecutive 5ecretary&> the Court
declared E2ecutive /rder 'o$ !& entitled FAuthoriHing the /ffice on Muslim Affairs to :nderta*e
"hili##ine 4alal Certification&F void for encroaching on the religious freedom of Muslims$ %n The
"rovince of )atangas v$ 0omulo&>, the Court declared some #rovisions of the ;eneral A##ro#riations
Acts of 1999& +999 and +991 unconstitutional for violating the Constitutional #rece#t on local
autonomy$ And in /#le v$ Torres&>! the Court li*e-ise declared unconstitutional Administrative /rder
'o$ >9L& entitled FAdo#tion of a 'ational Com#uteriHed %dentification 0eference 5ystem&F for being
violative of the right to #rivacy #rotected by the Constitution$
These Decisions& and many others& highlight that the Constitution is the highest la- of the land$ %t is
Fthe basic and #aramount la- to -hich all other la-s must conform and to -hich all #ersons& including
the highest officials of the land& must defer$ 'o act shall be valid& ho-ever noble its intentions& if it
conflicts -ith the Constitution$F>M Conse8uently& this Court has no recourse but to declare 5ection BbD
of E$/$ 'o$ 1 re#ealed by the 19LM Constitution$
5ignificantly& during the oral arguments on 5e#tember +1& +99!& Chairman 5abio admitted that should
this Court rule that 5ection BbD is unconstitutional or that it does not a##ly to the 5enate& he -ill
ans-er the 8uestions of the 5enators& thus:
C4%EF .:5T%CE "A';A'%)A':
/*ay$ 'o-& if the 5u#reme Court rules that 5ec$ BbD is unconstitutional or that it does not a##ly to the
5enate& -ill you ans-er the 8uestions of the 5enatorsQ
C4A%0MA' 5A)%/:
Pour 4onor& my father -as a (udge& died being a (udge$ % -as here in the 5u#reme Court as Chief of
5taff of .ustice Feria$ % -ould definitely honor the 5u#reme Court and the rule of la-$
C4%EF .:5T%CE "A';A'%)A':
Pou -ill ans-er the 8uestions of the 5enators if -e say thatQ
C4A%0MA' 5A)%/:
Pes& Pour 4onor$ That is the la- already as far as % am concerned$
3ith his admission& Chairman 5abio is not fully convinced that he and his Commissioners are shielded
from testifying before res#ondent 5enate Committees by 5ection BbD of E$/$ 'o$ 1$ %n effect& his
argument that the said #rovision e2em#ts him and his co=res#ondent Commissioners from testifying
before res#ondent 5enate Committees concerning 5enate 0es$ 'o$ ,, utterly lac*s merit$
%ncidentally& an argument re#eated by Chairman 5abio is that res#ondent 5enate Committees have no
#o-er to #unish him and his Commissioners for contem#t of the 5enate$
The argument is misleading$
Article V%& 5ection +1 #rovides:
The 5enate or the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives or any of its res#ective committees may conduct in8uiries
in aid of legislation in accordance -ith its duly #ublished rules of #rocedure$ The rights of #ersons
a##earing in or affected by such in8uiries shall be res#ected$
%t must be stressed that the /rder of Arrest for Fcontem#t of 5enate Committees and the "hili##ine
5enateF -as a##roved by 5enate "resident Villar and signed by fifteen B1,D 5enators$ From this& it can
be concluded that the /rder is under the authority& not only of the res#ondent 5enate Committees& but
of the entire 5enate$
At any rate& Article V%& 5ection +1 grants the #o-er of in8uiry not only to the 5enate and the 4ouse of
0e#resentatives& but also to any of their res#ective committees$ Clearly& there is a direct conferral of
#o-er to the committees$ Father )ernas& in his Commentary on the 19LM Constitution& correctly
#ointed out its significance:
%t should also be noted that the Constitution e2#licitly recogniHes the #o-er of investigation not (ust of
Congress but also of Fany of its committees$F This is significant because it constitutes a direct conferral
of investigatory #o-er u#on the committees and it means that the means -hich the 4ouses can ta*e in
order to effectively #erform its investigative function are also available to the Committees$>L
This is a reasonable conclusion$ The conferral of the legislative #o-er of in8uiry u#on any committee
of Congress must carry -ith it all #o-ers necessary and #ro#er for its effective discharge$ /ther-ise&
Article V%& 5ection +1 -ill be meaningless$ The indis#ensability and usefulness of the #o-er of
contem#t in a legislative in8uiry is underscored in a catena of cases& foreign and local$
%n the 1L+1 case of Anderson v$ Dunn&>9 the function of the 4ouses of Congress -ith res#ect to the
contem#t #o-er -as li*ened to that of a court& thus:
j)ut the court in its reasoning goes beyond this& and though the grounds of the decision are not very
clearly stated& -e ta*e them to be: that there is in some cases a #o-er in each 4ouse of Congress to
#unish for contem#tG that this #o-er is analogous to that e2ercised by courts of (ustice& and that it being
the -ell established doctrine that -hen it a##ears that a #risoner is held under the order of a court of
general (urisdiction for a contem#t of its authority& no other court -ill discharge the #risoner or ma*e
further in8uiry into the cause of his commitment$ That this is the general rulejas regards the relation
of one court to another must be conceded$
%n Mc;rain&9 the :$5$ 5u#reme Court held: FE2#erience has sho-n that mere re8uests for such
information are often unavailing& and also that information -hich is volunteered is not al-ays accurate
or com#leteG so some means of com#ulsion is essential to obtain -hat is needed$F The Court& in Arnault
v$ 'aHareno&1 sustained the Congress@ #o-er of contem#t on the basis of this observation$
%n Arnault v$ )alagtas&+ the Court further e2#lained that the contem#t #o-er of Congress is founded
u#on reason and #olicy and that the #o-er of in8uiry -ill not be com#lete if for every contumacious
act& Congress has to resort to (udicial interference& thus:
The #rinci#le that Congress or any of its bodies has the #o-er to #unish recalcitrant -itnesses is
founded u#on reason and #olicy$ 5aid #o-er must be considered im#lied or incidental to the e2ercise of
legislative #o-er$ 4o- could a legislative body obtain the *no-ledge and information on -hich to base
intended legislation if it cannot re8uire and com#el the disclosure of such *no-ledge and information if
it is im#otent to #unish a defiance of its #o-er and authorityQ 3hen the framers of the Constitution
ado#ted the #rinci#le of se#aration of #o-ers& ma*ing each branch su#reme -ithin the realm of its
res#ective authority& it must have intended each de#artment@s authority to be full and com#lete&
inde#endently of the other@s authority or #o-er$ And ho- could the authority and #o-er become
com#lete if for every act of refusal& every act of defiance& every act of contumacy against it& the
legislative body must resort to the (udicial de#artment for the a##ro#riate remedy& because it is
im#otent by itself to #unish or deal there-ith& -ith the affronts committed against its authority or
dignity$>
%n 'egros /riental %% Electric Coo#erative& %nc$ v$ 5angguniang "anlungsod of Dumaguete& the Court
characteriHed contem#t #o-er as a matter of self=#reservation& thus:
The e2ercise by the legislature of the contem#t #o-er is a matter of self=#reservation as that branch of
the government vested -ith the legislative #o-er& inde#endently of the (udicial branch& asserts its
authority and #unishes contem#ts thereof$ The contem#t #o-er of the legislature is& therefore& sui
generis 2 2 2$
Mean-hile& -ith res#ect to ;$0$ 'o$ 1M1MM& the #etition of "hilcomsat 4oldings Cor#oration and its
directors and officers& this Court holds that the res#ondent 5enate Committees@ in8uiry does not violate
their right to #rivacy and right against self=incrimination$
/ne im#ortant limitation on the Congress@ #o-er of in8uiry is that Fthe rights of #ersons a##earing in
or affected by such in8uiries shall be res#ected$F This is (ust another -ay of saying that the #o-er of
in8uiry must be Fsub(ect to the limitations #laced by the Constitution on government action$F As held in
)arenblatt v$ :nited 5tates&, Fthe Congress& in common -ith all the other branches of the
;overnment& must e2ercise its #o-ers sub(ect to the limitations #laced by the Constitution on
governmental action& more #articularly in the conte2t of this case& the relevant limitations of the )ill of
0ights$F
First is the right to #rivacy$
Aones of #rivacy are recogniHed and #rotected in our la-s$! 3ithin these Hones& any form of intrusion
is im#ermissible unless e2cused by la- and in accordance -ith customary legal #rocess$ The
meticulous regard -e accord to these Hones arises not only from our conviction that the right to #rivacy
is a Fconstitutional rightF and Fthe right most valued by civiliHed men&FM but also from our adherence
to the :niversal Declaration of 4uman 0ights -hich mandates that& Fno one shall be sub(ected to
arbitrary interference -ith his #rivacyF and Feveryone has the right to the #rotection of the la- against
such interference or attac*s$FL
/ur )ill of 0ights& enshrined in Article %%% of the Constitution& #rovides at least t-o guarantees that
e2#licitly create Hones of #rivacy$ %t highlights a #erson@s Fright to be let aloneF or the Fright to
determine -hat& ho- much& to -hom and -hen information about himself shall be disclosed$F9
5ection + guarantees Fthe right of the #eo#le to be secure in their #ersons& houses& #a#ers and effects
against unreasonable searches and seiHures of -hatever nature and for any #ur#ose$F 5ection > renders
inviolable the F#rivacy of communication and corres#ondenceF and further cautions that Fany evidence
obtained in violation of this or the #receding section shall be inadmissible for any #ur#ose in any
#roceeding$F
%n evaluating a claim for violation of the right to #rivacy& a court must determine -hether a #erson has
e2hibited a reasonable e2#ectation of #rivacy and& if so& -hether that e2#ectation has been violated by
unreasonable government intrusion$,9 A##lying this determination to these cases& the im#ortant
in8uiries are: first& did the directors and officers of "hilcomsat 4oldings Cor#oration e2hibit a
reasonable e2#ectation of #rivacyQG and second& did the government violate such e2#ectationQ
The ans-ers are in the negative$ "etitioners -ere invited in the 5enate@s #ublic hearing to deliberate on
5enate 0es$ 'o$ ,,& #articularly Fon the anomalous losses incurred by the "hili##ine /verseas
Telecommunications Cor#oration B"/TCD& "hili##ine Communications 5atellite Cor#oration
B"4%<C/M5ATD& and "hilcomsat 4oldings Cor#orations B"4CD due to the alleged im#ro#rieties in the
o#erations by their res#ective board of directors$F /bviously& the in8uiry focus on #etitioners@ acts
committed in the discharge of their duties as officers and directors of the said cor#orations& #articularly
"hilcomsat 4oldings Cor#oration$ Conse8uently& they have no reasonable e2#ectation of #rivacy over
matters involving their offices in a cor#oration -here the government has interest$ Certainly& such
matters are of #ublic concern and over -hich the #eo#le have the right to information$
This goes to sho- that the right to #rivacy is not absolute -here there is an overriding com#elling state
interest$ %n Morfe v$ Mutuc&,1 the Court& in line -ith 3halen v$ 0oe&,+ em#loyed the rational basis
relationshi# test -hen it held that there -as no infringement of the individual@s right to #rivacy as the
re8uirement to disclosure information is for a valid #ur#ose& i$e$& to curtail and minimiHe the
o##ortunities for official corru#tion& maintain a standard of honesty in #ublic service& and #romote
morality in #ublic administration$,> %n Valmonte v$ )elmonte&, the Court remar*ed that as #ublic
figures& the Members of the former )atasang "ambansa en(oy a more limited right to #rivacy as
com#ared to ordinary individuals& and their actions are sub(ect to closer scrutiny$ Ta*ing this into
consideration& the Court ruled that the right of the #eo#le to access information on matters of #ublic
concern #revails over the right to #rivacy of financial transactions$
:nder the #resent circumstances& the alleged anomalies in the "4%<C/M5AT& "4C and "/TC&
ranging in millions of #esos& and the cons#iratorial #artici#ation of the "C;; and its officials are
com#elling reasons for the 5enate to e2act vital information from the directors and officers of
"hilcomsat 4oldings Cor#orations& as -ell as from Chairman 5abio and his Commissioners to aid it in
crafting the necessary legislation to #revent corru#tion and formulate remedial measures and #olicy
determination regarding "C;;@s efficacy$ There being no reasonable e2#ectation of #rivacy on the #art
of those directors and officers over the sub(ect covered by 5enate 0es$ 'o$ ,,& it follo-s that their
right to #rivacy has not been violated by res#ondent 5enate Committees$
Anent the right against self=incrimination& it must be em#hasiHed that this right maybe invo*ed by the
said directors and officers of "hilcomsat 4oldings Cor#oration only -hen the incriminating 8uestion is
being as*ed& since they have no -ay of *no-ing in advance the nature or effect of the 8uestions to be
as*ed of them$F,, That this right may #ossibly be violated or abused is no ground for denying
res#ondent 5enate Committees their #o-er of in8uiry$ The consolation is that -hen this #o-er is
abused& such issue may be #resented before the courts$ At this (uncture& -hat is im#ortant is that
res#ondent 5enate Committees have sufficient 0ules to guide them -hen the right against self=
incrimination is invo*ed$ 5ec$ 19 reads:
5ec$ 19$ "rivilege Against 5elf=%ncrimination
A -itness can invo*e his right against self=incrimination only -hen a 8uestion tends to elicit an ans-er
that -ill incriminate him is #ro#ounded to him$ 4o-ever& he may offer to ans-er any 8uestion in an
e2ecutive session$
'o #erson can refuse to testify or be #laced under oath or affirmation or ans-er 8uestions before an
incriminatory 8uestion is as*ed$ 4is invocation of such right does not by itself e2cuse him from his
duty to give testimony$
%n such a case& the Committee& by a ma(ority vote of the members #resent there being a 8uorum& shall
determine -hether the right has been #ro#erly invo*ed$ %f the Committee decides other-ise& it shall
resume its investigation and the 8uestion or 8uestions #reviously refused to be ans-ered shall be
re#eated to the -itness$ %f the latter continues to refuse to ans-er the 8uestion& the Committee may
#unish him for contem#t for contumacious conduct$
The same directors and officers contend that the 5enate is barred from in8uiring into the same issues
being litigated before the Court of A##eals and the 5andiganbayan$ 5uffice it to state that the 5enate
0ules of "rocedure ;overning %n8uiries in Aid of <egislation #rovide that the filing or #endency of any
#rosecution of criminal or administrative action should not sto# or abate any in8uiry to carry out a
legislative #ur#ose$
<et it be stressed at this #oint that so long as the constitutional rights of -itnesses& li*e Chairman 5abio
and his Commissioners& -ill be res#ected by res#ondent 5enate Committees& it their duty to coo#erate
-ith them in their efforts to obtain the facts needed for intelligent legislative action$ The unremitting
obligation of every citiHen is to res#ond to sub#oenae& to res#ect the dignity of the Congress and its
Committees& and to testify fully -ith res#ect to matters -ithin the realm of #ro#er investigation$
%n fine& "C;; Chairman Camilo 5abio and Commissioners 0icardo Abcede& 'arciso 'ario& 'icasio
Conti& and Tereso .avierG and Manuel Andal and .ulio .alandoni& "C;;@s nominees to "hilcomsat
4oldings Cor#oration& as -ell as its directors and officers& must com#ly -ith the 5ub#oenae Ad
Testificandum issued by res#ondent 5enate Committees directing them to a##ear and testify in #ublic
hearings relative to 5enate 0esolution 'o$ ,,$
34E0EF/0E& the #etition in ;$0$ 'o$ 1M>9 for habeas cor#us is D%5M%55ED& for being moot$ The
#etitions in ;$0 'os$ 1M>1L and 1M1MM are li*e-ise D%5M%55ED$
5ection BbD of E$/$ 'o$ 1 is declared 0E"EA<ED by the 19LM Constitution$ 0es#ondent 5enate
Committees@ #o-er of in8uiry relative to 5enate 0esolution ,, is u#held$ "C;; Chairman Camilo <$
5abio and Commissioners 0icardo Abcede& 'arciso 'ario& 'icasio Conti and Tereso .avierG and
Manuel Andal and .ulio .alandoni& "C;;@s nominees to "hilcomsat 4oldings Cor#oration& as -ell as
its directors and officers& #etitioners in ;$0$ 'o$ 1M1MM& are ordered to com#ly -ith the 5ub#oenae Ad
Testificandum issued by res#ondent 5enate Committees directing them to a##ear and testify in #ublic
hearings relative to 5enate 0esolution 'o$ ,,$
5/ /0DE0ED$
"anganiban& C$.$& "uno& Kuisumbing& Pnares=5antiago& Car#io& Austria=MartineH& Corona& Car#io
Morales& Calle(o& 5r$& AHcuna& Chico='aHario& Tinga& ;arcia& and Velasco& ..$& concur$
Footnotes
1 E$/$ 'o$ 1 -as issued by Former "resident A8uino in the e2ercise of her legislative #o-er under the
"rovisional BFreedomD Constitution$ Thus& it is of the same category and has the same binding force as
a statute$ BAg#alo& 5tatutory Construction& 199L citing <egas#i v$ Ministry of Finance& 11, 5C0A 1L
N19L+OG ;arcia="adilla v$ "once Enrile& ;$0$ 'o$ !1>LL& A#ril +9& 19L>G A8uino v$ Commission on
Elections& !+ 5C0A +M, N19M,O D
+ 5ection + BaD& E2ecutive /rder 'o$1$
> 5ee "residential Commission on ;ood ;overnment v$ "ena& A#ril 1+& 19LL& 1,9 5C0A ,,L
Anne2 FEF of the "etition in ;$0$ 'o$ 1M>1L$
, %d$
! Anne2 FFF of the "etition in ;$0$ 'o$ 1M>1L$
M Anne2 F;F of the "etition in ;$0$ 'o$ 1M>1L$
L Anne2 FAF of the "etition in ;$0$ 'o$ 1M>1L$
9 "etition in ;$0$ 'o$ 1M1MM at #$ 1,$
19 Anne2 F)F of the "etition in ;$0$ 'o$ 1M>1L$
11 Anne2 F%F of the "etition in ;$0$ 'o$ 1M>1L$
1+ Anne2 F.F of the "etition in ;$0$ 'o$ 1M>1L$
1> Anne2 FDF of the #etition in ;$0$ 'o$ 1M>1L$
1 En )anc 0esolution dated 5e#tember +1& +99!$
1, +M> :$5$ 1>,& M 5$ Ct$ >19& M1 <$ Ed$ ,L9& ,9 A$<$0$ 1 B19+MD$
1! 'o$ <= >L+9& LM "hil$ +9 B19,9D$
1M + Abb$ "r$ >9 B'$P$ 1L!D$
1L "uno& <ecture on <egislative %nvestigations and the 0ight to "rivacy& at #$ ++$
19 )ernas 5$.$& The 19LM Constitution of the 0e#ublic of the "hili##ines& +99> Ed$ at #$M>M$
+9 )ernas 5$.$& The 19LM Constitution of the 0e#ublic of the "hili##ines& +99> Ed$ at #$M>9$
+1 ;$0$ 'o$ 1!9MMM& A#ril +9& +99!$
++ 3at*ins v$ :nited 5tates& >, :$5$ 1ML B19,MD& ##$ 19=19,$
+> 5enate v$ Ermita& %d$
+ De <eon& De <eon& .r$ The <a- on "ublic /fficers and Election <a-& #$ +$
+, 'o$ <=MM!!>& A#ril 1+& 19LL& 1,9 5C0A ,,L$
+! 19> 5C0A +L+ B1991D$
+M ;$0$ 'o$ M9>9& February 1>& 19L9& 1M9 5C0A +,!$
+L Valmonte v$ )elmonte& .r$& su#ra$
+9 1>! 5C0A +M$
>9 1,9 5C0A ,>9$
>1 5u#ra$
>+ Ag#alo& 5tatutory Construction& 199L citing %n re Cunanan& 9 "hil$ ,> B19,D$
>> 'o$ <=+>L+,& December +& 19!,& 1, 5C0A ,!9$
> ;$0$ 'o$ 1,>LLL& .uly 9& +99>& 9, 5C0A 9M$
>, ;$0$ 'o$ 1,+MM& May +M& +99& +9 5C0A M>!$
>! +9> 5C0A 11 B199LD$
>M CruH& Constitutional <a-& +99>& #$ $
>L )ernas& 5$.$& The 19LM Constitution of the 0e#ublic of the "hili##ines A Commentary& #$ !ML$
>9 19 :$5$ N! 3heat$O +9 B1L+1D cited in .ustice "uno& <egislative %nvestigations and 0ight to "rivacy$
9 5u#ra$
1 5u#ra$
+ 9M "hil$ >,L N19,,O$
> %d$
'o$ <=M+9+& 'ovember ,& 19LM& 1,, 5C0A +1$
, >!9 :$5$ 199 B19,9D$
! Mar8ueH v$ Desierto& ;$0$ 'o$ 1>,LL+& .une +M& +991& >,9 5C0A MM+$
M 5ee Morfe v$ Mutuc 'o$ <=+9>LM& .anuary >1& 19!L& ++ 5C0A +$
L Article 1+ of the :niversal Declaration of 4uman 0ights$ 5ee also Article 1M B1D and B+D of the
%nternational Covenant on Civil and "olitical 0ights$
9 Constitutional and <egal 5ystems of A5EA' Countries& 5ison& Academy of A5EA' <a- and
.uris#rudence& 1999& at ++1& citing %$0$ Cortes& The Constitutional Foundations of "rivacy& M B19M9D$
,9 )urro-s v$ 5u#erior Court of 5an )ernardino County& 1> Cal$ >d +>L& ,+9 " +d ,99 B19MD$ 5ee
RatH v$ :nited states B19!MD& >L9 :$5$ >M& >,9=>,+& LL 5$ Ct$ ,9M& 19 <$ Ed$ +d ,M!G "eo#le v$ Rrivda
B19M1D , Cal$ >d >,M& >!& 9! Cal$ 0#tr$ !+& L! "$ +d 1+!+G L Cal$ >d !+>=!+&19, Cal$ 0#tr$ ,+1& ,9
"$ +d ,M$ %'5E0T 4errera@s 4andboo* on Arrest& 5earch and 5eiHure$
,1 5u#ra$
,+ +9 :$5$ ,L9 B19MMD$
,> .ustice "uno& <ecture on <egislative %n8uiry and 0ight to "rivacy& #$ !9$
, 1M9 5C0A +,! B19L9D
,, CruH& Constitutional <a-& +99>& #$ >9M$
The <a-#hil "ro(ect = Arellano <a- Foundation



E' )A'C


0/;E<%/ A$ )A;A):P/&
"etitioner&








= versus =











C/MM%55%/' /' E<ECT%/'5&
0es#ondent$
;$0$ 'o$ 1M!9M9

"resent:

":'/& C$.$&
K:%5:M)%';&
cP'A0E5=5A'T%A;/&
CA0"%/&
A:5T0%A=MA0T%'EA&
C/0/'A&
CA0"%/ M/0A<E5&
AAC:'A&
T%';A&
C4%C/='AAA0%/&
VE<A5C/& .0$&
'AC4:0A&
0EPE5&
<E/'A0D/=DE CA5T0/& and
)0%/'& ..$


"romulgated:

December L& +99L

2====================================================================================================2

D E C % 5 % / '

)0%/'& .$:


)efore us is the #etition for certiorari& #rohibition& and mandamus&N1O -ith a #rayer for the issuance of
a tem#orary restraining order and a -rit of #reliminary in(unction& filed by 0ogelio )agabuyo
B#etitionerD to #revent the Commission on Elections BC/ME<ECD from im#lementing 0esolution 'o$
ML>M on the ground that 0e#ublic Act 'o$ 9>M1N+O 1 the la- that 0esolution 'o$ ML>M im#lements 1 is
unconstitutional$

)ACR;0/:'D FACT5

/n /ctober 19& +99!& Cagayan de /rohs then Congressman Constantino ;$ .araula filed and s#onsored
4ouse )ill 'o$ ,L,9: 6An Act "roviding for the A##ortionment of the <one <egislative District of the
City of Cagayan De /ro$7N>O This la- eventually became 0e#ublic Act B0$A$D 'o$ 9>M1$NO %t
increased Cagayan de /rohs legislative district from one to t-o$ For the election of May +99M& Cagayan
de /rohs voters -ould be classified as belonging to either the first or the second district& de#ending on
their #lace of residence$ The constituents of each district -ould elect their o-n re#resentative to
Congress as -ell as eight members of the 5angguniang "anglungsod$

5ection 1 of 0$A$ 'o$ 9>M1 a##ortioned the Cityhs barangays as follo-s:
<egislative Districts 1 The lone legislative district of the City of Cagayan De /ro is hereby
a##ortioned to commence in the ne2t national elections after the effectivity of this Act$ 4enceforth&
barangays )onbon& )ayabas& Raus-agan& Carmen& "atag& )ulua& %#onan& )ai*ingon& 5an 5imon&
"agat#at& Canitoan& )alulang& <umbia& "agalungan& Tag#angi& Taglimao& Tuburan& "igsag=an&
Tum#agon& )ayanga& Mambuaya& Dansulihon& Tigna#oloan and )isigan shall com#rise the first district
-hile barangays Macabalan& "untod& Consolacion& Camaman=an& 'aHareth& Macasandig& %ndahag&
<a#asan& ;usa& Cugman& F5 Catanico& Tablon& Agusan& "uerto& )ugo& and )alubal and all urban
barangays from )arangay 1 to )arangay 9 shall com#rise the second district$N,O


/n March 1>& +99M& the C/ME<EC en )anc #romulgated 0esolution 'o$ ML>MN!O im#lementing
0$A$ 'o$ 9>M1$

"etitioner 0ogelio )agabuyo filed the #resent #etition against the C/ME<EC on March +M& +99M$NMO
/n 19 A#ril +99L& the #etitioner amended the #etition to include the follo-ing as res#ondents:
E2ecutive 5ecretary Eduardo ErmitaG the 5ecretary of the De#artment of )udget and ManagementG the
Chairman of the Commission on AuditG the Mayor and the members of the 5angguniang "anglungsod
of Cagayan de /ro CityG and its )oard of Canvassers$NLO

%n as*ing for the nullification of 0$A$ 'o$ 9>M1 and 0esolution 'o$ ML>M on constitutional
grounds& the #etitioner argued that the C/ME<EC cannot im#lement 0$A$ 'o$ 9>M1 -ithout #roviding
for the rules& regulations and guidelines for the conduct of a #lebiscite -hich is indis#ensable for the
division or conversion of a local government unit$ 4e #rayed for the issuance of an order directing the
res#ondents to cease and desist from im#lementing 0$A$ 'o$ 9>M1 and C/ME<EC 0esolution 'o$
ML>M& and to revert instead to C/ME<EC 0esolution 'o$ ML91 -hich #rovided for a single legislative
district for Cagayan de /ro$

5ince the Court did not grant the #etitionerhs #rayer for a tem#orary restraining order or -rit of
#reliminary in(unction& the May 1 'ational and <ocal Elections #roceeded according to 0$A$ 'o$
9>M1 and 0esolution 'o$ ML>M$

The res#ondenths Comment on the #etition& filed through the /ffice of the 5olicitor ;eneral&
argued that: 1D the #etitioner did not res#ect the hierarchy of courts& as the 0egional Trial Court B0TCD
is vested -ith concurrent (urisdiction over cases assailing the constitutionality of a statuteG +D 0$A$ 'o$
9>M1 merely increased the re#resentation of Cagayan de /ro City in the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives and
5angguniang "anglungsod #ursuant to 5ection ,& Article V% of the 19LM ConstitutionG >D the criteria
established under 5ection 19& Article C of the 19LM Constitution only a##ly -hen there is a creation&
division& merger& abolition or substantial alteration of boundaries of a #rovince& city& munici#ality& or
barangayG in this case& no such creation& division& merger& abolition or alteration of boundaries of a local
government unit too* #laceG and D 0$A$ 'o$ 9>M1 did not bring about any change in Cagayan de /rohs
territory& #o#ulation and income classificationG hence& no #lebiscite is re8uired$

The #etitioner argued in his re#ly that: 1D #ursuant to the Courths ruling in Del Mar v$ "A;C/0&
N9O the Court may ta*e cogniHance of this #etition if com#elling reasons& or the nature and im#ortance
of the issues raised& -arrant the immediate e2ercise of its (urisdictionG +D Cagayan de /ro Cityhs
rea##ortionment under 0$A$ 'o$ 9>M1 falls -ithin the meaning of creation& division& merger& abolition
or substantial alteration of boundaries of cities under 5ection 19& Article C of the ConstitutionG >D the
creation& division& merger& abolition or substantial alteration of boundaries of local government units
involve a common denominator 1 the material change in the #olitical and economic rights of the local
government units directly affected& as -ell as of the #eo#le thereinG D a voterhs sovereign #o-er to
decide on -ho should be elected as the entire cityhs Congressman -as arbitrarily reduced by at least
one half because the 8uestioned la- and resolution only allo-ed him to vote and be voted for in the
district designated by the C/ME<ECG ,D a voter -as also arbitrarily denied his right to elect the
Congressman and the members of the city council for the other legislative district& and !D government
funds -ere illegally disbursed -ithout #rior a##roval by the sovereign electorate of Cagayan De /ro
City$N19O

T4E %55:E5


The core issues& based on the #etition and the #artiesh memoranda& can be limited to the
follo-ing contentious #oints:

1D Did the #etitioner violate the hierarchy of courts ruleG if so& should the instant #etition be
dismissed on this groundQ
+D Does 0$A$ 'o$ 9>M1 merely #rovide for the legislative rea##ortionment of Cagayan de /ro City&
or does it involve the division and conversion of a local government unitQ
>D Does 0$A$ 'o$ 9>M1 violate the e8uality of re#resentation doctrineQ

/:0 0:<%';

E2ce#t for the issue of the hierarchy of courts rule& -e find the #etition totally -ithout merit$

The hierarchy of courts #rinci#le$

The 5u#reme Court has original (urisdiction over #etitions for certiorari& #rohibition& mandamus& 8uo
-arranto& and habeas cor#us$N11O %t -as #ursuant to this original (urisdiction that the #etitioner filed
the #resent #etition$

3hile this (urisdiction is shared -ith the Court of A##ealsN1+O and the 0TCs&N1>O a direct invocation of
the 5u#reme Courths (urisdiction is allo-ed only -hen there are s#ecial and im#ortant reasons therefor&
clearly and es#ecially set out in the #etition$ 0easons of #racticality& dictated by an increasingly
overcro-ded doc*et and the need to #rioritiHe in favor of matters -ithin our e2clusive (urisdiction&
(ustify the e2istence of this rule other-ise *no-n as the 6#rinci#le of hierarchy of courts$7 More
generally stated& the #rinci#le re8uires that recourse must first be made to the lo-er=ran*ed court
e2ercising concurrent (urisdiction -ith a higher court$N1O

Among the cases -e have considered sufficiently s#ecial and im#ortant to be e2ce#tions to the rule& are
#etitions for certiorari& #rohibition& mandamus and 8uo -arranto against our nationhs la-ma*ers -hen
the validity of their enactments is assailed$N1,O The #resent #etition is of this natureG its sub(ect matter
and the nature of the issues raised 1 among them& -hether legislative rea##ortionment involves a
division of Cagayan de /ro City as a local government unit 1 are reasons enough for considering it an
e2ce#tion to the #rinci#le of hierarchy of courts$ Additionally& the #etition assails as -ell a resolution
of the C/ME<EC en banc issued to im#lement the legislative a##ortionment that 0$A$ 'o$ 9>M1
decrees$ As an action against a C/ME<EC en banc resolution& the case falls under 0ule ! of the
0ules of Court that in turn re8uires a revie- by this Court via a 0ule !, #etition for certiorari$N1!O For
these reasons& -e do not see the #rinci#le of hierarchy of courts to be a stumbling bloc* in our
consideration of the #resent case$

The "lebiscite 0e8uirement$


The #etitioner insists that 0$A$ 'o$ 9>M1 converts and divides the City of Cagayan de /ro as a
local government unit& and does not merely #rovide for the Cityhs legislative a##ortionment$ This
argument essentially #roceeds from a misunderstanding of the constitutional conce#ts of a##ortionment
of legislative districts and division of local government units$

<egislative a##ortionment is defined by )lac*hs <a- Dictionary as the determination of the
number of re#resentatives -hich a 5tate& county or other subdivision may send to a legislative body$
N1MO %t is the allocation of seats in a legislative body in #ro#ortion to the #o#ulationG the dra-ing of
voting district lines so as to e8ualiHe #o#ulation and voting #o-er among the districts$N1LO
0ea##ortionment& on the other hand& is the realignment or change in legislative districts brought about
by changes in #o#ulation and mandated by the constitutional re8uirement of e8uality of re#resentation$
N19O

Article V% Bentitled <egislative De#artmentD of the 19LM Constitution lays do-n the rules on legislative
a##ortionment under its 5ection , -hich #rovides:
5ec$ ,B1D$ B1D The 4ouse of 0e#resentatives shall be com#osed of not more than t-o hundred fifty
members unless other-ise fi2ed by la-& -ho shall be elected from legislative districts a##ortioned
among the #rovinces& cities& and the Metro#olitan Manila area in accordance -ith the number of their
res#ective inhabitants& and on the basis of a uniform and #rogressive ratio& and those -ho& as #rovided
by la-& shall be elected through a #arty=list system of registered national& regional and sectoral #arties
or organiHations$

2 2 2

B>D Each legislative district shall com#rise& as far as #racticable& continuous& com#act& and ad(acent
territory$ Each city -ith a #o#ulation of at least t-o hundred fifty thousand& or each #rovince& shall
have at least one re#resentative$

BD 3ithin three years follo-ing the return of every census& the Congress shall ma*e a rea##ortionment
of legislative districts based on the standards #rovided in this section$

5e#arately from the legislative districts that legal a##ortionment or rea##ortionment s#ea*s of& are the
local government units Bhistorically and generically referred to as 6munici#al cor#orations7D that the
Constitution itself classified into #rovinces& cities& munici#alities and barangays$N+9O %n its strict and
#ro#er sense& a munici#ality has been defined as 6a body #olitic and cor#orate constituted by the
incor#oration of the inhabitants of a city or to-n for the #ur#ose of local government thereof$7N+1O The
creation& division& merger& abolition or alteration of boundary of local government units& i$e$& of
#rovinces& cities& munici#alities& and barangays& are covered by the Article on <ocal ;overnment
BArticle CD$ 5ection 19 of this Article #rovides:


'o #rovince& city& munici#ality& or barangay may be created& divided& merged& abolished& or its
boundary substantially altered& e2ce#t in accordance -ith the criteria established in the local
government code and sub(ect to a##roval by a ma(ority of the votes cast in a #lebiscite in the #olitical
unit directly affected$


:nder both Article V%& 5ection ,& and Article C& 5ection 19 of the Constitution& the authority to act has
been vested in the <egislature$ The <egislature underta*es the a##ortionment and rea##ortionment of
legislative districts&N++O and li*e-ise acts on local government units by setting the standards for their
creation& division& merger& abolition and alteration of boundaries and by actually creating& dividing&
merging& abolishing local government units and altering their boundaries through legislation$ /ther
than this& not much commonality e2ists bet-een the t-o #rovisions since they are inherently different
although they interface and relate -ith one another$

The concern that lea#s from the te2t of Article V%& 5ection , is #olitical re#resentation and the means to
ma*e a legislative district sufficiently re#resented so that the #eo#le can be effectively heard$ As above
stated& the aim of legislative a##ortionment is 6to e8ualiHe #o#ulation and voting #o-er among
districts$7N+>O 4ence& em#hasis is given to the number of #eo#le re#resentedG the uniform and
#rogressive ratio to be observed among the re#resentative districtsG and accessibility and commonality
of interests in terms of each district being& as far as #racticable& continuous& com#act and ad(acent
territory$ %n terms of the #eo#le re#resented& every city -ith at least +,9&999 #eo#le and every #rovince
Birres#ective of #o#ulationD is entitled to one re#resentative$ %n this sense& legislative districts& on the
one hand& and #rovinces and cities& on the other& relate and interface -ith each other$ To ensure
continued adherence to the re8uired standards of a##ortionment& 5ection ,BD s#ecifically mandates
rea##ortionment as soon as the given standards are met$

%n contrast -ith the e8ual re#resentation ob(ective of Article V%& 5ection ,& Article C& 5ection 19
e2#ressly s#ea*s of ho- local government units may be 6created& divided& merged& abolished& or its
boundary substantially altered$7 %ts concern is the commencement& the termination& and the
modification of local government unitsh cor#orate e2istence and territorial coverageG and it s#ea*s of
t-o s#ecific standards that must be observed in im#lementing this concern& namely& the criteria
established in the local government code and the a##roval by a ma(ority of the votes cast in a #lebiscite
in the #olitical units directly affected$ :nder the <ocal ;overnment Code B0$A$ 'o$ M1!9D #assed in
1991& the criteria of income& #o#ulation and land area are s#ecified as verifiable indicators of viability
and ca#acity to #rovide services$N+O The division or merger of e2isting units must com#ly -ith the
same re8uirements Bsince a ne- local government unit -ill come into beingD& #rovided that a division
shall not reduce the income& #o#ulation& or land area of the unit affected to less than the minimum
re8uirement #rescribed in the Code$N+,O

A #ronounced distinction bet-een Article V%& 5ection , and& Article C& 5ection 19 is on the
re8uirement of a #lebiscite$ The Constitution and the <ocal ;overnment Code e2#ressly re8uire a
#lebiscite to carry out any creation& division& merger& abolition or alteration of boundary of a local
government unit$N+!O %n contrast& no #lebiscite re8uirement e2ists under the a##ortionment or
rea##ortionment #rovision$ %n Tobias v$ Abalos&N+MO a case that arose from the division of the
congressional district formerly covering 5an .uan and Mandaluyong into se#arate districts& -e
confirmed this distinction and the fact that no #lebiscite is needed in a legislative rea##ortionment$ The
#lebiscite issue came u# because one -as ordered and held for Mandaluyong in the course of its
conversion into a highly urbaniHed city& -hile none -as held for 5an .uan$ %n e2#laining -hy this
ha##ened& the Court ruled that no #lebiscite -as necessary for 5an .uan because the ob(ective of the
#lebiscite -as the conversion of Mandaluyong into a highly urbaniHed city as re8uired by Article C&
5ection 19 the <ocal ;overnment CodeG the creation of a ne- legislative district only follo-ed as a
conse8uence$ %n other -ords& the a##ortionment alone and by itself did not call for a #lebiscite& so that
none -as needed for 5an .uan -here only a rea##ortionment too* #lace$

The need for a #lebiscite under Article C& 5ection 19 and the lac* of re8uirement for one under
Article V%& 5ection , can best be a##reciated by a consideration of the historical roots of these t-o
#rovisions& the nature of the conce#ts they embody as heretofore discussed& and their areas of
a##lication$

A )it of 4istory$

%n Macias v$ C/ME<EC&N+LO -e first (uris#rudentially ac*no-ledged the American roots of our
a##ortionment #rovision& noting its roots from the
Fourteenth AmendmentN+9O of the :$5$ Constitution and from the constitutions of some American
states$ The "hili##ine /rganic Act of 199+ created the "hili##ine Assembly&N>9O the body that acted as
the lo-er house of the bicameral legislature under the Americans& -ith the "hili##ine Commission
acting as the u##er house$ 3hile the members of the "hili##ine Commission -ere a##ointed by the
:$5$ "resident -ith the conformity of the :$5$ 5enate& the members of the "hili##ine Assembly -ere
elected by re#resentative districts #reviously delineated under the "hili##ine /rganic Act of 199+
#ursuant to the mandate to a##ortion the seats of the "hili##ine Assembly among the #rovinces as
nearly as #racticable according to #o#ulation$ Thus& legislative a##ortionment first started in our
country$

The .ones <a- or the "hili##ine Autonomy Act of 191! maintained the a##ortionment #rovision&
dividing the country into 1+ senate districts and 99 re#resentative districts electing one delegate each to
the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives$ 5ection 1! of the Act s#ecifically vested the "hili##ine <egislature -ith
the authority to redistrict the "hili##ine %slands$

:nder the 19>, Constitution& Article V%& 5ection , retained the conce#t of legislative a##ortionment
together -ith 6district7 as the basic unit of a##ortionmentG the concern -as 6e8uality of re#resentation $
$ $ as an essential feature of re#ublican institutions7 as e2#ressed in the leading case of Macias v$
C/ME<EC$N>1O The case ruled that ine8uality of re#resentation is a (usticiable& not a #olitical issue&
-hich ruling -as reiterated in Monte(o v$ C/ME<EC$N>+O 'otably& no issue regarding the holding of a
#lebiscite ever came u# in these cases and the others that follo-ed& as no #lebiscite -as re8uired$

Article V%%%& 5ection + of the 19M> Constitution retained the conce#t of e8ual re#resentation 6in
accordance -ith the number of their res#ective inhabitants and on the basis of a uniform and
#rogressive ratio7 -ith each district being& as far as #racticable& contiguous& com#act and ad(acent
territory$ This formulation -as essentially carried over to the 19LM Constitution& distinguished only
from the #revious one by the #resence of #arty=list re#resentatives$ %n neither Constitution -as a
#lebiscite re8uired$

The need for a #lebiscite in the creation& division& merger& or abolition of local government units -as
not constitutionally enshrined until the 19M> Constitution$ 4o-ever& as early as 19,9& 0$A$ 'o$
++!N>>O re8uired& in the creation of barrios by "rovincial )oards& that the creation and definition of
boundaries be 6u#on #etition of a ma(ority of the voters in the areas affected$7 %n 19!1& the Charter of
the City of Caloocan B0$A$ 'o$ >+MLD carried this further by re8uiring that the 6Act shall ta*e effect
after a ma(ority of voters of the Munici#ality of Caloocan vote in favor of the conversion of their
munici#ality into a city in a #lebiscite$7 This -as follo-ed u# to 19M+ by other legislative enactments
re8uiring a #lebiscite as a condition for the creation and conversion of local government units as -ell
as the transfer of sitios from one legislative unit to another$N>O %n 19M>& the #lebiscite re8uirement -as
accorded constitutional status$

:nder these se#arate historical trac*s& it can be seen that the holding of a #lebiscite -as never a
re8uirement in legislative a##ortionment or rea##ortionment$ After it became constitutionally
entrenched& a #lebiscite -as also al-ays identified -ith the creation& division& merger& abolition and
alteration of boundaries of local government units& never -ith the conce#t of legislative a##ortionment$

'ature and Areas of A##lication$

The legislative district that Article V%& 5ection , s#ea*s of may& in a sense& be called a #olitical unit
because it is the basis for the election of a member of the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives and members of the
local legislative body$ %t is not& ho-ever& a #olitical subdivision through -hich functions of
government are carried out$ %t can more a##ro#riately be described as a re#resentative unit that may or
may not encom#ass the -hole of a city or a #rovince& but unli*e the latter& it is not a cor#orate unit$
'ot being a cor#orate unit& a district does not act for and in behalf of the #eo#le com#rising the districtG
it merely delineates the areas occu#ied by the #eo#le -ho -ill choose a re#resentative in their national
affairs$ :nli*e a #rovince& -hich has a governorG a city or a munici#ality& -hich has a mayorG and a
barangay& -hich has a #unong barangay& a district does not have its o-n chief e2ecutive$ The role of
the congressman that it elects is to ensure that the voice of the #eo#le of the district is heard in
Congress& not to oversee the affairs of the legislative district$ 'ot being a cor#orate unit also signifies
that it has no legal #ersonality that must be created or dissolved and has no ca#acity to act$ 4ence&
there is no need for any #lebiscite in the creation& dissolution or any other similar action on a legislative
district$

The local government units& on the other hand& are #olitical and cor#orate units$ They are the territorial
and #olitical subdivisions of the state$N>,O They #ossess legal #ersonality on the authority of the
Constitution and by action of the <egislature$ The Constitution defines them as entities that Congress
can& by la-& create& divide& abolish& mergeG or -hose boundaries can be altered based on standards
again established by both the Constitution and the <egislature$N>!O A local government uniths cor#orate
e2istence begins u#on the election and 8ualification of its chief e2ecutive and a ma(ority of the
members of its 5anggunian$N>MO

As a #olitical subdivision& a local government unit is an 6instrumentality of the state in carrying out the
functions of government$7N>LO As a cor#orate entity -ith a distinct and se#arate (uridical #ersonality
from the 5tate& it e2ercises s#ecial functions for the sole benefit of its constituents$ %t acts as 6an agency
of the community in the administration of local affairs7N>9O and the mediums through -hich the #eo#le
act in their cor#orate ca#acity on local concerns$N9O %n light of these roles& the Constitution sa- it fit
to e2#ressly secure the consent of the #eo#le affected by the creation& division& merger& abolition or
alteration of boundaries of local government units through a #lebiscite$

These considerations clearly sho- the distinctions bet-een a legislative a##ortionment or
rea##ortionment and the division of a local government unit$ 4istorically and by its intrinsic nature& a
legislative a##ortionment does not mean& and does not even im#ly& a division of a local government
unit -here the a##ortionment ta*es #lace$ Thus& the #lebiscite re8uirement that a##lies to the division
of a #rovince& city& munici#ality or barangay under the <ocal ;overnment Code should not a##ly to and
be a re8uisite for the validity of a legislative a##ortionment or rea##ortionment$



0$A$ 'o$ 9>M1 and C/ME<EC 0es$ 'o$ ML>M

0$A$ 'o$ 9>M1 is& on its face& #urely and sim#ly a rea##ortionment legislation #assed in accordance
-ith the authority granted to Congress under Article V%& 5ection ,BD of the Constitution$ %ts core
#rovision 1 5ection 1 1 #rovides:

5ECT%/' 1$ <egislative Districts$ E The lone legislative district of the City of Cagayan de /ro is
hereby a##ortioned to commence in the ne2t national elections after the effectivity of this Act$
4enceforth& barangays )onbon& )ayabas& Raus-agan& Carmen& "atag& )ulua& %#onan& )ai*ingon& 5an
5imon& "agat#at& Canitoan& )alulang& <umbia& "agalungan& Tag#angi& Taglimao& Tuburan& "igsag=an&
Tum#agon& )ayanga& Mambuaya& Dansulihon& Tigna#oloan and )isigan shall com#rise the first district
-hile barangays Macabalan& "untod& Consolacion& Camaman=an& 'aHareth& Macansandig& %ndahag&
<a#asan& ;usa& Cugman& F5 Catanico& Tablon& Agusan& "uerto& )ugo and )alubal and all urban
barangays from )arangay 1 to )arangay 9 shall com#rise the second district$

:nder these -ordings& no division of Cagayan de /ro City as a #olitical and cor#orate entity ta*es
#lace or is mandated$ Cagayan de /ro City #olitically remains a single unit and its administration is not
divided along territorial lines$ %ts territory remains com#letely -hole and intactG there is only the
addition of another legislative district and the delineation of the city into t-o districts for #ur#oses of
re#resentation in the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives$ Thus& Article C& 5ection 19 of the Constitution does not
come into #lay and no #lebiscite is necessary to validly a##ortion Cagayan de /ro City into t-o
districts$

Admittedly& the legislative rea##ortionment carries effects beyond the creation of another congressional
district in the city by #roviding& as reflected in C/ME<EC 0esolution 'o$ ML>M& for additional
5angguniang "anglunsod seats to be voted for along the lines of the congressional a##ortionment
made$ The effect on the 5angguniang "anglunsod& ho-ever& is not directly traceable to 0$A$ 'o$ 9>M1
but to another la- 1 0$A$ 'o$ !!>!N1O 1 -hose 5ection > #rovides:

5ECT%/' >$ /ther Cities$ E The #rovision of any la- to the contrary not-ithstanding the City of
Cebu& City of Davao& and any other city -ith more than one re#resentative district shall have eight BLD
councilors for each district -ho shall be residents thereof to be elected by the 8ualified voters therein&
#rovided that the cities of Cagayan de /ro& Aamboanga& )acolod& %loilo and other cities com#rising a
re#resentative district shall have t-elve B1+D councilors each and all other cities shall have ten B19D
councilors each to be elected at large by the 8ualified voters of the said cities: "rovided& That in no case
shall the #resent number of councilors according to their charters be reduced$

4o-ever& neither does this la- have the effect of dividing the City of Cagayan de /ro into t-o #olitical
and cor#orate units and territories$ 0ather than divide the city either territorially or as a cor#orate
entity& the effect is merely to enhance voter re#resentation by giving each city voter more and greater
say& both in Congress and in the 5angguniang "anglunsod$

To illustrate this effect& before the rea##ortionment& Cagayan de /ro had only one congressman and 1+
city council members city-ide for its #o#ulation of a##ro2imately ,99&999$N+O )y having t-o
legislative districts& each of them -ith one congressman& Cagayan de /ro no- effectively has t-o
congressmen& each one re#resenting +,9&999 of the cityhs #o#ulation$ %n terms of services for city
residents& this easily means better access to their congressman since each one no- services only
+,9&999 constituents as against the ,99&999 he used to re#resent$ The same goes true for the
5angguniang "anglungsod -ith its ran*s increased from 1+ to 1! since each legislative district no- has
L councilors$ %n re#resentation terms& the fe-er constituents re#resented translate to a greater voice for
each individual city resident in Congress and in the 5anggunianG each congressman and each councilor
re#resents both a smaller area and fe-er constituents -hose fe-er numbers are no- concentrated in
each re#resentative$ The City& for its #art& no- has t-ice the number of congressmen s#ea*ing for it
and voting in the halls of Congress$ 5ince the total number of congressmen in the country has not
increased to the #oint of doubling its numbers& the #resence of t-o congressman Binstead of oneD from
the same city cannot but be a 8uantitative and #ro#ortional im#rovement in the re#resentation of
Cagayan de /ro City in Congress$

E8uality of re#resentation$

The #etitioner argues that the distribution of the legislative districts is une8ual$ District 1 has only
9>&M19 registered voters -hile District + has 1+M&9M1$ District 1 is com#osed mostly of rural barangays
-hile District + is com#osed mostly of urban barangays$N>O Thus& 0$A$ 'o$ 9>M1 violates the #rinci#le
of e8uality of re#resentation$

A clarification must be made$ The la- clearly #rovides that the basis for districting shall be the
number of the inhabitants of a city or a #rovince& not the number of registered voters therein$ 3e settled
this very same 8uestion in 4errera v$ C/ME<ECNO -hen -e inter#reted a #rovision in 0$A$ 'o$
M1!! and C/ME<EC 0esolution 'o$ +>1> that a##lied to the "rovince of ;uimaras$ 3e categorically
ruled that the basis for districting is the number of inhabitants of the "rovince of ;uimaras by
munici#ality based on the official 199, Census of "o#ulation as certified to by Tomas "$ Africa&
Administrator of the 'ational 5tatistics /ffice$

The #etitioner& unfortunately& did not #rovide information about the actual #o#ulation of
Cagayan de /ro City$ 4o-ever& -e ta*e (udicial notice of the August +99M census of the 'ational
5tatistics /ffice -hich sho-s that barangays com#rising Cagayan de /rohs first district have a total
#o#ulation of +,&!& -hile the second district has +99&>++ residents$ :ndeniably& these figures sho-
a dis#arity in the #o#ulation siHes of the districts$N,O The Constitution& ho-ever& does not re8uire
mathematical e2actitude or rigid e8uality as a standard in gauging e8uality of re#resentation$N!O %n
fact& for cities& all it as*s is that 6each city -ith a #o#ulation of at least t-o hundred fifty thousand shall
have one re#resentative&7 -hile ensuring re#resentation for every #rovince regardless of the siHe of its
#o#ulation$ To ensure 8uality re#resentation through commonality of interests and ease of access by
the re#resentative to the constituents& all that the Constitution re8uires is that every legislative district
should com#rise& as far as #racticable& contiguous& com#act& and ad(acent territory$ Thus& the
Constitution leaves the local government units as they are found and does not re8uire their division&
merger or transfer to satisfy the numerical standard it im#oses$ %ts re8uirements are satisfied des#ite
some numerical dis#arity if the units are contiguous& com#act and ad(acent as far as #racticable$

The #etitionerhs contention that there is a resulting ine8uality in the division of Cagayan de /ro
City into t-o districts because the barangays in the first district are mostly rural barangays -hile the
second district is mostly urban& is largely unsubstantiated$ )ut even if bac*ed u# by #ro#er #roof& -e
cannot 8uestion the division on the basis of the difference in the barangaysh levels of develo#ment or
develo#mental focus as these are not #art of the constitutional standards for legislative a##ortionment
or rea##ortionment$ 3hat the com#onents of the t-o districts of Cagayan de /ro -ould be is a matter
for the la-ma*ers to determine as a matter of #olicy$ %n the absence of any grave abuse of discretion or
violation of the established legal #arameters& this Court cannot intrude into the -isdom of these
#olicies$NMO

34E0EF/0E& -e hereby D%5M%55 the #etition for lac* of merit$ Costs against the #etitioner$

5/ /0DE0ED$


A0T:0/ D$ )0%/'
Associate .ustice


3E C/'C:0:



0EP'AT/ 5$ ":'/
Chief .ustice




<E/'A0D/ A$ K:%5:M)%';
Associate .ustice



A'T/'%/ T$ CA0"%/
Associate .ustice



0E'AT/ C$ C/0/'A
Associate .ustice



AD/<F/ 5$ AAC:'A
Associate .ustice






M%'%TA V$ C4%C/='AAA0%/
Associate .ustice



A'T/'%/ ED:A0D/ )$ 'AC4:0A
Associate .ustice



B/n leaveD
C/'5:E</ P'A0E5=5A'T%A;/
Associate .ustice



MA$ A<%C%A A:5T0%A=MA0T%'EA
Associate .ustice



C/'C4%TA CA0"%/ M/0A<E5
Associate .ustice



DA'TE /$ T%';A
Associate .ustice






"0E5)%TE0/ .$ VE<A5C/& .0$
Associate .ustice



0:)E' T$ 0EPE5
Associate .ustice

TE0E5%TA .$ <E/'A0D/=DE CA5T0/
Associate .ustice



CE0T%F%CAT%/'

"ursuant to 5ection 1>& Article V%%% of the Constitution& it is hereby certified that the conclusions in the
above Decision -ere reached in consultation before the case -as assigned to the -riter of the o#inion
of the Court$


0EP'AT/ 5$ ":'/
Chief .ustice


c /n leave$
N1O :nder 0ule !, of the 0ules of Court$
N+O 6An Act "roviding for the A##ortionment of the <one <egislative District of the City of Cagayan
De /ro$7
N>O 0ollo& #$ +1$
NO %d$& #$ +,$
N,O %d$& #$ +,$
N!O %d$& ##$ +>=+$
NMO %d$& ##$ >=++$
NLO %d$& ##$ !9=9>
N9O ;$0$ 'o$ 1>L+9L& 'ovember +9& +999& >! 5C0A L,$
N19O 0ollo& ##$ 1+>=1L$

N11O C/'5T%T:T%/'& Article V%%%& 5ection ,B1D$
N1+O 5ec$ 9 B1D& )$"$ )lg$ 1+9$
N1>O 5ec$ +1 B1D& )$"$ )lg$ 1+9$
N1O 5ee: "eo#le v$ Cuaresma& ;$0$ 'o$ !MMLM& A#ril 1L& 19L9& 1M+ 5C0A 1,$
N1,O 5antiago v$ ;uingona& .r$& ;$0$ 'o$ 1>,MM& 'ovember 1L& 199L& +9L 5C0A M,!$
N1!O 5ee: )autista v$ C/ME<EC& ;$0$ 'os$ 1,M9!=9M& /ctober +>& +99>& 1 5C0A +99$
N1MO )lac*hs <a- Dictionary& ,th Edition& #$ 91$
N1LO Cla##& .ames E$& Dictionary of <a- B+999D& #$ >>$
N19O )lac*hs <a- Dictionary& su#ra note 1M& #$ 11>M$
N+9O C/'5T%T:T%/'& Art$ C& 5ec$ 1$
N+1O Martin& "ublic Cor#orations& 0evised 19L> Edition& #$ ,$
N++O Article V%& 5ection ,G Monte(o v$ C/ME<EC& >1+ "hil$ 9+ B199,D$
N+>O 5u#ra note 1L$

N+O 5ection M& <ocal ;overnment Code$
N+,O C/'5T%T:T%/'& Art$ C& 5ec$ 19$
N+!O 5EC$ 19$ "lebiscite 0e8uirement$ = 'o creation& division& merger& abolition& or substantial
alteration of boundaries of local government units shall ta*e effect unless a##roved by a ma(ority of the
votes cast in a #lebiscite called for the #ur#ose in the #olitical unit or units directly affected$ 5aid
#lebiscite shall be conducted by the Commission on Elections BComelecD -ithin one hundred t-enty
B1+9D days from the date of effectivity of the la- or ordinance effecting such action& unless said la- or
ordinance fi2es another date$
N+MO ;$0$ 'o$ 11ML>& December L& 199& +>9 5C0A 19!$
N+LO ;$0$ 'o$ <=1L!L& 5e#tember 1& 19!1& 11> "hil$ 1 B19!1D$
N+9O The Fourteenth Amendment of the :$5$ Constitution #rovides the basis for the re8uirement of
an e8uitable a##ortionment scheme$ 5ee generally& Colegrove v$ ;reen& >+L :$5$ ,9& cited in Macias
v$ C/ME<EC& su#ra note +L$
N>9O "eo#le v$ 5antiago& > "hil 1+9 B19++D$
N>1O 5u#ra note +L$
N>+O ;$0$ 'o$ 11LM9+& March 1!& 199,$
N>>O 6An Act Amending the <a-s ;overning <ocal ;overnments by %ncreasing their Autonomy
and 0eorganiHing "rovincial ;overnments$7
N>O A #lebiscite -as a conditio sine 8ua non in the creation of munici#al cor#orations including& but
not limited to& the follo-ing: 1D the City of Angeles& 0$A$ >M99G +D the Munici#ality of "io Duran in the
"rovince of Albay& 0$A$ >L1MG >D the "rovinces of 'orthern 5amar& Eastern 5amar and 3estern 5amar&
0$A$ ++1G D the "rovinces of Agusan del 'orte and Agusan del 5ur& 0$A$ 9M9$ The #rior a##roval of
a ma(ority of the 8ualified voters of certain sitios of the Munici#ality of Anilao -as also re8uired
before the transfer of the same sitios to the Munici#ality of )anate under 0$A$ !1 too* effect$

N>,O Metro#olitan Manila Develo#ment Authority v$ )el=Air Village Association& %nc$& ;$0$ 'o$
1>,9!+& March +M& +999& >+L 5C0A L>!$
N>!O C/'5T%T:T%/'& Article C& 5ecs$ > and 19G A8uilino "imentel& .r$& The <ocal ;overnment Code
of 1991: The Rey to 'ational Develo#ment& #$ ,$
N>MO 5ec$ 1& <ocal ;overnment Code$
N>LO <idasan v$ Commission on Elections& ;$0$ 'o$ <=+L9L9 /ctober +,& 19!M& +1 5C0A 9!$
N>9O %bid$
N9O 5ection 1, of the <ocal ;overnment Code #rovides: "olitical and Cor#orate 'ature of
<ocal ;overnment :nits$ = Every local government unit created or recogniHed under this Code is a
body #olitic and cor#orate endo-ed -ith #o-ers to be e2ercised by it in conformity -ith la-$ As such&
it shall e2ercise #o-ers as a #olitical subdivision of the national government and as a cor#orate entity
re#resenting the inhabitants of its territory$
N1O Enacted into la- on 'ovember !& 19LM$
N+O As #rovided by C/ME<EC 0es$ 'o$ ML91 that C/ME<EC 0es$ 'o$ ML>M su#erseded$

N>O 0ollo& #$ M1$
NO ;$0$ 'o$ 1>199& 'ovember 1M& 1999& >1L 5C0A >>M$
N,O Total "o#ulation by "rovince& City& Munici#ality and )arangay: as of August 1& +99M
mhtt#:ZZ---$census$gov$#hZdataZsectordataZ+99MZregiond+919$#dfn& last accessed 'ovember ,& +99L$
N!O 4arlan& dissenting o#inion in )a*er v$ Carr& >!9 :$ 5$ 1L! citing Allied 5tores of /hio v$ )o-ers&
>,L :$5$ ,++ and Mc;o-an v$ Maryland& >!! :$5$ +9& in -hich the 5u#reme Court ruled that the
E8ual "rotection Clause does not demand of legislation 6finic*y or e2act conformity to abstract
correlation 222$ The Constitution is satisfied if a legislature res#onds to the #ractical living facts -ith
-hich it deals$ Through -hat #recise #oints in a field of many com#eting #ressures a legislature might
most suitably have dra-n its lines is not a 8uestion for (udicial re=e2amination$ %t is enough to satisfy
the Constitution that in dra-ing them the #rinci#le of reason has not been disregarded$ And -hat
degree of uniformity reason demands of a statute is& of course& a function of the com#le2ity of the
needs -hich the statute see*s to accommodate$7
NMO Tobias v$ Abalos& ;$0$ 'o$ <=11ML>& December L& 199& +>9 5C0A 19!$
Today is Tuesday& 5e#tember 9+& +91
search
0e#ublic of the "hili##ines
5:"0EME C/:0T
Manila
E' )A'C
;$0$ 'o$ 1M>9> /ctober 9& +99M
"4A0MACE:T%CA< A'D 4EA<T4 CA0E A55/C%AT%/' /F T4E "4%<%""%'E5& #etitioner&
vs$
4EA<T4 5EC0ETA0P F0A'C%5C/ T$ D:K:E %%%G 4EA<T4 :'DE0 5EC0ETA0%E5 D0$
ET4E<P' "$ '%ET/& D0$ MA0;A0%TA M$ ;A</'& ATTP$ A<ECA'DE0 A$ "AD%<<A& T D0$
.ADE F$ DE< M:'D/G and A55%5TA'T 5EC0ETA0%E5 D0$ MA0%/ C$ V%<<AVE0DE& D0$
DAV%D .$ </AADA& A'D D0$ 'EME5%/ T$ ;AR/& res#ondents$
D E C % 5 % / '
A:5T0%A=MA0T%'EA& .$:
The Court and all #arties involved are in agreement that the best nourishment for an infant is mother@s
mil*$ There is nothing greater than for a mother to nurture her beloved child straight from her bosom$
The ideal is& of course& for each and every Fili#ino child to en(oy the une8ualed benefits of breastmil*$
)ut ho- should this end be attainedQ
)efore the Court is a #etition for certiorari under 0ule !, of the 0ules of Court& see*ing to nullify
Administrative /rder BA$/$D 'o$ +99!=991+ entitled& 0evised %m#lementing 0ules and 0egulations of
E2ecutive /rder 'o$ ,1& /ther-ise Rno-n as The FMil* Code&F 0elevant %nternational Agreements&
"enaliHing Violations Thereof& and for /ther "ur#oses B0%00D$ "etitioner #osits that the 0%00 is not
valid as it contains #rovisions that are not constitutional and go beyond the la- it is su##osed to
im#lement$
'amed as res#ondents are the 4ealth 5ecretary& :ndersecretaries& and Assistant 5ecretaries of the
De#artment of 4ealth BD/4D$ For #ur#oses of herein #etition& the D/4 is deemed im#leaded as a co=
res#ondent since res#ondents issued the 8uestioned 0%00 in their ca#acity as officials of said e2ecutive
agency$1
E2ecutive /rder 'o$ ,1 BMil* CodeD -as issued by "resident CoraHon A8uino on /ctober +L& 19L! by
virtue of the legislative #o-ers granted to the #resident under the Freedom Constitution$ /ne of the
#reambular clauses of the Mil* Code states that the la- see*s to give effect to Article 11+ of the
%nternational Code of Mar*eting of )reastmil* 5ubstitutes B%CM)5D& a code ado#ted by the 3orld
4ealth Assembly B34AD in 19L1$ From 19L+ to +99!& the 34A ado#ted several 0esolutions to the
effect that breastfeeding should be su##orted& #romoted and #rotected& hence& it should be ensured that
nutrition and health claims are not #ermitted for breastmil* substitutes$
%n 1999& the "hili##ines ratified the %nternational Convention on the 0ights of the Child$ Article + of
said instrument #rovides that 5tate "arties should ta*e a##ro#riate measures to diminish infant and
child mortality& and ensure that all segments of society& s#ecially #arents and children& are informed of
the advantages of breastfeeding$
/n May 1,& +99!& the D/4 issued herein assailed 0%00 -hich -as to ta*e effect on .uly M& +99!$
4o-ever& on .une +L& +99!& #etitioner& re#resenting its members that are manufacturers of breastmil*
substitutes& filed the #resent "etition for Certiorari and "rohibition -ith "rayer for the %ssuance of a
Tem#orary 0estraining /rder BT0/D or 3rit of "reliminary %n(unction$
The main issue raised in the #etition is -hether res#ondents officers of the D/4 acted -ithout or in
e2cess of (urisdiction& or -ith grave abuse of discretion amounting to lac* or e2cess of (urisdiction& and
in violation of the #rovisions of the Constitution in #romulgating the 0%00$>
/n August 1,& +99!& the Court issued a 0esolution granting a T0/ en(oining res#ondents from
im#lementing the 8uestioned 0%00$
After the Comment and 0e#ly had been filed& the Court set the case for oral arguments on .une 19&
+99M$ The Court issued an Advisory B;uidance for /ral ArgumentsD dated .une ,& +99M& to -it:
The Court hereby sets the follo-ing issues:
1$ 3hether or not #etitioner is a real #arty=in=interestG
+$ 3hether Administrative /rder 'o$ +99!=991+ or the 0evised %m#lementing 0ules and 0egulations
B0%00D issued by the De#artment of 4ealth BD/4D is not constitutionalG
+$1 3hether the 0%00 is in accord -ith the #rovisions of E2ecutive /rder 'o$ ,1 BMil* CodeDG
+$+ 3hether #ertinent international agreements1 entered into by the "hili##ines are #art of the la- of
the land and may be im#lemented by the D/4 through the 0%00G %f in the affirmative& -hether the
0%00 is in accord -ith the international agreementsG
+$> 3hether 5ections & ,B-D& ++& >+& M& and ,+ of the 0%00 violate the due #rocess clause and are in
restraint of tradeG and
+$ 3hether 5ection 1> of the 0%00 on Total Effect #rovides sufficient standards$
IIIIIIIIIIIII
1 B1D :nited 'ations Convention on the 0ights of the ChildG B+D the 34/ and :nicef F+99+ ;lobal
5trategy on %nfant and Poung Child FeedingGF and B>D various 3orld 4ealth Assembly B34AD
0esolutions$
The #arties filed their res#ective memoranda$
The #etition is #artly imbued -ith merit$
/n the issue of #etitioner@s standing
3ith regard to the issue of -hether #etitioner may #rosecute this case as the real #arty=in=interest& the
Court ado#ts the vie- enunciated in E2ecutive 5ecretary v$ Court of A##eals& to -it:
The modern vie- is that an association has standing to com#lain of in(uries to its members$ This vie-
fuses the legal identity of an association -ith that of its members$ An association has standing to file
suit for its -or*ers des#ite its lac* of direct interest if its members are affected by the action$ An
organiHation has standing to assert the concerns of its constituents$
2 2 2 2
2 2 2 3e note that& under its Articles of %ncor#oration& the res#ondent -as organiHed 2 2 2 to act as the
re#resentative of any individual& com#any& entity or association on matters related to the man#o-er
recruitment industry& and to #erform other acts and activities necessary to accom#lish the #ur#oses
embodied therein$ The res#ondent is& thus& the a##ro#riate #arty to assert the rights of its members&
because it and its members are in every #ractical sense identical$ 2 2 2 The res#ondent NassociationO is
but the medium through -hich its individual members see* to ma*e more effective the e2#ression of
their voices and the redress of their grievances$ , BEm#hasis su##liedD
-hich -as reasserted in "uro* )agong 5ilang Association& %nc$ v$ Pui#co&! -here the Court ruled that
an association has the legal #ersonality to re#resent its members because the results of the case -ill
affect their vital interests$M
4erein #etitioner@s Amended Articles of %ncor#oration contains a similar #rovision (ust li*e in
E2ecutive 5ecretary& that the association is formed Fto re#resent directly or through a##roved
re#resentatives the #harmaceutical and health care industry before the "hili##ine ;overnment and any
of its agencies& the medical #rofessions and the general #ublic$FL Thus& as an organiHation& #etitioner
definitely has an interest in fulfilling its avo-ed #ur#ose of re#resenting members -ho are #art of the
#harmaceutical and health care industry$ "etitioner is duly authoriHed9 to ta*e the a##ro#riate course of
action to bring to the attention of government agencies and the courts any grievance suffered by its
members -hich are directly affected by the 0%00$ "etitioner& -hich is mandated by its Amended
Articles of %ncor#oration to re#resent the entire industry& -ould be remiss in its duties if it fails to act
on governmental action that -ould affect any of its industry members& no matter ho- fe- or numerous
they are$ 4ence& #etitioner& -hose legal identity is deemed fused -ith its members& should be
considered as a real #arty=in=interest -hich stands to be benefited or in(ured by any (udgment in the
#resent action$
/n the constitutionality of the #rovisions of the 0%00
First& the Court -ill determine if #ertinent international instruments adverted to by res#ondents are #art
of the la- of the land$
"etitioner assails the 0%00 for allegedly going beyond the #rovisions of the Mil* Code& thereby
amending and e2#anding the coverage of said la-$ The defense of the D/4 is that the 0%00
im#lements not only the Mil* Code but also various international instruments19 regarding infant and
young child nutrition$ %t is res#ondents@ #osition that said international instruments are deemed #art of
the la- of the land and therefore the D/4 may im#lement them through the 0%00$
The Court notes that the follo-ing international instruments invo*ed by res#ondents& namely: B1D The
:nited 'ations Convention on the 0ights of the ChildG B+D The %nternational Covenant on Economic&
5ocial and Cultural 0ightsG and B>D the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination
Against 3omen& only #rovide in general terms that ste#s must be ta*en by 5tate "arties to diminish
infant and child mortality and inform society of the advantages of breastfeeding& ensure the health and
-ell=being of families& and ensure that -omen are #rovided -ith services and nutrition in connection
-ith #regnancy and lactation$ 5aid instruments do not contain s#ecific #rovisions regarding the use or
mar*eting of breastmil* substitutes$
The international instruments that do have s#ecific #rovisions regarding breastmil* substitutes are the
%CM)5 and various 34A 0esolutions$
:nder the 19LM Constitution& international la- can become #art of the s#here of domestic la- either by
transformation or incor#oration$11 The transformation method re8uires that an international la- be
transformed into a domestic la- through a constitutional mechanism such as local legislation$ The
incor#oration method a##lies -hen& by mere constitutional declaration& international la- is deemed to
have the force of domestic la-$1+
Treaties become #art of the la- of the land through transformation #ursuant to Article V%%& 5ection +1
of the Constitution -hich #rovides that FNnOo treaty or international agreement shall be valid and
effective unless concurred in by at least t-o=thirds of all the members of the 5enate$F Thus& treaties or
conventional international la- must go through a #rocess #rescribed by the Constitution for it to be
transformed into munici#al la- that can be a##lied to domestic conflicts$1>
The %CM)5 and 34A 0esolutions are not treaties as they have not been concurred in by at least t-o=
thirds of all members of the 5enate as re8uired under 5ection +1& Article V%% of the 19LM Constitution$
4o-ever& the %CM)5 -hich -as ado#ted by the 34A in 19L1 had been transformed into domestic la-
through local legislation& the Mil* Code$ Conse8uently& it is the Mil* Code that has the force and effect
of la- in this (urisdiction and not the %CM)5 #er se$
The Mil* Code is almost a verbatim re#roduction of the %CM)5& but it is -ell to em#hasiHe at this
#oint that the Code did not ado#t the #rovision in the %CM)5 absolutely #rohibiting advertising or
other forms of #romotion to the general #ublic of #roducts -ithin the sco#e of the %CM)5$ %nstead& the
Mil* Code e2#ressly #rovides that advertising& #romotion& or other mar*eting materials may be
allo-ed if such materials are duly authoriHed and a##roved by the %nter=Agency Committee B%ACD$
/n the other hand& 5ection +& Article %% of the 19LM Constitution& to -it:
5ECT%/' +$ The "hili##ines renounces -ar as an instrument of national #olicy& ado#ts the generally
acce#ted #rinci#les of international la- as #art of the la- of the land and adheres to the #olicy of #eace&
e8uality& (ustice& freedom& coo#eration and amity -ith all nations$ BEm#hasis su##liedD
embodies the incor#oration method$1
%n Mi(ares v$ 0anada&1, the Court held thus:
N;Oenerally acce#ted #rinci#les of international la-& by virtue of the incor#oration clause of the
Constitution& form #art of the la-s of the land even if they do not derive from treaty obligations$ The
classical formulation in international la- sees those customary rules acce#ted as binding result from the
combination NofO t-o elements: the established& -ides#read& and consistent #ractice on the #art of
5tatesG and a #sychological element *no-n as the o#inion (uris sive necessitates Bo#inion as to la- or
necessityD$ %m#licit in the latter element is a belief that the #ractice in 8uestion is rendered obligatory
by the e2istence of a rule of la- re8uiring it$1! BEm#hasis su##liedD
F;enerally acce#ted #rinci#les of international la-F refers to norms of general or customary
international la- -hich are binding on all states&1M i$e$& renunciation of -ar as an instrument of
national #olicy& the #rinci#le of sovereign immunity&1L a #erson@s right to life& liberty and due
#rocess&19 and #acta sunt servanda&+9 among others$ The conce#t of Fgenerally acce#ted #rinci#les of
la-F has also been de#icted in this -ise:
5ome legal scholars and (udges loo* u#on certain Fgeneral #rinci#les of la-F as a #rimary source of
international la- because they have the Fcharacter of (us rationaleF and are Fvalid through all *inds of
human societies$F B.udge Tana*a in his dissenting o#inion in the 19!! 5outh 3est Africa Case& 19!!
%$C$.$ +9!D$ /@Connell holds that certain #rinici#les are #art of international la- because they are Fbasic
to legal systems generallyF and hence #art of the (us gentium$ These #rinci#les& he believes& are
established by a #rocess of reasoning based on the common identity of all legal systems$ %f there should
be doubt or disagreement& one must loo* to state #ractice and determine -hether the munici#al la-
#rinci#le #rovides a (ust and acce#table solution$ 2 2 2 +1 BEm#hasis su##liedD
Fr$ .oa8uin ;$ )ernas defines customary international la- as follo-s:
Custom or customary international la- means Fa general and consistent #ractice of states follo-ed by
them from a sense of legal obligation No#inio (urisO$F B0estatementD This statement contains the t-o
basic elements of custom: the material factor& that is& ho- states behave& and the #sychological or
sub(ective factor& that is& -hy they behave the -ay they do$
2 2 2 2
The initial factor for determining the e2istence of custom is the actual behavior of states$ This includes
several elements: duration& consistency& and generality of the #ractice of states$
The re8uired duration can be either short or long$ 2 2 2
2 2 2 2
Duration therefore is not the most im#ortant element$ More im#ortant is the consistency and the
generality of the #ractice$ 2 2 2
2 2 2 2
/nce the e2istence of state #ractice has been established& it becomes necessary to determine -hy states
behave the -ay they do$ Do states behave the -ay they do because they consider it obligatory to
behave thus or do they do it only as a matter of courtesyQ /#inio (uris& or the belief that a certain form
of behavior is obligatory& is -hat ma*es #ractice an international rule$ 3ithout it& #ractice is not la-$++
B:nderscoring and Em#hasis su##liedD
Clearly& customary international la- is deemed incor#orated into our domestic system$+>
34A 0esolutions have not been embodied in any local legislation$ 4ave they attained the status of
customary la- and should they then be deemed incor#orated as #art of the la- of the landQ
The 3orld 4ealth /rganiHation B34/D is one of the international s#ecialiHed agencies allied -ith the
:nited 'ations B:'D by virtue of Article ,M&+ in relation to Article !>+, of the :' Charter$ :nder the
19! 34/ Constitution& it is the 34A -hich determines the #olicies of the 34/&+! and has the
#o-er to ado#t regulations concerning Fadvertising and labeling of biological& #harmaceutical and
similar #roducts moving in international commerce&F+M and to Fma*e recommendations to members
-ith res#ect to any matter -ithin the com#etence of the /rganiHation$F+L The legal effect of its
regulations& as o##osed to recommendations& is 8uite different$
0egulations& along -ith conventions and agreements& duly ado#ted by the 34A bind member states
thus:
Article 19$ The 4ealth Assembly shall have authority to ado#t conventions or agreements -ith res#ect
to any matter -ithin the com#etence of the /rganiHation$ A t-o=thirds vote of the 4ealth Assembly
shall be re8uired for the ado#tion of such conventions or agreements& -hich shall come into force for
each Member -hen acce#ted by it in accordance -ith its constitutional #rocesses$
Article +9$ Each Member underta*es that it -ill& -ithin eighteen months after the ado#tion by the
4ealth Assembly of a convention or agreement& ta*e action relative to the acce#tance of such
convention or agreement$ Each Member shall notify the Director=;eneral of the action ta*en& and if it
does not acce#t such convention or agreement -ithin the time limit& it -ill furnish a statement of the
reasons for non=acce#tance$ %n case of acce#tance& each Member agrees to ma*e an annual re#ort to the
Director=;eneral in accordance -ith Cha#ter C%V$
Article +1$ The 4ealth Assembly shall have authority to ado#t regulations concerning: BaD sanitary and
8uarantine re8uirements and other #rocedures designed to #revent the international s#read of diseaseG
BbD nomenclatures -ith res#ect to diseases& causes of death and #ublic health #racticesG BcD standards
-ith res#ect to diagnostic #rocedures for international useG BdD standards -ith res#ect to the safety&
#urity and #otency of biological& #harmaceutical and similar #roducts moving in international
commerceG BeD advertising and labeling of biological& #harmaceutical and similar #roducts moving in
international commerce$
Article ++$ 0egulations ado#ted #ursuant to Article +1 shall come into force for all Members after due
notice has been given of their ado#tion by the 4ealth Assembly e2ce#t for such Members as may notify
the Director=;eneral of re(ection or reservations -ithin the #eriod stated in the notice$ BEm#hasis
su##liedD
/n the other hand& under Article +>& recommendations of the 34A do not come into force for
members& in the same -ay that conventions or agreements under Article 19 and regulations under
Article +1 come into force$ Article +> of the 34/ Constitution reads:
Article +>$ The 4ealth Assembly shall have authority to ma*e recommendations to Members -ith
res#ect to any matter -ithin the com#etence of the /rganiHation$ BEm#hasis su##liedD
The absence of a #rovision in Article +> of any mechanism by -hich the recommendation -ould come
into force for member states is cons#icuous$
The former 5enior <egal /fficer of 34/& 5ami 5hubber& stated that 34A recommendations are
generally not binding& but they Fcarry moral and #olitical -eight& as they constitute the (udgment on a
health issue of the collective membershi# of the highest international body in the field of health$F+9
Even the %CM)5 itself -as ado#ted as a mere recommendation& as 34A 0esolution 'o$ >$++ states:
FThe Thirty=Fourth 3orld 4ealth Assembly 2 2 2 ado#ts& in the sense of Article +> of the Constitution&
the %nternational Code of Mar*eting of )reastmil* 5ubstitutes anne2ed to the #resent resolution$F
BEm#hasis su##liedD
The %ntroduction to the %CM)5 also reads as follo-s:
%n .anuary 19L1& the E2ecutive )oard of the 3orld 4ealth /rganiHation at its si2ty=seventh session&
considered the fourth draft of the code& endorsed it& and unanimously recommended to the Thirty=fourth
3orld 4ealth Assembly the te2t of a resolution by -hich it -ould ado#t the code in the form of a
recommendation rather than a regulation$ 2 2 2 BEm#hasis su##liedD
The legal value of 34A 0esolutions as recommendations is summariHed in Article !+ of the 34/
Constitution& to -it:
Art$ !+$ Each member shall re#ort annually on the action ta*en -ith res#ect to recommendations made
to it by the /rganiHation& and -ith res#ect to conventions& agreements and regulations$
A##arently& the 34A 0esolution ado#ting the %CM)5 and subse8uent 34A 0esolutions urging
member states to im#lement the %CM)5 are merely recommendatory and legally non=binding$ Thus&
unli*e -hat has been done -ith the %CM)5 -hereby the legislature enacted most of the #rovisions into
la- -hich is the Mil* Code& the subse8uent 34A 0esolutions&>9 s#ecifically #roviding for e2clusive
breastfeeding from 9=! months& continued breastfeeding u# to + months& and absolutely #rohibiting
advertisements and #romotions of breastmil* substitutes& have not been ado#ted as a domestic la-$
%t is #ro#ounded that 34A 0esolutions may constitute Fsoft la-F or non=binding norms& #rinci#les and
#ractices that influence state behavior$>1
F5oft la-F does not fall into any of the categories of international la- set forth in Article >L& Cha#ter %%%
of the 19! 5tatute of the %nternational Court of .ustice$>+ %t is& ho-ever& an e2#ression of non=binding
norms& #rinci#les& and #ractices that influence state behavior$>> Certain declarations and resolutions of
the :' ;eneral Assembly fall under this category$> The most notable is the :' Declaration of
4uman 0ights& -hich this Court has enforced in various cases& s#ecifically& ;overnment of 4ong*ong
5#ecial Administrative 0egion v$ /lalia&>, Me(off v$ Director of "risons&>! Mi(ares v$ 0a?ada>M and
5hangri=la %nternational 4otel Management& <td$ v$ Develo#ers ;rou# of Com#anies& %nc$$>L
The 3orld %ntellectual "ro#erty /rganiHation B3%"/D& a s#ecialiHed agency attached to the :' -ith
the mandate to #romote and #rotect intellectual #ro#erty -orld-ide& has resorted to soft la- as a ra#id
means of norm creation& in order Fto reflect and res#ond to the changing needs and demands of its
constituents$F>9 /ther international organiHations -hich have resorted to soft la- include the
%nternational <abor /rganiHation and the Food and Agriculture /rganiHation Bin the form of the Code2
AlimentariusD$9
34/ has resorted to soft la-$ This -as most evident at the time of the 5evere Acute 0es#iratory
5yndrome B5A05D and Avian flu outbrea*s$
Although the %40 0esolution does not create ne- international la- binding on 34/ member states& it
#rovides an e2cellent e2am#le of the #o-er of Fsoft la-F in international relations$ %nternational
la-yers ty#ically distinguish binding rules of international la-=Fhard la-F=from non=binding norms&
#rinci#les& and #ractices that influence state behavior=Fsoft la-$F 34/ has during its e2istence
generated many soft la- norms& creating a Fsoft la- regimeF in international governance for #ublic
health$
The Fsoft la-F 5A05 and %40 0esolutions re#resent significant ste#s in laying the #olitical
ground-or* for im#roved international coo#eration on infectious diseases$ These resolutions clearly
define 34/ member states@ normative duty to coo#erate fully -ith other countries and -ith 34/ in
connection -ith infectious disease surveillance and res#onse to outbrea*s$
This duty is neither binding nor enforceable& but& in the -a*e of the 5A05 e#idemic& the duty is
#o-erful #olitically for t-o reasons$ First& the 5A05 outbrea* has taught the lesson that #artici#ating
in& and enhancing& international coo#eration on infectious disease controls is in a country@s self=interest
2 2 2 if this -arning is heeded& the Fsoft la-F in the 5A05 and %40 0esolution could inform the
develo#ment of general and consistent state #ractice on infectious disease surveillance and outbrea*
res#onse& #erha#s crystalliHing eventually into customary international la- on infectious disease
#revention and control$1
%n the "hili##ines& the e2ecutive de#artment im#lemented certain measures recommended by 34/ to
address the outbrea*s of 5A05 and Avian flu by issuing E2ecutive /rder BE$/$D 'o$ +91 on A#ril +!&
+99> and E$/$ 'o$ +L9 on February +& +99& delegating to various de#artments broad #o-ers to close
do-n schoolsZestablishments& conduct health surveillance and monitoring& and ban im#ortation of
#oultry and agricultural #roducts$
%t must be em#hasiHed that even under such an international emergency& the duty of a state to
im#lement the %40 0esolution -as still considered not binding or enforceable& although said
resolutions had great #olitical influence$
As #reviously discussed& for an international rule to be considered as customary la-& it must be
established that such rule is being follo-ed by states because they consider it obligatory to com#ly -ith
such rules Bo#inio (urisD$ 0es#ondents have not #resented any evidence to #rove that the 34A
0esolutions& although signed by most of the member states& -ere in fact enforced or #racticed by at
least a ma(ority of the member statesG neither have res#ondents #roven that any com#liance by member
states -ith said 34A 0esolutions -as obligatory in nature$
0es#ondents failed to establish that the #rovisions of #ertinent 34A 0esolutions are customary
international la- that may be deemed #art of the la- of the land$
Conse8uently& legislation is necessary to transform the #rovisions of the 34A 0esolutions into
domestic la-$ The #rovisions of the 34A 0esolutions cannot be considered as #art of the la- of the
land that can be im#lemented by e2ecutive agencies -ithout the need of a la- enacted by the
legislature$
5econd& the Court -ill determine -hether the D/4 may im#lement the #rovisions of the 34A
0esolutions by virtue of its #o-ers and functions under the 0evised Administrative Code even in the
absence of a domestic la-$
5ection >& Cha#ter 1& Title %C of the 0evised Administrative Code of 19LM #rovides that the D/4 shall
define the national health #olicy and im#lement a national health #lan -ithin the frame-or* of the
government@s general #olicies and #lans& and issue orders and regulations concerning the
im#lementation of established health #olicies$
%t is crucial to ascertain -hether the absolute #rohibition on advertising and other forms of #romotion
of breastmil* substitutes #rovided in some 34A 0esolutions has been ado#ted as #art of the national
health #olicy$
0es#ondents submit that the national #olicy on infant and young child feeding is embodied in A$/$ 'o$
+99,=991& dated May +>& +99,$ )asically& the Administrative /rder declared the follo-ing #olicy
guidelines: B1D ideal breastfeeding #ractices& such as early initiation of breastfeeding& e2clusive
breastfeeding for the first si2 months& e2tended breastfeeding u# to t-o years and beyondG B+D
a##ro#riate com#lementary feeding& -hich is to start at age si2 monthsG B>D micronutrient
su##lementationG BD universal salt iodiHationG B,D the e2ercise of other feeding o#tionsG and B!D feeding
in e2ce#tionally difficult circumstances$ %ndeed& the #rimacy of breastfeeding for children is
em#hasiHed as a national health #olicy$ 4o-ever& no-here in A$/$ 'o$ +99,=991 is it declared that as
#art of such health #olicy& the advertisement or #romotion of breastmil* substitutes should be
absolutely #rohibited$
The national #olicy of #rotection& #romotion and su##ort of breastfeeding cannot automatically be
e8uated -ith a total ban on advertising for breastmil* substitutes$
%n vie- of the enactment of the Mil* Code -hich does not contain a total ban on the advertising and
#romotion of breastmil* substitutes& but instead& s#ecifically creates an %AC -hich -ill regulate said
advertising and #romotion& it follo-s that a total ban #olicy could be im#lemented only #ursuant to a
la- amending the Mil* Code #assed by the constitutionally authoriHed branch of government& the
legislature$
Thus& only the #rovisions of the Mil* Code& but not those of subse8uent 34A 0esolutions& can be
validly im#lemented by the D/4 through the sub(ect 0%00$
Third& the Court -ill no- determine -hether the #rovisions of the 0%00 are in accordance -ith those
of the Mil* Code$
%n su##ort of its claim that the 0%00 is inconsistent -ith the Mil* Code& #etitioner alleges the
follo-ing:
1$ The Mil* Code limits its coverage to children 9=1+ months old& but the 0%00 e2tended its coverage
to Fyoung childrenF or those from ages t-o years old and beyond:
M%<R C/DE
0%00
34E0EA5& in order to ensure that safe and ade8uate nutrition for infants is #rovided& there is a need to
#rotect and #romote breastfeeding and to inform the #ublic about the #ro#er use of breastmil*
substitutes and su##lements and related #roducts through ade8uate& consistent and ob(ective
information and a##ro#riate regulation of the mar*eting and distribution of the said substitutes&
su##lements and related #roductsG
5ECT%/' BeD$ F%nfantF means a #erson falling -ithin the age brac*et of 9=1+ months$
5ection +$ "ur#ose 1 These 0evised 0ules and 0egulations are hereby #romulgated to ensure the
#rovision of safe and ade8uate nutrition for infants and young children by the #romotion& #rotection
and su##ort of breastfeeding and by ensuring the #ro#er use of breastmil* substitutes& breastmil*
su##lements and related #roducts -hen these are medically indicated and only -hen necessary& on the
basis of ade8uate information and through a##ro#riate mar*eting and distribution$
5ection ,BffD$ FPoung ChildF means a #erson from the age of more than t-elve B1+D months u# to the
age of three B>D years B>! monthsD$
+$ The Mil* Code recogniHes that infant formula may be a #ro#er and #ossible substitute for breastmil*
in certain instancesG but the 0%00 #rovides Fe2clusive breastfeeding for infants from 9=! monthsF and
declares that Fthere is no substitute nor re#lacement for breastmil*F:
M%<R C/DE
0%00
34E0EA5& in order to ensure that safe and ade8uate nutrition for infants is #rovided& there is a need to
#rotect and #romote breastfeeding and to inform the #ublic about the #ro#er use of breastmil*
substitutes and su##lements and related #roducts through ade8uate& consistent and ob(ective
information and a##ro#riate regulation of the mar*eting and distribution of the said substitutes&
su##lements and related #roductsG
5ection $ Declaration of "rinci#les 1 The follo-ing are the underlying #rinci#les from -hich the
revised rules and regulations are #remised u#on:
a$ E2clusive breastfeeding is for infants from 9 to si2 B!D months$
b$ There is no substitute or re#lacement for breastmil*$
>$ The Mil* Code only regulates and does not im#ose unreasonable re8uirements for advertising and
#romotionG 0%00 im#oses an absolute ban on such activities for breastmil* substitutes intended for
infants from 9=+ months old or beyond& and forbids the use of health and nutritional claims$ 5ection
1> of the 0%00& -hich #rovides for a Ftotal effectF in the #romotion of #roducts -ithin the sco#e of the
Code& is vague:
M%<R C/DE
0%00
5ECT%/' !$ The ;eneral "ublic and Mothers$ 1
BaD 'o advertising& #romotion or other mar*eting materials& -hether -ritten& audio or visual& for
#roducts -ithin the sco#e of this Code shall be #rinted& #ublished& distributed& e2hibited and broadcast
unless such materials are duly authoriHed and a##roved by an inter=agency committee created herein
#ursuant to the a##licable standards #rovided for in this Code$
5ection $ Declaration of "rinci#les 1 The follo-ing are the underlying #rinci#les from -hich the
revised rules and regulations are #remised u#on:
2 2 2 2
f$ Advertising& #romotions& or s#onsor=shi#s of infant formula& breastmil* substitutes and other related
#roducts are #rohibited$
5ection 11$ "rohibition 1 'o advertising& #romotions& s#onsorshi#s& or mar*eting materials and
activities for breastmil* substitutes intended for infants and young children u# to t-enty=four B+D
months& shall be allo-ed& because they tend to convey or give subliminal messages or im#ressions that
undermine breastmil* and breastfeeding or other-ise e2aggerate breastmil* substitutes andZor
re#lacements& as -ell as related #roducts covered -ithin the sco#e of this Code$
5ection 1>$ FTotal EffectF = "romotion of #roducts -ithin the sco#e of this Code must be ob(ective and
should not e8uate or ma*e the #roduct a##ear to be as good or e8ual to breastmil* or breastfeeding in
the advertising conce#t$ %t must not in any case undermine breastmil* or breastfeeding$ The Ftotal
effectF should not directly or indirectly suggest that buying their #roduct -ould #roduce better
individuals& or resulting in greater love& intelligence& ability& harmony or in any manner bring better
health to the baby or other such e2aggerated and unsubstantiated claim$
5ection 1,$ Content of Materials$ = The follo-ing shall not be included in advertising& #romotional and
mar*eting materials:
a$ Te2ts& #ictures& illustrations or information -hich discourage or tend to undermine the benefits or
su#eriority of breastfeeding or -hich idealiHe the use of breastmil* substitutes and mil* su##lements$
%n this connection& no #ictures of babies and children together -ith their mothers& fathers& siblings&
grand#arents& other relatives or caregivers Bor yayasD shall be used in any advertisements for infant
formula and breastmil* su##lementsG
b$ The term FhumaniHed&F FmaternaliHed&F Fclose to mother@s mil*F or similar -ords in describing
breastmil* substitutes or mil* su##lementsG
c$ "ictures or te2ts that idealiHe the use of infant and mil* formula$
5ection 1!$ All health and nutrition claims for #roducts -ithin the sco#e of the Code are absolutely
#rohibited$ For this #ur#ose& any #hrase or -ords that connotes to increase emotional& intellectual
abilities of the infant and young child and other li*e #hrases shall not be allo-ed$
$ The 0%00 im#oses additional labeling re8uirements not found in the Mil* Code:
M%<R C/DE
0%00
5ECT%/' 19$ ContainersZ<abel$ 1
BaD Containers andZor labels shall be designed to #rovide the necessary information about the
a##ro#riate use of the #roducts& and in such a -ay as not to discourage breastfeeding$
BbD Each container shall have a clear& cons#icuous and easily readable and understandable message in
"ili#ino or English #rinted on it& or on a label& -hich message can not readily become se#arated from
it& and -hich shall include the follo-ing #oints:
BiD the -ords F%m#ortant 'oticeF or their e8uivalentG
BiiD a statement of the su#eriority of breastfeedingG
BiiiD a statement that the #roduct shall be used only on the advice of a health -or*er as to the need for
its use and the #ro#er methods of useG and
BivD instructions for a##ro#riate #re#aration& and a -arning against the health haHards of ina##ro#riate
#re#aration$
5ection +!$ Content 1 Each containerZlabel shall contain such message& in both Fili#ino and English
languages& and -hich message cannot be readily se#arated therefrom& relative the follo-ing #oints:
BaD The -ords or #hrase F%m#ortant 'oticeF or F;overnment 3arningF or their e8uivalentG
BbD A statement of the su#eriority of breastfeedingG
BcD A statement that there is no substitute for breastmil*G
BdD A statement that the #roduct shall be used only on the advice of a health -or*er as to the need for its
use and the #ro#er methods of useG
BeD %nstructions for a##ro#riate #re#ara=tion& and a -arning against the health haHards of ina##ro#riate
#re#arationG and
BfD The health haHards of unnecessary or im#ro#er use of infant formula and other related #roducts
including information that #o-dered infant formula may contain #athogenic microorganisms and must
be #re#ared and used a##ro#riately$
,$ The Mil* Code allo-s dissemination of information on infant formula to health #rofessionalsG the
0%00 totally #rohibits such activity:
M%<R C/DE
0%00
5ECT%/' M$ 4ealth Care 5ystem$ 1
BbD 'o facility of the health care system shall be used for the #ur#ose of #romoting infant formula or
other #roducts -ithin the sco#e of this Code$ This Code does not& ho-ever& #reclude the dissemination
of information to health #rofessionals as #rovided in 5ection LBbD$
5ECT%/' L$ 4ealth 3or*ers$ =
BbD %nformation #rovided by manufacturers and distributors to health #rofessionals regarding #roducts
-ithin the sco#e of this Code shall be restricted to scientific and factual matters and such information
shall not im#ly or create a belief that bottle=feeding is e8uivalent or su#erior to breastfeeding$ %t shall
also include the information s#ecified in 5ection ,BbD$
5ection ++$ 'o manufacturer& distributor& or re#resentatives of #roducts covered by the Code shall be
allo-ed to conduct or be involved in any activity on breastfeeding #romotion& education and
#roduction of %nformation& Education and Communication B%ECD materials on breastfeeding& holding of
or #artici#ating as s#ea*ers in classes or seminars for -omen and children activities and to avoid the
use of these venues to mar*et their brands or com#any names$
5ECT%/' 1!$ All health and nutrition claims for #roducts -ithin the sco#e of the Code are absolutely
#rohibited$ For this #ur#ose& any #hrase or -ords that connotes to increase emotional& intellectual
abilities of the infant and young child and other li*e #hrases shall not be allo-ed$
!$ The Mil* Code #ermits mil* manufacturers and distributors to e2tend assistance in research and
continuing education of health #rofessionalsG 0%00 absolutely forbids the same$
M%<R C/DE
0%00
5ECT%/' L$ 4ealth 3or*ers 1
BeD Manufacturers and distributors of #roducts -ithin the sco#e of this Code may assist in the research&
scholarshi#s and continuing education& of health #rofessionals& in accordance -ith the rules and
regulations #romulgated by the Ministry of 4ealth$
5ection $ Declaration of "rinci#les 1
The follo-ing are the underlying #rinci#les from -hich the revised rules and regulations are #remised
u#on:
i$ Mil* com#anies& and their re#resentatives& should not form #art of any #olicyma*ing body or entity
in relation to the advancement of breasfeeding$
5ECT%/' ++$ 'o manufacturer& distributor& or re#resentatives of #roducts covered by the Code shall be
allo-ed to conduct or be involved in any activity on breastfeeding #romotion& education and
#roduction of %nformation& Education and Communication B%ECD materials on breastfeeding& holding of
or #artici#ating as s#ea*ers in classes or seminars for -omen and children activities and to avoid the
use of these venues to mar*et their brands or com#any names$
5ECT%/' >+$ "rimary 0es#onsibility of 4ealth 3or*ers = %t is the #rimary res#onsibility of the health
-or*ers to #romote& #rotect and su##ort breastfeeding and a##ro#riate infant and young child feeding$
"art of this res#onsibility is to continuously u#date their *no-ledge and s*ills on breastfeeding$ 'o
assistance& su##ort& logistics or training from mil* com#anies shall be #ermitted$
M$ The Mil* Code regulates the giving of donationsG 0%00 absolutely #rohibits it$
M%<R C/DE
0%00
5ECT%/' !$ The ;eneral "ublic and Mothers$ 1
BfD 'othing herein contained shall #revent donations from manufacturers and distributors of #roducts
-ithin the sco#e of this Code u#on re8uest by or -ith the a##roval of the Ministry of 4ealth$
5ection ,1$ Donations 3ithin the 5co#e of This Code = Donations of #roducts& materials& defined and
covered under the Mil* Code and these im#lementing rules and regulations& shall be strictly #rohibited$
5ection ,+$ /ther Donations )y Mil* Com#anies 'ot Covered by this Code$ = Donations of #roducts&
e8ui#ments& and the li*e& not other-ise falling -ithin the sco#e of this Code or these 0ules& given by
mil* com#anies and their agents& re#resentatives& -hether in *ind or in cash& may only be coursed
through the %nter Agency Committee B%ACD& -hich shall determine -hether such donation be acce#ted
or other-ise$
L$ The 0%00 #rovides for administrative sanctions not im#osed by the Mil* Code$
M%<R C/DE
0%00

5ection !$ Administrative 5anctions$ 1 The follo-ing administrative sanctions shall be im#osed u#on
any #erson& (uridical or natural& found to have violated the #rovisions of the Code and its im#lementing
0ules and 0egulations:
aD 1st violation 1 3arningG
bD +nd violation 1 Administrative fine of a minimum of Ten Thousand B"19&999$99D to Fifty Thousand
B",9&999$99D "esos& de#ending on the gravity and e2tent of the violation& including the recall of the
offending #roductG
cD >rd violation 1 Administrative Fine of a minimum of 5i2ty Thousand B"!9&999$99D to /ne 4undred
Fifty Thousand B"1,9&999$99D "esos& de#ending on the gravity and e2tent of the violation& and in
addition thereto& the recall of the offending #roduct& and sus#ension of the Certificate of "roduct
0egistration BC"0DG
dD th violation 1Administrative Fine of a minimum of T-o 4undred Thousand B"+99&999$99D to Five
4undred B",99&999$99D Thousand "esos& de#ending on the gravity and e2tent of the violationG and in
addition thereto& the recall of the #roduct& revocation of the C"0& sus#ension of the <icense to /#erate
B<T/D for one yearG
eD ,th and succeeding re#eated violations 1 Administrative Fine of /ne Million B"1&999&999$99D "esos&
the recall of the offending #roduct& cancellation of the C"0& revocation of the <icense to /#erate B<T/D
of the com#any concerned& including the blac*listing of the com#any to be furnished the De#artment of
)udget and Management BD)MD and the De#artment of Trade and %ndustry BDT%DG
fD An additional #enalty of T-o Thou=sand Five 4undred B"+&,99$99D "esos #er day shall be made for
every day the violation continues after having received the order from the %AC or other such
a##ro#riate body& notifying and #enaliHing the com#any for the infraction$
For #ur#oses of determining -hether or not there is Fre#eatedF violation& each #roduct violation
belonging or o-ned by a com#any& including those of their subsidiaries& are deemed to be violations of
the concerned mil* com#any and shall not be based on the s#ecific violating #roduct alone$
9$ The 0%00 #rovides for re#eal of e2isting la-s to the contrary$
The Court shall resolve the merits of the allegations of #etitioner seriatim$
1$ "etitioner is mista*en in its claim that the Mil* Code@s coverage is limited only to children 9=1+
months old$ 5ection > of the Mil* Code states:
5ECT%/' >$ 5co#e of the Code 1 The Code a##lies to the mar*eting& and #ractices related thereto& of
the follo-ing #roducts: breastmil* substitutes& including infant formulaG other mil* #roducts& foods and
beverages& including bottle=fed com#lementary foods& -hen mar*eted or other-ise re#resented to be
suitable& -ith or -ithout modification& for use as a #artial or total re#lacement of breastmil*G feeding
bottles and teats$ %t also a##lies to their 8uality and availability& and to information concerning their
use$
Clearly& the coverage of the Mil* Code is not de#endent on the age of the child but on the *ind of
#roduct being mar*eted to the #ublic$ The la- treats infant formula& bottle=fed com#lementary food&
and breastmil* substitute as se#arate and distinct #roduct categories$
5ection BhD of the Mil* Code defines infant formula as Fa breastmil* substitute 2 2 2 to satisfy the
normal nutritional re8uirements of infants u# to bet-een four to si2 months of age& and ada#ted to their
#hysiological characteristicsFG -hile under 5ection BbD& bottle=fed com#lementary food refers to Fany
food& -hether manufactured or locally #re#ared& suitable as a com#lement to breastmil* or infant
formula& -hen either becomes insufficient to satisfy the nutritional re8uirements of the infant$F An
infant under 5ection BeD is a #erson falling -ithin the age brac*et 9=1+ months$ %t is the nourishment
of this grou# of infants or children aged 9=1+ months that is sought to be #romoted and #rotected by the
Mil* Code$
)ut there is another target grou#$ )reastmil* substitute is defined under 5ection BaD as Fany food being
mar*eted or other-ise #resented as a #artial or total re#lacement for breastmil*& -hether or not suitable
for that #ur#ose$F This section cons#icuously lac*s reference to any #articular age=grou# of children$
4ence& the #rovision of the Mil* Code cannot be considered e2clusive for children aged 9=1+ months$
%n other -ords& breastmil* substitutes may also be intended for young children more than 1+ months of
age$ Therefore& by regulating breastmil* substitutes& the Mil* Code also intends to #rotect and #romote
the nourishment of children more than 1+ months old$
Evidently& as long as -hat is being mar*eted falls -ithin the sco#e of the Mil* Code as #rovided in
5ection >& then it can be sub(ect to regulation #ursuant to said la-& even if the #roduct is to be used by
children aged over 1+ months$
There is& therefore& nothing ob(ectionable -ith 5ections ++ and ,BffD> of the 0%00$
+$ %t is also incorrect for #etitioner to say that the 0%00& unli*e the Mil* Code& does not recogniHe that
breastmil* substitutes may be a #ro#er and #ossible substitute for breastmil*$
The entirety of the 0%00& not merely truncated #ortions thereof& must be considered and construed
together$ As held in De <una v$ "ascual& FNtOhe #articular -ords& clauses and #hrases in the 0ule
should not be studied as detached and isolated e2#ressions& but the -hole and every #art thereof must
be considered in fi2ing the meaning of any of its #arts and in order to #roduce a harmonious -hole$F
5ection M of the 0%00 #rovides that F-hen medically indicated and only -hen necessary& the use of
breastmil* substitutes is #ro#er if based on com#lete and u#dated information$F 5ection L of the 0%00
also states that information and educational materials should include information on the #ro#er use of
infant formula -hen the use thereof is needed$
4ence& the 0%00& (ust li*e the Mil* Code& also recogniHes that in certain cases& the use of breastmil*
substitutes may be #ro#er$
>$ The Court shall ascertain the merits of allegations >, and ! together as they are interlin*ed -ith
each other$
To resolve the 8uestion of -hether the labeling re8uirements and advertising regulations under the
0%00 are valid& it is im#ortant to deal first -ith the nature& #ur#ose& and de#th of the regulatory #o-ers
of the D/4& as defined in general under the 19LM Administrative Code&M and as delegated in #articular
under the Mil* Code$
4ealth is a legitimate sub(ect matter for regulation by the D/4 Band certain other administrative
agenciesD in e2ercise of #olice #o-ers delegated to it$ The sheer s#an of (uris#rudence on that matter
#recludes the need to further discuss it$$L 4o-ever& health information& #articularly advertising
materials on a##arently non=to2ic #roducts li*e breastmil* substitutes and su##lements& is a relatively
ne- area for regulation by the D/4$9
As early as the 191M 0evised Administrative Code of the "hili##ine %slands&,9 health information -as
already -ithin the ambit of the regulatory #o-ers of the #redecessor of D/4$,1 5ection 9>L thereof
charged it -ith the duty to #rotect the health of the #eo#le& and vested it -ith such #o-ers as FBgD the
dissemination of hygienic information among the #eo#le and es#ecially the inculcation of *no-ledge
as to the #ro#er care of infants and the methods of #reventing and combating dangerous communicable
diseases$F
5eventy years later& the 19LM Administrative Code tas*ed res#ondent D/4 to carry out the state #olicy
#ronounced under 5ection 1,& Article %% of the 19LM Constitution& -hich is Fto #rotect and #romote the
right to health of the #eo#le and instill health consciousness among them$F,+ To that end& it -as
granted under 5ection > of the Administrative Code the #o-er to FB!D #ro#agate health information and
educate the #o#ulation on im#ortant health& medical and environmental matters -hich have health
im#lications$F,>
3hen it comes to information regarding nutrition of infants and young children& ho-ever& the Mil*
Code s#ecifically delegated to the Ministry of 4ealth Bhereinafter referred to as D/4D the #o-er to
ensure that there is ade8uate& consistent and ob(ective information on breastfeeding and use of
breastmil* substitutes& su##lements and related #roductsG and the #o-er to control such information$
These are e2#ressly #rovided for in 5ections 1+ and ,BaD& to -it:
5ECT%/' 1+$ %m#lementation and Monitoring 1
2 2 2 2
BbD The Ministry of 4ealth shall be #rinci#ally res#onsible for the im#lementation and enforcement of
the #rovisions of this Code$ For this #ur#ose& the Ministry of 4ealth shall have the follo-ing #o-ers
and functions:
B1D To #romulgate such rules and regulations as are necessary or #ro#er for the im#lementation of this
Code and the accom#lishment of its #ur#oses and ob(ectives$
2 2 2 2
BD To e2ercise such other #o-ers and functions as may be necessary for or incidental to the attainment
of the #ur#oses and ob(ectives of this Code$
5ECT%/' ,$ %nformation and Education 1
BaD The government shall ensure that ob(ective and consistent information is #rovided on infant
feeding& for use by families and those involved in the field of infant nutrition$ This res#onsibility shall
cover the #lanning& #rovision& design and dissemination of information& and the control thereof& on
infant nutrition$ BEm#hasis su##liedD
Further& D/4 is authoriHed by the Mil* Code to control the content of any information on breastmil*
vis=o=vis breastmil* substitutes& su##lement and related #roducts& in the follo-ing manner:
5ECT%/' ,$ 2 2 2
BbD %nformational and educational materials& -hether -ritten& audio& or visual& dealing -ith the feeding
of infants and intended to reach #regnant -omen and mothers of infants& shall include clear information
on all the follo-ing #oints: B1D the benefits and su#eriority of breastfeedingG B+D maternal nutrition& and
the #re#aration for and maintenance of breastfeedingG B>D the negative effect on breastfeeding of
introducing #artial bottlefeedingG BD the difficulty of reversing the decision not to breastfeedG and B,D
-here needed& the #ro#er use of infant formula& -hether manufactured industrially or home=#re#ared$
3hen such materials contain information about the use of infant formula& they shall include the social
and financial im#lications of its useG the health haHards of ina##ro#riate foods or feeding methodsG and&
in #articular& the health haHards of unnecessary or im#ro#er use of infant formula and other breastmil*
substitutes$ 5uch materials shall not use any #icture or te2t -hich may idealiHe the use of breastmil*
substitutes$
5ECT%/' L$ 4ealth 3or*ers 1
2 2 2 2
BbD %nformation #rovided by manufacturers and distributors to health #rofessionals regarding #roducts
-ithin the sco#e of this Code shall be restricted to scientific and factual matters& and such information
shall not im#ly or create a belief that bottlefeeding is e8uivalent or su#erior to breastfeeding$ %t shall
also include the information s#ecified in 5ection ,BbD$
5ECT%/' 19$ ContainersZ<abel 1
BaD Containers andZor labels shall be designed to #rovide the necessary information about the
a##ro#riate use of the #roducts& and in such a -ay as not to discourage breastfeeding$
2 2 2 2
BdD The term FhumaniHed&F FmaternaliHedF or similar terms shall not be used$ BEm#hasis su##liedD
The D/4 is also authoriHed to control the #ur#ose of the information and to -hom such information
may be disseminated under 5ections ! through 9 of the Mil* Code, to ensure that the information that
-ould reach #regnant -omen& mothers of infants& and health #rofessionals and -or*ers in the health
care system is restricted to scientific and factual matters and shall not im#ly or create a belief that
bottlefeeding is e8uivalent or su#erior to breastfeeding$
%t bears em#hasis& ho-ever& that the D/4@s #o-er under the Mil* Code to control information
regarding breastmil* vis=a=vis breastmil* substitutes is not absolute as the #o-er to control does not
encom#ass the #o-er to absolutely #rohibit the advertising& mar*eting& and #romotion of breastmil*
substitutes$
The follo-ing are the #rovisions of the Mil* Code that une8uivocally indicate that the control over
information given to the D/4 is not absolute and that absolute #rohibition is not contem#lated by the
Code:
aD 5ection + -hich re8uires ade8uate information and a##ro#riate mar*eting and distribution of
breastmil* substitutes& to -it:
5ECT%/' +$ Aim of the Code 1 The aim of the Code is to contribute to the #rovision of safe and
ade8uate nutrition for infants by the #rotection and #romotion of breastfeeding and by ensuring the
#ro#er use of breastmil* substitutes and breastmil* su##lements -hen these are necessary& on the basis
of ade8uate information and through a##ro#riate mar*eting and distribution$
bD 5ection > -hich s#ecifically states that the Code a##lies to the mar*eting of and #ractices related to
breastmil* substitutes& including infant formula& and to information concerning their useG
cD 5ection ,BaD -hich #rovides that the government shall ensure that ob(ective and consistent
information is #rovided on infant feedingG
dD 5ection ,BbD -hich #rovides that -ritten& audio or visual informational and educational materials
shall not use any #icture or te2t -hich may idealiHe the use of breastmil* substitutes and should include
information on the health haHards of unnecessary or im#ro#er use of said #roductG
eD 5ection !BaD in relation to 5ection 1+BaD -hich creates and em#o-ers the %AC to revie- and e2amine
advertising& #romotion& and other mar*eting materialsG
fD 5ection LBbD -hich states that mil* com#anies may #rovide information to health #rofessionals but
such information should be restricted to factual and scientific matters and shall not im#ly or create a
belief that bottlefeeding is e8uivalent or su#erior to breastfeedingG and
gD 5ection 19 -hich #rovides that containers or labels should not contain information that -ould
discourage breastfeeding and idealiHe the use of infant formula$
%t is in this conte2t that the Court no- e2amines the assailed #rovisions of the 0%00 regarding labeling
and advertising$
5ections 1>,, on Ftotal effectF and +!,! of 0ule V%% of the 0%00 contain some labeling re8uirements&
s#ecifically: aD that there be a statement that there is no substitute to breastmil*G and bD that there be a
statement that #o-dered infant formula may contain #athogenic microorganisms and must be #re#ared
and used a##ro#riately$ 5ection 1!,M of the 0%00 #rohibits all health and nutrition claims for #roducts
-ithin the sco#e of the Mil* Code& such as claims of increased emotional and intellectual abilities of
the infant and young child$
These re8uirements and limitations are consistent -ith the #rovisions of 5ection L of the Mil* Code& to
-it:
5ECT%/' L$ 4ealth -or*ers =
2 2 2 2
BbD %nformation #rovided by manufacturers and distributors to health #rofessionals regarding #roducts
-ithin the sco#e of this Code shall be restricted to scientific and factual matters& and such information
shall not im#ly or create a belief that bottlefeeding is e8uivalent or su#erior to breastfeeding$ %t shall
also include the information s#ecified in 5ection ,$,L BEm#hasis su##liedD
and 5ection 19BdD,9 -hich bars the use on containers and labels of the terms FhumaniHed&F
FmaternaliHed&F or similar terms$
These #rovisions of the Mil* Code e2#ressly forbid information that -ould im#ly or create a belief that
there is any mil* #roduct e8uivalent to breastmil* or -hich is humaniHed or maternaliHed& as such
information -ould be inconsistent -ith the su#eriority of breastfeeding$
%t may be argued that 5ection L of the Mil* Code refers only to information given to health -or*ers
regarding breastmil* substitutes& not to containers and labels thereof$ 4o-ever& such restrictive
a##lication of 5ection LBbD -ill result in the absurd situation in -hich mil* com#anies and distributors
are forbidden to claim to health -or*ers that their #roducts are substitutes or e8uivalents of breastmil*&
and yet be allo-ed to dis#lay on the containers and labels of their #roducts the e2act o##osite message$
That as*e-ed inter#retation of the Mil* Code is #recisely -hat 5ection ,BaD thereof see*s to avoid by
mandating that all information regarding breastmil* vis=a=vis breastmil* substitutes be consistent& at the
same time giving the government control over #lanning& #rovision& design& and dissemination of
information on infant feeding$
Thus& 5ection +!BcD of the 0%00 -hich re8uires containers and labels to state that the #roduct offered is
not a substitute for breastmil*& is a reasonable means of enforcing 5ection LBbD of the Mil* Code and
deterring circumvention of the #rotection and #romotion of breastfeeding as embodied in 5ection +!9
of the Mil* Code$
5ection +!BfD!1 of the 0%00 is an e8ually reasonable labeling re8uirement$ %t im#lements 5ection ,BbD
of the Mil* Code -hich reads:
5ECT%/' ,$ 2 2 2
2 2 2 2
BbD %nformational and educational materials& -hether -ritten& audio& or visual& dealing -ith the feeding
of infants and intended to reach #regnant -omen and mothers of infants& shall include clear information
on all the follo-ing #oints: 2 2 2 B,D -here needed& the #ro#er use of infant formula& -hether
manufactured industrially or home=#re#ared$ 3hen such materials contain information about the use of
infant formula& they shall include the social and financial im#lications of its useG the health haHards of
ina##ro#riate foods or feeding methodsG and& in #articular& the health haHards of unnecessary or
im#ro#er use of infant formula and other breastmil* substitutes$ 5uch materials shall not use any
#icture or te2t -hich may idealiHe the use of breastmil* substitutes$ BEm#hasis su##liedD
The label of a #roduct contains information about said #roduct intended for the buyers thereof$ The
buyers of breastmil* substitutes are mothers of infants& and 5ection +! of the 0%00 merely adds a fair
-arning about the li*elihood of #athogenic microorganisms being #resent in infant formula and other
related #roducts -hen these are #re#ared and used ina##ro#riately$
"etitionerhs counsel has admitted during the hearing on .une 19& +99M that formula mil* is #rone to
contaminations and there is as yet no technology that allo-s #roduction of #o-dered infant formula
that eliminates all forms of contamination$!+
%neluctably& the re8uirement under 5ection +!BfD of the 0%00 for the label to contain the message
regarding health haHards including the #ossibility of contamination -ith #athogenic microorganisms is
in accordance -ith 5ection ,BbD of the Mil* Code$
The authority of D/4 to control information regarding breastmil* vis=a=vis breastmil* substitutes and
su##lements and related #roducts cannot be 8uestioned$ %t is its intervention into the area of
advertising& #romotion& and mar*eting that is being assailed by #etitioner$
%n furtherance of 5ection !BaD of the Mil* Code& to -it:
5ECT%/' !$ The ;eneral "ublic and Mothers$ 1
BaD 'o advertising& #romotion or other mar*eting materials& -hether -ritten& audio or visual& for
#roducts -ithin the sco#e of this Code shall be #rinted& #ublished& distributed& e2hibited and broadcast
unless such materials are duly authoriHed and a##roved by an inter=agency committee created herein
#ursuant to the a##licable standards #rovided for in this Code$
the Mil* Code invested regulatory authority over advertising& #romotional and mar*eting materials to
an %AC& thus:
5ECT%/' 1+$ %m#lementation and Monitoring =
BaD For #ur#oses of 5ection !BaD of this Code& an inter=agency committee com#osed of the follo-ing
members is hereby created:
Minister of 4ealth
===================
Chairman
Minister of Trade and %ndustry
===================
Member
Minister of .ustice
===================
Member
Minister of 5ocial 5ervices and Develo#ment
===================
Member
The members may designate their duly authoriHed re#resentative to every meeting of the Committee$
The Committee shall have the follo-ing #o-ers and functions:
B1D To revie- and e2amine all advertising$ #romotion or other mar*eting materials& -hether -ritten&
audio or visual& on #roducts -ithin the sco#e of this CodeG
B+D To a##rove or disa##rove& delete ob(ectionable #ortions from and #rohibit the #rinting& #ublication&
distribution& e2hibition and broadcast of& all advertising #romotion or other mar*eting materials&
-hether -ritten& audio or visual& on #roducts -ithin the sco#e of this CodeG
B>D To #rescribe the internal and o#erational #rocedure for the e2ercise of its #o-ers and functions as
-ell as the #erformance of its duties and res#onsibilitiesG and
BD To #romulgate such rules and regulations as are necessary or #ro#er for the im#lementation of
5ection !BaD of this Code$ 2 2 2 BEm#hasis su##liedD
4o-ever& 5ection 11 of the 0%00& to -it:
5ECT%/' 11$ "rohibition 1 'o advertising& #romotions& s#onsorshi#s& or mar*eting materials and
activities for breastmil* substitutes intended for infants and young children u# to t-enty=four B+D
months& shall be allo-ed& because they tend to convey or give subliminal messages or im#ressions that
undermine breastmil* and breastfeeding or other-ise e2aggerate breastmil* substitutes andZor
re#lacements& as -ell as related #roducts covered -ithin the sco#e of this Code$
#rohibits advertising& #romotions& s#onsorshi#s or mar*eting materials and activities for breastmil*
substitutes in line -ith the 0%00hs declaration of #rinci#le under 5ection BfD& to -it:
5ECT%/' $ Declaration of "rinci#les 1
2 2 2 2
BfD Advertising& #romotions& or s#onsorshi#s of infant formula& breastmil* substitutes and other related
#roducts are #rohibited$
The D/4& through its co=res#ondents& evidently arrogated to itself not only the regulatory authority
given to the %AC but also im#osed absolute #rohibition on advertising& #romotion& and mar*eting$
Pet& oddly enough& 5ection 1+ of the 0%00 reiterated the re8uirement of the Mil* Code in 5ection !
thereof for #rior a##roval by %AC of all advertising& mar*eting and #romotional materials #rior to
dissemination$
Even res#ondents& through the /5;& ac*no-ledged the authority of %AC& and re#eatedly insisted&
during the oral arguments on .une 19& +99M& that the #rohibition under 5ection 11 is not actually
o#erational& viH:
5/<%C%T/0 ;E'E0A< DEVA'ADE0A:
2 2 2 2
2 2 2 'o-& the cru2 of the matter that is being 8uestioned by "etitioner is -hether or not there is an
absolute #rohibition on advertising ma*ing A/ +99!=1+ unconstitutional$ 3e maintained that -hat A/
+99!=1+ #rovides is not an absolute #rohibition because 5ection 11 -hile it states and it is entitled
#rohibition it states that no advertising& #romotion& s#onsorshi# or mar*eting materials and activities
for breast mil* substitutes intended for infants and young children u# to + months shall be allo-ed
because this is the standard they tend to convey or give subliminal messages or im#ression undermine
that breastmil* or breastfeeding 2 2 2$
3e have to read 5ection 11 together -ith the other 5ections because the other 5ection& 5ection 1+&
#rovides for the inter agency committee that is em#o-ered to #rocess and evaluate all the advertising
and #romotion materials$
2 2 2 2
3hat A/ +99!=1+& -hat it does& it does not #rohibit the sale and manufacture& it sim#ly regulates the
advertisement and the #romotions of breastfeeding mil* substitutes$
2 2 2 2
'o-& the #rohibition on advertising& Pour 4onor& must be ta*en together -ith the #rovision on the
%nter=Agency Committee that #rocesses and evaluates because there may be some information
dissemination that are straight for-ard information dissemination$ 3hat the A/ +99! is trying to
#revent is any material that -ill undermine the #ractice of breastfeeding& Pour 4onor$
2 2 2 2
A55/C%ATE .:5T%CE 5A'T%A;/:
Madam 5olicitor ;eneral& under the Mil* Code& -hich body has authority or #o-er to #romulgate
0ules and 0egulations regarding the Advertising& "romotion and Mar*eting of )reastmil* 5ubstitutesQ
5/<%C%T/0 ;E'E0A< DEVA'ADE0A:
Pour 4onor& #lease& it is #rovided that the %nter=Agency Committee& Pour 4onor$
2 2 2 2
A55/C%ATE .:5T%CE 5A'T%A;/:
2 2 2 Don@t you thin* that the De#artment of 4ealth overste##ed its rule ma*ing authority -hen it
totally banned advertising and #romotion under 5ection 11 #rescribed the total effect rule as -ell as the
content of materials under 5ection 1> and 1, of the rules and regulationsQ
5/<%C%T/0 ;E'E0A< DEVA'ADE0A:
Pour 4onor& #lease& first -e -ould li*e to stress that there is no total absolute ban$ 5econd& the %nter=
Agency Committee is under the De#artment of 4ealth& Pour 4onor$
2 2 2 2
A55/C%ATE .:5T%CE 'AAA0%/:
2 2 2 Did % hear you correctly& Madam 5olicitor& that there is no absolute ban on advertising of
breastmil* substitutes in the 0evised 0ulesQ
5/<%C%T/0 ;E'E0A< DEVA'ADE0A:
Pes& your 4onor$
A55/C%ATE .:5T%CE 'AAA0%/:
)ut& -ould you nevertheless agree that there is an absolute ban on advertising of breastmil* substitutes
intended for children t-o B+D years old and youngerQ
5/<%C%T/0 ;E'E0A< DEVA'ADE0A:
%t@s not an absolute ban& Pour 4onor& because -e have the %nter=Agency Committee that can evaluate
some advertising and #romotional materials& sub(ect to the standards that -e have stated earlier& -hich
are= they should not undermine breastfeeding& Pour 4onor$
2 2 2 2
2 2 2 5ection 11& -hile it is titled "rohibition& it must be ta*en in relation -ith the other 5ections&
#articularly 1+ and 1> and 1,& Pour 4onor& because it is recogniHed that the %nter=Agency Committee
has that #o-er to evaluate #romotional materials& Pour 4onor$
A55/C%ATE .:5T%CE 'AAA0%/:
5o in short& -ill you #lease clarify there@s no absolute ban on advertisement regarding mil* substitute
regarding infants t-o B+D years belo-Q
5/<%C%T/0 ;E'E0A< DEVA'ADE0A:
3e can #roudly say that the general rule is that there is a #rohibition& ho-ever& -e ta*e e2ce#tions and
standards have been set$ /ne of -hich is that& the %nter=Agency Committee can allo- if the advertising
and #romotions -ill not undermine breastmil* and breastfeeding& Pour 4onor$!>
5ections 11 and BfD of the 0%00 are clearly violative of the Mil* Code$
4o-ever& although it is the %AC -hich is authoriHed to #romulgate rules and regulations for the
a##roval or re(ection of advertising& #romotional& or other mar*eting materials under 5ection 1+BaD of
the Mil* Code& said #rovision must be related to 5ection ! thereof -hich in turn #rovides that the rules
and regulations must be F#ursuant to the a##licable standards #rovided for in this Code$F 5aid standards
are set forth in 5ections ,BbD& LBbD& and 19 of the Code& -hich& at the ris* of being re#etitious& and for
easy reference& are 8uoted hereunder:
5ECT%/' ,$ %nformation and Education 1
2 2 2 2
BbD %nformational and educational materials& -hether -ritten& audio& or visual& dealing -ith the feeding
of infants and intended to reach #regnant -omen and mothers of infants& shall include clear information
on all the follo-ing #oints: B1D the benefits and su#eriority of breastfeedingG B+D maternal nutrition& and
the #re#aration for and maintenance of breastfeedingG B>D the negative effect on breastfeeding of
introducing #artial bottlefeedingG BD the difficulty of reversing the decision not to breastfeedG and B,D
-here needed& the #ro#er use of infant formula& -hether manufactured industrially or home=#re#ared$
3hen such materials contain information about the use of infant formula& they shall include the social
and financial im#lications of its useG the health haHards of ina##ro#riate foods of feeding methodsG and&
in #articular& the health haHards of unnecessary or im#ro#er use of infant formula and other breastmil*
substitutes$ 5uch materials shall not use any #icture or te2t -hich may idealiHe the use of breastmil*
substitutes$
2 2 2 2
5ECT%/' L$ 4ealth 3or*ers$ 1
2 2 2 2
BbD %nformation #rovided by manufacturers and distributors to health #rofessionals regarding #roducts
-ithin the sco#e of this Code shall be restricted to scientific and factual matters and such information
shall not im#ly or create a belief that bottle feeding is e8uivalent or su#erior to breastfeeding$ %t shall
also include the information s#ecified in 5ection ,BbD$
2 2 2 2
5ECT%/' 19$ ContainersZ<abel 1
BaD Containers andZor labels shall be designed to #rovide the necessary information about the
a##ro#riate use of the #roducts& and in such a -ay as not to discourage breastfeeding$
BbD Each container shall have a clear& cons#icuous and easily readable and understandable message in
"ili#ino or English #rinted on it& or on a label& -hich message can not readily become se#arated from
it& and -hich shall include the follo-ing #oints:
BiD the -ords F%m#ortant 'oticeF or their e8uivalentG
BiiD a statement of the su#eriority of breastfeedingG
BiiiD a statement that the #roduct shall be used only on the advice of a health -or*er as to the need for
its use and the #ro#er methods of useG and
BivD instructions for a##ro#riate #re#aration& and a -arning against the health haHards of ina##ro#riate
#re#aration$
5ection 1+BbD of the Mil* Code designates the D/4 as the #rinci#al im#lementing agency for the
enforcement of the #rovisions of the Code$ %n relation to such res#onsibility of the D/4& 5ection ,BaD
of the Mil* Code states that:
5ECT%/' ,$ %nformation and Education 1
BaD The government shall ensure that ob(ective and consistent information is #rovided on infant
feeding& for use by families and those involved in the field of infant nutrition$ This res#onsibility shall
cover the #lanning& #rovision& design and dissemination of information& and the control thereof& on
infant nutrition$ BEm#hasis su##liedD
Thus& the D/4 has the significant res#onsibility to translate into o#erational terms the standards set
forth in 5ections ,& L& and 19 of the Mil* Code& by -hich the %AC shall screen advertising&
#romotional& or other mar*eting materials$
%t is #ursuant to such res#onsibility that the D/4 correctly #rovided for 5ection 1> in the 0%00 -hich
reads as follo-s:
5ECT%/' 1>$ FTotal EffectF = "romotion of #roducts -ithin the sco#e of this Code must be ob(ective
and should not e8uate or ma*e the #roduct a##ear to be as good or e8ual to breastmil* or breastfeeding
in the advertising conce#t$ %t must not in any case undermine breastmil* or breastfeeding$ The Ftotal
effectF should not directly or indirectly suggest that buying their #roduct -ould #roduce better
individuals& or resulting in greater love& intelligence& ability& harmony or in any manner bring better
health to the baby or other such e2aggerated and unsubstantiated claim$
5uch standards bind the %AC in formulating its rules and regulations on advertising& #romotion& and
mar*eting$ Through that single #rovision& the D/4 e2ercises control over the information content of
advertising& #romotional and mar*eting materials on breastmil* vis=a=vis breastmil* substitutes&
su##lements and other related #roducts$ %t also sets a viable standard against -hich the %AC may screen
such materials before they are made #ublic$
%n E8ui=Asia "lacement& %nc$ vs$ De#artment of Foreign Affairs&! the Court held:
2 2 2 NTOhis Court had& in the #ast& acce#ted as sufficient standards the follo-ing: F#ublic interest&F
F(ustice and e8uity&F F#ublic convenience and -elfare&F and Fsim#licity& economy and -elfare$F!,
%n this case& correct information as to infant feeding and nutrition is infused -ith #ublic interest and
-elfare$
$ 3ith regard to activities for dissemination of information to health #rofessionals& the Court also finds
that there is no inconsistency bet-een the #rovisions of the Mil* Code and the 0%00$ 5ection MBbD!! of
the Mil* Code& in relation to 5ection LBbD!M of the same Code& allo-s dissemination of information to
health #rofessionals but such information is restricted to scientific and factual matters$
Contrary to #etitioner@s claim& 5ection ++ of the 0%00 does not #rohibit the giving of information to
health #rofessionals on scientific and factual matters$ 3hat it #rohibits is the involvement of the
manufacturer and distributor of the #roducts covered by the Code in activities for the #romotion&
education and #roduction of %nformation& Education and Communication B%ECD materials regarding
breastfeeding that are intended for -omen and children$ 5aid #rovision cannot be construed to
encom#ass even the dissemination of information to health #rofessionals& as restricted by the Mil*
Code$
,$ 'e2t& #etitioner alleges that 5ection LBeD!L of the Mil* Code #ermits mil* manufacturers and
distributors to e2tend assistance in research and in the continuing education of health #rofessionals&
-hile 5ections ++ and >+ of the 0%00 absolutely forbid the same$ "etitioner also assails 5ection BiD!9
of the 0%00 #rohibiting mil* manufacturers@ and distributors@ #artici#ation in any #olicyma*ing body in
relation to the advancement of breastfeeding$
5ection BiD of the 0%00 #rovides that mil* com#anies and their re#resentatives should not form #art of
any #olicyma*ing body or entity in relation to the advancement of breastfeeding$ The Court finds
nothing in said #rovisions -hich contravenes the Mil* Code$ 'ote that under 5ection 1+BbD of the Mil*
Code& it is the D/4 -hich shall be #rinci#ally res#onsible for the im#lementation and enforcement of
the #rovisions of said Code$ %t is entirely u# to the D/4 to decide -hich entities to call u#on or allo-
to be #art of #olicyma*ing bodies on breastfeeding$ Therefore& the 0%00@s #rohibition on mil*
com#aniesh #artici#ation in any #olicyma*ing body in relation to the advancement of breastfeeding is
in accord -ith the Mil* Code$
"etitioner is also mista*en in arguing that 5ection ++ of the 0%00 #rohibits mil* com#anies from
giving reasearch assistance and continuing education to health #rofessionals$ 5ection ++M9 of the 0%00
does not #ertain to research assistance to or the continuing education of health #rofessionalsG rather& it
deals -ith breastfeeding #romotion and education for -omen and children$ 'othing in 5ection ++ of
the 0%00 #rohibits mil* com#anies from giving assistance for research or continuing education to
health #rofessionalsG hence& #etitioner@s argument against this #articular #rovision must be struc* do-n$
%t is 5ections 9M1 and 19M+ of the 0%00 -hich govern research assistance$ 5aid sections of the 0%00
#rovide that research assistance for health -or*ers and researchers may be allo-ed u#on a##roval of an
ethics committee& and -ith certain disclosure re8uirements im#osed on the mil* com#any and on the
reci#ient of the research a-ard$
The Mil* Code endo-s the D/4 -ith the #o-er to determine ho- such research or educational
assistance may be given by mil* com#anies or under -hat conditions health -or*ers may acce#t the
assistance$ Thus& 5ections 9 and 19 of the 0%00 im#osing limitations on the *ind of research done or
e2tent of assistance given by mil* com#anies are com#letely in accord -ith the Mil* Code$
"etitioner com#lains that 5ection >+M> of the 0%00 #rohibits mil* com#anies from giving assistance&
su##ort& logistics or training to health -or*ers$ This #rovision is -ithin the #rerogative given to the
D/4 under 5ection LBeDM of the Mil* Code& -hich #rovides that manufacturers and distributors of
breastmil* substitutes may assist in researches& scholarshi#s and the continuing education& of health
#rofessionals in accordance -ith the rules and regulations #romulgated by the Ministry of 4ealth& no-
D/4$
!$ As to the 0%00@s #rohibition on donations& said #rovisions are also consistent -ith the Mil* Code$
5ection !BfD of the Mil* Code #rovides that donations may be made by manufacturers and distributors
of breastmil* substitutes u#on the re8uest or -ith the a##roval of the D/4$ The la- does not #roscribe
the refusal of donations$ The Mil* Code leaves it #urely to the discretion of the D/4 -hether to
re8uest or acce#t such donations$ The D/4 then a##ro#riately e2ercised its discretion through 5ection
,1M, of the 0%00 -hich sets forth its #olicy not to re8uest or a##rove donations from manufacturers
and distributors of breastmil* substitutes$
%t -as -ithin the discretion of the D/4 -hen it #rovided in 5ection ,+ of the 0%00 that any donation
from mil* com#anies not covered by the Code should be coursed through the %AC -hich shall
determine -hether such donation should be acce#ted or refused$ As reasoned out by res#ondents& the
D/4 is not mandated by the Mil* Code to acce#t donations$ For that matter& no #erson or entity can be
forced to acce#t a donation$ There is& therefore& no real inconsistency bet-een the 0%00 and the la-
because the Mil* Code does not #rohibit the D/4 from refusing donations$
M$ 3ith regard to 5ection ! of the 0%00 #roviding for administrative sanctions that are not found in
the Mil* Code& the Court u#holds #etitioner@s ob(ection thereto$
0es#ondent@s reliance on Civil Aeronautics )oard v$ "hili##ine Air <ines& %nc$M! is mis#laced$ The
glaring difference in said case and the #resent case before the Court is that& in the Civil Aeronautics
)oard& the Civil Aeronautics Administration BCAAD -as e2#ressly granted by the la- B0$A$ 'o$ MM!D
the #o-er to im#ose fines and civil #enalties& -hile the Civil Aeronautics )oard BCA)D -as granted by
the same la- the #o-er to revie- on a##eal the order or decision of the CAA and to determine -hether
to im#ose& remit& mitigate& increase or com#romise such fine and civil #enalties$ Thus& the Court u#held
the CA)@s 0esolution im#osing administrative fines$
%n a more recent case& "ereH v$ <"; 0efillers Association of the "hili##ines& %nc$&MM the Court u#held
the De#artment of Energy BD/ED Circular 'o$ +999=9!=19 im#lementing )atas "ambansa B)$"$D )lg$
>>$ The circular #rovided for fines for the commission of #rohibited acts$ The Court found that nothing
in the circular contravened the la- because the D/E -as e2#ressly authoriHed by )$"$ )lg$ >> and 0$A$
'o$ M!>L to im#ose fines or #enalties$
%n the #resent case& neither the Mil* Code nor the 0evised Administrative Code grants the D/4 the
authority to fi2 or im#ose administrative fines$ Thus& -ithout any e2#ress grant of #o-er to fi2 or
im#ose such fines& the D/4 cannot #rovide for those fines in the 0%00$ %n this regard& the D/4 again
e2ceeded its authority by #roviding for such fines or sanctions in 5ection ! of the 0%00$ 5aid
#rovision is& therefore& null and void$
The D/4 is not left -ithout any means to enforce its rules and regulations$ 5ection 1+BbD B>D of the
Mil* Code authoriHes the D/4 to Fcause the #rosecution of the violators of this Code and other
#ertinent la-s on #roducts covered by this Code$F 5ection 1> of the Mil* Code #rovides for the
#enalties to be im#osed on violators of the #rovision of the Mil* Code or the rules and regulations
issued #ursuant to it& to -it:
5ECT%/' 1>$ 5anctions 1
BaD Any #erson -ho violates the #rovisions of this Code or the rules and regulations issued #ursuant to
this Code shall& u#on conviction& be #unished by a #enalty of t-o B+D months to one B1D year
im#risonment or a fine of not less than /ne Thousand "esos B"1&999$99D nor more than Thirty
Thousand "esos B">9&999$99D or both$ 5hould the offense be committed by a (uridical #erson& the
chairman of the )oard of Directors& the #resident& general manager& or the #artners andZor the #ersons
directly res#onsible therefor& shall be #enaliHed$
BbD Any license& #ermit or authority issued by any government agency to any health -or*er& distributor&
manufacturer& or mar*eting firm or #ersonnel for the #ractice of their #rofession or occu#ation& or for
the #ursuit of their business& may& u#on recommendation of the Ministry of 4ealth& be sus#ended or
revo*ed in the event of re#eated violations of this Code& or of the rules and regulations issued #ursuant
to this Code$ BEm#hasis su##liedD
L$ "etitionerhs claim that 5ection ,M of the 0%00 re#eals e2isting la-s that are contrary to the 0%00 is
frivolous$
5ection ,M reads:
5ECT%/' ,M$ 0e#ealing Clause = All orders& issuances& and rules and regulations or #arts thereof
inconsistent -ith these revised rules and im#lementing regulations are hereby re#ealed or modified
accordingly$
5ection ,M of the 0%00 does not #rovide for the re#eal of la-s but only orders& issuances and rules and
regulations$ Thus& said #rovision is valid as it is -ithin the D/4@s rule=ma*ing #o-er$
An administrative agency li*e res#ondent #ossesses 8uasi=legislative or rule=ma*ing #o-er or the
#o-er to ma*e rules and regulations -hich results in delegated legislation that is -ithin the confines of
the granting statute and the Constitution& and sub(ect to the doctrine of non=delegability and
se#arability of #o-ers$ML 5uch e2#ress grant of rule=ma*ing #o-er necessarily includes the #o-er to
amend& revise& alter& or re#eal the same$M9 This is to allo- administrative agencies fle2ibility in
formulating and ad(usting the details and manner by -hich they are to im#lement the #rovisions of a
la-&L9 in order to ma*e it more res#onsive to the times$ 4ence& it is a standard #rovision in
administrative rules that #rior issuances of administrative agencies that are inconsistent there-ith are
declared re#ealed or modified$
%n fine& only 5ections BfD& 11 and ! are ultra vires& beyond the authority of the D/4 to #romulgate
and in contravention of the Mil* Code and& therefore& null and void$ The rest of the #rovisions of the
0%00 are in consonance -ith the Mil* Code$
<astly& #etitioner ma*es a Fcatch=allF allegation that:
2 2 2 NTOhe 8uestioned 0%00 sought to be im#lemented by the 0es#ondents is unnecessary and
o##ressive& and is offensive to the due #rocess clause of the Constitution& insofar as the same is in
restraint of trade and because a #rovision therein is inade8uate to #rovide the #ublic -ith a
com#rehensible basis to determine -hether or not they have committed a violation$L1 BEm#hasis
su##liedD
"etitioner refers to 5ections BfD&L+ BiD&L> ,B-D&L 11&L, ++&L! >+&LM !&LL and ,+L9 as the #rovisions
that su##ress the trade of mil* and& thus& violate the due #rocess clause of the Constitution$
The framers of the constitution -ere -ell a-are that trade must be sub(ected to some form of
regulation for the #ublic good$ "ublic interest must be u#held over business interests$99 %n "est
Management Association of the "hili##ines v$ FertiliHer and "esticide Authority&91 it -as held thus:
2 2 2 Furthermore& as held in Association of "hili##ine Coconut Desiccators v$ "hili##ine Coconut
Authority& des#ite the fact that Four #resent Constitution enshrines free enter#rise as a #olicy& it
nonetheless reserves to the government the #o-er to intervene -henever necessary to #romote the
general -elfare$F There can be no 8uestion that the unregulated use or #roliferation of #esticides -ould
be haHardous to our environment$ Thus& in the aforecited case& the Court declared that Ffree enter#rise
does not call for removal of i#rotective regulationsh$F 2 2 2 %t must be clearly e2#lained and #roven by
com#etent evidence (ust e2actly ho- such #rotective regulation -ould result in the restraint of trade$
NEm#hasis and underscoring su##liedO
%n this case& #etitioner failed to sho- that the #roscri#tion of mil* manufacturersh #artici#ation in any
#olicyma*ing body B5ection BiDD& classes and seminars for -omen and children B5ection ++DG the
giving of assistance& su##ort and logistics or training B5ection >+DG and the giving of donations B5ection
,+D -ould unreasonably ham#er the trade of breastmil* substitutes$ "etitioner has not established that
the #roscribed activities are indis#ensable to the trade of breastmil* substitutes$ "etitioner failed to
demonstrate that the aforementioned #rovisions of the 0%00 are unreasonable and o##ressive for being
in restraint of trade$
"etitioner also failed to convince the Court that 5ection ,B-D of the 0%00 is unreasonable and
o##ressive$ 5aid section #rovides for the definition of the term Fmil* com#any&F to -it:
5ECT%/' , 2 2 2$ B-D FMil* Com#anyF shall refer to the o-ner& manufacturer& distributor of infant
formula& follo-=u# mil*& mil* formula& mil* su##lement& breastmil* substitute or re#lacement& or by
any other descri#tion of such nature& including their re#resentatives -ho #romote or other-ise advance
their commercial interests in mar*eting those #roductsG
/n the other hand& 5ection of the Mil* Code #rovides:
BdD FDistributorF means a #erson& cor#oration or any other entity in the #ublic or #rivate sector engaged
in the business B-hether directly or indirectlyD of mar*eting at the -holesale or retail level a #roduct
-ithin the sco#e of this Code$ A F#rimary distributorF is a manufacturer@s sales agent& re#resentative&
national distributor or bro*er$
2 2 2 2
B(D FManufacturerF means a cor#oration or other entity in the #ublic or #rivate sector engaged in the
business or function B-hether directly or indirectly or through an agent or and entity controlled by or
under contract -ith itD of manufacturing a #roducts -ithin the sco#e of this Code$
'otably& the definition in the 0%00 merely merged together under the term Fmil* com#anyF the entities
defined se#arately under the Mil* Code as FdistributorF and Fmanufacturer$F The 0%00 also
enumerated in 5ection ,B-D the #roducts manufactured or distributed by an entity that -ould 8ualify it
as a Fmil* com#any&F -hereas in the Mil* Code& -hat is used is the #hrase F#roducts -ithin the sco#e
of this Code$F Those are the only differences bet-een the definitions given in the Mil* Code and the
definition as re=stated in the 0%00$
5ince all the regulatory #rovisions under the Mil* Code a##ly e8ually to both manufacturers and
distributors& the Court sees no harm in the 0%00 #roviding for (ust one term to encom#ass both entities$
The definition of Fmil* com#anyF in the 0%00 and the definitions of FdistributorF and FmanufacturerF
#rovided for under the Mil* Code are #ractically the same$
The Court is not convinced that the definition of Fmil* com#anyF #rovided in the 0%00 -ould bring
about any change in the treatment or regulation of FdistributorsF and FmanufacturersF of breastmil*
substitutes& as defined under the Mil* Code$
E2ce#t 5ections BfD& 11 and !& the rest of the #rovisions of the 0%00 are in consonance -ith the
ob(ective& #ur#ose and intent of the Mil* Code& constituting reasonable regulation of an industry -hich
affects #ublic health and -elfare and& as such& the rest of the 0%00 do not constitute illegal restraint of
trade nor are they violative of the due #rocess clause of the Constitution$
34E0EF/0E& the #etition is "A0T%A<<P ;0A'TED$ 5ections BfD& 11 and ! of Administrative
/rder 'o$ +99!=991+ dated May 1+& +99! are declared ':<< and V/%D for being ultra vires$ The
De#artment of 4ealth and res#ondents are "0/4%)%TED from im#lementing said #rovisions$
The Tem#orary 0estraining /rder issued on August 1,& +99! is <%FTED insofar as the rest of the
#rovisions of Administrative /rder 'o$ +99!=991+ is concerned$
5/ /0DE0ED$
"uno& BChief .usticeD& Kuisumbing& Pnares=5antiago& 5andoval=;utierreH& Car#io& Corona& Car#io=
Morales& AHcuna& Tinga& Chico='aHario& ;arcia& Velasco& .r$& 'achura& 0eyes& ..$& concur$
Footnotes
1 5ection 11& 0ule >& 199M 0ules of Civil "rocedure -hich #rovides:
5ection 11$ Mis(oinder and non=(oinder of #arties$ = 'either mis(oinder nor non=(oinder of #arties is
ground for dismissal of an action$ "arties may be dro##ed or added by order of the court on motion of
any #arty or on its o-n initiative at any stage of the action and on such terms as are (ust$ 2 2 2
BEm#hasis su##liedD
+ Article 11$ %m#lementation and monitoring
11$1 ;overnments should ta*e action to give effect to the #rinci#les and aim of this Code& as
a##ro#riate to their social and legislative frame-or*& including the ado#tion of national legislation&
regulations or other suitable measures$ For this #ur#ose& governments should see*& -hen necessary& the
coo#eration of 34/& :'%CEF and other agencies of the :nited 'ations system$ 'ational #olicies and
measures& including la-s and regulations& -hich are ado#ted to give effect to the #rinci#les and aim of
this Code should be #ublicly stated& and should a##ly on the same basis to all those involved in the
manufacture and mar*eting of #roducts -ithin the sco#e of this Code$
2 2 2 2
> "etition& rollo& #$ 1+$
;$0$ 'o$ 1>1M19& May +,& +99& +9 5C0A L1$
, %d$ at 9!=9M$
! ;$0$ 'o$ 1>,99+& May & +99!& L9 5C0A >L+$
M %d$ at >9!$
L Anne2 F;F& "etitioner@s Memorandum dated .uly 19& +99M$
9 Anne2es F4F& F%F& and F.F of "etitioner@s Memorandum e2ecuted by 3yeth "hili##ines& %nc$& )ristol
Myers 58uibb B"hil$D& %nc$& and Abbott <aboratories& %nc$& res#ectively$
19 aD The :' Convention on the 0ights of the Child BC0CDG bD the %nternational Code of Mar*eting
)reastmil* 5ubstitutes B%CM)5DG cD the %nternational Covenant on Economic& 5ocial and Cultural
0ights BC5C0DG dD the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against 3omen
BCEDA3DG eD the ;lobal 5trategy for %nfant and Poung Child 'utrition B;lobal 5trategyDG and fD
various resolutions ado#ted by the 3orld 4ealth Assembly$
11 .oa8uin ;$ )ernas& 5$.$& Constitutional 5tructure and "o-ers of ;overnment B'otes and CasesD "art
% B +99,D$
1+ %d$
1> .oa8uin ;$ )ernas& 5$.$& An %ntroduction to "ublic %nternational <a-& +99+ Ed$& #$ ,M$
1 According to Fr$ )ernas& the Austrian Constitution BArt$ 9D and the Constitution of the Federal
0e#ublic of ;ermany BArt$ +,D also use the incor#oration method$
1, ;$0$ 'o$ 1>9>+,& A#ril 1+& +99,& ,, 5C0A >9M$
1! %d$ at +1$
1M Merlin M$ Magallona& Fundamentals of "ublic %nternational <a-& +99, Ed$& #$ ,+!$
1L %d$ at ,+,$
19 ;overnment of 4ong Rong 5#ecial Administrative 0egion v$ /lalia& ;$0$ 'o$ 1,>!M,& A#ril 19&
+99M$
+9 Ta?ada v$ Angara& >>L "hil$ ,!& ,9+ B199MD$
+1 <ouis 4en*in& 0ichard C$ "ugh& /scar 5chachter& 4ans 5mit& %nternational <a-& Cases and
Materials& +nd Ed$& #$ 9!$
++ 5u#ra note 1>& at 19=1>$
+> Minucher v$ Court of A##eals& , "hil$ +,9& +!9 B+99>D$
+ Article ,M$ The various s#ecialiHed agencies& established by intergovernmental agreement and
having -ide international res#onsibilities& as defined in their basic instruments& in economic& social&
cultural& educational& health& and related fields& shall be brought into relationshi# -ith the :nited
'ations in accordance -ith the #rovisions of Article !>$
5uch agencies thus brought into relationshi# -ith the :nited 'ations are hereinafter referred to as
s#ecialiHed agencies$
+, Article !>$ The Economic and 5ocial Council may enter into agreements -ith any of the agencies
referred to in Article ,M& defining the terms on -hich the agency concerned shall be brought into
relationshi# -ith the :nited 'ations$ 5uch agreements shall be sub(ect to a##roval by the ;eneral
Assembly$
%t may coordinate the activities of the s#ecialiHed agencies through consultation -ith and
recommendations to such agencies and through recommendations to the ;eneral Assembly and to the
Members of the :nited 'ations$
+! Article 1L$ The functions of the 4ealth Assembly shall be: BaD to determine the #olicies of the
/rganiHation 2 2 2$ BEm#hasis su##liedD
+M Article +1$ The 4ealth Assembly shall have authority to ado#t regulations concerning: 2 2 2 BeD
advertising and labeling of biological& #harmaceutical and similar #roducts moving in international
commerce$ BEm#hasis su##liedD
+L Article +>$ The 4ealth Assembly shall have authority to ma*e recommendations to Members -ith
res#ect to any matter -ithin the com#etence of the /rganiHation$ BEm#hasis su##liedD
+9 5ee David Fidler& Develo#ments %nvolving 5A05& %nternational <a-& and %nfectious Disease
Control at the Fifty=5i2th Meeting of the 3orld 4ealth Assembly& .une +99>& A5%<$
>9 %n 0esolution 'o$ >$++ BMay +1& 19L1D& the 34A& acting under Article +> of the 34/
Constitution& ado#ted the %C)M5$
BaD %n 0esolution 'o$ >,$+! BMay 19L+D& the 34A urged member states to im#lement the %C)M5 as a
Fminimum re8uirementF$
BbD %n 0esolution 'o$ >9$+L BMay 1!& 19L!D& the 34A re8uested the 34/ Director ;eneral to direct
the attention of member states to the fact that any food or drin* given before com#lementary feeding is
nutritionally re8uired may interfere -ith the initiation or maintenance of breastfeeding and therefore
should neither be #romoted nor encouraged for us by infants during this #eriod$
BcD %n 0esolution 'o$ >$> BMay 1& 1999D& the 34A urged member states to #rotect and #romote
breastfeeding as an essential com#onent of nutrition #olicies so as to enable infants to be e2clusively
breastfed during the first four to si2 months of life$
BdD %n 0esolution 'o$ ,$> BMay 1& 199+D& the 34A urged member states to im#lement the targets of
the %nnocenti Declaration s#ecifically& to give effect to the %CM)5$
BeD %n 0esolution 'o$ !$M BMay 19& 199>D& the 34A urged member states to strive to eliminate under=
nutrition& malnutrition and nutritional deficiency among children$
BfD %n 0esolution 'o$ M$, BMay 9& 199D& the 34A urged member states to ensure that there are no
donations of su##lies of breastmil* substitutes and other #roducts covered by the %CM)5 in any #art of
the health care system$
BgD %n 0esolution 'o$ 9$1, BMay +,& 199!D& the 34A urged member states to ensure that
com#lementary foods are not mar*eted for or used in -ays that undermine e2clusive and sustained
breastfeeding$
BhD %n 0esolution 'o$ ,$+ BMay +99+D& the 34A& noting that Fdes#ite the fact that the %nternational
Code of Mar*eting of )reastmil* 5ubstitutes and relevant subse8uent 3orld 4ealth Assembly
resolutions state that there should be no advertising or other forms of #romotion of #roducts -ithin its
sco#e& ne- modern communication methods including electronic means& are currently increasingly
being used to #romote such #roductsG and conscious of the need for the Code2 Alimentarius
Commission to ta*e the %nternational Code and subse8uent relevant 4ealth Assembly resolutions into
consideration in dealing -ith health claims in the develo#ment of food standards and guidelines 2 2 2&F
urged member states to develo# ne- a##roaches to #rotect& #romote and su##ort e2clusive
breastfeeding for si2 months as a global #ublic health recommendation$
BiD %n 0esolution 'o$ ,,$+, BMay 1,& +99+D& the 34A re8uested the Code2 Alimentarius Commission
to ensure that labelling of #rocessed foods for infants and young children be consistent -ith the 34/
#olicy under the %C)M5$
B(D %n 0esolution 'o$ ,L$>+ BMay +,& +99,D& the 34A urged member states to continue to #rotect and
#romote e2clusive breastfeeding for si2 months$
B*D %n 0esolution 'o$ ,9$+1 BMay +M& +99!D& the 34A reiterated its su##ort for the ;obal strategy for
%nfant and Poung Child Feeding$
>1 David Fidler& su#ra note +9$
>+ Article >L$ 1$ The Court& -hose function is to decide in accordance -ith international la- such
dis#utes as are submitted to it& shall a##ly: aD international conventions& -hether general or #articular&
establishing rules e2#ressly recogniHed by the contesting statesG bD international custom& as evidence of
a general #ractice acce#ted as la-G cD the general #rinci#les of la- recogniHed by civiliHed nationsG dD
sub(ect to the #rovisions of Article ,9& (udicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly 8ualified
#ublicists of the various nations& as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of la-$
>> 5u#ra note +9$
> <ouis 4en*in& et al$& %nternational <a-& Cases and Materials& +nd Ed$& su#ra note +1& at 11=1>!$
>, 5u#ra note 19$
>! 99 "hil$ M9 B19,1D$
>M 5u#ra note 1,$
>L ;$0$ 'o$ 1,99>L& March >1& +99!& L! 5C0A 9,$
>9 Ed-ard R-a*-a& 5ome Comments on 0ulema*ing at the 3orld %ntellectual "ro#erty /rganiHation&
---$la-$du*e$eduZshellZciteG 5e#tember 1>& +99M& 1+:>>& citing the 1999 3%"/ 0esolution
Concerning "rovisions on the "rotection of 3ell=Rno-n Mar*s& +999 3%"/ 0ecommendation
Concerning Trademar* <icenses& and +991 3%"/ 0ecommendation Concerning "rovisions on the
"rotection of Mar*s and other %ndustrial "ro#erty 0ights in 5igns on the %nternet$
9 %d$
1 5u#ra note +9$
+ 5ection +$ "ur#ose 1 These 0evised 0ules and 0egulations are hereby #romulgated to ensure the
#rovision of safe and ade8uate nutrition for infants and young children by the #romotion& #rotection
and su##ort of breastfeeding and by ensuring the #ro#er use of breastmil* substitutes& breastmil*
su##lements and related #roducts -hen these are medically indicated and only -hen necessary& on the
basis of ade8uate information and through a##ro#riate mar*eting and distribution$ B:nderscoring
su##liedD
> 5ection ,BffD$ FPoung ChildF means a #erson from the age of more than t-elve B1+D months u# to
the age of three B>D years B>! monthsD$ B:nderscoring su##liedD
;$0$ 'o$ 1+1L& .uly 1& +99!& 9, 5C0A +& ,,$
, 5ee ##$ 19=+1$
! 5ee #$ +1$
M E2ecutive /rder 'o$ +9+& made effective on 'ovember +>& 19L9 by "roclamation 'o$ 9,$
L .acobson v$ Massachusetts& 19M :5 11 B199,DG )eltran v$ 5ecretary of 4ealth ;$0$ 'o$ 1>>!9&
'ovember +,& +99,& M! 5C0A 1!L& 19!G 5t$ <u*eshs Medical Center Em#loyees Association= AF3 v$
'ational <abor 0elations Commission& ;$0$ 'o$ 1!+9,>& March M& +99MG Tablarin v$ ;utierreH& ;$0$
'o$ <=ML1!& .uly >1& 19LM& 1,+ 5C0A M>9& M1G "ollution Ad(udication )oard v$ Court of A##eals&
;$0$ 'o$ 9>L91& March 11& 1991& 19, 5C0A 11+& 1+>=1+G 0ivera v$ Cam#bell& > "hil$ >L& >,>=>,
B191!DG <orenHo v$ Director of 4ealth& ,9 "hil$ ,9,& ,9M B19+MD$
9 As early as "eo#le v$ "omar& ! "hil$ 9& , B19+D& -e already noted that Fadvancing civiliHation
is bringing -ithin the sco#e of #olice #o-er of the state today things -hich -ere not thought of as
being -ith in such #o-er yesterday$ The develo#ment of civiliHation& the ra#idly increasing #o#ulation&
the gro-th of #ublic o#inion& -ith Nan increasingO desire on the #art of the masses and of the
government to loo* after and care for the interests of the individuals of the state& have brought -ithin
the #olice #o-er of the state many 8uestions for regulation -hich formerly -ere not so considered$F
,9 Act 'o$ +M11& a##roved on March 19& 191M$
,1 Rno-n then as "ublic 4ealth 5ervice
,+ 5ection 1& Cha#ter %& Title %C& E2ecutive /rder 'o$ +9+$
,> %d$ at 5ection >$
, 5ECT%/' !$ The ;eneral "ublic and Mothers 1
BaD 'o advertising& #romotion or other mar*eting materials& -hether -ritten& audio or visual& for
#roducts -ithin the sco#e of this Code shall be #rinted& #ublished& distributed& e2hibited and broadcast
unless such materials are duly authoriHed and a##roved by an inter=agency committee created herein
#ursuant to the a##licable standards #rovided for in this Code$
BbD Manufacturers and distributors shall not be #ermitted to give& directly or indirectly& sam#les and
su##lies of #roducts -ithin the sco#e of this Code or gifts of any sort to any member of the general
#ublic& including members of their families& to hos#itals and other health institutions& as -ell as to
#ersonnel -ithin the health care system& save as other-ise #rovided in this Code$
BcD There shall be no #oint=of=sale advertising& giving of sam#les or any other #romotion devices to
induce sales directly to the consumers at the retail level& such as s#ecial dis#lays& discount cou#ons&
#remiums& s#ecial sales& bonus and tie=in sales for the #roducts -ithin the sco#e of this Code$ This
#rovision shall not restrict the establishment of #ricing #olicies and #ractices intended to #rovide
#roducts at lo-er #rices on a long=term basis$
BdD Manufactures and distributors shall not distribute to #regnant -omen or mothers of infants any gifts
or articles or utensils -hich may #romote the use of breastmil* substitutes or bottlefeeding& nor shall
any other grou#s& institutions or individuals distribute such gifts& utensils or #roducts to the general
#ublic and mothers$
BeD Mar*eting #ersonnel shall be #rohibited from advertising or #romoting in any other manner the
#roducts covered by this Code& either directly or indirectly& to #regnant -omen or -ith mother of
infants& e2ce#t as other-ise #rovided by this Code$
BfD 'othing herein contained shall #revent donations from manufacturers and distributors or #roducts
-ithin the sco#e of this Code u#on re8uest by or -ith the a##roval of the Ministry of 4ealth$
5ECT%/' M$ 4ealth Care 5ystem 1
BaD The Ministry of 4ealth shall ta*e a##ro#riate measures to encourage and #romote breastfeeding$ %t
shall #rovide ob(ective and consistent information& training and advice to health -or*ers on infant
nutrition& and on their obligations under this Code$
BbD 'o facility of the health care system shall be used for the #ur#ose of #romoting infant formula or
other #roducts -ithin the sco#e of this Code$ This Code does not& ho-ever& #reclude the dissemination
of information to health #rofessionals as #rovided in 5ection LBbD$
BcD Facilities of the health care system shall not be used for the dis#lay of #roducts -ithin the sco#e of
this Code& or for #lacards or #osters concerning such #roducts$
BdD The use by the health care system of F#rofessional serviceF re#resentatives& Fmothercraft nursesF or
similar #ersonnel& #rovided or #aid for by manufacturers or distributors& shall not be #ermitted$
BeD %n health education classes for mothers and the general #ublic& health -or*ers and community
-or*ers shall em#hasiHe the haHards and ris*s of the im#ro#er use of breastmil* substitutes #articularly
infant formula$ Feeding -ith infant formula shall be demonstrated only to mothers -ho may not be
able to breastfeed for medical or other legitimate reasons$
5ECT%/' L$ 4ealth 3or*ers 1
BaD 4ealth -or*ers shall encourage and #romote breastfeeding and shall ma*e themselves familiar -ith
ob(ectives and consistent information on maternal and infant nutrition& and -ith their res#onsibilities
under this Code$
BbD %nformation #rovided by manufacturers and distributors to health #rofessionals regarding #roducts
-ithin the sco#e of this Code shall be restricted to scientific and factual matters and such information
shall not im#ly or create a belief that bottlefeeding is e8uivalent or su#erior to breastfeeding$ %t shall
also include the information s#ecified in 5ection ,BbD$
BcD 'o financial or material inducements to #romote #roducts -ithin the sco#e of this Code shall be
offered by manufacturers or distributors to health -or*ers or members of their families& nor shall these
be acce#ted by the health -or*ers or members of their families& e2ce#t as other-ise #rovided in
5ection LBeD$
BdD 5am#les of infant formula or other #roducts -ithin the sco#e of this Code& or of e8ui#ment or
utensils for their #re#aration or use& shall not be #rovided to health -or*ers e2ce#t -hen necessary for
the #ur#ose of #rofessional evaluation or research in accordance -ith the rules and regulations
#romulgated by the Ministry of 4ealth$ 'o health -or*ers shall give sam#les of infant formula to
#regnant -omen and mothers of infants or members of their families$
BeD Manufacturers and distributors of #roducts -ithin the sco#e of this Code may assist in the research&
scholarshi#s and continuing education& of health #rofessionals& in accordance -ith the rules and
regulations #romulgated by the Ministry of 4ealth$
5ECT%/' 9$ "ersons em#loyed by Manufacturers and Distributors 1 "ersonnel em#loyed in mar*eting
#roducts -ithin the sco#e of this Code shall not& as #art of their (ob res#onsibilities& #erform
educational functions in relation to #regnant -omen or mothers of infants$
,, 5ee #$ +9$
,! 5ee #$ +1$
,M 5ECT%/' 1!$ All health and nutrition claims for #roducts -ithin the sco#e of the Code are
absolutely #rohibited$ For this #ur#ose& any #hrase or -ords that connotes to increase emotional&
intellectual abilities of the infant and young child and other li*e #hrases shall not be allo-ed$
,L 5ee #$ >9$
,9 5ECT%/' 19$ ContainersZ<abel 1
2 2 2 2
BdD The term FhumaniHedF& FmaternaliHedF or similar terms shall not be used$
!9 5ECT%/' +$ Aim of the Code 1 The aim of the Code is to contribute to the #rovision of safe and
ade8uate nutrition for infants by the #rotection and #romotion of breastfeeding and by ensuring the
#ro#er use of breastmil* substitutes and breastmil* su##lements -hen these are necessary& on the basis
of ade8uate information and through a##ro#riate mar*eting and distribution$
!1 5ECT%/' +!$ Content 1 Each containerZlabel shall contain such message& in both Fili#ino and
English languages& and -hich message cannot be readily se#arated therefrom& relative the follo-ing
#oints:
2 2 2 2
BfD The health haHards of unnecessary or im#ro#er use of infant formula and other related #roducts
including information that #o-dered infant formula may contain #athogenic microorganisms and must
be #re#ared and used a##ro#riately$
!+ T5' of the hearing of .une 19& +99M& ##$ 11=1+9$
!> T5' of .une 19& +99M hearing& ##$ 19>=19& 19L& +>1& +>M=+9& +9,=>99$
! ;$0$ 'o$ 1,++1& 5e#tember 19& +99!& ,9+ 5C0A +9,$
!, %d$ at >1$
!! 5ECT%/' M$ 4ealth Care 5ystem 1
2 2 2 2
BbD 'o facility of the health care system shall be used for the #ur#ose of #romoting infant formula or
other #roducts -ithin the sco#e of this Code$ This Code does not& ho-ever& #reclude the dissemination
of information to health #rofessionals as #rovided in 5ection LBbD$
!M 5ECT%/' L$ 4ealth 3or*ers$ =
2 2 2 2
BbD %nformation #rovided by manufacturers and distributors to health #rofessionals regarding #roducts
-ithin the sco#e of this Code shall be restricted to scientific and factual matters and such information
shall not im#ly or create a belief that bottlefeeding is e8uivalent or su#erior to breastfeeding$ %t shall
also include the information s#ecified in 5ection ,BbD$
!L 5ECT%/' L$ 4ealth 3or*ers =
2 2 2 2
BeD Manufacturers and distributors of #roducts -ithin the sco#e of this Code may assist in the research&
scholarshi#s and continuing education& of health #rofessionals& in accordance -ith the rules and
regulations #romulgated by the Ministry of 4ealth$
!9 5ECT%/' $ Declaration of "rinci#les 1 The follo-ing are the underlying #rinci#les from -hich the
revised rules and regulations are #remised u#on:
2 2 2 2
BiD Mil* com#anies& and their re#resentatives& should not form #art of any #olicyma*ing body or entity
in relation to the advancement of breastfeeding$
M9 5ECT%/' ++$ 'o manufacturer& distributor& or re#resentatives of #roducts covered by the Code
shall be allo-ed to conduct or be involved in any activity on breastfeeding #romotion& education and
#roduction of %nformation& Education and Communication B%ECD materials on breastfeeding& holding of
or #artici#ating as s#ea*ers in classes or seminars for -omen and children activities and to avoid the
use of these venues to mar*et their brands or com#any names$
M1 5ECT%/' 9$ 0esearch& Ethics Committee& "ur#ose = The D/4 shall ensure that research conducted
for #ublic #olicy #ur#oses& relating to infant and young child feeding should& at all times& be free form
any commercial influenceZbiasG accordingly& the health -or*er or researcher involved in such must
disclose any actual or #otential conflict of interest -ith the com#anyZ#erson funding the research$ %n
any event& such research and its findings shall be sub(ected to inde#endent #eer revie-$ 2 2 2$
M+ 5ECT%/' 19$ "ublic Disclosure 1 For trans#arency #ur#oses& a disclosure andZor disclaimer of the
s#onsoring com#any should be done by the com#any itself& health -or*er& researcher involved through
verbal declaration during the #ublic #resentation of the research and in #rint u#on #ublication$
M> 5ECT%/' >+$ "rimary 0es#onsibility of 4ealth 3or*ers 1 %t is the #rimary res#onsibility of the
health -or*ers to #romote& #rotect and su##ort breastfeeding and a##ro#riate infant and young child
feeding$ "art of this res#onsibility is to continuously u#date their *no-ledge and s*ills on
breastfeeding$ 'o assistance& su##ort& logistics or training from mil* com#anies shall be #ermitted$
M 5u#ra note !L$
M, 5ECT%/' ,1$ Donations 3ithin the 5co#e of This Code = Donations of #roducts& materials& defined
and covered under the Mil* Code and these im#lementing rules and regulations& shall be strictly
#rohibited$
M! 1,9=A "hil$ 1+ B19M,D$
MM ;$0$ 'o$ 1,919& .une +!& +99!& 9+ 5C0A !>L$
ML 5mart Communications& %nc$ v$ 'ational Telecommunications Commission& ,! "hil$ 1,& 1,,=1,!
B+99>D$
M9 PaHa*i Torres Manufacturing& %nc$ v$ Court of A##eals& ;$0$ 'o$ 1>9,L& .une +M& +99!& 9> 5C0A
L!& 9M$
L9 5u#ra note ML& at 1,!$
L1 "etitioner@s Memorandum$
L+ 5ECT%/' $ Declaration of "rinci#les 1 The follo-ing are the underlying #rinci#les from -hich the
revised rules and regulations are #remised u#on:
2 2 2 2
BfD Advertising& #romotions& or s#onsorshi#s of infant formula& breastmil* substitutes and other related
#roducts are #rohibited$
L> 5ECT%/' $ Declaration of "rinci#les 1 2 2 2
BiD Mil* com#anies& and their re#resentatives& should not form #art of any #olicyma*ing body or entity
in relation to the advancement of breastfeeding$
L 5ECT%/' ,$ 2 2 2 2 B-D FMil* Com#anyF shall refer to the o-ner& manufacturer& distributor& of
infant formula& follo-=u# mil*& mil* formula& mil* su##lement& breastmil* substitute or re#lacement&
or by any other descri#tion of such nature& including their re#resentatives -ho #romote or other-ise
advance their commercial interests in mar*eting those #roductsG 2 2 2$
L, 5ECT%/' 11$ "rohibition 1 'o advertising& #romotions& s#onsorshi#s& or mar*eting materials and
activities for breastmil* substitutes intended for infants and young children u# to t-enty=four B+D
months& shall be allo-ed& because they tend to convey or give subliminal messages or im#ressions that
undermine breastmil* and breastfeeding or other-ise e2aggerate breastmil* substitutes andZor
re#lacements& as -ell as related #roducts covered -ithin the sco#e of this Code$
L! 5u#ra note M9$
LM 5u#ra note M>$
LL 5ECT%/' !$ Administrative 5anctions$ 1 The follo-ing administrative sanctions shall be im#osed
u#on any #erson& (uridical or natural& found to have violated the #rovisions of the Code and its
im#lementing 0ules and 0egulations:
BaD 1st violation 1 3arningG
BbD +nd violation 1 Administrative fine of a minimum of Ten Thousand B"19&999$99D to Fifty Thousand
B",9&999$99D "esos& de#ending on the gravity and e2tent of the violation& including the recall of the
offending #roductG
BcD >rd violation 1 Administrative Fine of a minimum of 5i2ty Thousand B"!9&999$99D to /ne 4undred
Fifty Thousand B"1,9&999$99D "esos& de#ending on the gravity and e2tent of the violation& and in
addition thereto& the recall of the offending #roduct& and sus#ension of the Certificate of "roduct
0egistration BC"0DG
BdD th violation 1Administrative Fine of a minimum of T-o 4undred Thousand B"+99&999$99D to Five
4undred B",99&999$99D Thousand "esos& de#ending on the gravity and e2tent of the violationG and in
addition thereto& the recall of the #roduct& revocation of the C"0& sus#ension of the <icense to /#erate
B<T/D for one yearG
BeD ,th and succeeding re#eated violations 1 Administrative Fine of /ne Million B"1&999&999$99D
"esos& the recall of the offending #roduct& cancellation of the C"0& revocation of the <icense to /#erate
B<T/D of the com#any concerned& including the blac*listing of the com#any to be furnished the
De#artment of )udget and Management BD)MD and the De#artment of Trade and %ndustry BDT%DG
BfD An additional #enalty of T-o Thou=sand Five 4undred B"+&,99$99D "esos #er day shall be made for
every day the violation continues after having received the order from the %AC or other such
a##ro#riate body& notifying and #enaliHing the com#any for the infraction$
For #ur#oses of determining -hether or not there is Fre#eatedF violation& each #roduct violation
belonging or o-ned by a com#any& including those of their subsidiaries& are deemed to be violations of
the concerned mil* com#any and shall not be based on the s#ecific violating #roduct alone$
L9 5ECT%/' ,+$ /ther Donations )y Mil* Com#anies 'ot Covered by this Code = Donations of
#roducts& e8ui#ments& and the li*e& not other-ise falling -ithin the sco#e of this Code or these 0ules&
given by mil* com#anies and their agents& re#resentatives& -hether in *ind or in cash& may only be
coursed through the %nter Agency Committee B%ACD& -hich shall determine -hether such donation be
acce#ted or other-ise$
99 Eastern Assurance T 5urety Cor#oration v$ <and Trans#ortation Franchising and 0egulatory )oard&
,9 "hil$ >9,& >99 B+99>D$
91 ;$0$ 'o$ 1,!91& February +1& +99M$
The <a-#hil "ro(ect = Arellano <a- Foundation

"harmaceutical and 4ealth Care Association of the "hili##ines vs$ Du8ue
"harmaceutical and 4ealth Care Association of the "hili##ines vs$ Du8ue
'amed as res#ondents are the 4ealth 5ecretary& :ndersecretaries& and Assistant 5ecretaries of the
De#artment of 4ealth BD/4D$ For #ur#oses of herein #etition& the D/4 is deemed im#leaded as a co=
res#ondent since res#ondents issued the 8uestioned 0%00 in their ca#acity as officials of said e2ecutive
agency$1E2ecutive /rder 'o$ ,1 BMil* CodeD -as issued by "resident CoraHon A8uino on /ctober +L&
19L! by virtue of the legislative #o-ers granted to the #resident under the Freedom Constitution$ /ne
of the #reambular clauses of the Mil* Code states that the la- see*s to give effect to Article 11+ of the
%nternational Code of Mar*eting of )reastmil* 5ubstitutes B%CM)5D& a code ado#ted by the 3orld
4ealth Assembly B34AD in 19L1$ From 19L+ to +99!& the 34A ado#ted several 0esolutions to the
effect that breastfeeding should be su##orted& #romoted and #rotected& hence& it should be ensured that
nutrition and health claims are not #ermitted for breastmil* substitutes$%n 1999& the "hili##ines ratified
the %nternational Convention on the 0ights of the Child$ Article + of said instrument #rovides that
5tate "arties should ta*e a##ro#riate measures to diminish infant and child mortality& and ensure that all
segments of society& s#ecially #arents and children& are informed of the advantages of breastfeeding$
/n May 1,& +99!& the D/4 issued herein assailed 0%00 -hich -as to ta*e effect on .uly M& +99!$
%ssue: $ 3hether Administrative /rder or the 0evised %m#lementing 0ules and 0egulations B0%00D
issued by the De#artment of 4ealth BD/4D is not constitutionalG
4eld: PE5
under Article +>& recommendations of the 34A do not come into force for members&in the same -ay
that conventions or agreements under Article 19 and regulations under Article +1 come into force$
Article +> of the 34/ Constitution reads:
Article +>$ The 4ealth Assembly shall have authority to ma*e recommendations to Members -ith
res#ect to any matter -ithin the com#etence of the /rganiHation
for an international rule to be considered as customary la-& it must be established that such rule is
being follo-ed by states because they consider it obligatory to com#ly -ith such rules
:nder the 19LM Constitution& international la- can become #art of the s#here of domestic la- either
)y transformation or incor#oration$ The transformation method re8uires that an international la- be
transformed into a domestic la- through a constitutional mechanism such as local legislation$ The
incor#oration method a##lies -hen& by mere constitutional declaration& international la- is deemed to
have the force of domestic la-$
Conse8uently& legislation is necessary to transform the #rovisions of the 34A 0esolutions into
domestic la-$ The #rovisions of the 34A 0esolutions cannot be considered as #art of the la- of the
land that can be im#lemented by e2ecutive agencies -ithout the need of a la- enacted by the
legislature
source: Full Te2t htt#:ZZ---$la-#hil$netZ(ud(urisZ(uri+99MZoct+99MZgrI1M>9>I+99M$html
%#inas*il ni tobi sa 1:,+ AM
5EC/'D D%V%5%/'
N;$0$ 'o$ 1>9>+,$ A#ril 1+& +99,O
"0%5C%<<A C$ M%.A0E5& </0ETTA A'' "$ 0/5A<E5& 4%<DA )$ 'A0C%5/& 50$ MA0%A'%
D%MA0A'A'& 5F%C& and ./E< C$ <AMA';A' in their behalf and on behalf of the Class "laintiffs
in Class Action 'o$ MD< L9& :nited 5tates District Court of 4a-aii& #etitioners& vs$ 4/'$
5A'T%A;/ .AV%E0 0A'ADA& in his ca#acity as "residing .udge of )ranch 1>M& 0egional Trial
Court& Ma*ati City& and the E5TATE /F FE0D%'A'D E$ MA0C/5& through its court a##ointed legal
re#resentatives in Class Action MD< L9& :nited 5tates District Court of 4a-aii& namely: %melda 0$
Marcos and Ferdinand Marcos& .r$& res#ondents$
D E C % 5 % / '
T%';A& .$:
/ur martial la- e2#erience bore strange un-anted fruits& and -e have yet to finish -eeding out its
bitter cro#$ 3hile the restoration of freedom and the fundamental structures and #rocesses of
democracy have been much lauded& according to a significant number& the changes& ho-ever& have not
sufficiently healed the colossal damage -rought under the o##ressive conditions of the martial la-
#eriod$ The cries of (ustice for the tortured& the murdered& and the desa#arecidos arouse outrage and
sym#athy in the hearts of the fair=minded& yet the dis#ensation of the a##ro#riate relief due them cannot
be e2tended through the same ca#rice or -him that characteriHed the ill=-ind of martial rule$ The
damage done -as not merely #ersonal but institutional& and the #ro#er rebu*e to the ini8uitous #ast has
to involve the a-ard of re#arations due -ithin the confines of the restored rule of la-$
The #etitioners in this case are #rominent victims of human rights violationsN1O -ho& de#rived of the
o##ortunity to directly confront the man -ho once held absolute rule over this country& have chosen to
do battle instead -ith the earthly re#resentative& his estate$ The clash has been for no- interru#ted by a
trial court ruling& seemingly com#orted to legal logic& that re8uired the #etitioners to #ay a -ho##ing
filing fee of over Four 4undred 5eventy=T-o Million "esos B"M+&999&999$99D in order that they be
able to enforce a (udgment a-arded them by a foreign court$ There is an understandable tem#tation to
cast the struggle -ithin the sim#listic confines of a morality tale& and to em#loy short=cuts to arrive at
-hat might seem the desirable solution$ )ut easy& refle2ive resort to the e8uity #rinci#le all too often
leads to a result that may be morally correct& but legally -rong$
'onetheless& the a##lication of the legal #rinci#les involved in this case -ill comfort those -ho
maintain that our substantive and #rocedural la-s& for all their #erceived ambiguity and susce#tibility
to myriad inter#retations& are inherently fair and (ust$ The relief sought by the #etitioners is e2#ressly
mandated by our la-s and conforms to established legal #rinci#les$ The granting of this #etition for
certiorari is -arranted in order to correct the legally infirm and unabashedly un(ust ruling of the
res#ondent (udge$
The essential facts bear little elaboration$ /n 9 May 1991& a com#laint -as filed -ith the :nited 5tates
District Court B:5 District CourtD& District of 4a-aii& against the Estate of former "hili##ine "resident
Ferdinand E$ Marcos BMarcos EstateD$ The action -as brought forth by ten Fili#ino citiHensN+O -ho
each alleged having suffered human rights abuses such as arbitrary detention& torture and ra#e in the
hands of #olice or military forces during the Marcos regime$N>O The Alien Tort Act -as invo*ed as
basis for the :5 District Courths (urisdiction over the com#laint& as it involved a suit by aliens for
tortious violations of international la-$NO These #laintiffs brought the action on their o-n behalf and
on behalf of a class of similarly situated individuals& #articularly consisting of all current civilian
citiHens of the "hili##ines& their heirs and beneficiaries& -ho bet-een 19M+ and 19LM -ere tortured&
summarily e2ecuted or had disa##eared -hile in the custody of military or #aramilitary grou#s$
"laintiffs alleged that the class consisted of a##ro2imately ten thousand B19&999D membersG hence&
(oinder of all these #ersons -as im#racticable$
The institution of a class action suit -as -arranted under 0ule +>BaD and BbDB1DB)D of the :5 Federal
0ules of Civil "rocedure& the #rovisions of -hich -ere invo*ed by the #laintiffs$ 5ubse8uently& the :5
District Court certified the case as a class action and created three B>D sub=classes of torture& summary
e2ecution and disa##earance victims$N,O Trial ensued& and subse8uently a (ury rendered a verdict and
an a-ard of com#ensatory and e2em#lary damages in favor of the #laintiff class$ Then& on > February
199,& the :5 District Court& #resided by .udge Manuel <$ 0eal& rendered a Final .udgment BFinal
.udgmentD a-arding the #laintiff class a total of /ne )illion 'ine 4undred 5i2ty Four Million Five
Thousand Eight 4undred Fifty 'ine Dollars and 'inety Cents B[1&9!&99,&L,9$99D$ The Final
.udgment -as eventually affirmed by the :5 Court of A##eals for the 'inth Circuit& in a decision
rendered on 1M December 199!$N!O
/n +9 May 199M& the #resent #etitioners filed Com#laint -ith the 0egional Trial Court& City of Ma*ati
BMa*ati 0TCD for the enforcement of the Final .udgment$ They alleged that they are members of the
#laintiff class in -hose favor the :5 District Court a-arded damages$NMO They argued that since the
Marcos Estate failed to file a #etition for certiorari -ith the :5 5u#reme Court after the 'inth Circuit
Court of A##eals had affirmed the Final .udgment& the decision of the :5 District Court had become
final and e2ecutory& and hence should be recogniHed and enforced in the "hili##ines& #ursuant to
5ection ,9& 0ule >9 of the 0ules of Court then in force$NLO
/n , February 199L& the Marcos Estate filed a motion to dismiss& raising& among others& the non=
#ayment of the correct filing fees$ %t alleged that #etitioners had only #aid Four 4undred Ten "esos
B"19$99D as doc*et and filing fees& not-ithstanding the fact that they sought to enforce a monetary
amount of damages in the amount of over T-o and a Kuarter )illion :5 Dollars B:5[+$+, )illionD$
The Marcos Estate cited 5u#reme Court Circular 'o$ M& #ertaining to the #ro#er com#utation and
#ayment of doc*et fees$ %n res#onse& the #etitioners claimed that an action for the enforcement of a
foreign (udgment is not ca#able of #ecuniary estimationG hence& a filing fee of only Four 4undred Ten
"esos B"19$99D -as #ro#er& #ursuant to 5ection MBcD of 0ule 11$N9O
/n 9 5e#tember 199L& res#ondent .udge 5antiago .avier 0anadaN19O of the Ma*ati 0TC issued the
sub(ect /rder dismissing the com#laint -ithout #re(udice$ 0es#ondent (udge o#ined that contrary to the
#etitionersh submission& the sub(ect matter of the com#laint -as indeed ca#able of #ecuniary
estimation& as it involved a (udgment rendered by a foreign court ordering the #ayment of definite sums
of money& allo-ing for easy determination of the value of the foreign (udgment$ /n that score& 5ection
MBaD of 0ule 11 of the 0ules of Civil "rocedure -ould find a##lication& and the 0TC estimated the
#ro#er amount of filing fees -as a##ro2imately Four 4undred 5eventy T-o Million "esos& -hich
obviously had not been #aid$
'ot sur#risingly& #etitioners filed a Motion for 0econsideration& -hich .udge 0anada denied in an
/rder dated +L .uly 1999$ From this denial& #etitioners filed a "etition for Certiorari under 0ule !,
assailing the t-in orders of res#ondent (udge$N11O They #rayed for the annulment of the 8uestioned
orders& and an order directing the reinstatement of Civil Case 'o$ 9M=19,+ and the conduct of
a##ro#riate #roceedings thereon$
"etitioners submit that their action is inca#able of #ecuniary estimation as the sub(ect matter of the suit
is the enforcement of a foreign (udgment& and not an action for the collection of a sum of money or
recovery of damages$ They also #oint out that to re8uire the class #laintiffs to #ay Four 4undred
5eventy T-o Million "esos B"M+&999&999$99D in filing fees -ould negate and render inutile the liberal
construction ordained by the 0ules of Court& as re8uired by 5ection !& 0ule 1 of the 0ules of Civil
"rocedure& #articularly the ine2#ensive dis#osition of every action$
"etitioners invo*e 5ection 11& Article %%% of the )ill of 0ights of the Constitution& -hich #rovides that
6Free access to the courts and 8uasi=(udicial bodies and ade8uate legal assistance shall not be denied to
any #erson by reason of #overty&7 a mandate -hich is essentially defeated by the re8uired e2orbitant
filing fee$ The ad(udicated amount of the filing fee& as arrived at by the 0TC& -as characteriHed as
indis#utably unfair& ine8uitable& and un(ust$
The Commission on 4uman 0ights BC40D -as #ermitted to intervene in this case$N1+O %t urged that the
#etition be granted and a (udgment rendered& ordering the enforcement and e2ecution of the District
Court (udgment in accordance -ith 5ection L& 0ule >9 of the 199M 0ules of Civil "rocedure$ For the
C40& the Ma*ati 0TC erred in inter#reting the action for the e2ecution of a foreign (udgment as a ne-
case& in violation of the #rinci#le that once a case has been decided bet-een the same #arties in one
country on the same issue -ith finality& it can no longer be relitigated again in another country$N1>O The
C40 li*e-ise invo*es the #rinci#le of comity& and of vested rights$
The Courths dis#osition on the issue of filing fees -ill #rove a useful (uris#rudential guide#ost for
courts confronted -ith actions enforcing foreign (udgments& #articularly those lodged against an estate$
There is no basis for the issuance a limited #ro hac vice ruling based on the s#ecial circumstances of
the #etitioners as victims of martial la-& or on the emotionally=charged allegation of human rights
abuses$
An e2amination of 0ule 11 of the 0ules of Court readily evinces that the res#ondent (udge ignored the
clear letter of the la- -hen he concluded that the filing fee be com#uted based on the total sum
claimed or the stated value of the #ro#erty in litigation$
%n dismissing the com#laint& the res#ondent (udge relied on 5ection MBaD& 0ule 11 as basis for the
com#utation of the filing fee of over "M+ Million$ The #rovision states:
5EC$ M$ Cler* of 0egional Trial Court$=
BaD For filing an action or a #ermissive counterclaim or money claim against an estate not based on
(udgment& or for filing -ith leave of court a third=#arty& fourth=#arty& etc$& com#laint& or a com#laint in
intervention& and for all clerical services in the same time& if the total sum claimed& e2clusive of
interest& or the started value of the #ro#erty in litigation& is:
1$ <ess than " 199&99$99 1 " ,99$99
+$ " 199&999$99 or more = " L99$99
but less than " 1,9&999$99
>$ " 1,9&999$99 or more but = " 1&999$99
less than " +99&999$99
$ " +99&999$99 or more but
less than " +,9&999$99 = " 1&,99$99
,$ " +,9&999$99 or more but
less than " >99&99$99 = " 1&M,9$99
!$ " >99&999$99 or more but
not more than " 99&999$99 = " +&999$99
M$ " >,9&999$99 or more but not
more than "99&999$99 = " +&+,9$99
L$ For each " 1&999$99 in e2cess of
" 99&999$99 = " 19$99
$ $ $
BEm#hasis su##liedD
/bviously& the above=8uoted #rovision covers& on one hand& ordinary actions& #ermissive
counterclaims& third=#arty& etc$ com#laints and com#laints=in=interventions& and on the other& money
claims against estates -hich are not based on (udgment$ Thus& the relevant 8uestion for #ur#oses of the
#resent #etition is -hether the action filed -ith the lo-er court is a 6money claim against an estate not
based on (udgment$7
"etitionersh com#laint may have been lodged against an estate& but it is clearly based on a (udgment& the
Final .udgment of the :5 District Court$ The #rovision does not ma*e any distinction bet-een a local
(udgment and a foreign (udgment& and -here the la- does not distinguish& -e shall not distinguish$
A reading of 5ection M in its entirety reveals several instances -herein the filing fee is com#uted on the
basis of the amount of the relief sought& or on the value of the #ro#erty in litigation$ The filing fee for
re8uests for e2tra(udicial foreclosure of mortgage is based on the amount of indebtedness or the
mortgageehs claim$N1O %n s#ecial #roceedings involving #ro#erties such as for the allo-ance of -ills&
the filing fee is again based on the value of the #ro#erty$N1,O The aforecited rules evidently have no
a##lication to #etitionersh com#laint$
"etitioners rely on 5ection MBbD& #articularly the #roviso on actions -here the value of the sub(ect
matter cannot be estimated$ The #rovision reads in full:
5EC$ M$ Cler* of 0egional Trial Court$=
BbD For filing
1$ Actions -here the value
of the sub(ect matter
cannot be estimated === " !99$99
+$ 5#ecial civil actions e2ce#t
(udicial foreclosure -hich
shall be governed by
#aragra#h BaD above === " !99$99
>$ All other actions not
involving #ro#erty === " !99$99
%n a real action& the assessed value of the #ro#erty& or if there is none& the estimated value& thereof shall
be alleged by the claimant and shall be the basis in com#uting the fees$
%t is -orth noting that the #rovision also #rovides that in real actions& the assessed value or estimated
value of the #ro#erty shall be alleged by the claimant and shall be the basis in com#uting the fees$ Pet
again& this #rovision does not a##ly in the case at bar$ A real action is one -here the #laintiff see*s the
recovery of real #ro#erty or an action affecting title to or recovery of #ossession of real #ro#erty$N1!O
'either the com#laint nor the a-ard of damages ad(udicated by the :5 District Court involves any real
#ro#erty of the Marcos Estate$
Thus& res#ondent (udge -as in clear and serious error -hen he concluded that the filing fees should be
com#uted on the basis of the schematic table of 5ection MBaD& as the action involved #ertains to a claim
against an estate based on (udgment$ 3hat #rovision& if any& then should a##ly in determining the filing
fees for an action to enforce a foreign (udgmentQ
To resolve this 8uestion& a #ro#er understanding is re8uired on the nature and effects of a foreign
(udgment in this (urisdiction$
The rules of comity& utility and convenience of nations have established a usage among civiliHed states
by -hich final (udgments of foreign courts of com#etent (urisdiction are reci#rocally res#ected and
rendered efficacious under certain conditions that may vary in different countries$N1MO This #rinci#le
-as #rominently affirmed in the leading American case of 4ilton v$ ;uyotN1LO and e2#ressly
recogniHed in our (uris#rudence beginning -ith %ngenholl v$ 3alter E$ /lsen T Co$N19O The conditions
re8uired by the "hili##ines for recognition and enforcement of a foreign (udgment -ere originally
contained in 5ection >11 of the Code of Civil "rocedure& -hich -as ta*en from the California Code of
Civil "rocedure -hich& in turn& -as derived from the California Act of March 11& 1LM+$N+9O
0emar*ably& the #rocedural rule no- outlined in 5ection L& 0ule >9 of the 0ules of Civil "rocedure
has remained unchanged do-n to the last -ord in nearly a century$ 5ection L states:
5EC$ L$ Effect of foreign (udgments$ E The effect of a (udgment of a tribunal of a foreign country&
having (urisdiction to #ronounce the (udgment is as follo-s:
BaD %n case of a (udgment u#on a s#ecific thing& the (udgment is conclusive u#on the title to the thingG
BbD %n case of a (udgment against a #erson& the (udgment is #resum#tive evidence of a right as bet-een
the #arties and their successors in interest by a subse8uent titleG
%n either case& the (udgment or final order may be re#elled by evidence of a -ant of (urisdiction& -ant
of notice to the #arty& collusion& fraud& or clear mista*e of la- or fact$
There is an evident distinction bet-een a foreign (udgment in an action in rem and one in #ersonam$
For an action in rem& the foreign (udgment is deemed conclusive u#on the title to the thing& -hile in an
action in #ersonam& the foreign (udgment is #resum#tive& and not conclusive& of a right as bet-een the
#arties and their successors in interest by a subse8uent title$N+1O 4o-ever& in both cases& the foreign
(udgment is susce#tible to im#eachment in our local courts on the grounds of -ant of (urisdiction or
notice to the #arty&N++O collusion& fraud&N+>O or clear mista*e of la- or fact$N+O Thus& the #arty
aggrieved by the foreign (udgment is entitled to defend against the enforcement of such decision in the
local forum$ %t is essential that there should be an o##ortunity to challenge the foreign (udgment& in
order for the court in this (urisdiction to #ro#erly determine its efficacy$N+,O
%t is clear then that it is usually necessary for an action to be filed in order to enforce a foreign
(udgmentN+!O& even if such (udgment has conclusive effect as in the case of in rem actions& if only for
the #ur#ose of allo-ing the losing #arty an o##ortunity to challenge the foreign (udgment& and in order
for the court to #ro#erly determine its efficacy$N+MO Conse8uently& the #arty attac*ing a foreign
(udgment has the burden of overcoming the #resum#tion of its validity$N+LO
The rules are silent as to -hat initiatory #rocedure must be underta*en in order to enforce a foreign
(udgment in the "hili##ines$ )ut there is no 8uestion that the filing of a civil com#laint is an
a##ro#riate measure for such #ur#ose$ A civil action is one by -hich a #arty sues another for the
enforcement or #rotection of a right&N+9O and clearly an action to enforce a foreign (udgment is in
essence a vindication of a right #rescinding either from a 6conclusive (udgment u#on title7 or the
6#resum#tive evidence of a right$7N>9O Absent #erha#s a statutory grant of (urisdiction to a 8uasi=
(udicial body& the claim for enforcement of (udgment must be brought before the regular courts$N>1O
There are distinctions& nuanced but discernible& bet-een the cause of action arising from the
enforcement of a foreign (udgment& and that arising from the facts or allegations that occasioned the
foreign (udgment$ They may #ertain to the same set of facts& but there is an essential difference in the
right=duty correlatives that are sought to be vindicated$ For e2am#le& in a com#laint for damages
against a tortfeasor& the cause of action emanates from the violation of the right of the com#lainant
through the act or omission of the res#ondent$ /n the other hand& in a com#laint for the enforcement of
a foreign (udgment a-arding damages from the same tortfeasor& for the violation of the same right
through the same manner of action& the cause of action derives not from the tortious act but from the
foreign (udgment itself$
More im#ortantly& the matters for #roof are different$ :sing the above e2am#le& the com#lainant -ill
have to establish before the court the tortious act or omission committed by the tortfeasor& -ho in turn
is allo-ed to rebut these factual allegations or #rove e2tenuating circumstances$ E2tensive litigation is
thus conducted on the facts& and from there the right to and amount of damages are assessed$ /n the
other hand& in an action to enforce a foreign (udgment& the matter left for #roof is the foreign (udgment
itself& and not the facts from -hich it #rescinds$
As stated in 5ection L& 0ule >9& the actionable issues are generally restricted to a revie- of
(urisdiction of the foreign court& the service of #ersonal notice& collusion& fraud& or mista*e of fact or
la-$ The limitations on revie- is in consonance -ith a strong and #ervasive #olicy in all legal systems
to limit re#etitive litigation on claims and issues$N>+O /ther-ise *no-n as the #olicy of #reclusion& it
see*s to #rotect #arty e2#ectations resulting from #revious litigation& to safeguard against the
harassment of defendants& to insure that the tas* of courts not be increased by never=ending litigation of
the same dis#utes& and 1 in a larger sense 1 to #romote -hat <ord Co*e in the Ferrerhs Case of 1,99
stated to be the goal of all la-: 6rest and 8uietness$7N>>O %f every (udgment of a foreign court -ere
revie-able on the merits& the #laintiff -ould be forced bac* on hisZher original cause of action&
rendering immaterial the #reviously concluded litigation$N>O
"etitioners a##reciate this distinction& and rely u#on it to su##ort the #ro#osition that the sub(ect matter
of the com#laintkthe enforcement of a foreign (udgmentkis inca#able of #ecuniary estimation$
Admittedly the #ro#osition& as it a##lies in this case& is counter=intuitive& and thus deserves strict
scrutiny$ For in all #ractical intents and #ur#oses& the matter at hand is ca#able of #ecuniary estimation&
do-n to the last cent$ %n the assailed /rder& the res#ondent (udge #ounced u#on this #oint -ithout
e8uivocation:
The 0ules use the term 6-here the value of the sub(ect matter cannot be estimated$7 The sub(ect matter
of the #resent case is the (udgment rendered by the foreign court ordering defendant to #ay #laintiffs
definite sums of money& as and for com#ensatory damages$ The Court finds that the value of the foreign
(udgment can be estimatedG indeed& it can even be easily determined$ The Court is not minded to
distinguish bet-een the enforcement of a (udgment and the amount of said (udgment& and se#arate the
t-o& for #ur#oses of determining the correct filing fees$ 5imilarly& a #laintiff suing on #romissory note
for "1 million cannot be allo-ed to #ay only "99 filing fees BsicD& on the reasoning that the sub(ect
matter of his suit is not the "1 million& but the enforcement of the #romissory note& and that the value of
such 6enforcement7 cannot be estimated$N>,O
The (uris#rudential standard in gauging -hether the sub(ect matter of an action is ca#able of #ecuniary
estimation is -ell=entrenched$ The Marcos Estate cites 5ingsong v$ %sabela 5a-mill and 0aymundo v$
Court of A##eals& -hich ruled:
N%On determining -hether an action is one the sub(ect matter of -hich is not ca#able of #ecuniary
estimation this Court has ado#ted the criterion of first ascertaining the nature of the #rinci#al action or
remedy sought$ %f it is #rimarily for the recovery of a sum of money& the claim is considered ca#able of
#ecuniary estimation& and -hether (urisdiction is in the munici#al courts or in the courts of first
instance -ould de#end on the amount of the claim$ 4o-ever& -here the basic issue is something other
than the right to recover a sum of money& -here the money claim is #urely incidental to& or a
conse8uence of& the #rinci#al relief sought& this Court has considered such actions as cases -here the
sub(ect of the litigation may not be estimated in terms of money& and are cogniHable e2clusively by
courts of first instance Bno- 0egional Trial CourtsD$
/n the other hand& #etitioners cite the #onencia of .ustice .)< 0eyes in <a#itan v$ 5candia&N>!O from
-hich the rule in 5ingsong and 0aymundo actually derives& but -hich incor#orates this additional
nuance omitted in the latter cases:
222 4o-ever& -here the basic issue is something other than the right to recover a sum of money& -here
the money claim is #urely incidental to& or a conse8uence of& the #rinci#al relief sought& li*e in suits to
have the defendant #erform his #art of the contract Bs#ecific #erformanceD and in actions for su##ort& or
for annulment of (udgment or to foreclose a mortgage& this Court has considered such actions as cases
-here the sub(ect of the litigation may not be estimated in terms of money& and are cogniHable
e2clusively by courts of first instance$N>MO
"etitioners go on to add that among the actions the Court has recogniHed as being inca#able of
#ecuniary estimation include legality of conveyances and money de#osits&N>LO validity of a mortgage&
N>9O the right to su##ort&N9O validity of documents&N1O rescission of contracts&N+O s#ecific
#erformance&N>O and validity or annulment of (udgments$NO %t is urged that an action for enforcement
of a foreign (udgment belongs to the same class$
This is an intriguing argument& but ultimately it is self=evident that -hile the sub(ect matter of the
action is undoubtedly the enforcement of a foreign (udgment& the effect of a #rovidential a-ard -ould
be the ad(udication of a sum of money$ "erha#s in theory& such an action is #rimarily for 6the
enforcement of the foreign (udgment&7 but there is a certain obtuseness to that sort of argument since
there is no denying that the enforcement of the foreign (udgment -ill necessarily result in the a-ard of
a definite sum of money$
)ut before -e insist u#on this conclusion #ast beyond the #oint of rec*oning& -e must e2amine its
#ossible ramifications$ "etitioners raise the #oint that a declaration that an action for enforcement of
foreign (udgment may be ca#able of #ecuniary estimation might lead to an instance -herein a first level
court such as the Munici#al Trial Court -ould have (urisdiction to enforce a foreign (udgment$ )ut
under the statute defining the (urisdiction of first level courts& )$"$ 1+9& such courts are not vested -ith
(urisdiction over actions for the enforcement of foreign (udgments$
5ec$ >>$ .urisdiction of Metro#olitan Trial Courts& Munici#al Trial Courts and Munici#al Circuit Trial
Courts in civil cases$ E Metro#olitan Trial Courts& Munici#al Trial Courts& and Munici#al Circuit Trial
Courts shall e2ercise:
B1D E2clusive original (urisdiction over civil actions and #robate #roceedings& testate and intestate&
including the grant of #rovisional remedies in #ro#er cases& -here the value of the #ersonal #ro#erty&
estate& or amount of the demand does not e2ceed /ne hundred thousand #esos B"199&999$99D or& in
Metro Manila -here such #ersonal #ro#erty& estate& or amount of the demand does not e2ceed T-o
hundred thousand #esos B"+99&999$99D e2clusive of interest damages of -hatever *ind& attorney@s fees&
litigation e2#enses& and costs& the amount of -hich must be s#ecifically alleged: "rovided& That -here
there are several claims or causes of action bet-een the same or different #arties& embodied in the same
com#laint& the amount of the demand shall be the totality of the claims in all the causes of action&
irres#ective of -hether the causes of action arose out of the same or different transactionsG
B+D E2clusive original (urisdiction over cases of forcible entry and unla-ful detainer: "rovided& That
-hen& in such cases& the defendant raises the 8uestion of o-nershi# in his #leadings and the 8uestion of
#ossession cannot be resolved -ithout deciding the issue of o-nershi#& the issue of o-nershi# shall be
resolved only to determine the issue of #ossession$
B>D E2clusive original (urisdiction in all civil actions -hich involve title to& or #ossession of& real
#ro#erty& or any interest therein -here the assessed value of the #ro#erty or interest therein does not
e2ceed T-enty thousand #esos B"+9&999$99D or& in civil actions in Metro Manila& -here such assessed
value does not e2ceed Fifty thousand #esos B",9&999$99D e2clusive of interest& damages of -hatever
*ind& attorney@s fees& litigation e2#enses and costs: "rovided& That value of such #ro#erty shall be
determined by the assessed value of the ad(acent lots$N,O
5ection >> of )$"$ 1+9 refers to instances -herein the cause of action or sub(ect matter #ertains to an
assertion of rights and interests over #ro#erty or a sum of money$ )ut as earlier #ointed out& the sub(ect
matter of an action to enforce a foreign (udgment is the foreign (udgment itself& and the cause of action
arising from the ad(udication of such (udgment$
An e2amination of 5ection 19B!D& )$"$ 1+9 reveals that the instant com#laint for enforcement of a
foreign (udgment& even if ca#able of #ecuniary estimation& -ould fall under the (urisdiction of the
0egional Trial Courts& thus negating the fears of the #etitioners$ %ndeed& an e2amination of the
#rovision indicates that it can be relied u#on as (urisdictional basis -ith res#ect to actions for
enforcement of foreign (udgments& #rovided that no other court or office is vested (urisdiction over
such com#laint:
5ec$ 19$ .urisdiction in civil cases$ E 0egional Trial Courts shall e2ercise e2clusive original
(urisdiction:
222
B!D %n all cases not -ithin the e2clusive (urisdiction of any court& tribunal& #erson or body e2ercising
(urisdiction or any court& tribunal& #erson or body e2ercising (udicial or 8uasi=(udicial functions$
Thus& -e are comfortable in asserting the obvious& that the com#laint to enforce the :5 District Court
(udgment is one ca#able of #ecuniary estimation$ )ut at the same time& it is also an action based on
(udgment against an estate& thus #lacing it beyond the ambit of 5ection MBaD of 0ule 11$ 3hat
#rovision then governs the #ro#er com#utation of the filing fees over the instant com#laintQ For this
case and other similarly situated instances& -e find that it is covered by 5ection MBbDB>D& involving as it
does& 6other actions not involving #ro#erty$7
'otably& the amount #aid as doc*et fees by the #etitioners on the #remise that it -as an action
inca#able of #ecuniary estimation corres#onds to the same amount re8uired for 6other actions not
involving #ro#erty$7 The #etitioners thus #aid the correct amount of filing fees& and it -as a grave
abuse of discretion for res#ondent (udge to have a##lied instead a clearly ina##licable rule and
dismissed the com#laint$
There is another consideration of su#reme relevance in this case& one -hich should disabuse the notion
that the doctrine affirmed in this decision is grounded solely on the letter of the #rocedural rule$ 3e
earlier adverted to the the internationally recogniHed #olicy of #reclusion&N!O as -ell as the #rinci#les
of comity& utility and convenience of nationsNMO as the basis for the evolution of the rule calling for the
recognition and enforcement of foreign (udgments$ The :5 5u#reme Court in 4ilton v$ ;uyotNLO
relied heavily on the conce#t of comity& as es#ecially derived from the landmar* treatise of .ustice
5tory in his Commentaries on the Conflict of <a-s of 1L>$N9O Pet the notion of 6comity7 has since
been criticiHed as one 6of dim contours7N,9O or suffering from a number of fallacies$N,1O /ther
conce#tual bases for the recognition of foreign (udgments have evolved such as the vested rights theory
or the modern doctrine of obligation$N,+O
There have been attem#ts to codify through treaties or multilateral agreements the standards for the
recognition and enforcement of foreign (udgments& but these have not borne fruition$ The members of
the Euro#ean Common Mar*et accede to the .udgments Convention& signed in 19ML& -hich eliminates
as to #artici#ating countries all of such obstacles to recognition such as reci#rocity and rpvision au
fond$N,>O The most ambitious of these attem#ts is the Convention on the 0ecognition and Enforcement
of Foreign .udgments in Civil and Commercial Matters& #re#ared in 19!! by the 4ague Conference of
%nternational <a-$N,O 3hile it has not received the ratifications needed to have it ta*e effect&N,,O it is
recogniHed as re#resenting current scholarly thought on the to#ic$N,!O 'either the "hili##ines nor the
:nited 5tates are signatories to the Convention$
Pet even if there is no unanimity as to the a##licable theory behind the recognition and enforcement of
foreign (udgments or a universal treaty rendering it obligatory force& there is consensus that the
viability of such recognition and enforcement is essential$ 5teiner and Vagts note:
$ $ $ The notion of unconnected bodies of national la- on #rivate international la-& each follo-ing a
8uite se#arate #ath& is not one conducive to the gro-th of a transnational community encouraging travel
and commerce among its members$ There is a contem#orary resurgence of -riting stressing the identity
or similarity of the values that systems of #ublic and #rivate international la- see* to further 1 a
community interest in common& or at least reasonable& rules on these matters in national legal systems$
And such generic #rinci#les as reci#rocity #lay an im#ortant role in both fields$N,MO
5alonga& -hose treatise on #rivate international la- is of -orld-ide reno-n& #oints out:
3hatever be the theory as to the basis for recogniHing foreign (udgments& there can be little dis#ute that
the end is to #rotect the reasonable e2#ectations and demands of the #arties$ 3here the #arties have
submitted a matter for ad(udication in the court of one state& and #roceedings there are not tainted -ith
irregularity& they may fairly be e2#ected to submit& -ithin the state or else-here& to the enforcement of
the (udgment issued by the court$N,LO
There is also consensus as to the re8uisites for recognition of a foreign (udgment and the defenses
against the enforcement thereof$ As earlier discussed& the e2ce#tions enumerated in 5ection L& 0ule >9
have remain unchanged since the time they -ere ada#ted in this (urisdiction from long standing
American rules$ The re8uisites and e2ce#tions as delineated under 5ection L are but a restatement of
generally acce#ted #rinci#les of international la-$ 5ection 9L of The 0estatement& 5econd& Conflict of
<a-s& states that 6a valid (udgment rendered in a foreign nation after a fair trial in a contested
#roceeding -ill be recogniHed in the :nited 5tates&7 and on its face& the term 6valid7 brings into #lay
re8uirements such notions as valid (urisdiction over the sub(ect matter and #arties$N,9O 5imilarly& the
notion that fraud or collusion may #reclude the enforcement of a foreign (udgment finds affirmation
-ith foreign (uris#rudence and commentators&N!9O as -ell as the doctrine that the foreign (udgment
must not constitute 6a clear mista*e of la- or fact$7N!1O And finally& it has been recogniHed that 6#ublic
#olicy7 as a defense to the recognition of (udgments serves as an umbrella for a variety of concerns in
international #ractice -hich may lead to a denial of recognition$N!+O
The viability of the #ublic #olicy defense against the enforcement of a foreign (udgment has been
recogniHed in this (urisdiction$N!>O This defense allo-s for the a##lication of local standards in
revie-ing the foreign (udgment& es#ecially -hen such (udgment creates only a #resum#tive right& as it
does in cases -herein the (udgment is against a #erson$N!O The defense is also recogniHed -ithin the
international s#here& as many civil la- nations adhere to a broad #ublic #olicy e2ce#tion -hich may
result in a denial of recognition -hen the foreign court& in the light of the choice=of=la- rules of the
recogniHing court& a##lied the -rong la- to the case$N!,O The #ublic #olicy defense can safeguard
against #ossible abuses to the easy resort to offshore litigation if it can be demonstrated that the original
claim is no2ious to our constitutional values$
There is no obligatory rule derived from treaties or conventions that re8uires the "hili##ines to
recogniHe foreign (udgments& or allo- a #rocedure for the enforcement thereof$ 4o-ever& generally
acce#ted #rinci#les of international la-& by virtue of the incor#oration clause of the Constitution& form
#art of the la-s of the land even if they do not derive from treaty obligations$N!!O The classical
formulation in international la- sees those customary rules acce#ted as binding result from the
combination t-o elements: the established& -ides#read& and consistent #ractice on the #art of 5tatesG
and a #sychological element *no-n as the o#inion (uris sive necessitates Bo#inion as to la- or
necessityD$ %m#licit in the latter element is a belief that the #ractice in 8uestion is rendered obligatory
by the e2istence of a rule of la- re8uiring it$N!MO
3hile the definite conce#tual #arameters of the recognition and enforcement of foreign (udgments have
not been authoritatively established& the Court can assert -ith certainty that such an underta*ing is
among those generally acce#ted #rinci#les of international la-$N!LO As earlier demonstrated& there is a
-ides#read #ractice among states acce#ting in #rinci#le the need for such recognition and enforcement&
albeit sub(ect to limitations of varying degrees$ The fact that there is no binding universal treaty
governing the #ractice is not indicative of a -ides#read re(ection of the #rinci#le& but only a
disagreement as to the im#osable s#ecific rules governing the #rocedure for recognition and
enforcement$
Aside from the -ides#read #ractice& it is indubitable that the #rocedure for recognition and
enforcement is embodied in the rules of la-& -hether statutory or (uris#rudential& ado#ted in various
foreign (urisdictions$ %n the "hili##ines& this is evidenced #rimarily by 5ection L& 0ule >9 of the 0ules
of Court -hich has e2isted in its current form since the early 1999s$ Certainly& the "hili##ine legal
system has long ago acce#ted into its (uris#rudence and #rocedural rules the viability of an action for
enforcement of foreign (udgment& as -ell as the re8uisites for such valid enforcement& as derived from
internationally acce#ted doctrines$ Again& there may be distinctions as to the rules ado#ted by each
#articular state&N!9O but they all #rescind from the #remise that there is a rule of la- obliging states to
allo- for& ho-ever generally& the recognition and enforcement of a foreign (udgment$ The bare
#rinci#le& to our mind& has attained the status of o#inio (uris in international #ractice$
This is a significant #ro#osition& as it ac*no-ledges that the #rocedure and re8uisites outlined in
5ection L& 0ule >9 derive their efficacy not merely from the #rocedural rule& but by virtue of the
incor#oration clause of the Constitution$ 0ules of #rocedure are #romulgated by the 5u#reme Court&
NM9O and could very -ell be abrogated or revised by the high court itself$ Pet the 5u#reme Court is
obliged& as are all 5tate com#onents& to obey the la-s of the land& including generally acce#ted
#rinci#les of international la- -hich form #art thereof& such as those ensuring the 8ualified recognition
and enforcement of foreign (udgments$NM1O
Thus& relative to the enforcement of foreign (udgments in the "hili##ines& it emerges that there is a
general right recogniHed -ithin our body of la-s& and affirmed by the Constitution& to see* recognition
and enforcement of foreign (udgments& as -ell as a right to defend against such enforcement on the
grounds of -ant of (urisdiction& -ant of notice to the #arty& collusion& fraud& or clear mista*e of la- or
fact$
The #reclusion of an action for enforcement of a foreign (udgment in this country merely due to an
e2horbitant assessment of doc*et fees is alien to generally acce#ted #ractices and #rinci#les in
international la-$ %ndeed& there are grave concerns in conditioning the amount of the filing fee on the
#ecuniary a-ard or the value of the #ro#erty sub(ect of the foreign decision$ 5uch #ecuniary a-ard -ill
almost certainly be in foreign denomination& com#uted in accordance -ith the a##licable la-s and
standards of the forum$NM+O The vagaries of inflation& as -ell as the relative lo-=income ca#acity of the
Fili#ino& to date may very -ell translate into an a-ard virtually unenforceable in this country& des#ite
its integral validity& if the doc*et fees for the enforcement thereof -ere #redicated on the amount of the
a-ard sought to be enforced$ The theory ado#ted by res#ondent (udge and the Marcos Estate may even
lead to absurdities& such as if a##lied to an a-ard involving real #ro#erty situated in #laces such as the
:nited 5tates or 5candinavia -here real #ro#erty values are ine2orably high$ 3e cannot very -ell
re8uire that the filing fee be com#uted based on the value of the foreign #ro#erty as determined by the
standards of the country -here it is located$
As crafted& 0ule 11 of the 0ules of Civil "rocedure avoids unreasonableness& as it recogniHes that the
sub(ect matter of an action for enforcement of a foreign (udgment is the foreign (udgment itself& and not
the right=duty correlatives that resulted in the foreign (udgment$ %n this #articular circumstance& given
that the com#laint is lodged against an estate and is based on the :5 District Courths Final .udgment&
this foreign (udgment may& for #ur#oses of classification under the governing #rocedural rule& be
deemed as subsumed under 5ection MBbDB>D of 0ule 11& i$e$& -ithin the class of 6all other actions not
involving #ro#erty$7 Thus& only the blan*et filing fee of minimal amount is re8uired$
Finally& #etitioners also invo*e 5ection 11& Article %%% of the Constitution& -hich states that 6NFOree
access to the courts and 8uasi=(udicial bodies and ade8uate legal assistance shall not be denied to any
#erson by reason of #overty$7 5ince the #rovision is among the guarantees ensured by the )ill of
0ights& it certainly gives rise to a demandable right$ 4o-ever& no- is not the occasion to elaborate on
the #arameters of this constitutional right$ ;iven our #receding discussion& it is not necessary to utiliHe
this #rovision in order to grant the relief sought by the #etitioners$ %t is a2iomatic that the
constitutionality of an act -ill not be resolved by the courts if the controversy can be settled on other
groundsNM>O or unless the resolution thereof is indis#ensable for the determination of the case$NMO
/ne more -ord$ %t bears noting that 5ection L& 0ule >9 ac*no-ledges that the Final .udgment is not
conclusive yet& but #resum#tive evidence of a right of the #etitioners against the Marcos Estate$
Moreover& the Marcos Estate is not #recluded to #resent evidence& if any& of -ant of (urisdiction& -ant
of notice to the #arty& collusion& fraud& or clear mista*e of la- or fact$ This ruling& decisive as it is on
the 8uestion of filing fees and no other& does not render verdict on the enforceability of the Final
.udgment before the courts under the (urisdiction of the "hili##ines& or for that matter any other issue
-hich may legitimately be #resented before the trial court$ 5uch issues are to be litigated before the
trial court& but -ithin the confines of the matters for #roof as laid do-n in 5ection L& 0ule >9$ /n the
other hand& the s#eedy resolution of this claim by the trial court is encouraged& and contumacious delay
of the decision on the merits -ill not be broo*ed by this Court$
34E0EF/0E& the #etition is ;0A'TED$ The assailed orders are ':<<%F%ED and 5ET A5%DE& and
a ne- order 0E%'5TAT%'; Civil Case 'o$ 9M=19,+ is hereby issued$ 'o costs$
5/ /0DE0ED$
"uno& BChairmanD& Austria=MartineH& Calle(o& 5r$& and Chico='aHario& ..$& concur$
N1O "riscilla Mi(ares is a (udge of the 0egional Trial Court of "asay& <oretta Ann "$ 0osales an
incumbent member of the 4ouse of 0e#resentatives& and .oel <amangan a noted film director$
N+O 'amely Celsa 4ilao& .osefina 4ilao Forcadilla& Arturo "$ 0evilla& .r$& 0odolfo ;$ )enosa& Danila M$
Fuente& 0enato "ineda& Domiciano Am#aro& Chisto#her 5orio& .ose Duran& and Adora Faye De Vera$
0ollo& ##$ +=M$
N>O E2ce#t for Celsa 4ilao& -ho instead alleged that her daughter& <iliosa 4ilao& had been tortured then
e2ecuted by military #ersonnel during martial la-$ %d$ at +=>$
NO %d$ at +$
N,O %d$ at >,$
N!O The /#inion -as authored by Circuit .udge )etty )$ Fletcher and concurred in by Circuit .udge
4arry "ragerson$ Circuit .udge "amela Ann 0ymer filed an o#inion concurring and dissenting in #art&
her dissent centering on the methodology used for com#uting com#ensatory damages$ 0ollo& ##$ L=
1>+$
NMO :nder 5ection ,L of the :5 Federal 0ules of Civil "rocedure& the (udgment for com#ensatory
damages in a class suit is a-arded to a randomly selectedj$ "etitioner .oel <amangan -as among the
randomly selected claimants of the Torture subclass a-arded damages by the :5 District Court$ 5ee
0ollo& #$ M1$
NLO 'o- 5ection L& 0ule >9& 199M 0ules of Civil "rocedure$
N9O 5ince increased to "!99$99$
N19O 'o- an Associate .ustice of the Court of A##eals$
N11O "etitioners correctly note that they are #recluded from filing an a##eal on certiorari under 5ection
1& 0ule 1 of the 0ules of Civil "rocedure& -hich bars an a##eal ta*en from an order dismissing an
action -ithout #re(udice and dictates the aggrieved #arty to file an a##ro#riate civil action under 0ule
!, instead$ 5ee 0ollo& #$ 9
N1+O %n a 0esolution dated December +999$ 0ollo& #$ +L+$
N1>O %d$ at +9,$
N1O 5ee 5ection MBcD& 0ule 11$
N1,O 5ee 5ection MBdD& id$
N1!O ;ochan v$ ;ochan& +> "hil$ 91& ,9+ B+991D$
N1MO "hili##ine Aluminum 3heels v$ Fasgi Enter#rises& %nc$& ;$0$ 'o$ 1>M>ML& 1+ /ctober +999& >+
5C0A M++& M>G citing .ovito 0 5alonga& 0e2 )oo*store& Manila& "hili##ines& 199, Edition& #$ ,>$
N1LO 1,9 :$5$ 11> B1L9,D
N19O M "hil$ 1L9 B19+,D$ 3hile the "hili##ine 5u#reme Court in this case refused to enforce the
(udgment of the 4ong*ong Court on the ground of mista*e of la- or fact& it -as reversed on a##eal to
the :5 5u#reme Court$
N+9O %d$ ..$ Malcolm and Avance?a& dissenting$
N+1O 5ee also )orth-ic* v$ 4on$ Castro=)artolome& ;$0$ 'o$ <=,M>>L& +> .uly 19LM& 1,+ 5C0A 1+9&
+>,G "hili##ine %nternational 5hi##ing Cor#$ v$ Court of A##eals& ;$0$ 'o$ MM9L,& +! A#ril 19L9& 1M+
5C0A L19& L19$
N++O6 :ltimately& matters of remedy and #rocedure such as those relating to the service of summons or
court #rocess u#on the defendant& the authority of counsel to a##ear and re#resent a defendant and the
formal re8uirements in a decision are governed by the le2 fori or the internal la- of the forum$7
Asiavest Merchant )an*ers BMD )erhad v$ Court of A##eals& 1 "hil$ 1>& +9 B1991D$
N+>O 6Fraud& to hinder the enforcement -ithin this (urisdiction of a foreign (udgment& must be e2trinsic&
i$e$& fraud based on facts not controverted or resolved in the case -here (udgment is rendered& or that
-hich -ould go to the (urisdiction of the court or -ould de#rive the #arty against -hom (udgment is
rendered a chance to defend the action to -hich he has a meritorious case or defense$ %n fine& intrinsic
fraud& that is& fraud -hich goes to the very e2istence of the cause of action 1 such as fraud in obtaining
the consent to a contract 1 is deemed already ad(udged& and it& therefore& cannot militate against the
recognition or enforcement of the foreign (udgment$7 "hili##ine Aluminum 3heels v$ Fasgi
Enter#rises& %nc$& su#ra note 1M$
N+O 5ee& e$g$& 'agarmull v$ )inalbagan=%sabela 5ugar Co$& 1 "hil$ M+& MM B19M9DG %ngenholl v$ 3alter
E$ /lsen and Com#any& %nc$& su#ra note +9$
N+,O 0oeher v$ 0odrigueH& ;$0$ 'o$ 1+L+9& +9 .une +99>& 9 5C0A 9,& ,9>$
N+!O 6An action must be brought in the second state u#on the (udgment recovered in the first$7 .$
5alonga& "rivate %nternational <a- B>rd ed$& 19!MD& at ,99G citing ;oodrich& !99& !91G Chesire& !+LG %%
)eale& 1>MM$ )ut see E$ 5coles and "$ 4ay& Conflict of <a-s B+nd ed$& 19L+D& at 9!9& -hich recogniHes
that civil la- countries #rovide a #rocedure to give e2ecutory force to the foreign (udgment& as
distinguished from the Anglo=American common la- Bbut not statutoryD #ractice of re8uiring an action
on the (udgment$
N+MO 5ee "hilsec %nvestment Cor#$ v$ Court of A##eals& ;$0$ 'o$ 19>9>& 19 .une 199M& +M 5C0A
19+& 119$
N+LO 'orth-est /rient Airlines v$ Court of A##eals& ;$0$ 'o$ 11+,M>& 9 February 199,& +1 5C0A
19+& 199$
N+9O 5ee 5ection >BaD& 0ule 1& 0ules of Civil "rocedure$
N>9O Every ordinary civil action must be based on a cause of action$ 5ection 1& 0ule +& 0ules of Civil
"rocedure$ A cause of action is the act or omission by -hich a #arty violates a right of another$ 5ection
+& 0ule +& 0ules of Civil "rocedure$
N>1O 5ee "acific Asia /verseas 5hi##ing Cor#$ v$ '<0C& ;$0$ 'o$ M!,9,$ ! May 19LL& 1!1 5C0A
1++& 1>>$
N>+O 5oles T 4ay& su#ra note +M& at 91!$
N>>O %bid$
N>O 5alonga& su#ra note +M& at ,1G citing Cheshire& L9>$
N>,O 0ollo& #$ >9$ Em#hasis omitted$
N>!O 1>> "hil$ ,+! B19!LD$
N>MO %d$ at ,+L$
N>LO 0ollo& at >+!& citing ArroH v$ Alo(ado& 19 5C0A M11 B19!MD$
N>9O %bid citing )unayog v$ Tunas& 19! "hil$ M1, B19,9D
N9O %d$ citing )aito v$ 5armiento& 199 "hil$ 1L B19!9D$
N1O %d$ citing De 0ivera v$ 4alili& 9 5C0A ,9 B19!>D$
N+O %d$ citing )autista v$ <im& LL 5C0A M9 B19M9D and De <eon v$ Court of A##eals& +LM 5C0A 9
B199LD$
N>O %d$ citing Amorganda v$ Court of A##eals& 1!! 5C0A +9> B19LLDG /rtigas T Com#any v$ 4errera&
1+9 5C0A L9 B19L>D$
NO %d$ citing Mercado v$ :bay& 1LM 5C0A M19 B1999D and Fili#ino "i#e 3or*ers :nion v$ )atario& .r$&
1!> 5C0A ML9 B19LLD$
N,O As amended by 0e#$ Act 'o$ M!91$
N!O 5u#ra note >+$
NMO 5u#ra note 1M$
NLO 5u#ra note 1L$
N9O 4$ 5teiner T D$ Vagts& Transnational <egal "roblems: Materials and Te2t B+nd ed$& 19M!D& at MM,$
N,9O %bid$
N,1O 5ee 5alonga& su#ra note +M& at !!$
N,+O %d$ at ,9+=,9>$
N,>O 5coles T 4ays& su#ra note +M& at 9M9$
N,O 5teiner T Vagts& su#ra note ,1& at L9L$ 6A decision rendered in one of the Contracting 5tates shall
be entitled to recognition and enforcement in another Contracting 5tate under the terms of this
Convention 1 B1D if the decision -as given by a court considered to have (urisdiction -ithin the
meaning of this Convention& and B+D if it is no longer sub(ect to ordinary forms of revie- in the 5tate of
origin$7 Convention on the 0ecognition and Enforcement of Foreign .udgments in Civil and
Commercial Matters& Cha#ter %%& Article $
N,,O To date& only Cy#rus& the 'etherlands& "ortugal and Ru-ait have either ratified or acceded to the
Convention$
N,!O 5teiner T Vagts& su#ra note ,1$
N,MO 5teiner T Vagts& su#ra note ,1&at MM!$
N,LO 5alonga& su#ra note ,1& at ,9+$
N,9O 5teiner T Vagts& su#ra note +M& at MM9$ 6A #olicy common to all legal systems is to #rovide for the
final resolution of dis#utes$ The #olicy is furthered by each nationhs ado#tion of a vie- of i(urisdiction
in the international senseh -hich recogniHes the foreign courths assertion of (urisdiction as satisfying its
o-n notions of due #rocess in circumstances in -hich it itself -ould have asserted (urisdiction$7 5oles
T 4ay& su#ra note +M& at 9M!G citing 4ay& %nternational versus %nterstate Conflicts <a- in the :nited
5tates& >, 0abels Aeitschrift +9&,9 n$ 191 B19M1D and Cherun v$ Frishman& +>! F$ 5u##$ +9+ BD$D$C$
19!D$ 5alonga& in affirming the rule of -ant of (urisdiction& cites the commentaries of Cheshire&
3olff& ;oodrich and 'ussbaum$
N!9O 5ee& e$g$& 5alonga& su#ra note +M at ,1>$
N!1O %bidG citing 4enderson v$ 4enderson& ! K$)$ B1LD +LLG Van8uelin v$ )ouard& 1, C$)$ B'$5$ 1L!>D
>1G ;odard v$ ;ray& <$0$ ! K$)$ 1>9 B1LM9DG Vadala v$ <a-es +, K$)$D$ B1L99D >19& >1!G cf$ Chandler
v$ "e*etH& +9M :$5$ !99& ,! 5$Ct$& L9 <$Ed$ LL1 B19>!DG Cheshire& !!1=!!G 3olff& +!LG ;oodrich& !9>$
N!+O 5oles T 4ay& su#ra note +M& at 9ML$
N!>O 6Thus& -hen the foreign la-& (udgment or contract is contrary to a sound and established #ublic
#olicy of the forum& the said foreign la-& (udgment or order shall not be a##lied$7 )an* of America v$
American 0ealty Cor#$& >ML "hil$ 1+M9& 1+9! B1999DG citing "hili##ine Conflict of <a-s& Eight Edition&
199!& "aras& #age !$ 6<as sentencias de tribunals e2tran(eros no #ueden #onerse en vigor en Fili#inas
si son contrarias a las leyes& costumbres y orden #qblico$ 5i dichas decisiones& #or la sim#le teorra de
reci#rocidad& cortesra (udicial y urbanidad internacional son base suficiente #ara 8ue nuestros
tribunales decidan a tenor de las mismas& entonces nuestros (uHgados estarran en la #obre tessitura de
tener 8ue dictar sentencias contrarias a nuestras leyes& costumbres y orden #qblico$ Esto es absurdo$7
Kuerubin v$ Kuerubin& LM "hil$ 1+& 1>>$ B19,9D$
N!O 5ee 5ection L& 0ule >9& 0ules of Civil "rocedure$
N!,O 5oles T 4ays& su#ra note +M& at 9M9$
N!!O 6N%tO is generally recogniHed that& sub(ect to Ne2ce#tionsO& a rule of general customary international
la- is binding on all 5tates& -hether or not they have #artici#ated in the #ractice from -hich it s#rang$7
4$ Thirl-ay& 6The 5ources of %nternational <a-7& %nternational <a- Bed$ by M$Evans& 1st ed$& +99>D& at
1+$
N!MO 6'ot only must the acts concerned amount to a settled #ractice& but they must also be such& or be
carried out in such a -ay& as to be evidence of a belief that this #ractice is rendered obligatory by the
e2istence of a rule of la- re8uiring it$ The need for such a belief& i$e$& the e2istence of a sub(ective
element& is im#licit in the very notion of the o#inion (uris sive necessitatis$ 'orth 5ea Continental
5helf& .udgment& %C. 0e#orts 19!9& #$ >& #ara$ MMG cited in 4$ Thirl-ay& ibid$
N!LO 6The #roblems that arise in the enforcement of foreign (udgments are generally to be solved by the
#rinci#les of international la-$ The "hili##ines by its Constitution& ado#ts the generally acce#ted
#rinci#les of international la-$ F$ ;u#it& 6Enforcement of Foreign .udgments and Arbitral A-ards7&
CC%%% .$ %nteg$ )ar$ "hil$ >& at !9$
N!9O Divergent #ractices do not necessarily #reclude recognition of a customary norm$ %n revie-ing the
8uestion of the e2istence of customary rules forbidding the use of force or intervention& the
%nternational Court of .ustice #ertinently held: 6%t is not to be e2#ected that in the #ractice of 5tates the
a##lication of the rules in 8uestion should have been #erfect& in the sense that 5tates should have
refrained& -ith com#lete consistency& from the use of force or from intervention in each otherhs internal
affairs$ The Court does not consider that& for a rule to be established as customary& the corres#onding
#ractice must be in absolutely rigorous conformity -ith the rule$ %n order to deduce the e2istence of
customary rules& the Court deems it sufficient that the conduct of 5tates& should& in general& be
consistent -ith such rules& and that instances of 5tate conduct inconsistent -ith a given rule should
generally have been treated as breaches of that rule& not as indications of recognition of a ne- rule$7
Bem#hasis su##liedD Military and "aramilitary Activities in and against 'icaragua B'icaragua v$ :nited
5tates of AmericaD& Merits& .udgment& %C. 0e#orts 19L!& #$ 1& #ara$ 1L!G citing in 4$ Thirl-ay& su#ra
note !!$
NM9O And other inferior courts& relative to their (urisdictions$
NM1O 5ec$ +& Art$ %%& 19LM Const$& -hich states 6The "hili##ines renounces -ar as an instrument of
national #olicy& ado#ts the generally acce#ted #rinci#les of international la- as #art of the la- of the
land and adheres to the #olicy of #eace& e8uality& (ustice& freedom& coo#eration and amity -ith all
nations$
NM+O %ndeed& the valuation of foreign money (udgments remains a matter of debate in international la-$
%n the :nited 5tates& 5ection 1 of the 0estatement& 5econd& Conflicts of <a-s B19M1D ado#ts the rule
that the forum -ould convert the currency into local currency as of the date of the a-ard$ 4o-ever& this
rule has been criticiHed$ %n England& the (udgment debtor may no- effect #ayment either in the foreign
currency in the amount due or in local currency e8uivalent to the foreign currency on the date of
#ayment$ French and ;erman la- similarly #ermit the e2#ression of a (udgment in foreign currency$
5oles T 4ays& su#ra note +M& at 9M>$
NM>O Ty v$ Tram#e& >+1 "hil$ L1 B199,D$
NMO Tarrosa v$ 5ingson& ;$0$ 'o$ 111+>& +, May 199& +>+ 5C0A ,,>& ,,M$